Ertmer and Ottenbreit-Leftwich Article

TEACHER TECHNOLOGY CHANGE: HOW KNOWLEDGE, CONFIDENCE, BELIEFS, AND CULTURE INTERSECT

By: Peggy Ertmer and Anne Ottenbreit-Leftwich

 

                This article was published very recently in 2010. The main premise of this article is that even though there is greater access to computers, other technology and technology training in education today, in many classrooms, technology is still either not being integrated or if it is used it is not being used to its best effectiveness. The authors did a literature review of technology integration and focus was on this integration and how it is being spearheaded by teachers. When reviewing the list of references, you will see that the majority of the articles reviewed were from 2000 and later; there were a few referenced from the 1990’s and one from 1972. This is important because technology has exploded in the last 10-20 years and these references are relevant and up to date.

                Through this review, the authors point out that in many current classrooms, there is still insufficient integration of technology. They point out that if computers are used, they are still often used as an aid to direct instruction rather than as a source for student-centered learning. The authors discuss at length, the reasons they feel that this is the case as well as providing many ideas on how to overcome this and to more fruitfully integrate technology into the classroom.

                Some of the main reasons provided for why technology is underutilized, even today, are: “teachers’ use of technology are rarely linked to the student learning outcomes they are designed to facilitate”; teachers may know how to use the technology tools but they are still unsure of how to incorporate the tools effectively into their classroom routine; teachers are afraid of change and even when introduced to technological uses they often revert back to direct instruction because that is what they know and are comfortable with; and innovative teachers are often “peer-pressured” out of using technology. The main idea or need that the authors present for teachers to begin effectively and efficiently using technology is that they have to undergo a pedagogy paradigm shift—they have to realize the value of the integration so that they will undergo the integration. Some of the ideas that the authors discuss to make this happen are: preparing student teachers for this technology integration and then supporting them once they enter the classroom; developing support and interest groups for in-service teachers; providing specific use of technology integrated lessons with constructive feedback; and getting administrative support so that experimentation would be encouraged.

                I really enjoyed reading this article. I found it very interesting in the fact that in 2013, we are still so slow to adopt change. In the article, the authors discuss the idea that we as teachers often revert back to how we were taught and for many of us, we were taught by direct instruction and if computers were used it was basically used as a glorified typewriter. It’s been a while since I was in the classroom but I do remember that there was not a lot of administrative support when it came to technology use in my building. It seemed like it was something reserved for the computer lab not any other classroom. I think that this administrative support or in some cases as the authors mentioned, team support, is critical to bring about this integration. Like our students, I think teachers are afraid to experiment because they don’t want to look foolish and they are fearful of unknown consequences. I think also that even though schools do have computers and technology available, there still is a vast disproportionate availability of the technology. It is difficult to use technology in a consistent basis if all of the computers are located in a lab and the lab has to meet the needs of an entire school—I know this is still the case in many schools today. I really enjoyed reading about the “lesson study” idea of small groups of teachers examining and practicing lessons together. I had never heard of this before but I think it sounds wonderful—it is the same idea of student centered learning only the students are the teachers working cooperatively on how to integrate technology effectively. I think this kind of small group work could bring about a lot of change if it were encouraged and utilized. Again, this article was interesting and very challenging. I saw myself in a lot of the descriptions the authors presented and I sat there wishing I had had this class when I was getting ready to enter the classroom. I think that I would have done a lot of things differently!

Chapter 5 from Sandholtz, Ringstaff and Dwyer

CHAPTER 5: REDEFINING STUDENT AND TEACHER ROLES

In Sandholtz, Ringstaff and Dwyer

                Chapter 5 touched on a lot of similar things we have read in other reading assignments. The big idea in this chapter is again, in the ACOT classrooms, the changes that came about over the course of the study. The changes that were focused on in this chapter were how the roles of the teachers and their students changed over time. The authors discussed using the students as peer tutors not only with the technology itself but with the content as well. Reflections from the teachers touched on how in the beginning the students helped one another with use of the computers and sometimes helped the teachers too as well as how eventually they could see students helping one another to make strides not only academically but socially as well. Again, the teacher reflections are really neat to read. As with some of the content we read by Prensky, these teachers eventually had the students directing their own learning and becoming “content experts”. The students were teaching themselves as well as those around them.

                As mentioned above, I really enjoy the teacher reflections from this book. I think that probably this idea of redefining roles is one of the more difficult things for teachers who integrate technology into their classrooms. I think that we still picture the teacher as the one in the front of the room dispensing knowledge. To get away from that is exciting but requires an individual to give up a lot in order to eventually see the rewards. It is definitely something one has to undergo with a lot of faith. It also is something that would require a lot of good classroom management as well as administrative and fellow teacher support.

Chapter 4 from Sandholtz, Ringstaff and Dwyer

CHAPTER 4: MANAGING A TECHNOLOGY-RICH CLASSROOM

In Sandholtz, Ringstaff and Dwyer

                Chapter 4 goes through the stages mentioned in chapter 3 only the focus is on how the teachers in the ACOT program managed technology in their classrooms. They went from the entry phase where teachers were concerned with students moving around the room and whether the students would be able to format floppy discs, etc to discussing how new ways of cheating surfaced with the technology and then eventually how the teachers learned to take pointers from their students, how they developed their own inventive ways to use the technology. It was fun to read the excerpts from the different teachers and their reflections on how things had changed over time.

                As I read through our assigned readings this time, I continually reflected on my experiences in the classroom. I didn’t utilize technology much and I wish that I had. I wish that I had had innovators around me because I think that I would have jumped on board pretty quickly. I think I spent most of my time just trying to survive day to day that I know I wasn’t open to being an innovator myself; however, I know that had I the resources, I could have done some really neat things.

Chapter 3 from Sandholtz, Ringstaff and Dwyer

CHAPTER 3: THE EVOLUTION OF INSTRUCTION IN TECHNOLOGY-RICH CLASSROOMS

In Sandholtz, Ringstaff and Dwyer

                I’m assuming this entire book is about the ACOT 10 year study. Chapter 3 discusses the changes that occurred in these pilot classrooms over time. The authors broke down the evolution of these changes into distinct stages: Entry, Adoption, Adaptation, Appropriation and Invention. It was really interesting to read about the struggles of these teachers in the entry phase of this study and then to cover their progression from the initial bringing in of the computers to how they couldn’t imagine how they would be able to teach/survive without them. (While reading this, I kept thinking that we still have a lot of classrooms today that are either still in the entry phase or haven’t even gotten that far yet and it is 20-25 years later.) The authors point out, as we’ve seen in a lot of our readings thus far, that the attitudes and beliefs of the teachers, their administrators and students are the key to making these changes come about and work. Integration of technology is futile if no one really believes in it and wants to make it happen.

                The quote that is on the first page of this chapter was really interesting. “One thing I have a hard time with as a traditional classroom teacher is to let them go, let the students try a new way.” Realizing that this book was written regarding a 10 year study over integrating technology into the classroom back in the late 1980’s-1990’s and yet this quote is still so applicable to today was kind of sad. I think a lot of it boils down to the fact that many people have such a concrete idea of what a classroom teacher is in their heads and it is very hard to change that. I think a lot of it is that not only are teachers afraid to let students try a new way but teachers are afraid to let themselves try a new way.

 

"Professional development is largely personal, what are some things you can do for free to improve your technology skills?"

Often, there are lots of offerings for continuing education/professional development offered by our own school districts--at least the larger ones. I think a lot of times, if you are from a smaller district but show interest in what a larger district has to offer, they will often allow you to join them. I haven't checked, but I would think that the State Department of Education would also have links and listings of potential development offerings.

I would also check into the colleges and universities nearby to see what they might have to offer. Most colleges with education programs have a lot of outreach efforts that are free or have a very low cost.

Plus, the biggest resource we have is the internet itself. There are online resources, webinars, websites dedicated to professional development as well as postings on YouTube. There is a plethora of opportunities available, it is always a matter of looking for them and also networking with others to have contacts who are also looking for opportunities and are willing to share what they find.

CHAPTER 11: TOP TEN RULES THAT GOVERN SCHOOL AUTHORITY OVER STUDENT CYBER EXPRESSIONS

Chapter eleven presents ten rules that cover a range of issues when dealing with student expression by way of technological means. With these ten rules, the authors discuss important topics such as First Amendment applications, censorship permissibility, inappropriateness, regulations of time, place and manner of expressions, and threats and criminal activity. Basically the authors touch on areas where questions might arise about what is allowable and what isn’t when student expression is presented by way of technological means.

This chapter was interesting. I found it encouraging that schools do have the ability to intervene and censor material. Even though I feel that First Amendment rights are so very important, I believe it is also very important to make students aware that those rights are not just inclusive of what they want to say but that those rights pertain to what someone else wants (or more likely) doesn’t want to be exposed to. I found Rule 8 to be a bit concerning. It basically states that off-campus expressions can not be regulated by schools unless it disrupts school-related activities. Maybe I am misunderstanding something, but this, I think is where true cyber-bullying occurs. It is in the “My-Space” and “Facebook” pages, that are not school sanctioned, where this bullying takes place. I guess, maybe I am misreading this, because in one chapter we talk about how to keep this from happening, but then in this chapter it feels like basically we are being told that school’s can’t do anything about it.?????

CHAPTER 10: PREVENTING CYBERBULLYING

Chapter ten definitely touched on something that is probably a huge concern for anyone who is a parent or a teacher/administrator of children. There have always been bullies, from the beginning of time. However, we live in a time where bullying doesn’t just happen on the playground or lunchroom; bullying can now diffuse into the classroom, can follow students home and can be acted out in the “cyber-playground”. Bullying has grown from someone pushing you around in the hall and possibly taking your lunch money into terrifying threats of violence; subtle, yet ongoing mental or emotional jabs and potentially severe emotional and social trauma.

In this chapter, the authors discuss ways to assess cyber-bullying as well as how to recognize it and educate others about it. As discussed in chapter nine, the reality of setting clear guidelines for computer/other technological device usage must be a priority. The importance of making use of monitoring and filtering software was discussed, which again would lend itself to the acceptable use and expectations set forth in contract language. The authors discuss utilizing older students as peer mentors, particularly if a younger student has been bullied. The authors stress the importance of educating parents about the possible ways that their child could be bullied as well as how to communicate with their children about cyber-bullying and the critical need for monitoring. They also discuss the students’ role in cyber-bullying and how to protect themselves.

This chapter was interesting and I think it is a topic definitely necessary when discussing technology in the classroom. Even though I don’t have children, I see the possibilities out there for children to make good use of technology; but I also see danger signs everywhere. I think that cyber-bullying in ways is worse than regular “old-fashioned” bullying. Of course no bullying is acceptable, but with cyber-bullying it just seems so permeating/pervasive and the fact that it can start so subtly, is just disturbing. Young people, especially pre-teens to teenagers are so filled with angst about their appearance and relationships, that the fact that they can use these means as a way to hurt each other and bring this hurt in front of a very public audience is just terrible to consider.  

CHAPTER 9: POLICIES, PROCEDURES AND CONTRACTS: COMMUNICATING

EXPECTATIONS TO TEACHERS, STUDENTS AND PARENTS

Chapter nine discusses the necessity and construction of legal contracts for use of technology in learning environments. Basically, this chapter goes through the realities that, when a school has technology available, it must have very specific guidelines for its use, definitions of proper and improper usage, consequences for improper use and definitions of reasonable expectations. These guidelines should be specific to everyone involved from the school district to administrators, teachers, students and parents. There was an example of an “Acceptable Use Policy” that was interesting to look through. It was interesting in how detailed the language is and has to be.

I have to admit, this was a difficult chapter for me to read, simply because when I start to read or listen to “legal-eze” my mind sort of clouds over and blanks. I don’t enjoy legal stuff; however, I know that in our litigious society, it is a necessary evil. I also know that by having very detailed contracts in place that explain expectations for use of technology by everyone involved, it definitely makes it easier to know what is acceptable and what is not, which in turn makes it much more easy to determine when punitive actions might be required. Having contracts in place makes things more fair for everyone and hopefully provides a more safe environment.

CHAPTER 8: ASSESSMENT IN THE PARTNERSHIP PEDAGOGY

This chapter sort of supplements the first chapter, also written by Marc Prensky. In chapter one, Prensky proposed that students and teachers should be in a partnership in the classroom, where there is less direct instruction and more student-discovered knowledge gathering. Chapter eight discusses many possible ways to provide assessment in a partnering classroom, other than just traditional tests. Prensky suggests multiple methods of assessment such as: ipsative assessment (students “compete” against themselves and try to better their best), peer assessment (allows students to feel valued by their peers but also compare their work and hopefully strive to be better), real-world assessment (students receive feedback from students from around the world) and self-assessment (students assess their strengths and weaknesses, just like is done in a job). In addition to discussing the types of assessment that might be used with partnering, the author makes the point that with this partnering relationship, assessment of student work should be with the same tools the student has been using to do the work. In his discussion, Prensky also brings up some of the fears people have about partnering and assessment. He proposes that people are afraid that with partnering, students will not do as well on standardized exams. He also proposes that fears have come forth that current assessment does not take into account some of the new skills that students learn through partnering, so they “don’t count”. Further discussion reveals that those who are using it seem to feel that students in partnering settings actually do better on standardized exams because they are more engaged in their learning. Prensky points out that the fear that new skills are not accounted for is real and that assessment should be upgraded to include more skills-based learning.

The remainder of the chapter deals with assessing the progress of others in the partnership besides students. These others would be the teachers, administrators, parents, schools, our nation and then the world. Basically, Prensky gets to the root of a true partnership, which is in a partnering relationship, every partner has to give and take for the relationship to thrive and work. In focusing on the individual partners, he is looking at how each should be contributing to the partnership as well as benefiting from it and how do we assess that these contributions are where they need to be.

As I mentioned for chapter one, I think the idea of partnering is really neat. I think in a classroom that is set up for this, that the assessment methods proposed in chapter eight would work very well. This is definitely something that would require a lot of work on the front-end, making sure that guidelines and boundaries are well established so that true assessment takes place. Again, if organized well, I truly do think that meaningful learning could happen and meaningful assessment would be required.

CHAPTER 3: STRATEGIC LEADERSHIP

In chapter three, Schrum and Levin discuss the integration of technology. One of the key things touched upon in this chapter is how to understand the ways individuals deal with change and innovation. Another topic that was discussed was the role technology leaders in the school play in getting people involved and helping with the integration as well as assessing the technology rich lessons that should arise from new implementations.

We know that everyone approaches change differently; there is no better evidence of that than in a public school building. As new technology and innovations are adopted, educators implement these in different ways—some embrace and run with it, while others sit back and don’t want to have anything to do with the changes. The authors present two different frameworks of how people accept change. One of these frameworks is from Rogers (2003). Rogers characterizes people according to their willingness to adopt and use new technology based upon how much they are interested in it and how much value they place upon it. Rogers categorized people with those being most accepting to least accepting of change as “Innovators” (those who start the innovation), “Early adopters” (those who try innovation carefully), “Early majority” (thoughtful and careful but still willing to change), “Late majority” (skeptics who wait until the majority tries something new) and “Laggards” (critical of new ideas/innovations). The other framework for how people change was the Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM) and its stages of concern created by Hall and Hord (1987). In this model, there are basically steps that persons work through as they build a context for thinking about change: Awareness (learning about the change), Information (getting more information about the change), Personal, Management (determining how I will use the change), Consequence (determining if this works for me), Collaboration (figuring out how others use this innovation), and Refocusing (what else can be done to make this better).

Finally, the authors discuss how important it is for those being asked to use technology to feel comfortable with it. They propose that it is crucial for professional development related to technology resources to be prevalent so that people will understand it, realize its potential, and make use of it. They also point out that those who feel more comfortable with technology are often needed to take a leadership role in their environments in order to help with planning and implementation of innovative technology.

I found the two models for how people accept change to be very interesting. As I sat and read this chapter, I could picture people in my mind that fit Rogers’ categories—it was pretty funny! I think one of the most important things that was discussed in this chapter was that you have to make people feel comfortable with something new before you can expect a great response to it. It is difficult for most people to jump in and start using a new technology with students before they feel comfortable with it themselves. It goes back to what we discussed in some of the previous chapters, teachers are having to adopt new roles, sometimes they are learning from their students. However, I think that they will feel more comfortable with this role change (or partnering) if they are provided a more comfortable foundation of technology understanding as well as the comfort of a “go-to” person when they have technology implementation questions or problems.

Common Core

I finally got to sit down between conferencing with students today and look up some stuff on the Common Core. I honestly had not heard of Common Core prior to this class. I know that some of you referred to it in our last meeting but I didn't know what you were talking about. I've been out of the classroom a while so they were still using PASS standards here in Oklahoma the last time I taught middle school. I also don't have children of my own so I haven't really had much exposure to what has been going on in public schools for a while. I googled "Common Core" and found the main web site that discusses what these standards are as well as which states and territories have adopted them. I was surprised at how recent this was, it looks like this was just adopted by Oklahoma in 2009-10 and is expected to be fully implemented by 2014-15. After reading about the standards, I honestly think that they could be a really good thing. The thought of having national standards is encouraging and if everyone gets on board could potentially be tremendous for students and teachers. I love the idea of some sort of common goals--some consistency. I also liked the fact that it is presented that these core standards are designed to be relevant to what student's need in the real world. I found it very encouraging that those who had worked on these standards, referenced other countries so that our standards would be more in line globally as well.

I know that oftentimes people are resistant to change, I definitely observed this when I was teaching in public schools. If you really read about the standards, it doesn't really appear to be just totally off the wall, gigantic changes other than in some of the early math sequencing. It actually still allows a lot of freedom to teachers in what they want to teach. So, if people give it a chance, they will see that a lot of the things they have been doing (if they have been following state standards already) will probably still be applicable with the possibility of some tweaks here and there. It isn't re-inventing the wheel! I really see a lot of positive potential with these standards!

I guess if I were to have a fear about these standards, it would be that it ends up a "fad" that falls to the wayside like a lot of other "big" things in education have in the past. I would think, though, just looking at the scope of this that this won't be the case--however, it is going to take everyone to make this change turn out right. I know that I had plenty of teachers in my building that weren't even really doing what was necessary for the PASS standards. So, accountability is a big key here.

To become more knowledgeable about these would is not difficult. I found a lot of information on the Internet. I also found information on our Oklahoma State Department of Education web-site. Because these have been adopted by the state, I'm sure resources as well as training will be widely available.