New Literacies: Are Colorado Teacher Education Programs Preparing Pre-Service Teachers to Use Technology in Their Learning Environments?

A Dissertation Study - University of Denver - August 2004 - Debra S. Austin, PhD, JD

References

Adventure Colorado. Retrieved June 28, 2004 from http://colorado.com/.

American Institutes for Research. Retrieved April 25, 2004 from http://www.air.org/.

Armstrong, S. (2000). The technology needs of pre- service and in-service teachers. Log On or Lose Out Technology in 21stCentury Teacher Education [Online]. Available: http://www.mff.org/pubs/ME154.pdf. , (pp. 114-117). Washington , DC : American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education Publications.

Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education (CITE). Retrieved May 10, 2003 from http://www.aace.org/pubs/cite/default.htm.

Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Journal of Technology and Teacher Education (JTATE). Retrieved May 10, 2003 from http://www.aace.org/pubs/jtate/default.htm.

Bell , R., & Hofer, M. (2003). The Curry school of education and long-term commitment to technology integration. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 3(1), 88-98.

Berry-Helmlinger, L. (2004). Williams pushes state toward the future. Denver Business Journal. May 28 – June 3, 2004, pp. A3 and A61.

Bracey, B. (2000). A different divide: Teachers and other professionals. Edutopia online. [Online]. Available at: http://glef.org/php/article.php?id=Art_440

Bruni, J. (2000). The challenge of distinction versus extinction. Log On or Lose Out Technology in 21st Century Teacher Education, (pp. 119-122). Washington , DC: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education Publications.

Bucci, T., Copenhaver, L. Lehman, B., & O’Brien, T. (2003). Technology integration: Connections to educational theories. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 2(1), 30-46.

Bullough, Jr., R.V. (1997). Becoming a teacher. In B.J. Biddle, T.L. Good, & I.F. Goodson (Eds.), International handbook of Teachers and Teaching (pp. 79-134). Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Carroll, T. (2000). A call for a national effort to develop technology-proficient educators. Log On or Lose Out Technology in 21st Century Teacher Education, (pp.178-181). Washington , DC : American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education Publications.

Center for Digital Government (CDG). (2003). Digital cities survey. [Online]. Available at: http://www.centerdigitalgov.com/center/03digitalcities.phtml

Center for Teaching, Learning, and Technology (CTLT). (2004). Retrieved April 25, 2004 from http://www.ctlt.org/.

CEO Forum. (2001). Year 4 report: Key building blocks for student achievement in the 21 st century. [Online]. Available at: http://www. iste ceoforum.org/ jcte/20/1/index.cfm downloads/report4.pdf

Cherup, S. & Snyder, L. (2003). A model for integrating technology into teacher education: One college’s journey. Contemporary Issues in Education 3(1), 47-56.

Colorado Commission on Higher Education (CCHE). (2004). Colleges and Universities. [Online]. Available at: http://www.state.co.us/cche/colleges/index.html.

Colorado Department of Education (CDE-ALP). (2004). Alternative teacher state board approved programs. [Online]. Available at: http://www.cde.state.co.us/cdeprof/download/pdf/ALTdesignatedagencies.pdf.

Colorado Department of Education (CDE). (2004). Colorado technology in prek-12 education. Retrieved April 25, 2004 from http://www.cde.state.co.us/edtech/index.asp.

Colorado Department of Education (CDE-TIR). (2004). Teacher in residence program. [Online]. Available at: http://www.cde.state.co.us/cdeprof/download/pdf/TIRdesignatedagencies.pdf.

Colorado Department of Education (CDE). (2003). Colorado technology in prek-12 education. Educational technology center: Technology skills standards for prek-12 schools. Retrieved May 10, 2003 , from http://www.aace.org/pubs/jtate/default.htm http://www.cde.state.co.us/edtech/stand.asp.

Colorado Department of Education (CDE). (1991). Educator Licensing Act of 1991. 1 Colorado Code of Regulations 301-37. pp. 58-60. [Online]. Available at: http://www.cde.state.co.us/cdeboard/download/301-37%20amended%20endorsements%20final2003.DOC.

Colorado Department of Education (CDE). (1999). Performance-Based Standards for Colorado Teachers. [Online]. Available at: http://www.cde.state.co.us/cdeprof/li_perfbasedstandards.htm.

Colorado Department of Personnel & Administration (CDPA). Division of Information Technologies. Colorado State Archives. Retrieved June 28, 2004 from http://www.colorado.gov/dpa/doit/archives/.

Colorado Ski Country USA. Retrieved June 28, 2004 from http://www.coloradoski.com/index.cfm?success=true.

Creswell, J.W. (2002). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.

Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since 1920 . New York , NY : Teachers College Press.

Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom . Cambridge , MA : Harvard University Press. [Online]. Available: http://www.hup.harvard.edu/pdf/CUBOVE.pdf

Cunningham, A. (2003). Supporting student-centered teaching and learning: Technology in Wake Forest University education programs. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 3(1), 57-70.

Dance, F. (2003). Digitality’s debt to speech. Unpublished class handout: University of Denver.

Dede, C. (2002). Vignettes about the future of learning technologies. Visions 2020: Transforming education and training through advanced technologies. [Online]. Available at: http://www.technology.gov/reports/TechPolicy/2020Visions.pdf.

Dede, C. (2004). Distributed-learning communities as a model for educating teachers. SITE Conference Paper. Atlanta, GA.

Donlevy, J. & Donlevy, T. (1997). Teachers, technology, and training. Perspectives on education and school reform: Implications for the emerging role of the teacher. International Journal of Instructional Media, 24(2), 91-98.

Donovan, S., Bransford, J., and Pellegrino, J., (1999). How people learn: Bridging research and practice. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Drazdowski, T., Holodick, N., & Scappaticci, F. (1998). Infusing technology into a teacher education program: Three different perspectives. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education 6 (2/3), 141-149.

Drucker, P., (2004). BrainyQuote. Retreived April 25, 2004 from http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/p/peter_f_drucker.html.

Education Week on the Web. (2002, May). Colorado’s Data . [Online]. Available at: http://www.edweek.org/sreports/tc02/state_data.cfm?slug=35co_data.h21#access

Eisner, E. W. (1976). Educational connoisseurship and educational criticism: Their forms and functions in educational evaluation. Journal of Aesthetic Education, Bicentiennial Issue, 10(3-4), 135-150.

Eisner, E.W. (1991). Taking a second look: Educational connoisseurship revisited. In M. McLaughlin & D.C. Phillips (Eds.), Evaluation and Education: A Quarter Century 90th Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part II. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Eisner, E.W. (1994). The educational imagination: On the design and evaluation of school programs. (3 rd ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Eisner, E.W. (1998). The enlightened eye: Qualitative inquiry and the enhancement of educational practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

enGauge. (2000). North Central Regional Educational Laboratory. Retrieved April 7, 2004 from: http://www.ncrel.org/engauge/.

Enhancing Education Through Technology Act of 2001 (EETA). (2002). Public Law 107-110, Sections 2401 – 2404. [Online] Available at: http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pg34.html#sec2402.

Fetterman, D. (1998). Ethnography step by step. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Fillion, R. (2004). Professor downplays outsourcing. Rocky Mountain News. June 4, 2004, p. 6B.

Getz, L. (1997). Educational standards and independent schools. Unpublished doctoral dissertation: University of Denver.

Gimbert, B. & Zembal-Saul, C. (2002). Learning to teach with technology: From integration to actualization. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education. [Online serial], 2(2), 203-217.

Glenn, A. (2002). Connecting technology to content in learning. Log On or Lose Out Technology in 21st Century Teacher Education , (pp. 124). Washington, DC : American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education Publications.

Glesne, C. (1991). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. (2nd ed.) New York, NY: Longman.

Harada, V. (2003). From instruction to construction: Learning in the information age. In M. Fitzgerald, M. Orey, and R. Branch, Educational Media and Technology Yearbook 2003 pp. 40-48. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.

Henriques, L. (2002). Preparing tomorrow’s science teachers to use technology: An example from the field. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education . [Online serial]. 2(1), pp. 6-21.

International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement. (1999). Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study. Retrieved July 15, 2004 from http://nces.ed.gov/timss/.

International Society for Technology in Education ( ISTE -NETS). Educational Technology Standards and Performance Indicators for All Teachers (NETS*T). [Online]. Retrieved May 10, 2003 , from http://cnets.iste.org/getdocs.html#teachers .

International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). Journal of Computing in Teacher Education (JCTE). Retrieved May 10, 2003, from http://www.iste.org/jcte/20/1/index.cfm.

International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). ISTE Technology Foundation Standards for Students ( NETS*S). [Online]. Retrieved May 10, 2003 , from http://cnets.iste.org/students/s_stands.html .

International Technology Education Association (ITEA). The Technology Teacher (TTT). Retrieved May 10, 2003 , from http://www.iteawww.org/F1.html.

International Technology Education Association (ITEA). ITEA Standards for Technological Literacy . [Online]. Available at: Retrieved May 10, 2003 from http://www.iteawww.org/TAA/Publications/STL/STLListingPage.htm .

Jokeline. (2003, December 11). Rocky Mountain News, p. 14D.

King. K. (2002). Keeping pace with technology: Educational technology that transforms . Cresskill , NJ: Hampton Press, Inc.

Koob, R. (2002). Economic, political, and social trends: insights for today’s technology revolution. Log On or Lose Out Technology in 21st Century Teacher Education, (pp. 126-129). Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education Publications.

Lanham, R. (1993). The electronic word: Democracy, technology, and the arts. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

Levinson, P. (1997). The soft edge: A natural history and future of the information revolution. New York, NY: Routledge.

Lock, T. (2003). Colorado Governor Sees Tech Sector Rebounding In State. 19:20 , Dow Jones News Service. [Online]. Available at: http://www.oit.state.co.us/about/press_1.asp?mode=&prid=25 .

Lunenfeld, P. (1999). Unfinished business. The Digital Dialectic. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Maclachlan, M. (1999). Technology guru touts media literacy. TechWeb: The Business Technology Network. [Online]. Available at: http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/backtoschool/TWB19990912S0001.

Maeers, M., Browne, N., & Cooper, E. (2000). Pedagogically appropriate integration of informational technology in an elementary pre- service teacher education program. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education , 8(3), 219-229.

McLaughlin, R. (1998). Infusing technology into teacher education. Hands On, 21 , 16-18.

McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions of man. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Mehaffy, G. (2000). Making meaning, creating change, and building new structures. Log On or Lose Out Technology in 21st Century Teacher Education, (pp. 130-133). Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education Publications.

Mehlinger, H. (2002). The impact of technology on the roles and responsibilities of teacher educators. , Log On or Lose Out Technology in 21 st Century Teacher Education (pp. 134-139). Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education Publications.

Moursund, D. & Bielefeldt, T. (1999). Will new teachers be prepared to teach in a digital age? A National Survey on Information Technology in Teacher Education . [Online]. Available: http://www.mff.org/pubs/ME154.pdf .

MSN Encarta Dictionary. (2004). [Online]. Available at: http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861602202.

NetDay. (2004). Voices and Views from Today’s Tech-Savvy Students: NetDay National Report on Speak Up Day for Students 2003. [Online]. Available at: http://www.netday.org/index.htm.

New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy. (2002). [Online]. Available at: http://www.bartleby.com/59/23/cyberspace.html.

Newmann, F., Bryk, A. & Nagaoka, J. (2001). Improving Chicago’s schools: Authentic intellectual work and standardized tests: Conflict or coexistence? Consortium on Chicago School Research. [Online]. Available at: http://www.consortium-chicago.org/publications/pdfs/p0a02.pdf.

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB). (2002). Public Law 107-110. [Online]. Available at: http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/index.html.

Office of Educational Technology (OET). (2004). National Educational Technology Plan . (NETP). U.S. Department of Education. [Online]. Available at: http://www.nationaledtechplan.org/.

Office of Educational Technology (OET). (2001). Preparing tomorrow’s teachers to use technology program (PT3). U.S. Department of Education. [Online]. Available at: http://www.ed.gov/programs/teachtech/index.html.

OTA (Office of Educational Technology (OET). (2003). Learning for the 21st century: A report and mile guide for 21st century skills. U.S. Department of Education. [Online]. Available at: http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/downloads/P21_Report.pdf

Office of Educational Technology (OET). (2003). Mile guide for 21st century skills: Milestones for improving learning and education (MG). U.S. Department of Education. [Online]. Available at: http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/downloads/P21_MILE_Guide_Printable.pdf.

Office of Innovation and Technology (OIT). (2004 ). [Online]. Available at: http://www.oit.state.co.us/default.asp.

Office of Technology Asses sm ent (OTA ). (1995). Teachers and technology: Making the connection. Washington , DC : Government Printing Office. [Online]. Available: http://www.wws.princeton.edu/~ota/ns20/alpha_f.html .

RhymeZone. (2004). [Online]. Available at: http://www.rhymezone.com/.

Romano, M. (2003). Empowering teachers with technology: Making it happen. Lanham, MD: The Scarecrow Press, Inc.

Sarason, S.B. (1999). Teaching as a performing art. NewYork, NY: Teachers College Press.

Schwab, R. (2000). Technology and the changing roles and responsibilities of teacher educators. Log On or Lose Out Technology in 21st Century Teacher Education, (pp. 151-155). Washington , DC : American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education Publications.

Seidman, I. (1998). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences. (2nd ed.) New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Smith, S. (2001). Technology 101: Integration beyond a technology foundations course. Journal of Special Education Technology. 16 , (1), 43-45.

Snider, S. (2003). Exploring technology integration in a field-based teacher education program: Implementation efforts and findings. Journal of Research on Technology in Education 34 (3), 230-249.

State Educational Technology Directors Association. Retrieved on April 25, 2004 from http://www.setda.org/.

Tapscott, D., (1998). Growing up digital: The rise of the net generation. New York , NY : McGraw-Hill.

Technology in Education Conference (TIE). (2004). Retrieved from http://www.tie-online.org/2004/index.htm.

Tileston, D. (2000). 10 best teaching practices: How brain research, learning styles, and standards define teaching competencies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.

Thomas, L. (2000). Technology and expectations for new teachers. Log On or Lose Out Technology in 21 st Century Teacher Education, (pp. 156-158). Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education Publications.

Thomson, A. (2000). The challenge of faculty professional development: new approaches and structures for teacher educators. Log On or Lose Out Technology in 21st Century Teacher Education, (pp. 162-165). Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education Publications.

Tuana, P. (2000). Harnessing technology as a tool for teachers and students. Log On or Lose Out Technology in 21st Century Teacher Education, (pp. 167-168). Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education Publications.

Turkle, S. (1995). Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the internet. New York, NY: Touchstone Simon & Schuster Inc.

Vrasidas, C. & McIsaac, M. (2001). Integrating technology in teaching and teacher education: Implications for policy and curriculum reform. Educational Media International 38 , (2-3), p127-32.

Weis, A. (2000) Five critical skills for tomorrow’s teachers. Log On or Lose Out Technology in 21st Century Teacher Education, (pp.172-173). Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education Publications.

Wenglinksy, H. (1998). Does it compute? The relationship between educational technology and student achievement in mathematics. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Wikipedia. (2004). The free encyclopedia. [Online]. Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberspace.

Williams, L. (2002). Colorado Academic Performance above Average at K-12, Fails in High School Completion Rates. State Increases Engineering Graduates by Four Percent. American Electronics Association. [Online]. Available at: http://www.aeanet.org/PressRoom/idmk_CyEd2002_Colorado.asp .

Willis, E. & Raines, P. (2001). Technology in secondary teacher education: Integration, implications and ethics for the changing roles of teachers. T.H.E. Journal, 29(2) (pp. 54-64).

Willis, J., & Mehlinger, H. (1996). Information technology and teacher education. In J. Sikula (Ed), Handbook of research on teacher education (978-1029). New York, NY: Macmillan.

Willis, J., Thompson, A., & Sadera, W. (1999). Research on technology and teacher education: Current status and future directions . Educational Technology Research & Development, 47 , (4), 29-45.

Zisk, J. (2002). Are we ready to embrace the power that technology has to offer in education? Commentary: Response to Henriques. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education . [Online serial], 2(1), 26-30.

Appendices

APPENDIX A  

Original Email Interview

Protocol and Request for Artifacts

Debra S. Austin, JD
University of Denver College of Law
2255 E. Evans Avenue 330J
Denver, CO 80208
303-871-6205
daustin@law.du.edu

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Thank you for taking the time to participate in this study. You have been selected to participate because you are one of the seventeen teacher preparation programs in the state and I am interested in examining the status of technology education being provided to pre-service teachers in Colorado.

I have been an instructor at the University of Denver since 1998. I teach 2 courses for the College of Law (Advanced Legal Research and Becoming a Lawyer) and 1 course for the College of Education (Teaching with Technology). You may review my online Teaching Portfolio at: http://www.law.du.edu/daustin/teaching/. I began the PhD program in Curriculum & Instruction at the University of Denver in June 2000. I am conducting this study in order to complete my doctoral dissertation.

My research will be based on two types of data: responses to email interview questions and review of various artifacts. I am requesting that your institution determine the relevant individuals who can provide me with answers to the questions below and documents your institution has developed regarding technology education for pre-service teachers. Documentation can be emailed or mailed to me at the appropriate address above and I will reimburse the institution for necessary postage.

All statements made in response to this email interview will be kept confidential. All documents provided to the researcher for review will be kept confidential. The study will not result in an evaluation of your program. At no time will your program be identified in my report. My inquiry will result in a report on the landscape of technology education being provided to pre-service teachers in Colorado in 2004.

There are no right or wrong answers to any of my questions. If you prefer not to address a question, you may refrain from answering. The questions were developed after I conducted a review of the literature written by the scholars in the field of Instructional Technology in Teacher Education. Four key themes emerged from that review: technology leadership, the role of the teacher educator, the technology curriculum, and collaborative activities.

After I receive all responses from your institution, I will develop a profile of your technology education program. I will return that profile to you for your review and comments. Once I receive your response to the profile, I will begin my data analysis.

Thank you for your willingness to utilize email to participate in this study. If at any time you have questions or concerns regarding the study, the interview questions, the request for artifacts, or anything else, please do not hesitate to contact me.

In appreciation for your willingness to provide me with information for my study, I would be happy to provide you with a copy of my final report. You may wish to learn about the trends in technology education for pre-service teachers nationally and the innovative programs which are beginning to emerge. You may also be interested in the development of technology education in the teacher education programs here in Colorado. I hope to have a completed report by late summer 2004.

I look forward to reading your responses and would appreciate receiving them by March 15, 2004.

Sincerely,

Debra S. Austin

Interview Questions

1. Describe the vision your teacher preparation program has for technology education for pre-service teachers.
2. Describe the technology plan for your teacher education program. This would include information on technology funding, infrastructure, technical support, equitable access to technology, availability of technology teaching labs, student laptop requirement, and faculty professional development.
3. Who is responsible for creating and/or maintaining the technology plan and/or technology vision for your program? Describe the process of reviewing and maintaining the technology vision and/or technology plan at your institution.
4. Describe the role your teacher educators play in providing technology education to pre-service teachers.
5. Who provides technology instruction to pre-service teachers? How many instructors provide technology instruction to pre-service teachers? What is the status of technology instructors at your institution?
6. What faculty incentives are in place at your institution to encourage technology integration into teaching?
7. Describe the technology curriculum being provided to pre-service teachers in your program.
8. Describe the utilization of any of the following: course web pages and the content of those web pages (course documents, course readings, assignments, grades, links to content, downloadable files, etc), multimedia demonstrations, email, listservs, discussion boards, digital cameras and video cameras, electronic grade books, Internet resources, technology-enhanced assessments, and online portfolios of student work.
9. Describe the utilization of any other technology in your teacher preparation program.
10. Describe any teacher preparation program initiatives for:
    1. Collaboration between faculty and technology savvy students to support technology education for pre-service teachers
    2. Collaboration among faculty, mentor schools, and master teachers to mentor pre-service teachers in the use of technology in teaching
    3. Collaboration among other schools, colleges, and departments of education to develop and share effective teaching methods and curriculum with regard to technology education for pre-service teachers

 Request for Artifacts

1. If you have a technology mission statement for your teacher preparation program, I would like to review it.
2. If you have a technology plan for your teacher preparation program, I would like to review it.
3. If your faculty guidelines for appointment, promotion, and tenure provide faculty incentives for incorporating technology in teaching and/or participating in technology professional development, I would like to review them.
4. If you have developed course descriptions, course syllabi, course outcomes, technology-based assessment projects, and/or student electronic portfolios for technology education in your teacher preparation program, I would like to review them.
5. If you have developed technology course web pages, I would like to review them.
6. If you have developed documentation to market your program’s ability to provide technology education to pre-service teachers, I would like to review it.
7. If you maintain additional artifacts regarding technology education for pre-service teachers at your institution, I would like to review them.

APPENDIX B

Sample Customized Email Interview Protocol

Dear

I am conducting a doctoral dissertation on the state of technology education in teacher preparation programs in Colorado.  I have reviewed the web pages for the your teacher preparation program at your institution and am extremely impressed with the resources you have in your program, as well as the information you make available on your web site. 

I have several questions which would help me finalize data collection for your institution.  All responses will be kept confidential and your program will not be identified in the study.  While I am not sure who will read this study, I am very interested in working to educate policy makers regarding funding for educational technology.  Those currently in power in Colorado are extremely interested in attracting technology businesses to the state.  Employees for those businesses will largely be educated in Colorado.  It appears that your institution has benefited greatly from federal funding initiatives and have used that money to create an exemplary program.  Your program is an example of the impact that can be made with appropriate funding. 

I would very much appreciate your assistance in answering these questions.

1. How many computers are available in the Curriculum Center?
2. How many laptops are in your portable lab?
3. How long does the federal funding last for the 3 technology support positions and will the department continue to fund those positions at the end of the grant?  Were these PT3 or other grants?  How many technology support positions did the department have prior to the grant funding?
4. Who is the instructor for ED 280?  Who organizes the site visits to model classrooms? 
5. Did you launch the Instructional Technology Certificate Program in January?  Would you be willing to let me review the syllabi and/or course objectives? 
6. Who is developing the new online courses?  How many instructors will be delivering the online courses for the Certificate and eventually the Masters program?

Thank you very much for assisting me by providing data from your teacher preparation program. 

APPENDIX C

International Society for Technology in Education

Educational Technology Standards and Performance Indicators for All Teachers (NETS*T)

Educational Technology Standards and Performance Indicators for All Teachers NETS*T

Building on the NETS for Students, the ISTE NETS for Teachers (NETS* T), which focus on pre- service teacher education, define the fundamental concepts, knowledge, skills, and attitudes for applying technology in educational settings. All candidates seeking certification or endorsements in teacher preparation should meet these educational technology standards. It is the responsibility of faculty across the university and at cooperating schools to provide opportunities for teacher candidates to meet these standards.

The six standards areas with performance indicators listed below are designed to be general enough to be customized to fit state, university, or district guidelines and yet specific enough to define the scope of the topic. Performance indicators for each standard provide specific outcomes to be measured when developing a set of asses sm ent tools. The standards and the performance indicators also provide guidelines for teachers currently in the classroom.

1. TECHNOLOGY OPERATIONS AND CONCEPTS.

Teachers demonstrate a sound understanding of technology operations and concepts. Teachers:

• demonstrate introductory knowledge, skills, and understanding of concepts related to technology (as described in the ISTE National Education Technology Standards for Students)
• demonstrate continual growth in technology knowledge and skills to stay abreast of current and emerging technologies.

2. PLANNING AND DESIGNING LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS AND EXPERIENCES.

Teachers plan and design effective learning environments and experiences supported by technology. Teachers:

• design developmentally appropriate learning opportunities that apply technology-enhanced instructional strategies to support the diverse needs of learners.
• apply current research on teaching and learning with technology when planning learning environments and experiences.
• identify and locate technology resources and evaluate them for accuracy and suitability.
• plan for the management of technology resources within the context of learning activities.
• plan strategies to manage student learning in a technology-enhanced environment.

3. TEACHING, LEARNING, AND THE CURRICULUM.

Teachers implement curriculum plans that include methods and strategies for applying technology to maximize student learning. Teachers:

• facilitate technology-enhanced experiences that address content standards and student technology standards.
• use technology to support learner-centered strategies that address the diverse needs of students.
• apply technology to develop students' higher order skills and creativity.
• manage student learning activities in a technology-enhanced environment.

4. ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION.

Teachers apply technology to facilitate a variety of effective asses sm ent and evaluation strategies. Teachers:

• apply technology in assessing student learning of subject matter using a variety of asses sm ent techniques.
• use technology resources to collect and analyze data, interpret results, and communicate findings to improve instructional practice and maximize student learning.
• apply multiple methods of evaluation to determine students' appropriate use of technology resources for learning, communication, and productivity.

5. PRODUCTIVITY AND PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE.

Teachers use technology to enhance their productivity and professional practice. Teachers:

• use technology resources to engage in ongoing professional development and lifelong learning.
• continually evaluate and reflect on professional practice to make informed decisions regarding the use of technology in support of student learning.
• apply technology to increase productivity.
• use technology to communicate and collaborate with peers, parents, and the larger community in order to nurture student learning.

6. SOCIAL, ETHICAL, LEGAL, AND HUMAN ISSUES.

Teachers understand the social, ethical, legal, and human issues surrounding the use of technology in PK-12 schools and apply those principles in practice. Teachers:

• model and teach legal and ethical practice related to technology use.
• apply technology resources to enable and empower learners with diverse backgrounds, characteristics, and abilities.
• identify and use technology resources that affirm diversity
• promote safe and healthy use of technology resources.
• facilitate equitable access to technology resources for all students (ISTE NETS*T).
  

APPENDIX D

International Society for Technology in Education

Technology Foundation Standards for Students (NETS*S)

ISTE Technology Foundation Standards for Students NETS*S
The technology foundation standards for students are divided into six broad categories. Standards within each category are to be introduced, reinforced, and mastered by students. These categories provide a framework for linking performance indicators within the Profiles for Technology Literate Students to the standards. Teachers can use these standards and profiles as guidelines for planning technology-based activities in which students achieve success in learning, communication, and life skills.

Technology Foundation Standards for Students

• Basic operations and concepts
• Students demonstrate a sound understanding of the nature and operation of technology systems.
• Students are proficient in the use of technology.
• Social, ethical, and human issues
• Students understand the ethical, cultural, and societal issues related to technology.
• Students practice responsible use of technology systems, information, and software.
• Students develop positive attitudes toward technology uses that support lifelong learning, collaboration, personal pursuits, and productivity.
• Technology productivity tools
• Students use technology tools to enhance learning, increase productivity, and promote creativity.
• Students use productivity tools to collaborate in constructing technology-enhanced models, prepare publications, and produce other creative works.
• Technology communications tools
• Students use telecommunications to collaborate, publish, and interact with peers, experts, and other audiences.
• Students use a variety of media and formats to communicate information and ideas effectively to multiple audiences.
• Technology research tools
• Students use technology to locate, evaluate, and collect information from a variety of sources.
• Students use technology tools to process data and report results.
• Students evaluate and select new information resources and technological innovations based on the appropriateness for specific tasks.
• Technology problem-solving and decision-making tools
• Students use technology resources for solving problems and making informed decisions.
• Students employ technology in the development of strategies for solving problems in the real world (ISTE NETS*S).

Grades Pre K – 2 Performance Indicators:
All students should have opportunities to demonstrate the following performances.

Prior to completion of Grade 2 students will:

1. Use input devices (e.g., mouse, keyboard, remote control) and output devices (e.g., monitor, printer) to successfully operate computers, VCRs, audiotapes, and other technologies. (1)
2. Use a variety of media and technology resources for directed and independent learning activities. (1, 3)
3. Communicate about technology using developmentally appropriate and accurate terminology. (1)
4. Use developmentally appropriate multimedia resources (e.g., interactive books, educational software, elementary multimedia encyclopedias) to support learning. (1)
5. Work cooperatively and collaboratively with peers, family members, and others when using technology in the classroom. (2)
6. Demonstrate positive social and ethical behaviors when using technology. (2)
7. Practice responsible use of technology systems and software. (2)
8. Create developmentally appropriate multimedia products with support from teachers, family members, or student partners. (3)
9. Use technology resources (e.g., puzzles, logical thinking programs, writing tools, digital cameras, drawing tools) for problem solving, communication, and illustration of thoughts, ideas, and stories. (3, 4, 5, 6)
10. Gather information and communicate with others using telecommunications, with support from teachers, family members, or student partners. (4)

Grades 3 – 5 Performance Indicators:
All students should have opportunities to demonstrate the following performances.

Prior to completion of Grade 5 students will:

1. Use keyboards and other common input and output devices (including adaptive devices when necessary) efficiently and effectively. (1)
2. Discuss common uses of technology in daily life and the advantages and disadvantages those uses provide. (1, 2)
3. Discuss basic issues related to responsible use of technology and information and describe personal consequences of inappropriate use. (2)
4. Use general purpose productivity tools and peripherals to support personal productivity, remediate skill deficits, and facilitate learning throughout the curriculum. (3)
5. Use technology tools (e.g., multimedia authoring, presentation, Web tools, digital cameras, scanners) for individual and collaborative writing, communication, and publishing activities to create knowledge products for audiences inside and outside the classroom. (3, 4)
6. Use telecommunications efficiently and effectively to access remote information, communicate with others in support of direct and independent learning, and pursue personal interests. (4)
7. Use telecommunications and online resources (e.g., e-mail, online discussions, Web environments) to participate in collaborative problem-solving activities for the purpose of developing solutions or products for audiences inside and outside the classroom. (4, 5)
8. Use technology resources (e.g., calculators, data collection probes, videos, educational software) for problem solving, self-directed learning, and extended learning activities. (5, 6)
9. Determine when technology is useful and select the appropriate tool(s) and technology resources to address a variety of tasks and problems. (5, 6)
10. Evaluate the accuracy, relevance, appropriateness, comprehensiveness, and bias of electronic information sources. (6)

Grades 6 – 8 Performance Indicators:
All students should have opportunities to demonstrate the following performances.

Prior to completion of Grade 8 students will:

1. Apply strategies for identifying and solving routine hardware and software problems that occur during everyday use. (1)
2. Demonstrate knowledge of current changes in information technologies and the effect those changes have on the workplace and society. (2)
3. Exhibit legal and ethical behaviors when using information and technology, and discuss consequences of misuse. (2)
4. Use content-specific tools, software, and simulations (e.g., environmental probes, graphing calculators, exploratory environments, Web tools) to support learning and research. (3, 5)
5. Apply productivity/multimedia tools and peripherals to support personal productivity, group collaboration, and learning throughout the curriculum. (3 , 6)
6. Design, develop, publish, and present products (e.g., Web pages, videotapes) using technology resources that demonstrate and communicate curriculum concepts to audiences inside and outside the classroom. (4, 5, 6)
7. Collaborate with peers, experts, and others using telecommunications and collaborative tools to investigate curriculum-related problems, issues, and information, and to develop solutions or products for audiences inside and outside the classroom. (4, 5)
8. Select and use appropriate tools and technology resources to accomplish a variety of tasks and solve problems. (5, 6)
9. Demonstrate an understanding of concepts underlying hardware, software, and connectivity, and of practical applications to learning and problem solving. (1, 6)
10. Research and evaluate the accuracy, relevance, appropriateness, comprehensiveness, and bias of electronic information sources concerning real-world problems. (2, 5, 6)

Grades 9 – 12 Performance Indicators:
All students should have opportunities to demonstrate the following performances.

Prior to completion of Grade 12 students will:

1. Identify capabilities and limitations of contemporary and emerging technology resources and assess the potential of these systems and services to address personal, lifelong learning, and workplace needs. (2)
2. Make informed choices among technology systems, resources, and services. (1, 2)
3. Analyze advantages and disadvantages of widespread use and reliance on technology in the workplace and in society as a whole. (2)
4. Demonstrate and advocate for legal and ethical behaviors among peers, family, and community regarding the use of technology and information. (2)
5. Use technology tools and resources for managing and communicating personal/professional information (e.g., finances, schedules, addresses, purchases, correspondence). (3, 4)
6. Evaluate technology-based options, including distance and distributed education, for lifelong learning. (5)
7. Routinely and efficiently use online information resources to meet needs for collaboration, research, publication, communication, and productivity. (4, 5, 6)
8. Select and apply technology tools for research, information analysis, problem solving, and decision making in content learning. (4, 5)
9. Investigate and apply expert systems, intelligent agents, and simulations in real-world situations. (3, 5, 6)