User talk:Janineryder

Introduction
Technology has taken our world by force. Everywhere we look we see technology being utilized or updated. But there is one place where we often do not find technological tools: in the classroom. Why is it that the classroom, of all places, is not keeping up with the rapidly advancing technological tools we experience everywhere else? Technology has impacted society immensely – it can make life easier, but it can also complicate it. This holds true even for the educators (Nisan-Nelson, 2001). Nisan-Nelson (2001) continues to state that “Society has placed demands on teachers to integrate these new information technologies into their curricula based on the needs of an ever-growing job market in technological fields” (pp. 83-84). This demand on teachers, in turn, places a demand on educational officials and school districts to educate teachers on effective methods and tools for technology integration in the classroom. There already exists many models for professional development in this area, but are these models adequate and effective? If they are as effective as we believe they are, then why is it that the majority of teachers do not utilize the tools, skills and knowledge that they learn at these workshops and seminars in their teaching? (Bradshaw, 2002).

Concerns with Technology Integration
Mouza (2002) points out that teachers are often uneasy about using computers and other forms of technology in their classrooms and that they are “…unaware of the teaching and learning pedagogies that computers and the Internet are able to support” (pp.272-273). Some teachers even admit to not learning about new technologies to use in their classrooms simply based on lack of interest (Bradshaw, 2002). Some admit to fears of the possibility that their students have greater knowledge about using the technological tools than they do (Bradshaw, 2002). Others, specifically more experienced teachers, are weary of shifting from their established way of teaching, and feel that their approach to teaching is already successful, and therefore does not need to be changed. Also, there is always the unreliability of technological tools and the possibility that the technology will fail, and hence ruin the planned lesson. Another fear of incorporating technology in their teaching practices that was expressed by educators was the concern with managing a lesson where the resources are limited and the students are plentiful (Burns, 2002).However, atop the mountain of all of these reasons for not integrating technology in their classroom sit the most prominent reason: the fact that teachers are not receiving adequate professional development in the area of technology integration (Schrum, 1999). Coupled with this major issue, is the fact that oftentimes teachers do not receive an adequate amount of release time to pursue professional development that targets technology integration in the curriculum (National Center for Education Statistics, 2000, as cited in Cole, Simkins, & Penuel, 2002). A major theme that emanates from the teachers’ rationale for not incorporating technology into their teaching practices is that they have not been well-trained (if trained at all) on how to effectively utilize technological teaching tools. Providing opportunities for teachers to learn, practice and collaborate on this issue will boost their confidence in using these tools. Caverly, Peterson, & Mandeville (1997) sum this nicely by stating “Obviously, the problem is not with the technology, but with the educators’ training…no one show teachers how to integrate their new technology into their instruction or, sadly, into their students’ learning processes” (p.56).

Concerns with Current Professional Development
The demand for well-planned and hands-on professional development in the area of technology integration is extremely high. Some believe that teachers who are fresh out of their university training are more quick and confident to use technology in their teaching practices. But as Watson (2006) states: “Teacher lack of preparedness to use computers and the Internet begins at the preservice level” (p.153). School districts and education officials are addressing the fact that teachers require in-services on appropriately and effectively integrating technological tools in teaching and learning, and as a result, have offered professional development opportunities. But are these opportunities accomplishing what they set out to do? Teachers have expressed concerns with present day professional development workshops and seminars on this topic. One concern expressed is that these PD opportunities are often a one-shot deal, with little or no follow up (Mouza, 2002). Any ideas that are learned during these short in-services often do not make it into the classrooms of the teacher participants (Bradshaw, 2002). Other concerns among teachers is that the professional development opportunities that are currently available do not relate well to their classrooms situations and settings, nor do they target the individual concerns of the participants (Mouza, 2002), and more often than not, the workshops often focus solely on the technological tools itself, rather than how to effectively apply it to teaching curricula (Cole, Simkins, & Penuel, 2002).

Effective Professional Development
But there is hope. There exist PD models that are cited to be effective. Feedback from the participants of these workshops is positive. What is it that these effective PD models have that others do not? Sugar (2005) states that workshops that support more long-term professional development for teachers tend to be more effective. Other factors that are common to effective professional development models include educating teachers on how to choose appropriate technological tools to complement student learning, showing them how to decide the proper place of the tool in their teaching, and demonstrating how to effectively incorporate the tool into their content area (Plair, 2008). Bradshaw (2002) mentions that PD that “…extends over time, respond to the needs and concerns of teachers, and impact student learning” (p.132) will result in positive, long-term effects on teaching approaches using technology. Reflection, administrative support and fous on the “...pedagogy-technology relationship, rather than on technology alone” (Cole, Simkins, & Penuel, 2002, p. 437) are other considerations that are effective in professional development.

While there are growing concerns with the quality of the PD teachers are receiving, one article outlines what the authors believe to be the “10 Commandments to Implement Technology”. In their article, Meltzer & Sherman (1997) present ten components that prove to be effective in training teachers to incorporate technology in their lessons. These components include the above mentioned concerns expressed by teachers, as well as creating a vision, modeling teaching behaviors, promoting learning transfer, focus on real classroom applications and letting teachers play (Meltzer & Sherman, 1997).

It appears that the main complaint made by teachers regarding the quality of professional development available to them centers around time, whether it be the lack of time allowed for them to practice, collaborate or even attend workshops. However, others express concern with the fact that PD only demonstrates the tool, instead of illustrating how to actually apply the tool in an effective way.

Other Resources and Options to Consider
A study outlined in Sugar (2005) coupled teachers with an on-site “technology coach” in the school. The duties of the coach included being “…technology facilitators, technology coordinators, technology specialists, and other similar roles” (Sugar, 2005). Similarly, Plair (2008) highlights what she terms as a “knowledge broker”, which is essentially an expert on programs, tools and resources that is available to help teachers with their technology concerns. The coach and the knowledge broker act in similar ways within the school. The presence of these experts targets teachers’ concerns with the failure or unreliability of technology in their classroom.

Another possible consideration to promote the integration of technology in teaching and learning is to include a training course in teacher education programs. Although methods courses usually attempt to target this issue, there are other important components that these courses must target, and therefore cannot do justice to the technological tools aspect. However, the implementation of a methods course dedicated solely to the use of technology in teaching a particular subject area may prove to be beneficial.

Since time is a major obstacle to overcome, especially when dealing with release time for professional development, allowing time for collaboration among teachers in specific subject areas over a longer period of time may be more appropriate than placing teachers in workshops that are short-lived and over-flowing with information. (Kanaya, Light, & McMillan Culp, 2005). This idea was also presented by Mulqueen (2001) when he stated that PD should allow “…time for all teachers to meet and talk about their problems and successes with technology infusion” (p.253). Along the same line of thought, Guskey (2001) suggests that “…embedding professional development into the teachers’ day to day work lives allows teachers to see professional development as an integral part of their job, and not something separate” (Guskey, 2001, as cited in Shareski, 2004).

Conclusion
As outlined in the literature, there exist many concerns among teachers with respect to the quality and quantity of professional development that is available on the subject of technology integration in the classroom. Even though there are concerns, education officials and school districts have been successful in planning and implementing effective PD on this topic, even though these models are scarce and still in review. It is necessary to scrutinize these effective models in order to further develop strong PD opportunities for educators. Shareski (2004) sums this issue nicely by stating “The key to obtaining the returns we seek is to continue to invest in high quality professional development…” (p. 17).