Download - Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
1/27
EvaluatigStrategiesUsedToIcorporateTechologyIto
PreserviceEducatio:AReviewOftheLiterature
RobinH.KayUniversity o Ontario Institute o echnology
AbstractTe ollowing paper is based on a review o 68 reereed journal articles that ocused onintroducing technology to preservice teachers. en key strategies emerged rom this review,
including delivering a single technology course; oering mini-workshops; integrating technol-ogy in all courses; modeling how to use technology; using multimedia; collaboration amongpreservice teachers, mentor teachers and aculty; practicing technology in the feld; ocusing oneducation aculty; ocusing on mentor teachers; and improving access to sotware, hardware,and/or support. Tese strategies were evaluated based on their eect on computer attitude,ability, and use. Te ollowing patterns emerged: First, most studies looked at programs thatincorporated only one to three strategies. Second, when our or more strategies were used, theeect on preservice teachers use o computers appeared to be more pervasive. Tird, mostresearch examined attitudes, ability, or use, but rarely all three. Fourth, and perhaps mostimportant, the vast majority o studies had severe limitations in method: poor data collectioninstruments, vague sample and program descriptions, small samples, an absence o statisticalanalysis, or weak anecdotal descriptions o success. It is concluded that more rigorous andcomprehensive research is needed to ully understand and evaluate the eect o key technologystrategies in preservice teacher education. (Keywords: preservice computer technology educa-tion review strategies.)
BACKGROUnD
Overthepast10years,researchers,educators,andadministratorshavede-batedthevalueandeectotechnologyinelementaryandsecondaryeduca-tion.Severalcomprehensivestudieshaveconcludedthatcomputershavehada
minorornegativeeectonstudentlearning(e.g.,Cuban,2001;Russell,Bebell,ODwyer,&OConnor,2003;Roberston,2003;Waxman,Connell,&Gray,2002).However,anumberolarge-scalemeta-analyses(Baker,Gearhart,&Herman,1994;Kozma,2003;Kulik,1994;Mann,Shakeshat,Becker,&Kott-kamp,1999;Scardamalia&Bereiter,1996;SIIA,2000;Sivin-Kachala,1998;Wenglinksy,1998)havereportedsignicantimprovementinachievementscores,attitudestowardlearning,anddepthounderstandingwhencomputerswereintegratedwithlearning.Gainsobservedinthesestudies,however,weredependentonsubjectarea(Kulik,1994),typeosotwareused(Sivin-Kachala,
1998),specicstudentpopulation,sotwaredesign,educatorrole,andlevelostudentaccess(Sivin-Kachala,1998).
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
2/27
inclassrooms,specicallyocusingonstudent-to-computerratio,high-speedInternetaccess,andpreserviceteachereducation.AccordingtotheUSDepart-mentoEducationsNationalCenterorEducationStatistics(2002),theaver-agestudent-to-computerratioin2001was5.4:1,asignicantincreaseromthe12:1ratioreportedin1998.Furthermore,99%oallpublicschoolsnowhaveaccesstotheInternet,with94%havinghigh-speedbroadbandconnections(USDepartmentoEducation,NationalCenterorEducationStatistics,2002).Othercountrieshaveollowedasimilarpatternoincreasingtechnologyaccessintheclassroom(Compton&Harwood,2003;McRobbie,Ginns,&Stein,2000;Plante&Beattie,2004).Teemphasisonintegratingtechnologyintopreserviceeducationprograms
hadmirroredtherapidriseincomputerandInternetaccess.Alargenumberonationallyrecognizedorganizations(e.g.,CEOForumonEducationandech-nology,2000;NationalCouncilorAccreditationoeacherEducation,2003;OA,1995;ISE/NCAE,2003seeBennett,20002001orareview)havedevelopedcomprehensivestandardsortheuseotechnologyinteacherprepa-ratoryprograms.Testagehasbeensetorpreserviceteacherstousetechnologyintheclassroom.Assumingthatthoughtuluseotechnologyincertaincontextscanhaveasignicantandpositiveeectonstudentlearning(Baker,Gearhart,&Herman,1994;Kozma,2003;Kulik,1994;Mann,Shakeshat,Becker,&Kottkamp,1999;Scardamalia&Bereiter,1996;SIIA,2000;Sivin-Kachala,1998;Weng-linsky,1998),preserviceteachereducationprogramsareanaturalplacetostartwithrespecttointegratingtechnologyintoeducation,particularlywhenthereexistsastronginrastructurethatsupportscomputeruse.Yettheevidencesug-geststhattheseprogramshavenotbeensuccessulinpreparingnewteacherstousetechnologyeectively(CEOForumonEducationandechnology,2000;Moursund&Bieleeldt,1999;OA,1995;USDepartmentoEducation,2000;Yildirim,2000).Anumberoobstaclesthatpreventsuccessulimple-mentationocomputersincludelackotime(Eifer,Greene,&Carroll,2001;Wepner,Ziomek,&ao,2003),teachingphilosophyomentorsandschoolad-ministrationwithrespecttotechnology(e.g.,Dexter&Riedel,2003;Doering,Hughes,&Human,2003;Stuhlmann&aylor,1999),technologicalskilloacultyoeducationmembers(acultyoeducationreerstoColleges,Schools,andDepartmentsoEducation)(Eiferetal.,2001;Strudler,Archambault,Bendixen,Anderson,&Weiss,2003;Tompson,Schmidt,&Davis,2003),earotechnologicalproblems(Bullock,2004;Doeringetal.,2003),alackoclearunderstandingabouthowtointegratetechnologyintoteaching(Cuban,2001),andinsucientaccesstotechnology(e.g.,Bartlett,2002;Brushetal.,2003;Russelletal.,2003).Giventhepotentialproblems,itshouldcomeasnosurprisethatpreserviceteachersareperceivedasunpreparedtousetechnology.
RESEARCH PROBLEM AnD PURPOSE
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
3/27
well.odate,thereisnoconsolidatedpictureonhowtoeectivelyintroducetechnologytopreserviceteachers.Acomprehensivedescriptionandevaluationostrategiesisanecessarystep,then,toguideresearchers,administrators,andeducators.Tepurposeothispaperistoidentiy,describe,andevaluatestrate-giesusedtoincorporatetechnologyintopreserviceeducation.
METHOD
DataAcomprehensivesearchotheliteraturewasdonebasedontwocriteria.First,
allarticleswereselectedexclusivelyromreereedprintoronlinejournals.Con-erencepapersorreportswerenotincludedinthisreview.Second,theocusothesearticleshadtobeonincorporatingtechnologyintopreserviceeducation.Allrelevantarticleswereincludedintheanalysis.(SeeAppendixA,page403,
oracompletelistoarticlesincludedinthereview.)DataAnalysisEachstudy(thetermstudyreerstoeitherapositionpaperoronethatcol-
lectsempiricaldata)reviewedwasevaluatedintermsomethod,strategiesused,andtheeectothesestrategies.Anexaminationomethodincludedtheol-lowingelements:samplesize,teachinglevel,descriptionoteachereducationprogram,datacollection,addressingindividualdierences,datacollection,anddataanalysis.Inaddition,eachpaperwasevaluatedastowhetheritincludedoneormoreotheollowingtenstrategies:singletechnologycourse;oeringmini-workshops;integratingtechnologyinallcourses;modelinghowtousetechnology;usingmultimedia;collaborationamongpreserviceteachers,mentorteachers,andaculty;practicingtechnologyinthefeld;ocusingoneducationaculty;ocusingonmentorteachers;andimprovingaccesstosotware,hard-ware,and/orsupport.Finally,theeectothestrategiesusedwasdeterminedbythereportedchangesinpreserviceteacherscomputerattitudes,ability,and/oruse.AppendixB,page407,providesadetaileddescriptionothecodingovariablesusedinthisstudy.Itshouldbenotedthatameta-analysiswasnotdonebecause(a)only14
studiesusedreliabledatacollectionmethodscombinedwithormalstatistics,(b)onlyourothese14studiesincludedacompletedescriptionothesample,includingteachinglevel,and(c)ameaningulcomparisonothesestudieswaslimitedduetodierencesindependentvariablesmeasured(e.g.,ninestudieslookedatattitude,sevenlookedatability,andthreestudieslookedatuse).
RESULTSAnDDISCUSSIOn
MethodologyUsedinReviewedStudies
Sample Size.Samplesizevariedrom0to1,313subjects.Temeansamplesizewas52subjectswhenextremecaseswereremoved,however,28%(n=19)o all studies reported a sample size o zero In other words strategies were pro-
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
4/27
byFraenkelandWallen(2003)asaruleothumb.Giventhecostintimeandmoneyomanyothesetechnology-basedprograms,itisadvisablethatlargersamplesbeassessedintheuture.
Teaching Level.Teuseotechnologyinlearningispartiallydependentongradeleveldierenteducationalsotwareisdesignedwithdierentgoalsandproceduresinmind.Nonetheless,morethan50%othestudiesexamined(n=35)ailedtoreportspecifcteachinglevel.Slightlymorethan25%(n=18)oallstudieslookedatelementarypreserviceteachersand12%(n=8)examinedmixedteachinglevels.Middleschoolandsecondarypreserviceteacherswereclearlyunder-represented.Itwouldbeprudentorutureresearchersto(a)identiythespecifcteachinglevelsopreservicecandidatesand(b)expandtheocustopreserviceteachersoolderstudents.
Description of Program.Acleardescriptionothegeneraleducationpro-gramisnecessaryoracoherentcomparisonoresearchontechnologyandpreserviceeducation.Detailssuchaslengthoprogram,numberoacultyandstudents,andcourseorganizationandocusareimportantwithrespecttoin-terpretingresults.Forexample,asingletechnologycoursestrategymightbee-ectiveoraone-yearprogram,butnotoramulti-yearprogram.Amultimediaapproachusingonlinecoursesmightworkbetterorprogramsinmoreremotelocations.Scienceandmathpreserviceteachersmightadaptmorequicklytotechnologythantheirsocialsciencecounterparts.Tesekindospeculationscannotbeaddressedbyreviewingthestudiesinthispaper,becausemorethan90%(n=62)oallresearchersneglectedtodescribetheireducationalprogramsinsucientdetail.Aclear,completedescriptionotheseprogramsisnecessarytobuildunderstandingohowtechnologyisusedinpreserviceeducation.
Data Collection.Surveyswerethepredominatemodeodatacollection,ac-countingor44%(n=30)oallstudies.However,internalreliabilityestimatesorthesesurveyswerereportedonlyhalthetime.Scalevalidityestimateswerealmostnevernoted(n=3).Qualitativemethodswereusedexclusivelyin16%(n=11)othepapersanalyzed.Tecombinationosurveyandqualitativemeth-odswasemployedinonly12%othepapers.Isurveysareused,reliabilityandvaliditydetailsneedtobedonetoensurethedataaresound.Inaddition,mul-tipledatacollectionmethodsarerecommendedtohelpincreasethevalidityodatabeingcollectedandpresented.
Dependent Variables.Computerattitude,ability,andusearethethreekeydependentvariablesinthevastmajorityotechnologyandpreserviceteacheredu-cationliterature,althoughcleardefnitionsoability,attitude,andusearerarelypresentedortheoreticallyjustifed.Computerabilitywasexaminedmostoten(60%,n=41),ollowedcloselybycomputerattitudes(56%,n=38).Computeruse,ontheotherhand,waslookedatinonlyonethirdothestudiesexamined(n=23).Slightlymorethanonethird(n=24)oallstudiesusedmorethanonedependentvariableandonlyourarticles(6%)lookedatability,attitude,anduse.Multiple dependent variables are recommended or uture research to gain a more
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
5/27
Individual diferences.Only10%(n=7)othestudiesexaminedinthispaperlookedatindividualdierencesamongpreserviceteacherscomputerat-titudes,ability,oruse.However,dierencesincomputer-relatedbehaviorshavebeenobservedwithrespecttogender(seeKay,1992,inpress;Sanders,inpress;Whitley,1997orareviewotheliterature),SES(e.g.,Becker&Ravitz,1999;Nolan,1992;Shashaani,1994),andculture(Evans,1995;Homan&Novak,1998;Wilkinson,Buboltz,Cook,Matthew,&Tomas,2000).Strategiesthatworkwellorcertaingroupsmaynotbeeectiveorothers.Inordertounder-standthepreciseeectospecifcstrategiesonpreserviceteachersuseotech-nology,itisimportanttoexamineindividualnuancesinmoredetail.
Data Analysis.Temostreasonabledesigntodeterminetheeectoasetostrategiesoncomputerattitude,ability,oruseisapre-postorexperimentalanalysis;however,thisormatwasusedinonly29%(n=20)oallstudies.Teremainingarticlesreportednoresearchmethod(16%,n=11),anecdotalde-scriptions(28%,n=19),orpercentages(27%,n=18).Althoughthereisclearlyaroleorqualitativeresearchinassessingtheeectivenessospecifctechnologystrategies,thisroleisprobablybestusedinconjunctionwithquantitativedata,atleastattheevaluationstage.Futureresearchneedstoeither(a)employapre-posttestorexperimentaldesigntoassesstheeectovariousstrategiesonintro-ducingtechnologytopreserviceteachersor(b)ollowmorerigorousprotocolsincollectingandanalyzingqualitativedata.
StrategiesUsedtoIncorporateTechnology
Overview.Atleasttenstrategieswereusedtoteachtechnologytopreserviceteachers,includingintegratingtechnologyinallcourses(44%,n=30);usingmultimedia(37%,n=25);ocusingoneducationaculty(31%,n=21);deliver-ingasingletechnologycourse(29%,n=20);modelinghowtousetechnology(27%,n=18);collaborationamongpreserviceteachers,mentorteachers,andaculty(25%,n=17);practicingtechnologyinthefeld(19%,n=13);oeringmini-workshops(18%,n=12);improvingaccesstosotware,hardware,and/orsupport(14%,n=10);andocusingonmentorteachers(13%,n=9).
Mostresearchstudies(65%,n=44)havedoneagoodjobatclearlydescrib-
ingthestrategiesusedtoincorporatetechnologyintotheirpreserviceeducationprograms.Inaddition,thetheoreticaloundationsotheseprogramsarepar-tially(n=30)orullyarticulated(n=29)inroughlynineoutoeverytenstudies.Adetaileddescriptionothekeycharacteristicsoeachothetenstrategiesis
providedbelow.Integrated.Anintegratedstrategyweavestheuseotechnologyinallpreser-
viceeducationcourses.Tereisnosinglecoursethatteachesbasiccomputerskills.Severalprominentorganizationshavestronglyendorsedtheintegratedphilosophy(seeMoursund&Bieleeltdt,1999orISE/NCAE,2003).
Althoughthisapproachhasbeensuccessulinimprovingconfdence(Pope,Hare,&Howard,2002)andtechnologyskills(Albee,2003;Popeetal.,2002;
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
6/27
Kinzie,2000).Disadvantagestousingthismodelincludethelackohardware(Vannatta&Beyerbach,2000),limitedacultyexpertiseandtime(Eiferetal.,2001;Vannatta&Beyerbach,2000;Whetstone&Carr-Chellman,2001),andthedicultyotranserringwhatislearnedatschooltoeldexperienceintheclassroom(Brushetal.,2003;Eiferetal.,2001;Simpson,Payne,Munro,&Hughes,1999;Vrasida&McIsaac,2001).
Multimedia.Tisstrategyisagrabbagomultimedia-basedapproachesusedtoincorporatetechnologyintopreserviceeducation.Examplesincludetheuseotechnologycasestudies(Gillingham&opper,1999),onlinecourses(Marra,2004),andelectronicportolios(Bartlett,2002;Blocher,Echols,deMontes,Willis,&ucker,2003;Doty&Hillman,2000).Casestudiespresentingex-amplesotechnologybeingusedintheclassroomoersimilaradvantagestomodeling,althoughthemodeopresentationisanonlinevideo.Onlinecoursesoertheadvantageoaccessibility;however,problem-based,constructivelearn-ingisdiculttoachievewiththisormat(Marra,2004).Electronicportoliosareessentiallyperormance-basedassessmentsthatrequirepreserviceteacherstodemonstratetheirmasteryotechnologyinavarietyoareas(Doty&Hillman,2000).Temultimediamodelisrelativelynew,thereoreclearadvantagesanddisadvantageshaveyettobesystematicallydocumented.
Education faculty.Anumberoacultieshaveocusedonimprovingtheatti-tudes,ability,anduseocomputersbyeducationacultywiththeultimategoaloimprovingtheoveralluseotechnologyinpreserviceeducationprograms(e.g.,Davis&Falba,2002;Eiferetal.,2001;Howland&Wedman,2004;Seels,Campbell,&alsma,2003;Strudleretal.,2003;Tompsonetal.,2003;Vannatta&Beyerbach,2000).Teargumentismadethatiacultydonotbuyintotheuseotechnologyineducation,itishighlyunlikelythatpreservicecandidateswillbemotivatedinthisendeavor.Teadvantageothisapproachisthatacohesive,coordinatedenvironmentcanbecreatedtoeectivelyintroduceandmodeltechnology.Itisunclear,however,whetherimprovingacultyatti-tudeandskillsactuallytranserstopreserviceteachersuseotechnologyintheclassroom.Creatingastrongocusontechnologyoracultymaybeanecessaryrststep,butotherstrategiesmightneedtoollow.
Single course.Manyacultiesoeducationusethesingle-coursestrategytoteachtechnology(Hargrave&Hsu,2000;Stuhlmann&aylor,1999).ypi-cally,astand-alonecourseisdevotedtoteachingawiderangeobasiccom-puterskillstoallstudents,althoughseveralormatshavebeenused,includingcontent-based(e.g.,Doeringetal.,2003),project-based(e.g.,McRobbieetal.,2000),orprocess-based(Francis-Pelton,Farragher,&Riecken,2000;Willis&SujodeMontes,2002).Principleadvantagesothisstrategyarethatitcanimprovesel-ecacy(Albion,2001;Gunter,2001),provideagoodoverviewotheuseotechnologyinteaching(McRobbieetal.,2000)anddevelopastrongoundationotechnologyskills(Hargrave&Hsu,2000;Strudleretal.,2003).Disadvantages observed in using this strategy include learning technology skills
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
7/27
Modelling.Temodelingapproachinvolvesdemonstratinghowtechnologycanbeusedintheclassroomandisotencombinedwithanintegratedstrat-egy.However,theemphasiswithmodelingistoprovidepreservicecandidateswithconcreteexamplesohowtechnologycanbeusedintheclassroom.TeISE/NCAEstandards(2003)supporttheuseomodelingasaneectiveap-proachtoteachingtechnologyinpreserviceeducation.Teclearadvantagetousingmodelingisthatittransersdirectlytothereal-worldclassroom,unlikethesinglecourseandintegratedstrategies(Howland&Wedman,2004;Marra,2004).Disadvantagestomodelingincludetheinabilityoacultytoprovidemeaningulandeectivetechnologyexamples(Eiferetal.,2001;Vannatta&Beyerbach,2000)andpreserviceteachersnotbeinggiventheopportunitytoconstructtheirowntechnology-basedlessons.Collaboration.Acollaborationstrategyinvolvesestablishingpartnerships
amonguniversities,colleges,andpublicschoolstocreatetechnology-richlearn-ingexperiences.Tisapproachinvolvesdevelopingcommunitiesopractice,knowledgerepositories,expertisedirectories,peerandmentorassistance,andbestpracticeexamples(Carrolletal.,2003).Placingpreserviceandinserviceteachersinteamstocollaborativelyidentiywaystointegratetechnologyintothecurriculumhasanumberobenets,includingprovidingopportunitiestoexploreandpracticetechnologicalapplicationsinasupportiveenvironment,developingpositiverelationshipsbetweenlocalpublicschoolsandtheuniver-sity,andincreasingthecomortlevelousingtechnology(Dawson&Norris,2000;Tompsonetal.,2003).Tekeychallengesoapplyingthisapproachare(a)theconsiderableorganizationandtimeneededtodevelopeectivelearningcommunitiesand(b)therequirementthatallpartiesmustbemotivated(Car-rolletal.,2003;Dawson&Norris,2000;Tompsonetal.,2003).Ionepartothecommunityisresistanttotheuseotechnology,theeectivenessothestrategyiscompromised(Carrolletal.,2003).Field-based.Teeld-basedstrategy,althoughhighlyrecommendedbythe
ISE/NACEstandards(2003),hasbeenusedsparinglybyacultiesoedu-cation(Balli,Wright,&Foster,1997;Beyerbach,Walsh,&Vannatta,2001;Brushetal.,2003).Tephilosophybehindthisstrategyistoactivelysupporttheproductionanddeliveryotechnology-basedlessonsbypreserviceteachers.Temainadvantageothisapproachisthatstudentslearnromhands-onexpe-rienceandcanocusonhowtechnologyaectslearningintheclassroom(Ballietal.,1997;Beyerbachetal.,2001;Brushetal.,2003).However,ithisistheonlystrategyusedtoteachtechnology,preserviceteacherscaneelunpreparedduetoalackoskill(Brushetal.,2003).Workshops.Anumberoeducationacultiesuseworkshopseitherexclusively
ortosupportotheraspectsoatechnologyenhancedprogram(e.g.,Ballietal.,1997;Bashman,Palla,&Pianetti,2005;Beyerbachetal.,2001;Collier,Weinburgh,&Rivera,2004;Seelsetal.,2003).Teideaisthatshort,ocusedseminars or labs can help preservice teachers and aculty in key areas. Within a
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
8/27
however,somecomputerskillsmightbesacrifced.Aswell,thelong-termeectoaworkshoponpreserviceteachersattitudesanduseinclassroomhasyettobeestablished.
Access.Tisstrategyaddressestheaccessthatpreserviceteachershavetosotware,hardware,andsupport.Forexample,someprogramsprovidepreser-vicestudentswithlaptopsandsotware(e.g.,Kay&Knaack,2005;Pierson&McNeil,2000).Otherprogramsoertechnologyonwheelstobeusedintheclassroomandinthefeld(Wright,Wilson,Gordon,&Stallworth,2002).Stillothersprovideextensivetechnologicalsupportoracultyandpreserviceteachers(e.g.,Kay&Knaack,2005;Strudleretal.2003;Wrightetal.,2002).Withoutkeyaccesselements,otherstrategiesareboundtohavelimitedeect.Inotherwords,onecanprovidetechnologicaltrainingandguidanceorpre-servicecandidatesinacomputerlab,butithereislimitedaccesstocomputersattheuniversityorintheK12schools,itisdiculttousethetechnologyinaneectivemanner.Nonetheless,onlyahandulostudiesusedanaccessstrategy(e.g.,Howland&Wedman,2004;Johnson-Gentile,LonBerger,Pa-rana,&West,2000;Kay&Knaack,2005;Pierson&McNeil,2000;Strudleretal.2003;Tompsonetal.,2003;Wrightetal.,2002)toimprovepreservicetechnologyeducationprograms.Itshouldbenotedthatprovidingsotware,hardware,andsupportiscritical,butotherstrategieswillhavetocomeintoplayitechnologyistobeusedinameaningulandeectivemanner.
Mentor teachers.Tisstrategyistypicallyusedwiththecollaborativeap-proach;however,specialemphasisisplacedontherelationshipbetweenthepreserviceandmentorteacherwhoworktogethertoproducemeaninguluseotechnology(e.g.,Aust,Newberry,OBrien,&Tomas,2005;Bullock,2004;Dawson&Norris,2000,Doeringetal.,2003;Pierson&McNeil,2000;Seelsetal.,2003;Strudleretal.2003;Tompsonetal.,2003;Wrightetal.,2002).Tepreserviceteacherisotenguidedbythementorteacherintermsopeda-gogyandrealworldexperience.Tementorteacher,inturn,issupportedbythepreserviceteacherwithrespecttothelatesttechnologyandsotware.Tisstrategy,althoughusedsparingly,appearstohaveconsiderablepotentialorpromotingeectiveuseotechnologyintheclassroom,eventhoughempiricalevidenceislimited.Italsotakeslesstimethantheull-collaborativemodelin-volvingpartnershipsamongaculty,mentorteachers,andpreservicecandidates.
Combination of strategies.Tecombinedstrategyinvolvesusingtwoormoreapproachestoincorporatingtechnology.Forexample,modeling/integration,sin-gle-course/integration,andintegration/communitystrategiesarecombinationsregularlyobservedinacultiesoeducation(e.g.,Collieretal,2004;Compton&Harwood,2003;Smith&Robinson,2003).Tirtypercent(n=21)oallstudiesevaluatedinthispaperusedonlyonestrategy.Morethanhal(57%,n=39)usedtwoorewerstrategiestohelpintroducetechnologytopreserviceteachers.
Strudler&Wetzel(1999)reportedthatexemplarycollegesoeducationuseacombined strategy or introducing technology and include stand-alone technol-
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
9/27
Aprincipalcomponentsanalysiswasdonetoexplorewhethercertaincom-binationsothetenstrategiesexaminedinthispaperwereevident.Becauseallcommunalitieswereabove0.4(Stevens,1992),theprincipalcomponentanalysiswasdeemedanappropriateexploratorymethod(Guadagnoli&Velicer,1988).Bothorthogonal(varimax)andoblique(directoblimin)rotationswereused,giventhatthecorrelationamongpotentialstrategycombinationswasunknown.Teserotationalmethodsproducedidenticalactorcombinations,sotheresultsromthevarimaxrotation(usingKaisernormalization)arepre-sentedbecausetheysimpliytheinterpretationothedata(Field,2005).TeKaiser-Meyer-Olkinmeasureosamplingadequacy(0.546)andBartlettstestosphericity(p
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
10/27
technologyintopreserviceeducation.Tird,althoughthesestudiesarethebestquantitativeexamplesinthisreviewpaper,theyarearromexemplary.Mostothemethodologicalproblemsreportedinthelargersampleapplytothissubset.Inaddition,onlyonestudy(Strudleretal.,2003)usedqualitativemethodstosupportthequantitativesurveydata.
ImplicationsforEducationAterreading,coding,analyzing,andevaluatingthe68studiesorthispaper,oneconclusionisirreutable.Extensivetimeandmoneyhasbeenspentdevel-
opingstrategiesandprogramstohelppreserviceteachersusetechnologyeec-tively.Anumberoelaborate,theory-drivenblueprintshavebeencollaborative-lycratedtoaddressthetechnologyneedsopreserviceteachers,aculty,mentorteachers,andstudents(Beyerbachetal.,2001;Gillingham&opper,1999;Howland&Wedman,2004;Johnson-Gentileetal.,2000;Pierson&McNeil,2000;Seelsetal.,2003;Strudleretal.,2003;Tompsonetal.,2003;Wrightetal.,2002).Itisunortunatethatmanyotheauthorsotheseprogramshavenotputthesameeortintosystematicallyevaluatingtheireectoneducation.Consequently,itwouldbeirresponsibletoprovideanystrongrecommenda-
tionswithrespecttowhichstrategiesworkandhowwell.Whenmorethoroughresearchisdone,itappearsthatthestrategiesusedhaveasignifcantandpositive
Table1:VarimaxRotatedFactorLoadingsonStrategiesUsedtoIncorporateTechnology
Strategy Factor1 Factor2 Factor3 Factor4Collaboration .87Mentorteacher .77Fieldbased .69Access .61 .45SingleCourse -.78Integrated .77Faculty .40 .48 Multimedia .77
Workshops .77 Modeling .88
FACOR EIGENVALUE PCOFVAR CUMPC 1 2.42 24.2 24.2 2 1.56 15.6 39.8 3 1.44 14.4 54.2 4 1.08 10.8 65.2
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
11/27
Table2:Top
QuantitativeStudiesinT
echnologyandPreservice
Education
SurveyQ
ual*
L*
Size
Program
Desc.
Model
Desc.
ot.
Strat.Teory
Att.
Chng.
Abil.
Chng.
Use
Chng.
001)
Yes
No
Elem
89
No
Partial
2
Part
Yes
Ye
s
NE2
al.(
2004)
Yes
No
Elem
43
No
Yes
2
Yes
NE
Ye
s
NE
al.(20
03)
Yes
No
NR1
69
No
Yes
2
Yes
Yes
NE
NE
001)
Yes
No
NR
171
No
Yes
2
Partial
Yes
NE
NE
&Wedman(2004)3
Yes
No
NR
21
Partial
Yes
5
Yes
Yes
Ye
s
Yes
aack(2005)3
Yes
No
Mix
52
Yes
Yes
4
Yes
Yes
Ye
s
Yes
(2003)
Yes
No
NR
102
No
Partial
1
Partial
Yes
NE
NE
.(199
5)
Yes
No
NR
17
No
Yes
1
Yes
Yes
Ye
s
NE
03)
Yes
No
NR
66
Partial
Yes
2
Yes
No
Ye
s
NE
al.(2
003)3
Yes
Yes
NR
273
No
Yes
6
Yes
NE
NE
Yes
&Beyerbach(2000)
Yes
No
Mix
122
No
Yes
3
Yes
NE
Ye
s
NE
02)
Yes
No
NR
74
No
Partial
1
Partial
NE
NE
NE
.(200
4)
Yes
No
NR
280
Partial
Yes
2
Yes
Yes
NE
NE
2000)
Yes
No
NR
114
No
Yes
1
No
Yes
NE
NE
Reported
Examined
4strategiesused
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
12/27
Finally,aguidingmodel,basedonanumberowell-developedprogramsre-portedinthispaper(e.g.,Beyerbachetal.,2001;Gillingham&opper,1999;Howland&Wedman,2004;Johnson-Gentileetal.,2000;Pierson&McNeil,2000;Seelsetal.,2003;Strudleretal.,2003;Tompsonetal.,2003;Wrightetal.,2002),ispresentedinFigure1.Tedynamicsothismodelincludeseveralcriticalandinteractivecomponents.First,goodaccesstosotware,hardware,andsupportisnecessaryintheuni-
versityclassroomandinthefeldplacement.Iyoudonothaveadequateaccessineitherarea,itisunlikelythattheotherstrategieswillwork.Second,regard-lessowhetherthestrategyissingle-course,workshop,integration,multime-dia-based,oracombination,itisimportantthateveryeortbemadetomodelandconstructauthenticteachingactivities.Althoughanumberoleadingor-ganizationshavestronglyendorsedanintegratedapproach(e.g.,Moursund&Bieleeltdt,1999orISE/NCAE,2003),theempiricalevidencesupportingonestrategyoveranotherislackingatthispoint.Tird,collaborationamongpreserviceteachers,aculty,andmentorteachersisideal;however,partnershipsbetweenpreserviceandmentorteachersmayworkjustaswell.Withoutcol-laborationinvolvingthementorteacher,itseemsunlikelythatgainsinattitudeandabilitywilltranslatetomeaninguluseotechnology.
RecommendationsforFutureforResearch
Firstandoremost,utureresearchersopreservicetechnologyineducationneedtoincludetheollowingsixelementsintheirinvestigations:
1. acleardescriptionothesampleincluding,astheminimum,numberostudents,age,gender,andteachinglevel
2. acomprehensivedescriptionotheeducationprogramincludingnumberoyearsostudy,numberostudents,andorganizationotheprogramwithrespecttotheuseotechnology
3. reliabilityandvalidityestimatesoanydatacollectioninstrumentsused4. bothqualitativeandquantitativedata
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
13/27
5. ormalanalysisoindividualdierencesithesamplesizeislargeenough,and
6.measuresthatlookatattitude,abilityanduseinthesamestudy.Asensiblestartingpointistoexaminetheexemplarprogramsnotedearlier(e.g.,Beyerbachetal.,2001;Gillingham&opper,1999;Howland&Wed-man,2004;Johnson-Gentileetal.,2000;Pierson,2000;Seelsetal.,2003;Strudleretal.,2003;Tompsonetal.,2003;Wrightetal.,2002).Goodtheoryandstructureistheoundationoanygoodprogram.Itwouldalsobebenecialtolookatresearchpracticesinthe14quantitativestudies(seeable2)alreadyinvestigatedinthisarticle.Althoughthesestudieshavefaws,theresearchde-signsarereasonablysolid.Itiscriticaltoaddressthemethodologicalconcernsnotedaboveinorderto
buildacoherentunderstandingohowtoguidepreserviceteachersintheuseotechnology.Withoutthesekeychanges,researchers,administrators,andeduca-torswillcontinuealongarudderlesspathousingtechnologyineducation.
SummaryTisarticleoeredadetailedanalysiso68studiesexaminingtheuseotech-
nologyinpreserviceeducation.Althoughsomesolid,thoughtultechnology-basedprogramshavebeendeveloped,onlyahandulostudieshavecareullyandrigorouslypursuedtheevaluationprocess.Tejuryisstilloutonwhichstrategiesworkbest,althoughthereissomepreliminaryevidencetosuggestthatmultiplestrategiesworkwellwithrespecttouseocomputersbypreservice
teachersintheclassroom.Inordertobuildamorecoherentknowledgebaseintechnologyandpreserviceeducation,thereisaobviousmandateormorethor-oughanalysisthatincludesacleardescriptionothesampleandprogrambeingevaluated,reliableandvalidmeasurestocollectdata,andabroaderocusthatlooksatchangesincomputerattitudes,ability,anduse.
Contributor
RobinKay,PhD,isanassistantproessorintheFacultyoEducationattheUniversityoOntarioInstituteoechnology.Hehaspublishedmorethan20articlesintheareaocomputersineducation,presentednumerouspapersatteninternationalconerences,reereedthreeprominentcomputereducationjour-nals,andtaughtcomputers,mathematics,andtechnologyor17years.Currentprojectsincluderesearchonlaptopuseinteachereducation,discussionboarduse,learningobjects,educationalmini-clips,andactorsthatinfuencehowstudentslearnwithtechnology.(Address:RobinH.Kay,UniversityoOntarioInstituteoechnology,2000SimcoeStreetNorth,Oshawa,ONL1H7K4,Canada;[email protected].)
References
Albee J J (2003) A study o preservice elementary teachers technology skill
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
14/27
orcomputeruseamongteachereducationstudents.Journal of Technology andTeacher Education,9(3),321347.Albion,P.R.(2003).PBL+IMM=PBL2:Problembasedlearningandinter-activemultimediadevelopment.Journal of Technology and Teacher Education,11(2),243257.Albion,P.R.,&Gibson,I.W.(2000).Problem-basedlearningasamulti-mediadesignrameworkinteachereducation.Journal of Technology and TeacherEducation,8(4),315316.Aust,R.,Newberry,B.,OBrien,J.,&Tomas,J.(2005).Learninggenera-tion:osteringinnovationwithtomorrowsteachersandtechnology.Journal ofTechnology and Teacher Education, 13(2),167195.Baker,E.L.,Gearhart,M.,&Herman,J.L.(1994).EvaluatingtheAppleclass-roomsotomorrow.InE.L.Baker&H.F.ONeile,Jr.(Eds.). Technology assess-ment in education and training(pp.173197).Hillsdale,NJ:LawrenceErlbaum.Balli,S.J.,Wright,M.D.,&Foster,P.N.(1997).Preserviceteacherseldexperienceswithtechnology.Education Technology,37(5),4046.Bartlett,A.(2002).Preparingpreserviceteacherstoimplementperormanceassessmentandtechnologythroughelectronicportolios.Action in Teacher Edu-cation,24(1),9097.Basham,J.,Palla,A.,&Pianetti,E.(2005).Anintegratedrameworkusedtoincreasepreserviceteachernets-tability.Journal of Technology and TeacherEducation, 13(2),257276.Becker,H.J.&Ravitz,J.(1999).Teinfuenceocomputerandinternetuseonteacherspedagogicalpracticesandperceptions.Journal of Research on Com-puting in Education, 31(4),356384.Bennett,L.(20002001).echnologystandardsorthepreparationoteach-ers.International Journal of Social Education, 15(2),111.Beyerbach,B.,Walsh,C.,&Vannatta,R.A.(2001).Fromteachingtech-nologytousingtechnologytoenhancestudentlearning:Preserviceteacherschangingperceptionsotechnologyinusion.Journal of Technology and TeacherEducation,9(1),105127.Blocher,J.M.,Echols,J.,deMontes,L.S.,Willis,E.,&ucker,G.(2003).Shitingrominstructiontoconstruction:Apersonalmeaningulexperience.Action in Teacher Education,24(4),474478.Brush,.,Glazewski,K.,Rutowski,K,Berg,K.,Stromors,C.,Van-Nest,M.,etal.(2003).Integratingtechnologyinaeld-basedteachertrainingprogram:[email protected] Technology,Research and Development,51(1),5773.Bucci,..(2003).Tetechnologyteachinglab:MeetingtheISEchal-lenge.Action in Teacher Education,24(4),19.Bullock,D.(2004).Movingromtheorytopractice:Anexaminationotheactorsthatpreserviceteachersencounterastheattempttogainexperienceteachingwithtechnologyduringeldplacementexperiences.Journal of Technol-ogy and Teacher Education, 12(2), 211237.
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
15/27
CEOForumonEducationandechnology(2000).eacher preparation StaRchart: A self-assessment tool for colleges of educationPreparing a new generationof teachers.RetrievedAugust30,2004,romhttp://www.ceoorum.org/down-loads/tpreport.pd.Cherup,S.,&Snyder,L.(2003).Amodelorintegratingtechnologyintoteachereducation:Onecollegesjourney. Contemporary Issues in echnology andeacher Education, 3(1),4352.Clit,R..,Mullen,L.,Levin,J.,&Larson,A.(2001).echnologiesincontexts:Implicationsorteachereducation.eaching and eacher Education, 17,3350.Collier,S.,Weinburgh,M.H.,&Rivera,M.(2004).Inusingtechnologyskillsintoateachereducationprogram:Changeinstudentsknowledgeabouttheuseotechnology.Journal of echnology and eacher Education,12(3),447468.Compton,V.,&Harwood,C.(2003).Enhancingtechnologicalpractice:AnassessmentrameworkortechnologyeducationinNewZealand.InternationalJournal of echnology and Design Education,13(1),126.Cuban,L.(2001).Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom.Cam-bridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.Davis,K.S.,&Falba,C.J.(2002).Integratingtechnologyinelementarypre-serviceteachereducation:orchestratingscienticinquiryinmeaningulways.Journal of Science eacher Education,13(4),303329.Dawson,K.,&Norris,A.(2000).PreserviceteachersexperiencesinaK12/universitytechnology-basedeldinitiative:benets,acilitators,constraints,andimplicationsorteachereducators.Journal of Computing in eacher Educa-tion, 17(1),412.Dexter,S.,&Riedel,E.(2003).Whyimprovingpreserviceteachereducation-altechnologypreparationmustgobeyondthecollegeswalls.Journal of eacherEducation,54(4),334346.Doering,A.,Hughes,J.&Human,D.(2003).Preserviceteachers:Arewethink-ingwithtechnology?Journal of Research on echnology in Education, 35(3),342361.Doty,L.,&Hillman,C.(2000).rainingpreserviceteachersintechnology:
Aportolioapproach.International Journal of Social Education,15(1),1318.Eifer,K.,Greene,.,&Carroll,J.(2001).Walkingthetalkistough:Fromasingletechnologycoursetoinusion.Te Educational Forum,65(4),366375.Ertmer,P.A.,Conklin,D.,Lewandowski,J.,Osika,E.,Selo,M.,&Wignall,E.(2003).Increasingpreserviceteacherscapacityortechnologyintegrationthroughtheuseoelectronicmodels.eacher Education Quarterly,30(1),95112.Evans,V.(1995).Blackout:Preventingracialdiscriminationonthenet.Li-
brary Journal,120,4446.Evans,B.P.,&Gunter,G.A.(2004).Acatalystorchange:Infuencingpre-serviceteachertechnologyprociency.Journal of Educational Media & LibrarySciences, 41(3),325336.Field,A.(2005).Discovering Statistics Using SPSS(2nded.)TousandOaks,CA: SAGE Publications.
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
16/27
Francis-Pelton,L.,Farragher,P.&Riecken,.(2000).Contentbasedtechnology:Learningbymodeling.Journal of Technology and Teacher Education 8(3),177186.
Fraenkel,J.R.,&Wallen,N.E.(2003).How to Design and Evaluate Researchin Education (5thed.).Boston:McGraw-Hill.
Gibson,S.(2002).Incorporatingcomputer-basedlearningintopreserviceeducationcourses.Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education On-line, 2(1),97118.
Gillingham,M.G.,&opper,A.(1999).echnologyinteacherpreparation:Preparingteachersortheuture.Journal of Technology and Teacher Education,7(4),303321.
Gimbert,B.,&Zembal-Saul,C.(2002).Learningtoteachwithtechnology:romintegrationtoactualization.Contemporary Issues in Technology and TeacherEducation, 2(2),204217.
Guadagnoli,E.,&Velicer,W.(1988).Onmethodsintheanalysisoprofledata.Psychometrika,24,95112.
Gunter,G.A.(2001).Makingadierence:Usingemergingtechnologiesandteachingstrategiestorestructureanundergraduatetechnologycourseorpreser-viceteachers.Education Media International, 38(1),1320.
Halpin,R.(1999).Amodelorconstructivistlearninginpractice:Computerliteracyintegratedintoelementarymathematicsandscienceteachereducation.Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32(1),128138.
Hargrave,D.,&Hsu,Y.(2000).Surveyoinstructionaltechnologycoursesorpreserviceteachers.Journal of Technology and Teacher Education,8(4),303314.
Hattler,J.A.(1999).echnologyorpreserviceteachers:drivereducationortheinormationsuperhighway.Journal of Technology and Teacher Education,7(4),323332.
Homan,D.L.&Novak,.P.(1998),BridgingtheracialdivideontheIn-ternet.Science,280(April17),390391.
Howland,J.,&Wedman,J.(2004).Aprocessmodeloracultydevelop-ment:individualizingtechnologylearning.Journal of Technology and TeacherEducation, 12(2),239263.
ISE/NCAE(2003).ISTE/NCATE Standards for educational technology pro-grams.RetrievedAugust30,2004,romhttp://cnets.iste.org/ncate/.
Johnson-Gentile,K.,Lonberger,R.,Parana,J.,&West,A.(2000).Preparingpreserviceteachersorthetechnologicalclassroom:Aschool-collegepartner-ship.Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 8(2),97109.
Kariuki,M.,&Duran,M.(2004).Usinganchoredinstructiontoteachpre-serviceteacherstointegratetechnologyinthecurriculum.Journal of Technologyand Teacher Education, 12(3),431445.
Kay,R.H.(1992).Ananalysisomethodsusedtoexaminegenderdierencesincomputer-relatedbehaviour.Journal of Educational Computing Research, 8(3),323336.
Kay, R. H. (in press). Addressing gender dierences in computer ability, atti-
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
17/27
Kozma,R.B.(2003).Technology, innovation, and educational change. A globalperspective.Eugene,OR:InternationalSocietyorTechnologyinEducation.Kulik,J.A.(1994).Meta-analyticstudiesofndingsoncomputer-basedinstruction.InE.L.Baker,&H.F.ONeile,Jr.(Eds.),Technology assessment ineducation and training, (pp.933).Hillsdale,NJ:LawrenceErlbaum.Krueger,K.,Boboc,M.,Smaldino,S.,Cornish,Y.,&Callahan,W.(2004).InTimeimpactreport.WhatwasInTimeseectivenessandimpactonacultyandpreserviceteachers?Journal of Technology and Teacher Education,12(2),185210.Lohr,L.,Javeri,M.,Mahoney,C.,Gall,J.,Li,K.,&Strongin,D.(2003).Usingrapidapplicationdevelopmenttoimprovetheusabilityoapreserviceteachertech-nologycourse.Educational Technology Research and Development,51(2),4155.Luan,W.S.,Jalil,H.A.,Ayub,A.F.M.,Bakar,K.A.,&Hong,T.S.(2003).Teachingadiscreteinormationtechnologycourseinaconstructivistlearn-ingenvironment:IsiteectiveorMalaysianpreserviceteachers?Internet andHigher Education, 6,193204.Maeers,M.,Browne,N.,&Cooper,E.(2000).Pedagogicallyappropriatein-tegrationoinormationaltechnologyinanelementarypreserviceteacheredu-cationprogram.Journal of Technology and Teacher Education,8(3),219229.Mann,D.Shakeshat,C.,Becker,J.,&Kottkamp,R.(1999).West Virginias
Basic Skills/Computer Education program: An analysis of student achievement.SantaMonica,CA:MilkenFamilyFoundation.Marra,R.(2004).Anonlinecoursetohelpteachersusetechnologytoen-hancelearning:Successesandlimitations.Journal of Technology and TeacherEducation,12(3),411429.McRobbie,C.J.,Ginns,I.S.,&Stein,S.J.(2000).Preserviceprimaryteach-ersthinkingabouttechnologyandtechnologyeducation.International Journalof Technology and Design Education,10,81101.Milbrath,Y.L.,&Kinzie,M.B.(2000).Computertechnologytrainingorprospectiveteachers:computerattitudesandperceivedsel-ecacy.Journal ofTechnology and Teacher Education,8(4),373396.Moursund,D.,&Bieleeldt,T.(1999).Will new teachers be prepared to teach
in a digital age? A national survey on information technology in teacher education. SantaMonica,CA:MilkenExchangeonEducationalTechnology.Available:http://www.m.org/publications/publications.ta?page=154.Mullen,L.(2001).Beyondinusion:Preservicestudentsunderstandingsabouteducationaltechnologiesorteachingandlearning.Journal of Technologyand Teacher Education,9(3),447466.NationalCenterorEducationStatistics.(2001).Internet Access in U.S. Public
Schools and Classrooms: 19942001.RetrievedAugust20,2004,romhttp://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d02/tables/dt419.asp.NationalCouncilorAccreditationoTeacherEducation.(2003).International Tech-
nology Education Association/Council on Technology Teacher Education (ITEA/CTTE).Retrieved July 27, 2004, rom http://www.ncate.org/standard/programstds.htm.
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
18/27
Nolan,P.(1992).Computersineducation;Achievingequitableaccessanduse.Journal of Research on Computing in Education,24(3)299314.OReilly,D.(2003).Makinginormationandcommunicationstechnology
work.echnology, Pedagogy and Education,12(3),417446.OTA(1995).Teachersandtechnology:Makingtheconnection.(OTA-EHR-
616).Washington,DC:U.S.GovernmentPrintingOfce.Available:http://www.wws.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/byteserv.prl/~ota/disk1/1995/9541/9541.PDF.Peters,J.M.,OBrien,G.,Briscoe,C.,&Korth,W.W.(1995).Along-term
assessmentoanintegratedmicrocomputercomponentorpreservicesecond-aryscienceteachers.Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science eaching,14(4),499520.Pierson,M.E.,&McNeil,S.(2000).Preservicetechnologyintegration
throughcollaborativeactioncommunities.Contemporary Issues in echnologyand eacher Education, 1(1),189199.Plante,J.&Beattie,D.(2004).Education, skills, and learningResearch papers:
Connectivity and IC integration in Canadian elementary and secondary schools: Firstresults from the Information and Communications echnologies in Schools Survey, 20032004.StatisticsCanada.RetrievedAugust29,2004,romhttp://www.schoolnet.ca/home/documents/Report_EN.pd.Pope,M.,Hare,P.,&Howard,E.(2002).Technologyintegration:Closingthegap
betweenwhatpreserviceteachersaretaughttodoandwhattheycando.Journal ofechnology and eacher Education,10(2),191203.Robertson,H.(2003).Towardatheoryonegativity:Teachereducationand
inormationandcommunicationstechnology.Journal of eacher Education,54(4),280296.Rowley,J.,Dysard,G.,&Arnold,J.(2005).Developinganewtechnologyinu-
sionprogramorpreparingtomorrowsteachers.Journal of echnology and eacherEducation, 13(1),105123.Russell,M.,Bebell,D.,ODwyer,L.,&OConnor,K.(2003).Examiningteacher
technologyuse:Implicationsorpreserviceandinserviceteacherpreparation.Journalof eacher Education,54(4),297310.Sahin,T.Y.(2003).Studentteachersperceptionsoinstructionaltechnology:De-
velopingmaterialsbasedonaconstructivistapproach.British Journal of Educationalechnology,34(1),6774.Sanders,J.(inpress).Genderandtechnology:Aresearchreview.InC.Skelton,B.
Francis,&L.Smulyan(Eds.),Handbook of gender and education.London:Sage.Scardamalia,M.&Bereiter,C.(1996).Computersupportorknowledge-build-
ingcommunities.InT.Koschmann(Ed.),CSCL: Teory and practice of an emergingparadigm (pp.249268).Mahwah,NJ:Erlbaum.Seels,B.,Campbell,S.,&Talsma,V.(2003).Supportingexcellenceintech-
nologythroughcommunitiesolearning.Educational echnology Research andDevelopment,51(1),91104.Shashaani, L. (1994). Socioeconomic status, parents sex-role stereotypes, and
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
19/27
Shoner,M.B.,Dias,L.B.,&Tomas,C.D.(2001).Amodelorcollabor-ativerelationshipsbetweeninstructionaltechnologyandteachereducationpro-grams.Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 1(3),395411.SIIA.(2000).Report on the eectiveness o technology in schools.Washington,DC:SotwareandInormationIndustryAssociation.Simpson,M.,Payne,F.,Munro,R.,&Hughes,S.(1999).Usinginormationandcommunicationstechnologyasapedagogicaltool:Whoeducatestheedu-cators?Journal o Education or Teaching,25(3),247262.Simpson,M.,Payne,F.,Munro,R.,&Lynch,E.(1998).Usinginorma-tionandcommunicationstechnologyasapedagogicaltool:AsurveyoninitialteachereducationinScotland.Jouranl o Inormation Technology or TeacherEducation,7(3),431446.Sivin-Kachala,J.(1998).Report on the eectiveness o technology in school,
19901997.Washington,DC:SotwarePublishersAssociation.Smith,S.J.,&Robinson,S.(2003).echnologyintegrationthroughcol-laborativecohorts:Preparingutureteacherstousetechnology.Remedial andSpecial Education,24(3),154160.Snider,S.L.(2003).Exploringtechnologyintegrationinafeld-basedteachereducationprogram:Implementationeortsandfndings.Journal o Research onTechnology in Education, 34(3),230249.Stevens,J.P.(1992).Applied multivariate statistics or the social science applica-
tions(2nded.).Hillsdale,NJ:Erlbaum.Stuhlmann,J.M.,&aylor,H.G.(1999).Preparingtechnicallycompetentstudentteachers:Athreeyearstudyointerventionsandexperiences.Journal oTechnology and Teacher Education,7(4),333350.Strudler,N.,&Wetzel,L.(1999).Lessonsromexemplarycollegesoeduca-tion:Factorsaectingtechnologyintegrationinpreserviceprograms.Educa-tional Technology Research and Development,47(4),6381.Strudler,N.,Archambault,L.,Bendixen,L.,Anderson,D.,&Weiss,R.(2003).ProjectHREAD:echnologyhelpingrestructureeducationalaccessanddelivery.Educational Technology Research and Development,51(1),3954.Tompson,A.D.,Schmidt,D.A.,&Davis,N.E.(2003).echnologycol-laborativesorsimultaneousrenewalinteachereducation.Educational Technol-ogy Research and Development,51(1),7389.U.S.DepartmentoEducation.(2000).E-Learning: Putting a world-class
education at the fngertips o all children[Report].Washington,DC.RetrievedAugust30,2004,romhttp://www.ed.gov/about/oces/list/os/technology/re-ports/e-learning.pd.U.S.DepartmentoEducation,NationalCenterorEducationStatistics.(2002).Internet access in U.S. public schools and classrooms: 19942002.RetrievedAugust30,2004,romhttp://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d02/tables/dt419.asp.Vannatta,R.A.,&Beyerbach,B.(2000).Facilitatingaconstructivistvisiono technology integration among education aculty and preservice teachers.
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
20/27
Vrasida,C.,&McIsaac,M.S.(2001).Integratingtechnologyintoteachingandteachereducation:Implicationsorpolicyandcurriculumreorm.Educa-tional Media International,23,127132.Wang,Y.(2002).Fromteacher-centrednesstostudent-centredness:Arepre-
serviceteachersmakingtheconceptualshitwhenteachingininormationageclassrooms?Educational Media International,39(34),257265.Wang,L.,Ertmer,P.A.,&Newby,.J.(2004).Increasingpreserviceteach-
erssel-ecacybeliesortechnologyintegration.Journal o Research on ech-nology in Education, 36(3),231250.Wang.Y.,&Holthaus,P.(1999).Facingtheworld:Studentteacherscom-
puteruseduringpracticum.Journal o Educational echnology Systems,27(3),207223.Waxman,H.C.,Connell,M.L.,&Gray,J.(2002).A quantitative synthesis
o recent research on the efects o teaching and learning with technologyon studentoutcomes.Naperville,IL:NorthCentralRegionalLaboratory.Wenglinsky,H.(1998).Does it compute?Te relationship between educational
technology and student achievement in mathematics.Princeton,NJ:EducationalestingService.Wepner,S.B.,Ziomek,N.,&aoL.(2003).Treeteachereducatorsper-
spectivesabouttheshitingresponsibilitiesoinusingtechnologyintothecur-riculum.Action in eacher Education,24(4),5363.Whetstone,L.,&Carr-Chellman,A.A.(2001).Preparingpreserviceteachers
tousetechnology:Surveyresults.echrends,45(4),1119.Whitley,B.E.,Jr.(1997).Genderdiferencesincomputer-relatedattitudes
andbehaviors:Ameta-analysis.Computers in Human Behavior,13,122.Willis,E.M.,&SujodeMontes,L.(2002).Doesrequiringatechnology
courseinpreserviceteachereducationafectstudentteacherstechnologyuseintheclassroom?Journal o Computing in eacher Education,18(3),7680.Wilkerson,.L.(2003).Atrialmodelorpreparingpreserviceteachersor
theintegrationotechnologyinteachingandlearning.Action in eacher Educa-tion,24(4),2732.Wilkinson,L.,Buboltz,W.,Cook,J.,Matthew,K.,&Tomas,D.(2000).
Minoritiesandmainstreamculture:Doesatechnologygapexist?InC.Craw-ord,D.Willis,R.Carlsen,I.Gibson,K.McFerrin,J.Price,etal.(Eds.),Pro-ceedings o society or inormation technology and teacher education internationalconerence 2000(pp.25142519).Chesapeake,VA:AACE.Wright,V.H.,Wilson,E.K.,Gordon,W.,&Stallworth,J.B.(2002).Master
technologyteacher:Apartnershipbetweenpreserviceandinserviceteachersandteachereducators.Contemporary Issues in echnology and eacher Education,2(3),353362.
Yildirm,S.(2000).Efectsoaneducationalcomputingcourseonpreserviceandinserviceteachers:Adiscussionandanalysisoattitudesanduse. Journal oResearch on Computing in Education, 32(4), 479495.
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
21/27
DIxA
fStudiesReviewed Su
rveyRel*
Qua
l*L*
Size
Pro
gram
D
esc.
Model
Desc.
ot.
Strat.T
eory
Data
Aa
l.
Att.
Chg.
Abil.
Chg.
Use
Chg.
01)
Yes
No
No
Elem
57
Partial
Partial
1
No
Form4
No
Yes
No
Gibson
(2000)
Yes
No
No
NR1
14
No
Yes
1
Yes
Desc2
No
No
No
001)
Yes
Yes
No
Elem
89
No
Partial
2
Part
Form
Yes
Yes
No
003)
No
No
No
NR
0
No
Yes
1
Yes
None
No
No
No
(2005)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Mix
244
No
Yes
4
Yes
Form
No
No
No
(1997)
No
No
Yes
Mix
285
No
Yes
3
Part
Perc3
No
No
No
003)
No
No
Yes
Elem
26
Yes
Partial
1
Part
Perc
No
No
No
al.
(20
05)
Yes
No
No
NR
34
Partial
Yes
4
Part
Form
No
Yes
No
etal.(
2001)
Yes
No
Yes
NR
60
No
Yes
5
Yes
Form
No
Yes
No
al.
(20
03)
No
No
Yes
NR
1
No
Partial
1
Part
Desc
No
No
No
l.(2003)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Elem
100
Partial
Yes
4
Part
Perc
No
No
No
03)
No
No
Yes
Elem
21
No
Yes
1
No
Perc
No
No
No
004)
No
No
Yes
MS
2
No
No
2
Part
Desc
No
No
No
Snider(2003)
No
No
No
NR
0
No
Yes
1
Yes
None
No
No
No
(2001)
Yes
No
Yes
Mix
0
No
Yes
2
Part
Desc
No
No
No
al.
(2004)
Yes
Yes
No
Elem
43
No
Yes
2
Yes
Form
No
Yes
No
&Har
wood
No
No
No
NR
0
No
Yes
2
Yes
Desc
No
No
No
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
22/27
SurveyRel*
Qual*L*
Size
Pro
gram
D
esc.
Model
Desc.
ot.
Strat.T
eory
Data
Aal.
Att.
Chg.
Abil.
Chg.
Use
Chg.
alba(2
002)
Yes
No
Yes
Elem
101
No
No
2
Part
Desc
No
No
No
&Norris(2000)
No
No
Yes
NR
16
Partial
Yes
4
Partial
Desc
No
No
No
Riedel
(2003)
Yes
No
No
Mix
201
Partial
Partial
3
Partial
Perc
No
No
No
tal.(2
003)
No
No
Yes
NR
10
Partial
Partial
3
No
Desc
No
No
No
illman
(2000)
No
No
No
NR
0
No
Partial
4
No
Desc
No
No
No
.(2001
)
No
No
Yes
Fac
12
Partial
No
2
Partial
Perc
No
No
No
al.
(2003)
Yes
Yes
No
NR
69
No
Yes
2
Yes
Form
Yes
No
No
Gunter
(2004)
Yes
No
No
NR
40
No
Partial
3
Partial
Perc
No
No
No
l.(2002)
No
No
No
Sec
0
Yes
Yes
3
Yes
None
No
No
No
ltonet
al.
(2000)
No
No
No
NR
0
No
Yes
2
Partial
None
No
No
No
002)
No
No
No
Elem
18
No
Yes
3
Yes
Perc
No
No
No
m&To
pper
No
No
No
NR
0
No
Yes
5
Yes
None
No
No
No
&Zembal-Saul
No
No
Yes
Elem
0
No
Yes
3
Partial
Desc
No
No
No
001)
Yes
Yes
No
NR
171
No
Yes
2
Partial
Form
Yes
No
No
999)
Yes
Yes
No
Elem
73
Partial
Yes
1
Partial
Perc
No
No
No
999)
No
No
No
NR
0
No
Yes
1
Yes
None
No
No
No
&Wed
man
Yes
Yes
No
NR
21
Partial
Yes
5
Yes
Form
Yes
Yes
Yes
DIxA,COn'
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
23/27
SurveyRel*
Qual*L*
Size
Pro
gram
D
esc.
Model
Desc.
ot.
Strat.T
eory
Data
Anal.
Att.
Chng.
Abil.
Chng.
Use
Chng.
Gentile
&Lon-
00)
Yes
No
No
Elem
0
Partial
Yes
5
Partial
Perc
No
No
No
Duran
(2004)
No
No
No
NR
22
No
Yes
2
Yes
None
No
No
No
aack(2
005)
Yes
Yes
No
Mix
52
Yes
Yes
4
Yes
Form
Yes
Yes
Yes
al.(20
04)
Yes
No
No
Fac
0
No
Yes
3
Yes
Perc
No
No
No
(2003)
Yes
Yes
No
NR
570
No
Yes
3
Partial
Desc
No
No
No
(2003
)
Yes
Yes
No
NR
102
No
Partial
1
Partial
Form
Yes
No
No
al.(2000)
No
No
No
Elem
0
No
Yes
2
Yes
Desc
No
No
No
etal.(2000)
No
No
Yes
Elem
21
Partial
Yes
2
Partial
Desc
No
No
No
&Kinz
ie(2000)
Yes
No
No
NR
42
Yes
Partial
2
No
Form
Yes
No
No
001)
No
No
Yes
NR
4
No
Partial
1
Partial
Desc
No
No
No
1)
No
No
No
NR
0
Partial
Yes
1
Partial
None
No
No
No
2003)
Yes
No
Yes
NR
18
Partial
Partial
1
Partial
Perc
No
No
No
l.(1995)
Yes
Yes
No
NR
17
No
Yes
1
Yes
Form
Yes
Yes
No
McNe
il(2000)
No
No
No
NR
0
Yes
Yes
9
Yes
None
No
No
No
(2002)
Yes
No
No
Elem
26
No
Yes
2
Partial
Form
Yes
No
No
al.(2005)
Yes
No
No
NR
0
No
Yes
3
Yes
Perc
No
No
No
03)
Yes
No
No
Elem
80
No
No
1
Yes
Perc
No
No
No
(2003)
Yes
No
Yes
NR
98
Partial
Yes
5
Yes
Perc
No
No
No
tal.(2001)
Yes
No
No
MS
0
No
Yes
3
Yes
Desc
No
No
No
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
24/27
SurveyRel*
Qual*L*
Size
Pro
gram
D
esc.
Model
Desc.
ot.
Strat.T
eory
Data
Aal.
Att.
Chg.
Abil.
Chg.
Use
Chg.
tal.(1
999)
Yes
No
No
Mix
243
No
No
1
Partial
Perc
No
No
No
tal.(1
998)
Yes
No
No
Mix
1313
Yes
No
0
No
Perc
No
No
No
Robinson(2003)
No
No
Yes
Spec
1
No
Partial
2
Partial
Desc
No
No
No
03)
Yes
Yes
No
NR
66
Partial
Yes
2
Yes
Form
No
Yes
No
n&aylor
No
No
Yes
Elem
4
No
Partial
4
No
Desc
No
No
No
al.(20
03)
Yes
Yes
Yes
NR
273
No
Yes
6
Yes
Form
No
No
Yes
netal.(2003)
No
No
Yes
Elem
28
No
Yes
6
Yes
Desc
No
No
No
&Beye
rbach
Yes
Yes
No
Mix
122
No
Yes
3
Yes
Form
No
Yes
No
&McIsaac(2001)
No
No
No
NR
0
No
No
3
Yes
None
No
No
No
02)
Yes
Yes
No
NR
74
No
Partial
1
Partial
Form
No
No
No
.(2004)
Yes
Yes
No
NR
280
Partial
Yes
2
Yes
Form
Yes
No
No
Holthau
s(1998
Yes
No
No
Elem
64
No
Partial
1
No
Perc
No
No
No
(2003)
No
No
No
NR
0
No
Yes
1
Partial
None
No
No
No
al.(
2002)
No
No
Yes
Sec
10
Partial
Partial
6
Partial
Desc
No
No
No
2000)
Yes
Yes
No
NR
114
No
Yes
1
No
Form
Yes
No
No
Reported
scriptiveDataOnly
centagesReported
rmalStatistics(e.g.,t-test,
ANOVA,correlations)
DIxA,COn'
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
25/27
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
26/27
APPEnDIxB,COn'T
Variable DescriptioScorigCriteria
Multimedia
Wasmultimedia(e.g.,portolios,
onlinelearning,videocasestudies)usedtoteachtechnology?
0No
1Yes
Collaborative
Wastherecollaborationamongpreserviceteachers,educationac-ulty,andmentorteacherstousetechnology?
0No1Yes
FieldBased
Didpreserviceteacherspracticetheuseotechnologyintheclassroom?
0No1Yes
Faculty
Didthetechnologyprogramocus
onimprovingacultyuseotech-nology?
0No
1Yes
Mentoreachers
Didthetechnologyprogramocusonimprovingmentorteachersuseotechnology?
0No1Yes
Access
Didthetechnologyprogramocusonaccesstosotware,hardware,and/ortechnologicalsupport?
0No1Yes
TeorybehindStrategies
Wasthetheorybehindusingspe-cifcstrategiesusedtoincorporatetechnologybasedonsoundtheory?
0Notprovided1Partially2Yes
DescriptionoStrategies
Wasthereaclear,coherentdescrip-tionothestrategiesusedtoincor-poratetechnologyintotheteachereducationprogram?
0Notprovided1Partially2Yes
EFFECONLEARNING
ComputerAttitudes
Didcomputerattitudesimproveasaresultothestrategiesusedtoincorporatetechnology?
0No1Yes
ComputerAbility
Didcomputerabilityimproveasaresultothestrategiesusedtoin-corporatetechnology?
0No1Yes
ComputerUse Didcomputeruseimproveasaresultothestrategiesusedtoin-corporate technology?
0No1Yes
-
8/14/2019 Preparing Teachers for the Future Gillingham
27/27