Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

 Established in 2001  ATEP pre-service education programs to Aboriginal students in partnership with First Nations colleges and/or local school authorities.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: " Established in 2001  ATEP pre-service education programs to Aboriginal students in partnership with First Nations colleges and/or local school authorities."— Presentation transcript:


2  Established in 2001  ATEP pre-service education programs to Aboriginal students in partnership with First Nations colleges and/or local school authorities across Northern Alberta  Provides access to teacher education programs for individuals in remote areas  Students receive a B.Ed. From the University of Alberta

3  Seeks to deliver community based education that is reflective of: › Community culture › Local concerns and aspirations › Feeling “at home” while learning  Students can continue to live and work in their home communities

4  The University works with the First Nations colleges to: › Identify and hire instructors › Develop curricular materials › Plan individual course delivery › Secure resources  A site coordinator also assists students with their individual program planning

5  ATEP uses a cohort-based model › Build a climate of trust and community › Foster supportive collegiality  Two-year cohort cycle  Average intake of 18-25 students per cycle  Students do not have to be aboriginal to participate in the program  Since 2001, 71 students have graduated from the ATEP program

6  In conjunction with Blue Quills First Nations College in St. Paul, Alberta  Approximately 140 miles (220 KM) north-east of Edmonton.

7  20 ATEP Students › 15 Aboriginal and 5 non-aboriginal › 15 females and 5 males  Average age: 35 years old in 2007  Median age: 33 years old in 2007  All 20 are participating in the research component of this initiative in some way

8  Previous experiences with ATEP have indicated that participation and retention are directly linked to issues surrounding: › Commuting › Communication › Financial resources › Access to resources (library, classroom, etc...) › Increases in blended-learning opportunities

9  Increase access  Increase integration

10  Increase student access to technology equipment and resources  Increase access to courses through distance and blended delivery  Foster a community of learners that extends beyond face-to-face learning and contributes to the cultural experiences of ATEP.

11  Through the generous support of the University of Alberta TLEF program, the TELUS Community Foundation and Hewlett-Packard, each student received: › An HP laptop computer › Microsoft Office 2007 › EVDO satellite Internet card › Unlimited Internet access for the duration of their program

12  Increase levels of technology integration in the program  Develop students’ technology skills  Develop students’ knowledge of classroom technology integration to: › Promote student problem-solving › Promote critical thinking › Support learners with special needs

13  Students participated in a series of PD sessions to enhance their skills and raise awareness of resources.  Instructors were approached about the project and encouraged to develop activities that made use of the technology.


15  The research team developed a set of research questions that included examining: › Student and instructor skills › Attitudes towards technology › Instructor best practices › Student integration levels › Overall effectiveness of our model

16  This paper/presentation looks at our students’ progress so far.  In light of our research questions, this translates to: › Student attitudes › Student skills › Students’ integration levels

17  Both qualitative and quantitative  Qualitative: › Student reflections › Student interviews › Student focus groups › Sharing circles › Artifacts › Concept maps  Quantitative: › Numerous instruments delivered pre-mid-post (pre and mid only at this time)

18  Instruments administered: › Survey of Teachers’ Attitudes Towards Information Technology (TAT) (Knezek & Christenses, 1998) › Attitudes section of the Fordham University Regional Technology Center Technology Skills Self-Assessment Profile (D’Agustino, Imbimbo & King, 2004)  Student reflections  Interviews, focus groups and sharing circles

19  Skill self-assessment only  Instruments administered: › Technology Proficiency Self-Assessment (TPSA) (Ropp, 1999) to examine competencies › University of Alberta Faculty of Education Technology Survey to examine how independently students and faculty can complete technology tasks  Student reflections  Interviews, focus groups and sharing circles

20  Analysis of artifacts: final unit plans from their final methods course (Social Studies).  Concept maps  Interviews with mentor teachers after student teaching.  Student reflections  Interviews, focus groups and sharing circles

21  For our own interest, we have also administered: › The Paragon Learning Style Inventory (based on the MBPI) (Shindler, 2003) › The Visual – Auditory – Kinaesthetic (VAK) Test (Chislett, 2005)


23  High average age of the cohort. › Normal distribution with a mean of 35 and a medium of 33 at the onset of the program in 2007. › Some millennial learners, some baby boomers and some from generation X.

24  Hardware difficulties › Late arrival › OS issues › Internet access issues › Hardware failures

25  FURETCTSSA Instrument  Students moved towards a more positive attitude towards computers on 17 out of 18 questions  The remaining question had no change.  Moved from pre-point averages of 4.00 to mid-point averages of 4.35 (n=13).

26 PreMidChange 1. I enjoy doing things on a computer.4.3084.6150.308 2. I avoid using computers as much as possible.2.2311.615- 0.615 3. I think using computers for classroom instruction involves too much time.2.3851.923- 0.462 4. I know that computers give me opportunities to learn many new things.4.3854.5380.154 5. Computers intimidate and threaten me.2.2312.000- 0.231 6. Spending school funds on computer technology is not worth it.1.462 0 7. Teachers should know how to use computers in their classrooms.4.3084.7690.462 8. I feel computers are necessary tools in both educational and work settings.4.3854.7690.385 9. I believe that I am /would be a better teacher if I knew how to use the computers in my classroom. 4.1544.5380.385 10. I have a lot of self-confidence when it comes to working with computers.3.4624.2310.769 11. I believe using computers can improve communication with my students’ families.3.9234.3080.385 12. I want to learn a lot about how to use computers for instruction.4.3084.3850.077 13. I believe that the Internet can dramatically change teaching.4.1544.2310.077 14. Changing the curriculum to integrate technology requires too much training.3.0772.308- 0.769 15. Computers can be used successfully with courses that demand creative activity.4.1544.4620.308 16. Computers can be a useful instructional aid in almost all subject areas.4.3854.4620.077 17. Computers break down too much to be of very much use.2.6152.000- 0.615 18. Computers can enhance remedial (low-achieving student) instruction4.0774.2310.154 (n=13)

27  The Survey of Teachers’ Attitudes Towards Technology (TAT) also showed consistent motion towards more positive attitudes.  The formal TAT scoring analysis will be conducted when the post data has been collected (Knezek & Christiensen, 1998).

28  Average changes of more than.5 points on a 5 point Likert scale between pre and mid point administration of the Teacher Attitudes Towards Instructional Technology (TAT) instrument. 1.I think that it takes a long time to finish when I learn the computer.0.50 towards disagree 2.Working with a computer makes me nervous.0.67 towards disagree 3.Using a computer is very frustrating.0.67 towards disagree 4.Computers do not scare me at all.0.75 towards agree 5.I can learn more from books than from a computer.0.67 towards agree 6.Computers do not scare me at all.0.75 towards disagree 7.I have a lot of self-confidence when it comes to working with computers.0.50 towards agree 8.Computer lessons are a favorite subject for me.0.83 towards agree 9.A computer test would scare me.0.75 towards disagree 10.I see the computer as something I will rarely use in my daily life as an adult.0.67 towards agree 11.Use of computers in education almost always reduces the personal treatment of students.0.67 towards disagree 12. I feel at ease when I am around computers.0.58 towards agree 13. Learning about computers is boring to me.0.67 towards disagree 14. I am afraid that if I begin to use computers I will become dependent upon them and lose some of my reasoning skills.0.58 towards disagree (n=13)

29  Average changes of more than.5 points on a 7 point semantic scale between pre and mid point administration of the Teacher Attitudes Towards Instructional Technology (TAT) instrument. PreMidChange Computers: Bad vs. Good5.676.580.92 towards good Computers: Empty vs. Full5.005.830.83 towards full Computers: Dull vs. Exciting5.436.170.75 towards exciting Computers: Suffocating vs. Fresh5.256.080.83 towards fresh eMail: Boring vs. Interesting5.426.000.58 towards interesting eMail: Exciting vs. Unexciting2.832.330.50 towards exciting WWW: Worthless vs. Valuable5.756.250.50 towards valuable WWW: Not needed vs. Needed5.586.250.67 towards needed Multimedia: Important vs. Unimportant2.251.670.58 towards important Multimedia: Boring vs. Interesting5.506.250.75 towards interesting Multimedia: Means nothing vs. Means a lot5.586.080.50 towards means a lot Multimedia: Appealing vs. Unappealing2.251.670.58 towards appealing Multimedia: Fascinating vs. Mundane2.331.580.75 towards fascinating Multimedia: Worthless vs. Valuable5.506.330.83 towards valuable Multimedia: Involving vs. Uninvolving2.251.670.58 towards involving Multimedia: Not needed vs. Needed5.506.250.75 towards needed (n=13)

30  Average changes of more than.5 points on a 7 point semantic scale between pre and mid point administration of the Teacher Attitudes Towards Instructional Technology (TAT) instrument. PreMidChange Productivity: Important vs. Unimportant2.081.330.75 towards important Productivity: Boring vs. Interesting5.336.331.00 towards interesting Productivity: Fascinating vs. Mundane2.091.580.51 towards fascinating Productivity: Worthless vs. Valuable6.006.580.58 towards valuable Productivity: Not needed vs. Needed5.926.420.50 towards needed Students: Important vs. Unimportant2.171.420.75 towards important Students: Boring vs. Interesting5.676.420.75 towards interesting Students: Relevant vs. Irrelevant2.251.420.83 towards relevant Students: Exciting vs. Unexciting2.081.420.67 towards exciting Students: Means nothing vs. Means a lot5.756.580.83 towards means a lot Students: Appealing vs. Unappealing2.171.500.67 towards appealing Students: Fascinating vs. Mundane2.171.330.83 towards fascinating Students: Worthless vs. Valuable5.756.751.00 towards valuable Students: Involving vs. Uninvolving2.001.500.50 towards involving Students: Not needed vs. Needed5.426.330.92 towards needed (n=13)

31  Initial qualitative data supports these findings. › In student reflections about the use of Elluminate for online courses, 12 responses were predominantly positive, 3 were neutral and 3 were predominantly negative. › Mid-point reflections on the project overall had 10 students with predominantly positive responses and 1 student who was neutral. › Our focus group data has similar ratios, though the data is hard to quantify.

32  Students were not starting on the even playing field that was anticipated. › Initial skill-self assessments showed that students did not have the skills you would anticipate after an introductory computing course.  PD sessions had to be modified › Supplemental support for low end learners › Supplemental resources for high end learners › Shift of focus to pedagogy and integration over more complex skills

33  Supplemental support systems were put into place › One additional college support person › One cohort member was hired as a temporary TA › Phone and email support was provided by the PD coordinator

34  Technology Proficiency Self- Assessment › 20 skills self-assessed on a Likert scale › Students moved from an average of 3.88 to 4.12 on pre to mid-point measures (n=12) › Of the twenty items, students moved more towards disagree on one of the skills, three remained the same and moved towards agree on the remaining 16 items.  We have substantial amounts of qualitative data that support these findings.

35 PreMidChange 1. Send email to a friend.4.92 0.00 2. Subscribe to a discussion list. 3. Create a "nickname" or an "alias" to send email to several people at once.3.333.500.17 4. Send a document as an attachment in an email.4.834.920.09 5. Keep copies of outgoing messages that I send to others.4.334.420.09 6. Use an Internet search engine to find web pages related to my subject matter interests.4.424.500.08 7. Search for and find the Smithsonian Institution Web site.3.834.170.34 8. Create my own WWW home page.2.422.750.33 9. Keep track of a web site that I have visited so that I can return later.3.834.250.42 10. Find primary sources of information on the Internet that I can use in my teaching.4.25 0.00 11. Use a spreadsheet to create a pie chart.3.583.920.34 12. Create a newsletter with graphics and text in 3 columns. 13. Save documents in other formats.3.753.920.17 14. Use the computer to create a slideshow presentation.4.424.670.25 15. Create a database of information.2.753.500.75 16. Write an essay describing how I would use technology in my classroom.4.254.630.38 17. Create a lesson or unit that incorporates subject matter software as an integral part.3.884.130.25 18. Use technology to collaborate with other teachers or students from a distance.4.004.380.38 19. Describe 5 software programs that I would use in my teaching.3.503.38-0.12 20. Write a plan with a budget to buy technology for my classroom.4.00 0.00 Average3.884.12 (n=12)

36  We will compare the students on our own University of Alberta Faculty of Education Technology Survey which was only administered at pre and post points because of length.  The instrument has students gauge their skill level on a five point scale of: › I am totally confident that I can do this on my own. › I am pretty sure that I can do this on my own. › I could do this with a bit of help. › I can’t do this but would like to learn how. › I can’t do this and don’t really care to learn how.

37  Instructors did not always respond to the initiative in the way we had hoped.  Some instructors made extensive use of the available technology while...  Others opted not to make use of it at all. › Another reason why pedagogy and integration became an important focus of the PD sessions

38  Despite these challenges, students were able to experience a number of technologies in their courses, including: › Taking a synchronous online course › Taking an asynchronous online course › Recording a podcast › Completing digital scavenger hunts › Creating multimedia storybooks › Creating concept maps with Inspiration › Authoring spreadsheets › Blogging › Using Ning as a CMS

39  Students were also able to explore a wide range of tools and software in the PD sessions, even though they didn’t have a chance to apply them in the classroom: › Read and Write Gold › BoardMaker Plus! › Google Earth › Community Walk › Google Sites › Blogger › VoiceThread › And more..

40  Results to follow...  Students have just begun their final round of student teaching.  Students will complete the second round of concept maps at the call-back day in April.  We do currently have the students’ final unit plans from their last methods course and are beginning to analyze them for technology integration activities.

41  Despite many challenges, we have seen evidence of positive growth in terms of student attitudes towards technology and self-assessed skill.  We are currently beginning to examine evidence of enhanced student technology integration in their teaching and planning.

42  We will be publishing further results after we gather post data at the end of the project.  We will also publish best practices and lessons learned for organizations who may be seeking to implement similar programs.  This initiative has provided us with a great deal of guidance about future endeavours and will inform many future decisions about technology use in our off-site programs.

43  Kim Peacock  ATEP Web Site  ATEP Technology Initiative Web Site

Download ppt " Established in 2001  ATEP pre-service education programs to Aboriginal students in partnership with First Nations colleges and/or local school authorities."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google