Technology Based Instructions

DEVELOPING TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATED LESSONS-

INDIVIDUAL AND GROUP

INTRODUCTION
When designing computer-based activities, give consideration to how
technology can be used to acquire, organize, demonstrate, and communicate
information. The planning process for technology integration is similar to planning a
curriculum unit. The main differences are HOW the students acquire the knowledge
and skills, HOW they demonstrate and apply the knowledge and skills, and HOW
learning will be assessed or evaluated. These differences have a major influence on
the structure of a lesson plan as they incorporate the use of the computer.

In addition to the skills and knowledge that must be taught as part of the
curriculum, consideration must also be given to the technology skills students need
to learn. Often teachers assume that the students will figure it out on their own.
However, this can waste instructional time. It is a good idea to plan ahead, so that the
time in the computer lab is well spent.

Technology has become integrated in the classroom in so many ways, that we

often don't even think about how we are using it. The Education World Tech Team
offers lessons and activities to help educators make better use of technology tools for
instruction, and to help students improve their technology skills within the context of
the regular curriculum. Included: Integration activities that utilize the Web,
PowerPoint, Excel, digital photography, SMART Boards, and more.

In more and more schools today, technology is recognized as an instructional

tool, not as a subject of instruction. Still, many educators, less familiar and less
comfortable with technology than their students, struggle to seamlessly integrate a
growing list of technology tools into their regular curriculum. So, to help you make
the best use of technology in your schools and classrooms this year, we asked the
Education World Tech Team to share some of their favorite technology integration
lessons, activities, and strategies with you.

"Using technology in the classroom is becoming easier for teachers,"

instructional technology consultant Jamye Swinford told Education World. "Students
are coming to class with more skills. Whether a teacher requires it or not, most
students use technology for their projects."

Probably the technology tool used most often for student projects is the World
Wide Web.
WEB SITES

"The Internet has many sites that easily lend themselves to classroom
integration," Swinford pointed out. "A favorite of mine, Refdesk.com, has a Site of
the Day section containing a wealth of useful and interesting Web sites. An archive
also is available. Other useful sections of the site include a Thought of the Day,
Word of the Day, and Current Events. All those sections provide a wealth of research
and discussion opportunities.

"Refdesk also has links to newspapers, listed by state and country. Foreign
language classes can access online news articles in the language being studied,"
Swinford continued. "Dictionary and thesaurus links also are easily accessible.
Translation links are available too -- all in one place on one page. If a student or
teacher needs a starting page to find resources, I definitely recommend this site."

"The Internet is loaded with activities for all types of classes," agreed high
school science teacher John Tiffany. "I regularly try to integrate Internet-based
activities into my astronomy class, my biology class, and my integrated science class
for freshmen. Activities might include current readings on topics in the field, or
activities that students can do. My astronomy class is small, so this year, I intend to
give each student an e-mail account and post articles to my Web site. Students will
respond individually, I'll post their responses, and have students respond to one
another's postings."

"Many times, I worked with a science teacher to help students use the Internet
to learn about planets, hurricanes, earthquakes, and so on," said retired K-8 computer
teacher/coordinator Betty Kistler. "We would locate appropriate sites and then I
would create a Web page for students to use. The science teacher sometimes came
into the lab with his students and guided the research; other times, he used the
Internet on a big screen in his classroom. Students sometimes worked in pairs to
answer questions. I found that most teachers felt more secure using the Internet in
the lab with me or in their classroom if I was there. As time went by, they became
more confident and comfortable with the technology (and the technology became
more reliable too)."

"In history," high school Webmaster Fred Holmes said, "a teacher might
assign students to research different areas of a particular subject. Students would
then go onto the Internet, collect pictures, information, and so on, and present the
results of their research to the class. A study of Civil War battles would be an
example of that type of activity; the teacher would assign groups different battles, the
students would research their assigned battles, collect pictures, and then give a
guided tour of the battlefield, telling what happened there."

Internet scavenger hunts are another way to integrate technology into almost
any topic or subject area. "I have my older students create online scavenger hunts for
younger students," noted computer coordinator Jennifer Wagner. "It improves my
older students' research and typing skills, and provides lower grade teachers with
extra activities for their students."
 Fourth grade teacher Mary Kreul offered a number of Internet-based activities for
all grade levels.

 Visit the Web pages of state and local historical societies when studying your state
or locality; learn about the region's history and famous citizens, and access current
information about your area.

 Puzzlemaker can be used by teachers and students alike to develop crossword

puzzles, word searches, mazes, cryptograms, and more based on curriculum
vocabulary and concepts.

 ePals allows students to contact class or individual partners, work on writing

skills, exchange weather information, compare communities, and make new
friends around the world via e-mail.

 Blogging is similar to an online diary; it provides a quick and easy way for
teachers and students to share work, opinions, ideas, and information. Blogging
can be used with 5- and 6-year-olds, with high school students, and with
elementary age students. For more information about blogging, visit Weblogs in
Education.

 Check the daily weather for the weather in states or countries students are
studying in social studies; add a math connection by using a graphing program to
chart temperatures, precipitation, or storms, and then compare the results to
weather in your area.

 Take virtual field trips to places connected to people or places students are
learning about; for example Thomas Jefferson's Monticello, Cleopatra's
Palace, Alaska, or Appomattox.

 The Library of Congress has wonderful collections of music (both sound files and
sheet music) that can help your music department contribute to a study American
History.
POWERPOINT AND EXCEL:

"PowerPoint is another technology tool that's exceptionally easy to use in the

classroom," noted Jamye Swinford. "All kinds of research projects can be adapted to
this application.

"If a teacher has experience," Swinford said, "presentation skills also can be
emphasized. Besides standard presentations, such as slide shows, projects may be
presented in an interactive way, using a game show format, for example. A student I
know created "Millionaire Muslim Style," using a popular game show format to
present facts about the Muslim religion. It was fun and everyone learned the
information."
 "Our students often used PowerPoint to accompany oral reports on curricular
topics," added Betty Kistler. "Perhaps the best integrated project I participated in
involved 8th graders looking at World War II posters on the Internet. Students
analyzed the posters and related them to the history of that time. I modeled this using
one poster, and then students picked two or three posters to focus on and used the
Internet to research their posters. A couple of students assisted me (or did I assist
them?) putting the posters into PowerPoint. In Social Studies class, groups of
students who had focused on a particular poster discussed their thoughts. Then, each
group presented its findings to the class, projecting the PowerPoint images up on the
screen. The result was a lively and thoughtful discussion between the reporting
groups and the rest of the class."

"Excel is another easily adaptable application," Swinford said. "Charts and

graphs are a natural with Excel. This application can be used to tally results for any
kind of question. Elementary students can enter results, create graphs, and compare
and contrast their results.

"The natural graph structure of Excel can be used by students to create game
boards or patterns," Swinford added. "Calendars or timelines also are easily created
with Excel. Older students can create interactive lessons or activities. The database
capabilities of Excel allow easy sorting and classifying of information."

"Spreadsheets, such as those created in Excel, also can be used in sociology

and psychology to chart different observations," noted Fred Holmes.

Betty Kistler's sixth grade students used the Internet to obtain weather in a
country they were studying in-depth over a period of time; they then used Excel to
record and compare the weather in that country to their own.

WORD PROCESSING:

"Facilitate students' ability to use word processors (depending on age, of

course) and they can do a lot with technology on their own without taking up teacher
time," Stew Pruslin said.

"Word processing is a standard application available in almost every school,"

Jamye Swinford agreed. "A word processing program can be used for desktop
publishing; students can create newsletters and magazines, advertisements and
flyers, even business cards.

"The drawing tools included in most word processing programs allow students
to create pictures and logos, puzzles and more," Swinford said. "Stories can be
illustrated. Cookbooks can be created with imported graphics or custom illustrations.
Using the HTML conversion utilities, students can create Web pages from word
processing documents. Interactive documents can be made with the use of
hyperlinks.

"Word processing features, such as tracking and commenting, facilitate

collaborative projects," Swinford added. "Tables are useful for collecting data and
recording information. If a word processing program was the only application
available, a teacher could have a technology-rich classroom with little effort."

"We did some keyboarding instruction beginning in grade 3, and then used the
weekly spelling list for practice," noted Betty Kistler; "sort of like the old 'write the
words 5 times' assignment. Students eventually became proficient with word
processing for writing essays. In 6th grade, students used word processing to report
on a week-long camping experience; in 7th grade, they learned to use columns to
create a newspaper based on topics from colonial times."

"Students also can use a word processing program to record 'What I Learned
This Week,' added preservice instructor Vicky Romano. "Each student types one or
two sentences throughout the week; then on Friday, the teacher prints the entire
document and sends it home."

"At a conference I attended on Writing Across the Curriculum, the keynote

address, given by Dr. James R. Squire, was entitled Writing to Learn," education and
instructional technology professor Bernie Poole told Education World. "The message
was simple: the act of organizing ideas with a view to communicating in writing to
others does more than simply demonstrate what knowledge we have. It activates,
reinforces, and transforms, that knowledge.

"This is a powerful idea," Poole said. "Writing is a purposeful, often

painstaking, process, the execution of which is perhaps the most educational
cognitive activity in which we and our students can be engaged. It is a process
appropriate to learners of all ages and all subject areas, right across the K-college
curriculum and beyond.

"It seems to me that we can construct a powerful syllogism based on Dr.

Squire's ideas about Writing to Learn, said Poole. "A syllogism is a logical argument
(much revered by the ancient Greeks) that makes three propositions, the first two of
which (premises) make the third (concluding) statement difficult to deny. Here's my
syllogism:

"Make sense? I think it does. As teachers, we should do all we can to have our
students use the word processor, e-mail, and chat rooms/instant messaging to write
their brains out. Think about it. How many teachers require their students to write? If
writing is such a powerful learning experience, shouldn't every teacher every day
plan activities that involve writing? And if not, why not?

"So let's get our students using the computer across the curriculum, over and
over, for assignments that involve them in 'writing their brains out.' Poole
concluded."

MISCELLANEOUS TECHNOLOGY TOOLS:

"The most important thing is for the teacher to let their imagination go," said
Fred Holmes. "If the idea works, great; if there are problems, the teacher can 'tweak'
them along the way.
 "Students can learn about the political process, for example, by working in
groups to stage an election," Holmes suggested. "Each group might select a
campaign manager, a candidate, and so on, and then create film ads promoting their
candidates. Students can edit or enhance the ads using video capture and editing
software, and then show the ads to their schoolmates and ask the student body to
vote for the best candidate."

"Students also can import pictures from the Internet or scan drawings they
created by hand or with a graphics program to add to their written reports," noted
Betty Kistler.

"Digital cameras can be used to illustrate a variety of curricular topics, such as

growing plants, changing seasons, and field trips," said Mary Kreul. "Digital photos
can be printed, used to illustrate student writing, or included in a slide show or on a
Web page."

TEACHERS:

Students, of course, aren't the only ones who get to use the fun stuff!

"I use a SMART Board and a projector to project PowerPoint presentations for
my class," John Tiffany told Education World. "It's so convenient to stand up at the
board and be able to click through a presentation by tapping on the screen. I also use
SMART Board for brainstorming sessions with students. I allow them to come to the
board and write their own ideas. If we're doing math problems, I allow students to
come to the front and work out the assignments on the SMART Board. They enjoy
doing that. I then can save their brainstorming ideas or work for future reference,
rather than having to copy it or risk losing it, as would have been the case if I'd used
a chalkboard. I also allow students to experiment with the SMART Board during
down time.

"Using PowerPoint and a projector instead of an overhead and lecture notes is

another use of technology that allows me to spice up my lectures," Tiffany said. "I
can include pictures, sounds, sound bytes, and music to enhance the information I
present.

"I also have a microscope that I've hooked up to my computer; the students are
fascinated with it," added Tiffany. "It doesn't have the best resolution, but we have
fun looking at things and trying to guess what they are. I've used it when I want to
look at specific things to use as part of a lesson. It's a lot easier and quicker than
setting up a microscope and having students take turns looking at something
individually."

To promote technology use among their students, Jennifer Wagner

recommends that teachers encourage online projects, visit other teachers' Web sites
to see how they are integrating technology, and get together with other teachers on a
bi-weekly basis to go through the curriculum and share ways they can use
technology in their lessons.
 Vicky Romano suggests that teachers hold 'office hours' one or two evenings a
week via an online chat room, and answer questions from students and their families.

ADMINISTRATORS:

Of course, few school-based technology programs can succeed without the

support and encouragement of school administrators.

"What I have found is that one of the most important indicators to tying
technology-skill instruction to the curriculum, particularly at the K-12 level, is a firm
grounding in technology standards on the part of administrators," Nicholas Langlie
told Education World. "If administrators do not understand the scope of what they
should know regarding technology, technology use will not be implemented
successfully. If administrators cannot appreciate the scope of what is involved, how
can they be expected to value the technology and align it with the curriculum? I do
not believe they can.

"I believe that without informed leadership, most technology initiatives are
fragmented and lack cohesion," said Langlie, Online Teaching/Learning Support at
New York's Hudson Valley Community College. "I believe it to be very difficult to
tie technology-skill instruction to the curriculum if you cannot pull together all the
pieces and appreciate what it is doing in the bigger picture of the culture of learning
you have in your school district."

"The best way to get technology integrated into the curriculum is to make sure
your district's teachers are provided with lots and lots of training," added education
technology specialist Robin Smith. "For the past four years, our teachers have been
required to take 14 hours of technology training in the summer as part of their
contract. We provide training at various times during the summer and teachers select
the courses and times that are most convenient and beneficial to them. We also
provide training during the school year.

"To be sure we are providing what teachers need, we have a committee of

approximately 20 people, including both technophobic teachers and technology
experts, as well as administrators, who determine what topics we need to provide
training for. This summer," Smith noted, "the committee provided a full day of
training for all teachers at each grade level. During the training, we provided a grid
of benchmarks to be met for each grade, projects and activities they might do with
their classes to meet those benchmarks, and evaluation sheets to ensure that teachers
can show parents and administrators what skills students have successfully
implemented and what deficiencies still need to be addressed.

"This summer, we also trained administrators to be are aware of what teachers

should be doing and what they need to look for in the classroom to assure that their
teachers are integrating technology," Smith said.

"I think the biggest things district need to remember," Smith said, "is that
technology integration can't be accomplished overnight. It takes timebaby steps and
lots of patience. Through training, time, strong administrative support and
leadership, and long term planning, however, all schools can reach their goals for
technology integration."

Lesson organization:

Computers help you better organize and present your information. Typing up your
notes in Microsoft Word or Google Docs, or creating a PowerPoint presentation,
helps you focus less on how you’re going to teach and more on whatyou’re going to
cover. During class, you can project those notes onto a big screen to give students an
indication of where the lesson is going. If you do have a tendency to take rabbit
trails, or if your class is especially proficient at finding them, it’s easy to refocus and
redirect when the lesson content is neatly organized on screen.

Having the notes projected onto a big screen also helps you focus on the overall
content instead of getting lost in the minutiae. Rather than taking the time to write
everything up on the board with a marker while you’re giving the lesson (and
simultaneously having to worry about your handwriting and spelling), you can
instead focus on expounding the content.

2. Visual aids:

I’m a very visual learner, so when I teach, I like to use as many visual aids as I can.
If I’m teaching about weather, for example, I want to not only talk about the subject
but also show my students relevant pictures so they can better understand the topic.
Fortunately, the Internet provides more opportunities than ever to find relevant
images so you can give students a concrete context for the subject. Pre-selected
images can also be projected or shown on individual computers to reinforce the
lesson while you talk. At the very least, you can print pictures off of a personal
computer and show them to the class.
3. Videos:

A short, entertaining, instructional video is a great way to get students excited about
learning. Some of my favorite sites for this are Brainpop, National Geographic Kids,
and National Geographic on YouTube (especially the 101 videos like Tornadoes
101). Your students are also bound to love the Crash Course series with Hank Green;
you can use these videos to quickly introduce a subject, supplement your own
lessons, or review the material before an exam.

4. Class reading:

I used to teach as a substitute in one classroom in which there was a Kindle library
that the teachers shared and used in their English classes. The students could adjust
the size of the text and follow along as their classmates took turns reading. Besides
using Kindles, you can also project the assigned text onto a big screen or use
personal computers to direct the students to sites like Learning A-Z, which has
leveled e-books and guided lessons.
5. Board work with a SMART board:

I love SMART boards — with this technology, you can easily project your computer
screen onto the board while still retaining the functionality of a traditional classroom
whiteboard. This means that you can display any pictures, notes, or practice work
from your computer and then write all over them as you discuss different elements of
the lesson. Students love coming up and writing on this board, too; this makes
practice work for subjects like math, grammar, and languages especially fun.

If you don’t have access to a SMART board but do have access to a computer and
projector, you can achieve similar results by simply projecting the image from your
computer onto a whiteboard.

6. Games:

Educational games are a great way to reinforce your lesson and engage your students
(read more about the lessons that come from playing games). Students can play pre-
selected games on individual computers, or you can project one game onto your
board and play it as a class.

For example, Classcraft offers both pre-made and make-your-own quests that can be
used to guide students through a particular lesson or unit. To make these quests even
more engaging, you can include an accompanying online game or short video. Other
websites with educational games include Sheppard Software, Fun Brain, PBS Kids
Games, and National Geographic Kids Games.
7. Research:

While I love hard-copy books, there’s no denying that the Internet has expanded the
range of available resources and made research easier than ever before — students
no longer have to trudge on over to the library and find books on their research topic,
then flip through hundreds of pages to find what they’re looking for. Now,
computers enable students to quickly and easily collect information from a wide
range of credible online resources. Students can also use local library web pages to
more efficiently search for relevant hard-copy sources.

8. Presentations

When it comes to presentations, computers provide a fun variety of ways for students
to share their knowledge. PowerPoint is definitely a favorite that can be used with all
ages. Students can write a story, display graphs and pictures, and practice public
speaking as they navigate through the slides in an oral presentation. Prezi is another
excellent online presentation resource for students; it gives them a bit more freedom
and creativity in how they choose to present the information and transition between
“slides.”

Students can also present what they’ve learned by using tools such as Microsoft
Publisher to create bookmarks, brochures, posters, or postcards. There are even
programs to guide students through the process of developing and designing their
own websites. And of course, computers also enable students to type up high-quality
reports, with the added benefit of helping them learn from editing features that check
for spelling and grammar errors, as well as other writing mistakes.

Beyond the lesson

The role of a teacher continues long after the lesson has ended. To that end, here are
two ways in which computers can enrich the post-lesson experience.

9. Communication and feedback:

Some schools provide online portals like Canvas through which teachers and
students can communicate via messages or discussion boards. This encourages
questions and dialogue about classroom assignments. It also enables teachers to give
immediate feedback on any project or assignment.

Did you know?

Classcraft offers a messaging feature that allows you to communicate with students
and parents who have created parent accounts. You can also send announcements as
one-way messages that blast out to all students or parents. Learn more about this
feature here.

10. Grades

Rather than recording grades on individual papers and in a gradebook, and then
sending out paper report cards at the end of each term, teachers can post the grades
in an online portal that’s accessible to both students and parents. This allows
everyone to get an immediate idea of how the student is doing. If the student is
struggling with a concept, the parent is informed early enough to be able to work
with the teacher on providing extra support. Plus, there’s less of a need to worry
about any paper communication getting lost in backpacks and pockets.

Technology and learning go hand in hand

Computer technology has grown in leaps and bounds since the 80s. Whereas it was
once a rare privilege to have access to computers, it’s now almost impossible not to
(at the very least, there are libraries and internet cafes available to those who don’t
own a personal computer). And while computers are not a necessary component of
teaching (I’ve certainly taught without them), they do expand the possibilities
available to you and your students. When used properly, classroom technology
makes learning more fun, engaging, and highly effective.
 The issue of computer technology integration in teacher education has reached the

national level, resulting in standards for schools, colleges, and departments of

education (SCDEs) that address the integration of computer technology as a tool to

enhance student learning. As a result, to meet these standards faculty members at

SCDEs are faced with the challenge of developing computer technology use and

integration skills in preservice teachers. This study explored the practice of

integrating computer technology into the curriculum of three teacher preparation

programs. By studying the process of computer technology infusion, this research

study focused on defining the developmental stages SCDEs experienced. As a result,

a Five-Stage Model of computer technology integration was produced.

Theoretical Framework

Technological changes in the past quarter of a century have challenged

professional educators to reevaluate their instructional skills and to reconstruct their

delivery as they assist students in integrating new technology tools. This resulting

phenomenon is described by change theorist Everett M. Rogers as the diffusion of an

innovation and served as the theoretical framework for this study.

Rogers (1995) defined diffusion as “the process by which an innovation is

communicated through certain channels over time among the members of a social

system” (p. 5). An innovation is “an idea, practice, or object that is perceived as new

by an individual or other unit of adoption” (p. 11). Rogers’ rate of adoption model,

most applicable to this study, states that innovations are diffused over time in a

pattern that resembles an S-shaped curve. An innovation goes through a period of

slow, gradual growth before experiencing a period of relatively dramatic growth.

Following this the innovation’s rate of adoption gradually stabilizes and eventually

declines. The rate of adoption is the culmination of the decision-making processes of

users regarding their implementation of the innovation. Rogers established that

individuals could be divided into innovation adopter types: innovators, early

adopters, early majority, late majority, and laggards. He then specified that the early

adopters are the key players in bringing the innovation to the point of being self-

sustaining.

Gladhart (2001) developed a Levels of Adoption model by adapting the Apple

Classrooms of Tomorrow (ACOT) study by Dwyer, Ringstaff, and Sandholtz (1992).

Gladhart’s model addressed the issues of teacher behavior, student behavior, and

technology tools regarding computer integration. The teacher behavior part of the

model lists the following five levels of computer technology integration: entry,

adoption, adaptation, appropriation, and invention.

Russell (1996) identified six stages that learners move through as they learn to use

technology: awareness, learning the process, understanding the application of the

process, familiarity and confidence, adaptation to other contexts, and creative

applications to new contexts. Russell’s action research specifically addressed the use

of email by over 400 teachers in postgraduate study. The students emailed

metacognitive reflections regarding their experiences, resulting in the emergence of

six categories “learners typically go through as they learn to use technology” (The

Study section, ¶4).

Table 1 provides a comparison of the three models regarding the stages an adopter

follows as an innovation is implemented. The models of Rogers, Gladhart, and

Russell show several similarities. Stage 1 for all three models involves the initial step

of becoming aware of and acquainted with the innovation. All three authors alluded

to the individualism of this stage; that is, the potential adopters’ feelings, lack of

communication with others about the innovation, and an overall attitude of

observation rather than activity.

Stage 2 varies considerably among the three authors. Rogers’ Stage 2 involves the

forming of a positive or negative attitude about the innovation. Russell emphasized

the use of the innovation and the development of new skills. In Stage 2, Gladhart

saw users applying their new technology skills to their teaching.

In Stage 3, Gladhart and Russell stressed that the increase in skill levels allows the

adopter to apply the use of this new technology to their teaching. In addition, with

confidence in their skills, adopters are able to provide creative integration activities

for their students. To Rogers this stage shows evidence of an individual involved in

activities leading to the decision to adopt or reject the innovation.

For Rogers, Stage 4 was the action phase of the adoption of an innovation. Here the

individual makes the decision to adopt or reject the innovation. Russell observed an

increased adopter confidence in technology use and troubleshooting. Gladhart saw

teachers shifting their instructional methods to use of technology to provide a

learner-centered approach.
Stage 5 is the final stage for Rogers and Gladhart. Rogers simply stated that it is in

this stage that the individual uses the innovation. Rogers added that users seek

reinforcement for their decision. Gladhart noted that adopters change their

instructional methods to include technology as an active, creative, and socially

interactive approach. In Stage 5, Russell described the use of technology as applying

to multiple circumstances relating to curriculum. She identified the transference of

knowledge and experience as occurring at this stage.

Summary of Models of Stages of Adoption of an Innovation

Gladhart

Adoption Rubric

Rogers for Computer Russell

Innovation- Technology Learning to Use

Decision Process Integration Technology

Stage
1 Knowledge Entry Awareness
2 Persuasion Adoption Learning the
process
3 Decision Adaptation Understanding and
application of the
process
4 Implementation Appropriation Familiarity and
confidence
5 Confirmation Invention Adaptation to other
contexts
6 Creative
application to new
contexts
These three models all dealt with individual adoption of an innovation and

served as the context from which this study was developed. This researcher

relied on the individual adoption foundation to assess a systemic level application of

the adoption of an innovation; that is, the integration of computer technology into the

teacher education curriculum.

Research Methods

This research used a descriptive case study design (Yin, 1989) to examine the three

teacher education programs. By using the case study method, this researcher was

able to “retain the holistic and meaningful characteristics of real-life events

[including] organizational and managerial processes” (Yin, 1989, p. 14).

The participating programs were chosen based on their use of the computer

technology infusion model, rather than the stand-alone course model. The infusion

model refers to the inclusion and utilization of computer technology by faculty

members and students throughout the teacher education coursework. In the stand-

alone course model one required course provides instruction for preservice teachers

on computer technology literacy and integration skills. The three teacher education

programs were determined to be at different levels of the infusion process by an

analysis of their documentation and the results of the School Technology and

Readiness (STaR) Chart (CEO Forum, nd). The participating programs are from

private institutions in northern and southern California, with enrollments ranging

from 1,250 to 7,000 students. The two schools with enrollments of 7,000 are located

in urban settings; the third, with an enrollment of 1,250, is in rural northern

California. All three institutions are accredited by the Western Association of

Schools and Colleges.

A well-rounded description was developed by triangulating data sources from the

three programs. Evidence was gathered from existing documents, survey

instruments, key informant interviews, and focus group interviews to answer the

research question: What are the processes that occur as departments of education

move toward the infusion of computer technology into the teacher education

curriculum?

Existing Documents:

In an attempt to bring teacher credentialing requirements into compliance with

national trends and standards, several California State Assembly and Senate bills

addressed the issue. Standard 20.5 – Use of Computer-Based Technology in the

Classroom, adopted in 1998, required that “candidates are able to use appropriate

computer-based technology to facilitate the teaching and learning process”

(Swofford, 2000). To meet Credential Standard 20.5, each university teacher

education department submitted an implementation plan to the California

Commission on Teacher Credentialing (CCTC). The CCTC evaluated, accepted or

rejected, and oversaw each university’s plan. For this study, the Standard 20.5

proposals were secured from 11 teacher education programs. Three programs met the

study design criteria and were accommodating to participation in the research

Survey Instruments:
Four survey instruments were used in this research: The STaR Chart, a faculty

demographic survey, the Stages of Adoption survey (Stages), and the Levels of Use

(LoU) survey. The STaR Chart (CEO Forum, nd) is a self-assessment tool which

assists SCDEs in determining the level of technology integration in the teacher

education program. The Chart provides a matrix defined by three levels of

technology integration and eight categories involving administration, faculty,

students, and alumni. The tool can be used to assess an institution’s current

technology integration status and assist in planning for the future. The STaR Chart

was used to determine the level of computer technology integration of each

participating teacher education program and was completed by the key informants on

the CEO Forum Web site. Key informants emailed the results to the researcher. The

STaR Chart findings classified one program in each of the following stages: Early

Technology Level, Developing Technology Level, and Advanced Technology Level.

The demographic questionnaire collected information from the teacher education

faculty members in each program. Personal information such as age, gender,

education level, and position status were compiled. The following items regarding

computer technology use were collected: computer access; computer, software, and

e-mail use; training; and Web site authoring. The mean scores of each of the items

were used in the triangulation procedure to provide a thorough understanding of the

characteristics of the teacher education faculty.

The Stages survey (adapted from Christensen, 1997) is a self-assessment measure

that describes the adoption behaviors of an innovation user on one of eight

progressive levels. Users select a single level that best describes their position along
the continuum of adopting computer use. The Stages survey was used in this study to

indicate the stage of computer technology use of the teacher education faculty

members in each program. A mean score of the technology use levels of the faculty

at each site was determined.

The LoU survey (adapted from Griffin & Christensen, 1999) is a self-assessment

measure that describes the computer technology use behaviors on one of seven

progressive levels. Respondents select a single level that best describes their levels

of computer technology use. The LoU was used to indicate the computer technology

use of the teacher education faculty in each program. A mean score of the

technology use levels of the faculty at each site was determined.

The teacher education faculty members from the participating institutions were

contacted through the key informants and asked to complete the demographic

questionnaire, the Stages survey, and the LoU survey. Information was gathered

from faculty members who integrated and who did not integrate computer

technology into their teaching. Faculty members were given the choice of

completing the surveys online or by hard copy.

Key Informant Interviews:

After initial telephone contact with the institutions, the key informants (those

individuals with the most information about computer technology integration in their

university teacher education programs) were identified. Key informants at each

institution participated in an in-depth interview.

Focus Group Interviews:

The focus groups at each site were comprised of at least two teacher education

faculty members, one department of education administrator, one support staff

individual, and one teacher education student. Key informants at each site assisted in

identifying focus group members.

Data Analysis

Implementation Plans for the California Credential Standard 20.5 were assessed to

determine the method for developing computer technology skills in preservice

teachers. Those universities indicating in their plan the use of the infusion model

were considered for the study. From these institutions, one Early Technology site,

one Developing Technology site, and one Advanced Technology site were identified.

The 20.5 Plan from the Early Technology program indicated they were using a

stand-alone model. However, the Department Chair indicated they were in the

process of adopting the infusion model.

Surveys:

The 19-item STaR Chart report, completed by the key informant at each site,

identified the stage of technology integration of each participating teacher education

program. As stated previously, one of the participating programs was found to be in

each of the categories, Early, Developing, and Advanced Technology.

The demographic questionnaire and each of the three surveys completed by the

faculty participants were scored, compiled, and analyzed individually and

corporately. Thirty teacher education faculty members completed the survey process,

with a 100% response rate. Demographic information was used in the triangulation

procedure to provide a thorough understanding of the characteristics of the teacher

education faculty at the three sites.

The LoU and Stages self-report, single-item surveys do not require statistical

interpretation. Mean scores on each survey for each participant and mean scores for

each site were determined.

Interviews:

Key Informant. In-person interviews with the key informant at each site were

recorded and the text transcribed verbatim. Each informant was asked a standard set

of open-ended questions (see Appendix A). A qualitative assessment procedure was

applied to the key informants’ answers. The text was read and an interpretive

statement was written that captured the essence of the key informant’s quote. Those

interpretive statements were sorted into categories. In each of the categories, themes

were identified and then paired with corresponding quotations from the key

informant.

Focus Group. A focus group, consisting of four to six teacher education

stakeholders, was interviewed to explain further stages and processes of infusing

computer technology into the teacher education curriculum. The focus group

participants were asked a standard set of open-ended questions (see Appendix A).
 The focus group interviews were recorded and the text transcribed verbatim. The text

was analyzed with the same approach used with the key informant interviews.

The existing documents, survey instruments, key informant interviews, and focus

group interviews provided this researcher with a wide range of data from which to

address the research question.

Results and Discussion

As a result of the data analysis, defining characteristics for each program were

identified. These revolved around themes of leadership, support, resources, and

faculty and student computer technology use and integration. A five-stage

developmental model of computer technology integration emerged. The stages are as

follows:

 Stage 1: Pre-integration

 Stage 2: Transition

 Stage 3: Development

 Stage 4: Expansion

 Stage 5: Systemwide Integration

Each stage in the model (see Table 2) consists of distinctive characteristics, tasks,

and actions that occur as SCDEs move toward the system-wide integration of

computer technology into the teacher education curriculum.

Table 2

Five-Stage Model for Computer Technology Integration Into Teacher Education

Curriculum

Stage Characteristics, Tasks, Actions

Pre-  lack of university leadership
Integration
 few faculty using computer technology

 stand-alone classes offered to meet credentialing

requirements

 lack of infrastructure to provide funding, support,

and resources

Transition  change in support of leadership at the university,

school, and/or departmental levels

 increased interest and vision for the use and

integration of computer technology filters down to

the teacher educators

 requirements of technology standards produces shift

Development SCDEs begin to complete tasks that enable them to

infuse computer technology throughout the

curriculum

 acquisition of technical resources such as

computers for faculty, computer labs

 hiring of education technology faculty and

 specialists

 planning and implementation of new faculty

development programs

Expansion  further movement in the department toward

providing the needed education technology

hardware, software and systematic training for

faculty success in computer technology integration

 strengthening of the relationships between the

support personnel and the faculty

 presence of these relationships produce positive

impact on the faculty levels of use and integration

 creation of an environment in which faculty are

encouraged to risk trying new technologies and

methodologies

Systemwide  evidence of the integration of standards proficiencies

Integration
for students indicated

 computer technology being imbedded into each of

the teacher education courses

 faculty and students enthusiasm for integration

increases

Stage 1, Pre-Integration, is marked by a need for university leadership at all levels to

support integration, both monetarily and organizationally. At this level, faculty

members show limited professional and personal computer technology use. In

addition, standalone classes are the only means used to meet credentialing

requirements. Last, no infrastructure has been developed to provide funding, support,

and resources.

In the second stage, Transition, major changes regarding administrative support at

the university, school, and/or departmental levels occur. There is an increased

interest and vision for the use and integration of computer technology on the part of

teacher educators. Increased use and integration of computer technology is

happening in this stage due to the requirements of external standards at state and

national levels. Administrators are using the requirement to meet the standards to

assist in the procurement of funding and additional technical support.

In the third stage, Development, SCDEs begin to complete the tasks that enable them

to integrate computer technology throughout the curriculum. They acquire technical

resources such as computers for faculty and computer labs, and they hire education

technology faculty and specialists to assist faculty members in beginning the

infusion process. In addition, the planning and implementation of faculty

development programs for integration training emerge in this stage.

Expansion, the fourth stage, is marked by further movement toward providing the

needed technology hardware, educational software, and faculty training leading to

proficiency in computer technology integration. The development and deepening of

the relationships between the support personnel and the faculty can also be seen in

this stage. The quality of these relationships can positively impact faculty levels of

use and integration. This occurs with the creation of an environment in which faculty
members dare to risk experimentation with new technologies and methodologies. At

the Developing and Advanced Technology Levels, the existing supportive

relationships were striking. Strong ties had been established between the support

personnel and the faculty, enabling the faculty members to attain higher skill levels

and a better understanding of the place of computer technology in their teaching.

Faculty members reported the importance of this one-on-one availability of a

personal resource to assist them in their use and integration of computer technology.

This need for individualized support for faculty was mentioned at the Early

Technology Level, although it had not been made available for the entire faculty.

In Stage 5, Systemwide Integration, evidences of the integration of the state and

International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) standards proficiencies for

students are evident, and computer technology is imbedded into every teacher

education course. A systematic approach to faculty development through supportive

relationship-based mentoring comes to fruition in this stage, as both faculty members

and students are enthusiastically involved in the infusion process.

It was found that the Early Technology site was working through Stage 3 –

Development; the Developing Technology site was in the beginning of Stage 5 –

Systemwide Integration; and the Advanced Technology site set the benchmarks for

Stage 5. The specific experiences of these programs occurring during the processes

of integration can be seen in Appendix B.

Conclusions
Pressures from both the society at large and the standards movement are increasing

the need for SCDEs to ensure that the teachers they are training are capable of

integrating computer technology into the K-12 curriculum. This Five-Stage Model

provides a template for teacher education programs seeking to meet that goal.

The use of this model with the most potential for impact is for SCDEs to identify

their current stage position and then to develop a plan to move through the remaining

stages. This type of application of the model can result in a reduction of time, the

maximization of resources, and the creation of effective faculty development

programs.

It is important to note that each of the participating programs in this study varied in

their movement through the stages, leading to the conclusion that the stages are not

necessarily linear nor are they interdependent. While many of the tasks are

completed in succession, there are factors that influence program movement through

the stages; for example, the provision of substantial funding will assist programs in

bypassing lower level tasks that are funding dependent.

To meet the integration goal, teacher education faculty members are called upon to

explore, evaluate, and create teaching strategies that enable preservice teachers to

use technology in K-12 classrooms. As shown through this model, success is

dependent upon supportive leaders who provide assistance in funding, access to

adequate facilities, and systematic faculty development. In addition, many students

are entering their teacher education programs with increased levels of computer use

and with the expectation of the use and integration of computer technology by their

instructors. When combined with strong administrative support, this top-

 down/bottom-up phenomenon can be the most effective method in the push toward

systemwide integration. As students are asking for more computer technology

integration and administrators are providing access and training, teacher education

faculty members must seize every opportunity to ready their preservice teachers for

computer technology integration into their future classrooms.

Obviously, the choice not to use computer technology in classrooms is no longer an

option. Instead, the issue is how to best prepare future teacher educators to meet the

demands of teaching and learning in a technology rich world. SCDEs must employ

the most effective method for assisting future generations in meeting these demands.

The Five-Stage Model provides SCDEs with a detailed description of how to move

to the system-wide integration of computer technology into the teacher education

curriculum. As shown by the Advanced Technology program, this goal can be

accomplished with sound leadership, a dedicated faculty, and a definitive plan.

Questions for In-Depth Interviews

Questions for Key Informants

1. Let’s start with some background information. Can you share what you know of the

history of computer technology use and integration in your teacher education

program?

2. How do you see the 20.5 Standard fit into this chronology? How did the Standard

20.5 requirements affect the computer integration process in your department?

3. What do you see as the department’s philosophy of integration? What is the

university’s philosophy of computer technology integration?

4. What is the department’s vision of computer technology infusion? How was it

developed? Who was involved?

5. When you completed the STaRTP Chart, your answers placed your school in the

early, developing, or advanced stage. In your own words, describe that stage in

regards to how computer technology is being used by faculty and students.

6. What did computer integration look like at the earlier stage(s)? What steps brought

you where you are from where you were?

7. What do you foresee in the future stages? What is needed to take you to that point?

8. Describe how the faculty are encouraged to integrate technology into their teaching.

What type of support do they receive for integrating technology into their teaching?

Questions for Focus Groups

1. Describe the way computer technology is integrated into the teacher education

curriculum. Are you teaching applications or integration? What computer

technologies do the instructors use? What computer technologies do the students

use?

2. I’m interested the steps that you have seen the teacher education program take

toward infusing computer technology into the curriculum. I want each of you to tell

me from your perspective. Faculty member, what steps have you taken to adjust

their teaching methods to model technology integration? Students, what steps have

you seen? Technology person, can you give me a specific example of someone who

you’ve seen make progress toward infusion?

3. From your perspective, what has led to the current level of computer technology

integration into your teacher education curriculum? How did it actually come
 about? Faculty, could you talk about the first class where you integrated

technology? Student, what changes have you seen?

4. What are some of the extrinsic and intrinsic barriers that inhibit the faculty from

integrating computer technology into their teaching? Time? Access? Training?

What other problems do you see?

5. What steps are being taken (or should be taken) to rectify these challenges?

6. Once the faculty has bought into technology integration, what actions need to be

taken in order to increase the effective integration of computer technology into your

program?

7. What is your vision for a fully integrated teacher education program? What would it

look like when you walk into a classroom? What would the teacher be doing? What

would the students be doing? How does all this match up to the department’s

vision?

8. What is the question I haven’t asked? What do you really want to tell me about the

stages and processes of integrating computer technology into the education

curriculum?

The Processes Experienced by the Early, Developing, and Advanced

Technology Level Programs in Their Move Toward Integration:

EARLY DEVELOPING ADVANCED

Stage 1 – Pre-Integration
 Provost not pro-  No supportive  Little or no integration – Power

technology leadership Point & Internet used

 Limited use of Web  Only desktop  One stand-alone course for

 CT computers on campus: credential

 Few education faculty Dean’s office  Director of MA in Ed Tech was

using computer  No funding, in charge of course

technology, those technology plan,  Infrastructure needed to

were not asking for training, or implement standards

more hardware/software;

 20.5 response written faculty bought their

by one faculty own computers

member  One stand-alone

 One stand-alone course for credential

course for credential  CCTC* visit noted

lack of computer

technology

Stage 2 – Transition
 Changes in computer  New leadership was  University-wide push for

use on campus strongly in favor of computer technology use and

 Academic computing computer technology infusion

began to offer training use and infusion  Visionary Dean wrote grant

 Standards calling for  Computers provided  Grant received

changes for all teacher  Technical and staff development

 Some faculty education faculty planning

resistance remained  Infrastructure

improved
  Faculty training

provided

 Some faculty

resistance remained

Stage 3 – Development
 Computer lab installed Faculty given up-to-  1-year grant facilitator hired

in Education building date hardware and  Faculty member with IT skills

 CCTC report writing software hired

process found some  Standardization of  Collaboration between the two

faculty pushing for software for all faculty for planning and building

infusion  Program in of smarterclassrooms with

 Search for ed tech compliance with cutting edge technology

faculty to lead the CCTC standards  Faculty development planning

department  Lowered levels of and implementation

 Ed tech faculty faculty resistance to

member hired integration

 Ed tech specialist  Increased availability

assigned by academic of peripherals

computing

 Faculty decided to

infuse

 Faculty needs

assessment completed
 Faculty development

 Faculty becoming

more aware of

computer technology

possibilities

 Some faculty

resistance remained

Stage 4 – Expansion
 Purchasing technology Smarter classrooms equipped

beyond current skill  Faculty member becomes

levels and providing Technology Director

the ongoing training  Hiring of technology specialist

for faculty  Development of relationships

 Online educational between support personnel and

portal employed for faculty

future use

 Online masters’

program exploration

 Informal support

through relationships

between high and low-

skilled users

Stage 5 – Systemwide Integration

 Infusion of standards  Infusion of standards

proficiencies in some proficiencies in all courses with

courses congruent systematic faculty

 Imbedding of development

computer technology  Imbedding of computer

in some courses technology in some courses.