The University of Arizona

Teachers Perception in a Technology Integration Workshop: Implications for Professional Development in the Digital Age

Kele Anyanwu

Abstract


School districts are embracing innovative technology applications by increasing the accessibility of Web 2.0 applications from district networks. Workshops on these applications have become the favorite type of professional development workshop among in-service teachers. While there are studies using self-report instruments to examine in-service teachers’ perceptions and attitudes about integration practices involving Web 2.0 tools and professional development, few studies report details of in-service teachers’ lived experiences of these professional development sessions. A gap in understanding the meaning in-service teachers place on Web 2.0 professional development workshops exists. Five themes were established to understand participants’ Web 2.0 workshop experiences. The findings from the study suggest that breaking professional development for teachers into two segments, that is, an online segment where the basics are delivered online and a face-to-face segment dedicated to modeling Web 2.0 tool integration m with hands-on collaboration are considered most effective by teachers.

DOI:10.2458/azu_itet_v3i1_anyanwu


Keywords


professional development, Web 2.0, technology integration, workshop, qualitative analysis.

Full Text:

PDF HTML

References


Anderson, P. (2007). What is Web 2.0? Ideas, technologies and implications for education. JISC Technology and Standards Watch. Retrieved from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/techwatch/tsw0701b.pdf

Ashton, J. and Newman, L. (2006). An unfinished symphony: 21st century teacher education using knowledge-creating heutagogies. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37, 825-840.

Bernard, H. R. (2006). Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.

Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33, 3-15.

Bowe, R. & Pierson, M. (2008). Professional development in educational technology: What have we learned so far? In Borthwick, A & M. Pierson (Eds.), Transforming classroom practice, (pp. 9-22).Washington, DC: ISTE.

Chen, Y. L. (2008). Modeling the determinants of Internet use. Computer & Education,51, 545-558.

Cheek, J., Onslow, M., & Cream, A. (2004). Beyond the divide: Comparing and contrasting aspects of qualitative and quantitative research approaches. Advances in Speech-Language Pathology, 6, 147-152. doi: 10.1080/14417040412331282995

Clarke, D., & Hollingsworth, H. (2002). Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 947–967.

Consortium of School Networking. (2011). Leadership for Web 2.0 in education: Promise and reality. Retrieved from http://www.cosn.org/Portals/7/docs/Web%202.0/ExecSummaryCoSN%20Report042809Final.pdf

Cooper, T. & Johnson, C. (2013). Web 2.0 Tools for Constructivist Online Professional Development. In J. Herrington et al. (Eds.),Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Media and Technology 2013 (pp. 1923-1926). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Dalgarno, B. & Lee, M. J. (2010). What are the learning affordances of 3-D virtual environments? British Journal of Educational Technology, 41, 10-32.

Dede, C. (2006). The evolution of online teacher professional development. In C. Dede (Ed.),

Online professional development for teachers. Cambridge: Harvard Education University Press.

Dede, C., & Ketelhut, J. (2009). A Research Agenda for Online Teacher Professional Development. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(1), 8.

Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Chicago: Henry Regnery Co.

Dukes, S. (1984). Phenomenological methodology in the human sciences. Journal of Religion and Health, 23, 197-203.

Eagleton, T. (1983). Literary theory: An introduction. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

EDUCAUSE(2013). Digital badges for professional development. EDUCAUSE Review. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/digital-badges-professional-development.

Escobar-Rodrguez, T., Carvajal-Trujillo, E. & Monge-Lozano, P. (2014). Factors that influence the perceived advantages and relevance of Facebook as a learning tool: An extension of the UTAUT. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30(2),. Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education.

Frankel, J. & Wallen, N. (2009). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Gray, L., Thomas, N., and Lewis, L. (2010). Teachers’ Use of Educational Technology in U.S. Public Schools: 2009 (NCES 2010-040). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2010/2010040.pdf

Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38,(4) 915-945.

Groenewald, T. (2004). A phenomenological research design illustrated. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 3 (1). Retrieved from http://www.ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/3_1/pdf/groenewald.pdf

Grundy, S. & Robinson, J. (2004). Teacher professional development: Themes and trends in the recent Australian experience. In C. Day and J. Sachs (Eds.), International Handbook on Continuing Professional Development of Teachers (pp. 146-66). Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Hanushek, E. A. (2005). Economic outcomes and school quality: Education policy series. Paris, France: International Institute for Educational Planning and International Academy of Education.

International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (2008). The ISTE NETS and Performance Indicators for Teachers (NETS•T). Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/Libraries/PDFs/NETS_for_Teachers_2008_EN.sflb.ashx

Interactive Educational Systems Design (IESD). (2011). National survey report digital districts: Web 2.0 and collaborative technologies in U.S. schools. Retrieved from http://www.prweb.com/releases/2011/03/prweb5205194.htm

Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Estrada, V. & Freeman, A. (2014). NMC Horizon Report: 2014 K-12 Edition. Austin, TX: New Media Consortium.

Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2005). The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Elsevier.

Knowles, M. (1984). The adult learner: A neglected species. Houston: Gulf Publishing.

Lemke, C., Coughlin, E., Garcia, L., Reifsneider, D., & Baas, J. (2009). Leadership for Web 2.0 in education: Promise and reality. Culver City, CA: Metiri Group.

Lester, S. (1999). An introduction to phenomenological research. Retrieved from http://www.sld.demon.co.uk/resmethy.pdf

Lawless, K. A. & Pellegrinio, J. W. (2007) Professional development in integrating technology into teaching and learning: Knowns, unknows, and ways to pursue better questions and answers. Review of Educational Research. Retrieved from http://www. Jstor.org/stable/4624911.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (2000). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 163-188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Little, C. A., & Housand, B. C. (2011). Avenues to professional learning online: Technology tips and tools for professional development in gifted education. Gifted Child Today,. Retrieved from http://gct.sagepub.com/content/34/4/18.full.pdf+html

Loucks-Horsley, S., Hewson, P. W., Love, N., & Stiles, K. E. (1998). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Merriam, S. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

McDuffie, K. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (2008). The contributions of qualitative research to discussions of evidence-based practice in special education. Intervention in School and Clinic, 44, 91-97. Retrieved from http://isc.sagepub.com/

Met Life (2010). Met Life survey of the American teacher: Collaborating for student success. Retrieved from: https://www.metlife.com/assets/cao/contributions/foundation/american-teacher/MetLife-Teacher-Survey-2011.pdf

Miles, M. B. (1995). Foreword. In T. R. Guskey & M. Huberman (Eds.), Professional development in education: New paradigms and practices (pp. vii-ix). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Moore, M. G. (2007). Theory of transactional distance. In M. G. Graham (Ed.), Handbook of distance education (2nd ed., pp. 89-101). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Morrow, S. (2005). Quality and trustworthiness in qualitative research in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 250-260.

Newman, D. L., (2008). Ensuring integration of teacher changes: What practices will make sure that professional development takes hold? In R. Bowe & M. Pierson (Eds.), Transforming classroom practice (pp. 187-203). Washington, DC: ISTE.

Noe, R. A., & Schmitt, N. (1986). The influence of trainee attitudes on training effectiveness: Test of a model. Personnel Psychology, 39, 497–523.

Noe, R. A., & Colquitt, J. A. (2002). Planning for training impact: Principles of training effectiveness. In K. Kraiger (Ed.), Creating, implementing, and maintaining effective training and development: State-of-the-art lessons for practice (pp. 53–79). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Nyirenda, R. (2015). Factors that support and inhibit the use of Web 2.0 technology tools among faculty and students in higher education. In Proceedings of Global Learn 2015 (pp. 134-135). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

Opfer, V., & Pedder, D. (2011). Conceptualizing teacher professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 81(3), 376-407. Retrieved from http://rer.sagepub.com/content/81/3/376

Onwuegbuzie, A. J. & Leech, N. L. (2007). A call for qualitative power analyses. Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, 41, 105–121.

O’Reilly, T. (2005). What is Web 2.0? Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Retrieved from http://oreilly.com/pub/a/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html?page=2

Orr, B. (2007). Parsing the meaning of Web 2.0. American Bankers Association, 99(4), 53.

Patton, Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Richardson, W. (2007). The read/write lab in the classroom. Retrieved from http://weblogged.com.

Richardson, V. (2003). The dilemmas of professional development. Phi Delta Kappan, 84, 401-406.

Salas, E., Wildman, J. L., & Piccolo, R. (2009). Using simulation based training to enhance management education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 8, 559–573.

Salas, E., Tannenbaum, S. I., Kraiger, K., & Smith-Jentsch, K. A., (2012). The science of training and development in organizations: What matters in practice? Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 2, 74-101. doi: 10.1177/1529100612436661

Schlager, M. S., & Fusco, J. (2003). Teacher professional development, technology, and communities of practice: are we putting the cart before the horse? The Information Society, 19(3), 203-220.

Shank, G. D. (2002). Qualitative research: A personal skills approach. Columbus, OH: Merrill Prentice Hall.

Solomon, G. & Schrum, L. (2007). Web 2.0: New tools, new schools. Washington D.C.: ISTE.

Sykes, G. (1996). Reform of and as professional development. Phi Delta Kappa, 77, 465–489.

Stake, E. R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Tannenbaum, S. I., & Yuki, G. (1992). Training and development in work organizations. Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 474–483.

Timperly, H., & Alton-Lee, A. (2008). Reframing teacher professional learning: An alternative policy approach to strengthening valued outcomes for diverse learners. Review of Research in Education, 32(1) 328-369. Retrieved from http://rre.sagepub.com/content/32/1/328.full

Swain, C. & Pearson, T. (200). Educators and technology standards: Influencing the digital divide. Journal of Research on Technology and Education, 34, 326-335.

U. S. Department of Education. (2004). New no child left behind flexibility: Highly qualified teachers. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/nclb/methods/teachers/hqtflexibility.html

U. S. Department of Education (2008). National Center for Educational Statistics. The condition of education. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2008/2008031.pdf

U. S. Department of Education (2009). National Center for Educational Statistics. Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS). Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009324.pdf

Vandenberg, D. (1997). Phenomenological research in the study of education. In D. Vandenberg (Ed.), Phenomenology & education discourse (pp. 3-37). Johannesburg, South Africa: Heinemann.

Vrasidas, C. (2015). The rhetoric of reform and teachers’ use of ICT. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(2), 370-380. Wiley

Wells, J., & Lewis, L. (2006). Internet access in U. S. public schools and classrooms:

–2005. (NCES 2007-020). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

Wei, R. C., Darling-Hammond, L., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos S. (2009) Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the United States and abroad (Technical Report). Retrieved from National Staff Development Council website: http://www.srnleads.org/resources/publications/pdf/nsdc_profdev_tech_report.pdf

Wei, R. C., Darling-Hammond, L., & Adamson, F. (2010). Professional development in the United States: Trends and challenges (Technical Report). Retrieved from National Staff Development Council website: http://www.nsdc.org/news/NSDCstudytechnicalreport2010.pdf

Wolfson, N. (2010). Cognitive aging and computer-based instruction: The role of coherence level and advanced organizers (Unpublished master’s thesis). Fort Collins: Colorado State University.

Wolfson, N. E., & Cavanagh, T. M. (2011, August). Older adults and technology-based instruction: Optimizing learning outcomes and transfer. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, San Antonio, TX.

Yoon, K. S., Duncan, T., Lee, S. W.-Y., Scarloss, B., & Shapley, K. (2007). Reviewing the evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement (Issues & Answers Report, REL 2007–No. 033). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.