Week 6 effectsoftechnology-roshana
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Week 6 effectsoftechnology-roshana

on

  • 298 views

This PPT is for my class EDUU564

This PPT is for my class EDUU564

Statistics

Views

Total Views
298
Views on SlideShare
298
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Week 6 effectsoftechnology-roshana Presentation Transcript

  • 1. Effects of Staff Development Trainings Roshana Safi EDUU 564 Brandman University DR: Van OurkerkPicture obtained from Electronic School
  • 2. Table of Contents Abstract Introduction Review of Literature Theoretical Framework Methodology  Teacher Technology Survey  Teacher Survey  Focus Group  Observations Summary of Findings Implications Further Research References
  • 3. Abstract Look at the effects of staff development trainings Focus on teachers who are involved in EETT Data collected  Surveys  Focus groups  Observations Staff development trainings  Teachers attend  Take information back and implement in their classroom  Need more opportunities
  • 4. Introduction “A variety of studies indicate that technology will have little effect unless teachers are adequately and appropriately trained” (Kelley & Ringstaff, 2002, p.12). Education is technology driven Accountability  Professional development  Competency Research Questions  How much of what is learned at staff development trainings in technology is implemented in the classroom?  Are teachers utilizing staff development opportunities in technology?
  • 5. Review of Literature It is said that fewer than five hours of professional development is for technology (McKenzie, 2000) Barriers  Time  Administrative support  No follow up  Money  Trained in wrong areas Outcomes  More successful  Use of technology will rise  Higher order thinking skills
  • 6. Review of Literature Cons  Geared towards basic software  Lack of training on how to incorporate into the curriculum Teacher Competency  Accountability  Bausell and Klemick (2007), reported that only 45 states had standards to measure competency, 9 states had requirements tied to licensure and recertification, 39 states offered online courses for professional development and only 9 require teachers to demonstrate competency.  Barriers  Copyright laws  Test scores  Lack of professional development
  • 7. Review of Literature Solutions  Incentives  All are temporary Technology Can Work  Co-Nect Schools  Whole school technology reform  Technology changes the way you teach Conclusion  Lack of professional development  Teachers need to be motivated
  • 8. Theoretical Framework  Dewey  Active participants to learn  Progression of learning  Learn better by doing  Piaget  Assimilate information  Accommodate informationPicture obtained from dewey.pragmatism.org/ and www.marxists.org/glossary/people/p/i.htm
  • 9. Methodology Setting  Southern California School district Participants  EETT teachers  Enhancing Education through Technology Grant Data Collected  Teacher Technology Surveys  Given twice a year through the district  Teacher Survey  Designed after reviewing information from technology survey  Focus Group Discussion  Made up of EETT teachers  Observations  Four observations of EETT teachers
  • 10. Teacher Technology Survey Competency  Word – 60% of teachers can teach someone how to use this while only 2% say they do not know how to use it.  Excel – 33% say they need help while 28% do not know how to use it.  Presentation software – 66% do not know how to do this while 9% can do this by themselves. Implementation  Majority do not use technology to its fullest
  • 11. Teacher Survey Trainings  Of the teachers surveyed, all teachers attend staff development trainings  Of the 17 teachers, only 1 had attended a technology training recently Implementation  16 teachers said they learned something from the training and immediately implemented something while 1 said they did not implement anything. Technology Trainings  Only 2 teachers had been to technology training during this school year.  Offered by the district  Would like to go  Have already been  Would not be beneficial to me  No time  Need more information
  • 12. Focus Group Equipment Used  Projector, laptop, document camera, promethean board, activotes, slate Implementation in the Classroom  Make lesson more interactive  Only 1 was not using the technology to its fullest Last training attended  All had attended a training recently  EETT institute, activote, weblockers, cluster meeting, iTree, Google Earth Learning  All teachers learned some new piece of information Implementation  11 teachers implemented something write away  Activotes  Google earth  2 did not implement anything “just yet”
  • 13. Observations 4 EETT Teachers Attended an Activ Studio Training on how to make flipcharts After training, observations took place 3 out of 4 teachers were using new information learned. Flipcharts were used and student engagement was high. 1 teacher went above and beyond  Flipcharts  Activates 3 out of 4 showed competency with the equipment Difficulties  First year  Incorporating new technology
  • 14. This is an example ofa flipchart that ateacher created.
  • 15. Summary of Findings Teachers are required to go to staff development trainings. Teachers are learning and implementing new information. District  Ensure teachers get appropriate training  Implement better staff development opportunities  Follow up  Make teachers aware of trainings Implementation of technology is successful when the information learned is relevant to the learner. Trainings need to be offered at different levels.
  • 16. Implications Teachers do not use technology to its fullest potential. Staff development center  Share data Personal mission  Share with my colleagues  Share knowledge about technology  Share dates and times of technology trainings Teachers can use technology in different ways.  eChalk  Weblockers
  • 17. Further Research More focused  One staff development training  Survey before  Survey after  Observe or hold discussion group  Follow up from district Student perspective  Does using technology affect student learning?  Why do you think teachers do or do not use technology?  Survey students
  • 18. “Knowledgeable, skillful teachers form the bedrock of good schools” (Noyce, 2006, p.1).
  • 19. References Bausell, C. Vinograd, Klemick, E. (2007) Tracking U.S. Trends. Education Week, 26 (30), 42-44. Retrieved June 24, 2007 from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2007/03/29/30trackingtrends.h26.html?qs=digital+equity Becker, H., Ravitz, J., and Wang, Y. (1999). Computer Use and Pedagogy in Co-NECT Schools, A Comparative Study. Teaching, Learning, and Computing, 1999. Retrieved on June 24, 2007 from http://www.crito.uci.edu/tlc/findings/co-nect/startpage.html CDW Government, Inc., (2006). Technology as a teaching tool. CDW-G teachers talk technology 2005, Retrieved July 8, 2007, from http://newsroom.cdwg.com/features/feature-08-29-05.htm#contact McKenzie, J. (2000). Head of the Class. Electronic school, January, 2001. Retrieved June 24, 2007 from http://www.electronic-school.com/2001/01/0101f2.html Noyce, P. (2006). Professional Development: How Do We Know If It Works?. Electronic School. September, 2006. Retrieved October 20, 2007 from http://www.noycefdn.org/documents/ProfDev_HowDoWeKnowIfItWorks-EdWeek091306.pdf Office of Technology Assessment. Teachers and Technology: Making the Connection. OTA Publications, April, 1995. Retrieved on June 24, 2007 from http://www.wws.princeton.edu/ota/ns20/year_f.html Ringstaff, C, & Kelley, L (2002). The Learning Return on Our Educational Technology Investment. Retrieved July 8, 2007, from http://www.netdaycompass.org/outside_frame.cfm?thispath=instance_id=1700^category_id=5&this Smerdon, AuthorB., & Cronen, S. (2000). Teachers Tools for the 21st Century: A Report on Teachers Use of Technology. National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved on July 14, 2007 from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2000102 Tenbusch, J. (1998). Teaching the Teachers: Technology Staff Development that Works. Electronic School. March, 1998. Retrieved on October 20, 2007 from http://www.electronic-school.com/0398f1.html.