Reflections on cross-institutional and cross-collaborative research and pedagogy in teacher education <br />     “Cross –i...
Goals for the Talk<br />Discuss and reflect on cross-institutional research<br />Background<br />Definitions<br />Research...
Background<br />American Educational Research Association (AERA) Panel on Research and Teacher Education <br />recommenda...
Background<br />Standards for Teacher Educators from the Association of Teacher Educators <br />Standard 5  -  Collaborati...
Cross-Institutional Research<br /><ul><li>“Cross –institutional research is an important and often undervalued and overloo...
Research<br />Cross-institutional and cross-collaborative projects<br />In language learning contexts<br />In language tea...
Cross-Institutional Research<br />Add chart<br />
Arnold et al., 2005<br />Goal: examine how CMC facilitates positive social interactions and the formation of communities f...
Müller-Hartmann (2005) <br />Goal: to look at the development of both intercultural communicative competence and critical ...
Arnold et al., 2009<br />Goal: to examine the nature of online group interaction and cooperation in the process of develop...
Fuchs, 2010<br />Goal: Exploratory case study of teachers in US and in Germany and their evaluation of a blended learning ...
What did students gain?<br />Involvement in a “community” of learners and/or teachers/experts<br />Learning from and teach...
What technological tools used?<br />
Tool Trends<br />Variety of tools<br />Use of model teaching (Fuchs,2010; Hubbard & Levy, 2006; Muller-Hartmann, 2005; Wil...
Challenges<br />Technology can be a hindrance<br />A suitable partner to work with<br />Careful planning, sometimes a grea...
Implementation<br />Locate possible partners<br />Project development (what and how it might be achieved) and possible too...
The next step?<br />Think big, think collaborative<br />Experiment with new technologies – microblogging, social networkin...
Selected References<br />Arnold, N., Ducate, L., Lomicka, L., & Lord, G. (2005). Using Computer-mediated Communication to ...
Selected References<br />Fuchs, C. (2006b). Computer-mediated negotiation across borders: German-American collaboration in...
CMC Teacher Education SIG Presentation; Lomicka
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

CMC Teacher Education SIG Presentation; Lomicka

548

Published on

PowerPoint Presentation, Lomicka, Eurocall CMC Teacher Education SIGs, 2011, Barcelona

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
548
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Thank you.
  • CMC Teacher Education SIG Presentation; Lomicka

    1. 1. Reflections on cross-institutional and cross-collaborative research and pedagogy in teacher education <br /> “Cross –institutional research is an important and often undervalued and overlooked means of extending the reach and capacities of any given institution” (wikia.com)<br />Lara Lomicka, The University of South Carolina<br />lomicka@sc.edu<br />
    2. 2. Goals for the Talk<br />Discuss and reflect on cross-institutional research<br />Background<br />Definitions<br />Research<br />Gains<br />Tools<br />Challenges<br />Implementation<br />Next step<br />
    3. 3. Background<br />American Educational Research Association (AERA) Panel on Research and Teacher Education <br />recommendation for more cross-institutional studies (Cochran-Smith, 2005)<br />
    4. 4. Background<br />Standards for Teacher Educators from the Association of Teacher Educators <br />Standard 5 - Collaboration<br />Collaborate regularly and in significant ways with representatives of schools, universities, state education agencies, professional associations, and communities to improve teaching, learning, and teacher education. <br />http://www.ate1.org/pubs/Standard_5.cfm<br />
    5. 5. Cross-Institutional Research<br /><ul><li>“Cross –institutional research is an important and often undervalued and overlooked means of extending the reach and capacities of any given institution” (wikia.com)</li></li></ul><li>Cross-Institutional Research<br />“relationship building” is critical<br />multiple institutional representatives to work together toward common goals in education<br />replace “me” with “we”<br />establish mutual trust and respect<br />(ADR news report, 2(1), January 2008)<br />
    6. 6. Research<br />Cross-institutional and cross-collaborative projects<br />In language learning contexts<br />In language teacher education<br />
    7. 7. Cross-Institutional Research<br />Add chart<br />
    8. 8. Arnold et al., 2005<br />Goal: examine how CMC facilitates positive social interactions and the formation of communities for professional growth among FL teachers<br />Cross-institutional set up: graduate students from 3 US institutions enrolled in methods courses (new teachers) participated in regular exchange via discussion forums<br />Results: benefits for FL teacher ed programs, connections to peers and community development, successful modeling encouraged them to incorporate technology in own teaching<br />
    9. 9. Müller-Hartmann (2005) <br />Goal: to look at the development of both intercultural communicative competence and critical media literacy in foreign language teachers<br />Cross-institutional set up: pre- and in-service student-teachers in two upper-level courses in Germany and in the US, both novice and experienced; collaboration on tasks and regular exchange<br />Results: development of ICC; wanted to develop more technical skills<br />
    10. 10. Arnold et al., 2009<br />Goal: to examine the nature of online group interaction and cooperation in the process of developing a collaborative product<br />Cross-institutional set up: New teachers from three large US universities worked together to develop a wiki during semester<br />Results: successful interaction depends on group members; differing levels of participation point to unequal levels of involvement, which affected the level of collaboration, the group dynamics, and the final product. In addition, the leader in each group influenced the degree of collaboration taking place in the group.<br />
    11. 11. Fuchs, 2010<br />Goal: Exploratory case study of teachers in US and in Germany and their evaluation of a blended learning course using task based language teaching (TBLT)<br />Cross-institutional set up: ESL teachers in the US and in Germany; shared perspectives about teaching contexts and practices in chat, wikis, forums<br />Results: more technology in teacher education; learned about TSLT<br />
    12. 12. What did students gain?<br />Involvement in a “community” of learners and/or teachers/experts<br />Learning from and teaching one another<br />Sharing ideas and experiences<br />Mentoring opportunities<br />Motivation to complete work/projects<br />Technology<br />
    13. 13. What technological tools used?<br />
    14. 14. Tool Trends<br />Variety of tools<br />Use of model teaching (Fuchs,2010; Hubbard & Levy, 2006; Muller-Hartmann, 2005; Willis, 2001) <br />Importance of innovative uses of technology<br />Future?<br />
    15. 15. Challenges<br />Technology can be a hindrance<br />A suitable partner to work with<br />Careful planning, sometimes a great deal of time in advance<br />Frequent and regular communication between teachers involved<br />Resolving issues that relate to a colleague’s students or your own students<br />Preparing for and dealing with cultural misunderstanding, miscommunication, frustrations<br />Keeping up to date on the best tools for each project<br />
    16. 16. Implementation<br />Locate possible partners<br />Project development (what and how it might be achieved) and possible tools<br /> Clear and realistic expectations for each partner<br /> Realistic timeframe for communication/ feedback<br />
    17. 17. The next step?<br />Think big, think collaborative<br />Experiment with new technologies – microblogging, social networking, social media, iPads, etc.<br />Involve different groups<br />Use collaboration to lead to another project, if possible<br />
    18. 18. Selected References<br />Arnold, N., Ducate, L., Lomicka, L., & Lord, G. (2005). Using Computer-mediated Communication to Establish Social and Supportive Environments in Teacher Education. CALICO Journal, 22(3): 537-566.<br />Arnold, N., Ducate, L., Lomicka, L., Lord, G. (2009). Assessing online collaboration among language teachers: A cross-institutional case study. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 8(2): 121-139.<br />Arnold, N., & Ducate, L. (2006). Connecting universities, constructing meaning: An analysis of beginning and future FL teachers ‘meeting’ online. Language Learning and Technology, 10(1), 42-66. <br />Arnold, N., Ducate, L., and Lomicka, L. (2007). Virtual communities of practice in teacher education. In M. Kassen, R. Lavine, K. Murphy-Judy, & M. Peters (Eds.). Preparing and Developing Technology-proficient L2 Teachers (pp. 103-132). San Marcos, TX: Computer Assisted Language Instruction Consortium. <br />Cochran-Smith, M. (2005). Studying teacher education: What we know and need to know. The Journal of Teacher Education 56: 301. DOI: 10.1177/0022487105280116.<br />Egbert, J., Paulus, T., & Nakamichi, Y. (2002). The impact of CALL instruction on classroom computer use: A foundation for rethinking technology in teacher education. Language Learning & Technology, 6(3), 108-126. Available: http://llt.msu.edu/vol6num3/egbert.default.html<br />Hubbard, P. & Levy, M. (Eds.). (2006). Teacher education in CALL. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.<br />Fuchs, C. (2003). Negotiating over a distance: The challenges of computer-mediated communication (CMC) in foreign language teacher education. In M.K. Legutke, & D. Rsler (Eds.), Fremdsprachenlernen mit digitalen Medien.  Beitrge des Giessener Forschungskolloquiums. [Foreign language learning with computer technologies. Articles by the Giessen research colloquium.] (pp. 179-208). Tbingen: Narr. <br />Fuchs, C. (2006a). Exploring German pre-service teachers' electronic and professional literacies. ReCALL, 18(2), 174-192.<br />
    19. 19. Selected References<br />Fuchs, C. (2006b). Computer-mediated negotiation across borders: German-American collaboration in language teacher education. Frankfurt: Peter Lang EuropischerVerlagderWissenschaften.<br />Fuchs, C. (2009). Computer-mediated task design: Language student teachers' expectations and realizations. Letras & Letras. 37-64.<br />Fuchs, C. (2010). Cross-institutional blended learning in teacher education: A case study. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 2(2), 30-49<br />Fuchs, C. (2011). Methodological Implications of Using Google Applications (Google Sites and Google Wave) for Cross-Institutional Collaboration in Language Teacher Education. Paper presented at American Association for Applied Linguistics Conference, Chicago.<br />Lord, G., & Lomicka, L. (2008). Blended learning in teacher education: An investigation of classroom community across media. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 8(2). <br />Lord, G., & Lomicka, L. (2007a). Social presence in virtual communities of FL teachers. System 35: 208-228. <br />Lord, G., & Lomicka, L. (2007b). Foreign Language Teacher Preparation and Asynchronous CMC: Promoting Reflective Teaching. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education. 15 (4): 513-532. Chesapeake, VA: AACE.<br />Muller-Hartmann, A. (2005). Learning how to teach intercultural communicative competence via telecollaboration: A model for language teacher education. In J. A. Belz & S. L. Thorne (eds.), Internet-Mediated Intercultural Foreign Language Education (p. 63-83). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.<br />Willis, J. (2001). Foundational assumptions for information technology and teacher education.  Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 1(3), 305-320.<br />

    ×