AECT 2010 - Introducing In-Service Teachers to Web 2.0


Published on

Unger, K., & Barbour, M. K. (2010, October). Introducing in-service teachers to Web 2.0. A paper presented at the annual convention of the Association for Educational Communication and Technology, Anaheim, CA.

Technology integration programs for teachers need to move beyond teaching word processing and other office tools, and general Internet tools; and instead focus on Web 2.0 tools that K-12 students are using in their daily lives. Wayne State University’s IT6230 – Internet in the Classroom course prepares in-service teachers with pedagogy, strategies, and tools for incorporating online resources into their teaching. This presentation will focus on the utilization of Web 2.0 tools to deliver and reinforce technology integration with in-service teachers.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • blogs served as the place where they post, using text, images, and links, course assignments and reflective entries
  • Updated blog notification – classmates and instructor
  • Microblogging is another form of written communication, but is on a smaller scale (i.e., 140 characters)
  • Organized by contentCreate and edit content collaboratively
  • platform for people to connect with people who share the same interestsMany K-12 educators are reluctant to engage in social networking sites, particularly the same site used by their students. It is hoped that exposure to more controlled and safe environments within this genre of Web 2.0 tools, along with an exploration of ways in which it can be used for classroom learning will overcome that initial reluctance.
  • websites that they find personally usefulmore robust tool, but kept Delicious as an option to those students who may become overwhelmed by a more comprehensive tool.
  • AECT 2010 - Introducing In-Service Teachers to Web 2.0

    1. 1. Instructional Technology Introducing in-service teachers to Web 2.0 Kelly Unger - Dr. Michael Barbour -
    2. 2. Distance Education in Instructional Technology Higher Ed• 2000-01: 56% of institutions offering distance ed programs• 2003: 3,077,000 enrollments (Waits & Lewis)• 2005: Increase by 35% (Allen & Seaman)• Who else does this begin to IMPACT?
    3. 3. Instructional Technology Current state of K-12 VSStudents Enrolled in Online Courses• 2001 = 40,000 – 50,000 (Clark)• 2009 = >1,000,000 K-12 (Picciano & Seaman)Students Enrolled in Online Courses• 45 States (plus DC) reporting significant K-12 online learning activity
    4. 4. GAPInstructional Technology Less than 40% of all online K-12 teachers in the United States reported to receiving professional development before they began teaching online (Rice & Dawley, 2007)
    5. 5. Instructional Technology Current state of VS• 2006 – Michigan adds online learning graduation requirement• Added 3 new standards for teachers in Educational Technology 1. Online Technology Experience and Skills 2. Online Course Design 3. Online Course Delivery• Necessitated changes to all endorsement programs in the state
    6. 6. Instructional Technology Current state of VS• At Wayne State University changed reflected in IT6230 – Internet in the Classroom – preparing teachers for three new roles (Davis, 2007) 1. Virtual School Designer 2. Virtual School Teacher 3. Virtual School Facilitator » most middle and high school teachers in Michigan were more likely to play the role of the facilitator the majority of course activities focused on this position
    7. 7. Instructional Technology Curriculum• Generational Differences (2 weeks) – dispelling digital natives/millennials myths – exploring “Generation Me”• Web 2.0 Tools (6 weeks) – blogs, RSS, wikis, microblogging, social bookmarking, social networking, collaborative tools• K-12 Online Learning (7 weeks)
    8. 8. Instructional Technology Purpose of Study Examine the effectiveness of the chosen K-12 online learning curriculum, with the goal of making continual improvements to the course (Stringer, 2004).
    9. 9. Instructional Technology Methods• Three Semesters – Winter 2008 - 9 of 15 students – Winter 2009 - 5 of 7 students – Summer 2009 – 5 of 14 students• Data – Blog comments based prompts by the instructor – Individual and group projects – Student evaluations of teaching
    10. 10. Instructional Technology Methods• Inductive analysis approach (LeCompte & Preissle, 1993) and constant comparative coding (Ezzy, 2002).• Microsoft Word® as a tool to complete this analysis following the procedure outlined by Ruona (2005).• Weekly meetings to discuss codes, categories and potential themes.
    11. 11. Blogs Instructional Technology• Winter 2008 and 2009 – Blogger, WordPress, and Edublog• Summer 2009 – Edublog (least likely to be blocked)
    12. 12. RSS Feed Instructional Technology• Winter 2008 and 2009 – Bloglines and Google Reader• Summer 2009 – Google Reader
    13. 13. Microblogging Instructional TechnologyWinter 2008 Winter 2009 Summer 2009Twitter Twitter Plurk Plurk *Higher % of Edmodo Educators
    14. 14. Wikis Instructional TechnologyWinter 2008 and 2009 Summer 2009Wikispaces Wet Paint http://clifmims.wetpainorizon ucation Upcoming Courses: Wikispaces…WetPaint eliminated ad free educator accounts
    15. 15. Social Networks Instructional Technology• All Semesters – NING – MACUL• Winter & Summer 2009 – Facebook
    16. 16. Social Bookmarking Instructional Technology• Winter 2008 & 2009 – Delicious • Summer 2009 – Delicious or Diigo
    17. 17. Other Web 2.0 ToolsInstructional Technology
    18. 18. Instructional Technology Questions and Discussion
    19. 19. Instructional Technology Introducing in-service teachers to Web 2.0 Kelly Unger - Dr. Michael Barbour -