BY: KRIS M. IRWIN, PH.D. WARNELL SCHOOL OF FORESTRY & NATURAL RESOURCES THE UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA NATIONAL PLT COORDINATORS CONFERENCE DEADWOOD, SOUTH.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Definitions Innovation Reform Improvement Change.
Advertisements

Second Information Technology in Education Study (SITES) A Project of the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA)
PD Plan Agenda August 26, 2008 PBTE Indicators Track
Co-Teaching as Best Practice in Student Teaching Conclusion 1.
Managing Technological Change Chapter 4 Matt Dockery.
Math-Science Subgroup Report Recommendations. APEC Context Members are keenly interested in collaborating to learn from each other how to provide 21 st.
Title 4 Effects of a student designed multimedia project on 8th graders attitude and performance.
Home Economics Teachers’ Readiness for Teaching STEM
Implementing Peer Coaching in PLTs Teacher Leadership for High Student Growth Sara Overby WCPSS Coordinating Teacher for Secondary Literacy,
INTEL CONFIDENTIAL, FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY 1 Intel Teach Essentials Program Curriculum Roundtable – Oxford – July 2013.
Education for Sustainability UNSW and NSW State Initiatives.
ICT TEACHERS` COMPETENCIES FOR THE KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY
TEAM MORALE Team Assignment 12 SOFTWARE MEASUREMENT & ANALYSIS K15T2-Team 21.
PHYSICAL & HEALTH EDUCATION CANADA. Who is Physical & Health Education Canada? The national voice for physical and health education. We work with.
OER10, March 22-24, 2010 Cynthia Jimes, PhD Institute for the Study of Knowledge Management in Education ISKME: Siyavula: Building Communities to Support.
Nguyen Thi Thuy Trang Dr. Jenny Barnett Dr. Ruth Geer 8/27/
Manipulatives – Making Math Fun Dr. Laura Taddei.
Margaret J. Cox King’s College London
Project Learning Tree Project Learning Tree is an award-winning environmental education program designed for teachers and other educators, parents, and.
Tie Into Practice Technology Integration Example: A Research Paper Website Jennifer Jarvis and Connie Keating.
Brooke Bennett. *National Educational Technology Standards and Performance Indicators for Teachers* 1. Facilitate & inspire student learning and creativity.
SUCCESSFULLY PREPARING ALL STUDENTS FOR THEIR FUTURES SE 256 TH STREET, KENT, WA | TECH TALKS: TOOLS WORTH KNOWING Professional.
The Integration and Effectiveness of Information and Communication Technologies in Canadian Postsecondary Education Dr. Carl Cuneo, Director, EvNet, Network.
1 Julia Da Silva- Beharry, August The goal of this final project is to disseminate key research findings and K-12 classroom application strategies.
The goal of this final project is to disseminate key research findings and K-12 classroom application strategies. This is based upon the effectiveness.
Presenting History Using Photostory January 2010 History Connected Teaching American History Grant Connections to Standards: Massachusetts History and.
54321 Michigan Technology Readiness: are YOU ready for Any Time, Any Place, Any Way, Any Pace March 26, 2012.
Full Implementation of the Common Core. Last Meeting Performance Tasks Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium Upcoming Accountability Measure Strong teaching.
Student Voice in Every School – the Why and the How NSW Secondary Principals’ Council Professional Learning Day Term
Professional Development Proposal Sarah Baker EDAD 5320 Monday, April 27, 2009.
MATE 4001 Carol Brown TPACK for MATE 4001 Integrating technology is not about technology – it is primarily about content and effective instructional practices.
Tech-Know-Build: Indiana Students Building Knowledge with Technology Kathleen Keck Kathleen Steele Tami Haas Crawfordsville Community Schools Crawfordsville,
SCHOOL BOARD A democratically elected body that represents public ownership of schools through governance while serving as a bridge between public values.
Plenary Session 7: Technologies and Principles of Learning in Support of Teaching Delwyn L. Harnisch University of Nebraska, Lincoln.
Module 2 Wikispaces: A Training Module Patsy Kraj Spring 2011 University of West Georgia.
Copyright © 2008, Intel Corporation. All rights reserved. Intel, the Intel logo, Intel Education Initiative, and Intel Teach Program are trademarks of.
The E-Mentorship Vision Network A partnership between The New Hampshire Professional Development Center And The Northeast Regional Center for Vision Education.
STARTALK: Our mission, accomplishments and direction ILR November 12, 2010.
Teacher competencies. Professional competence with ICT Draw on appropriate ICT applications to enhance personal and professional effectiveness  Using.
OCAN Train the Trainer For Trainers Version 2.0 December 2010.
Winning Strategies Conference 2010 – Metro ECSU – Saturday, March 20 Jonathan C. W. Jones, M.Ed.
Collaborating Online for Rigor and Relevance Doug Silver, Director of Research, Successful Practices Network Ashley Terwilliger, Member Services Coordinator,
Teacher Professional Development for Problem-Based Integration of Technology James D. Lehman Peggy A. Ertmer Jingshu Huang Sung-Hee Park Purdue University.
Preparing Future Teachers for 21 st Century Learning Partnerships that enhance the capacity of pre-service education 2008 Deakin University Faculty of.
School Administrators’ Perceptions of Secondary CTE Teachers’ Teaching and Learning Professional Development Needs.
Leading Beyond the Institution: Graduates as Learners, Leaders, and Scholarly Practitioners Drs. Ron Zambo, Debby Zambo, Ray R. Buss.
WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY College of Education and Human Services Integrating Technology Into Foundations and Methods Courses.
UNC Deans Council The North Carolina K-12 Digital Learning Transition Glenn Kleiman Friday Institute for Educational Innovation NC State University College.
1 Educational Technology Electronic Teaching Portfolio Based on the ISTE/NCATE Foundation Standards for all educators. All candidates in teacher preparation.
Introduction to Keypads Agenda 2010 Determining Priorities for State-District Leadership and Action.
Technology Workshop 2 June 22, Extent of Technology Integration in Instruction by ABE Teachers.
Government of Nepal Ministry of Education National Center for Educational Development.
Researching Technology in South Dakota Classrooms Dr. Debra Schwietert TIE Presentation April 2010 Research Findings.
Friday Institute Leadership Team Glenn Kleiman, Executive Director Jeni Corn, Director of Evaluation Programs Phil Emer, Director of Technology Planning.
Webinar NGSS Earth and Space Science: Needs and a Call to Action April 9, pm Eastern | 3pm Central | 2pm Mountain | 1pm Pacific Dr. Ed Robeck, American.
Supporting Secondary-to-Postsecondary Collaboration To Support Rigorous, Effective Instruction Planning for the 2016 GEAR UP Summer Institute February.
- CAT 1 - Developing the Organization: By Recognizing the Importance and Relevance of Student Voices in Developing a Positive School Climate.
IN WHAT WAYS DO PRESERVICE TEACHERS UTILIZED AN WEB-BASED LEARNING SUPPORT SYSTEM? Fethi Ahmet Inan The University of Memphis Soner Yildirim.
Graduate Program Completer Evaluation Feedback 2008.
TELL Survey 2015 Trigg County Public Schools Board Report December 10, 2015.
2009 Institute for Staff Development Students Today, Leaders Tomorrow Getting Started: Teaching Principles of Information Technology 2009 NAF Summer Institute.
Patsy Kraj Spring 2011 University of West Georgia.
Course Work 2: Critical Reflection GERALDINE DORAN B
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN AND SOCIAL CIENCES APPLIED LINGUISTICS IN ENGLISH CAREER    “THE INFLUENCE OF TEACHER’S ATTITUDES AND BELIEFS INTO TECHNOLOGY-RELATED.
Cross-Institutional Collaboration for Sustainability
Project Learning Tree Project Learning Tree is an education program designed for teachers and others working with youth from pre-school through 12th grade.
Colorado Project Learning Tree
Campus Needs Assessment
Forensic Science RISE Program
Final Exam Reflection IDT3600 SARAH HERBERT.
Presentation transcript:

BY: KRIS M. IRWIN, PH.D. WARNELL SCHOOL OF FORESTRY & NATURAL RESOURCES THE UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA NATIONAL PLT COORDINATORS CONFERENCE DEADWOOD, SOUTH DAKOTA MAY 16, 2012 PREPARING THE NEXT PLT GENERATION TO USE TECHNOLOGY CONNECTIONS

PRESENTATION OBJECTIVES What I will do: Define technology use in the context of PLT Describe barriers to technology implementation Present data from national research Provide interaction between you and the data What you will do: Evaluate your own use of technology with PLT Identify your barriers to implementation Discuss ways to overcome barriers

WHAT IS TECHNOLOGY FOR PLT? Cutting Edge EE Address the need to develop technologically literate students (2011 PLT K-8 Guide, p. 6) Justify Use of Technology Support learning objectives Artifact that demonstrates learning: Used for assessment Motivation Student-centered Cooperative learning Student/Teacher interaction Technology for PLT (2011, PLT K-8 Guide, p. 9) Skill development Access to knowledge Creativity

TECHNOLOGY CONNECTIONS 1.Word Processing - writing 2.Spreadsheets – data 3.Presentation Software - report 4.Graphic Software - photos & video 5.Graphic Organizer - visual thinking 6.Digital/video camera – capture 7.Peripherals - other than computers 8.Internet Resources - resources

NATIONAL PLT SURVEY RESULTS Conducted Summer/Fall 2010 PLT Network invited to participate Participation lower than anticipated Educators (513) Facilitators (211) State Coordinators (43) Results are relevant to EE and PLT Revealed opportunities

GUIDE USED MOST AND AUDIANCE? Over 72% reported using PLT most often with PreK-12 students Only 7% reported using PLT with college students Guide  % PreK-8 Activity Guide65086 High School Modules10614 Total756100

LEVEL OF CONFIDENCE Item Frequency of Response (%) Mean (SD) I am confident in my ability to use technology tools when teaching with the PLT curriculum. 30 (3.5) 63 (7.2) 68 (7.8) 127 (14.6) 154 (17.7) 192 (22.1) 235 (27.0) 5.10 (1.7)

LEVEL OF IMPORTANCE Frequency of Response (%) Mean (SD) It is important to incorporate technology tools when it is recommended in the PLT PreK-8 Activity Guide. 17 (2.0) 57 (6.6) 83 (9.6) 177 (20.4) 145 (16.7) 164 (18.9) 225 (25.9) 5.04 (1.7)

LEVEL OF FAMILIARITY Level  % Not familiar Somewhat familiar Familiar Very familiar Total Ave Level = 2.14 or “Somewhat familiar”

LEVEL OF USE Technology Tools Frequency of Response (%) Mean (SD) Word Processing Software (2)211 (24.7) 168 (19.7) 150 (17.6) 187 (21.9) 137 (16.1) 2.85 (1.42) Spreadsheet/Database Software286 (33.6) 261 (30.6) 139 (16.3) 123 (14.4) 43 (5.0) 2.27 (1.21) Presentation Software (3)221 (26.2) 181 (21.4) 151 (17.9) 195 (23.1) 97 (11.5) 2.72 (1.37) Graphic Software309 (37.0) 210 (25.1) 145 (17.3) 120 (14.4) 52 (6.2) 2.28 (1.23) Graphic Organizer Software334 (39.8) 213 (25.4) 135 (16.1) 119 (14.2) 38 (4.5) 2.18 (1.23) Digital/Video Cameras (4)255 (30.1) 199 (23.5) 173 (20.4) 140 (16.5) 81 (9.6) 2.52 (1.33) Peripherals364 (43.7) 219 (26.3) 127 (15.2) 91 (10.9) 32 (3.8) 2.05 (1.17) Internet Resources (1)126 (14.9) 121 (14.3) 146 (17.2) 245 (28.9) 209 (24.7) 3.34 (1.38)

CHARACTERISTICS OF PLT TECHNOLOGY USER Completed a PLT workshop after January 1, 2007 A trained PLT educator Uses technology tools and encourages student learning with technology Tend to be less than 35 Most likely live in Northeast, South, or West PLT region

BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTATION 1.Status Quo - The feeling that things could be better if something changes. 2.Knowledge & Skills - Those who will implement the innovation must have adequate knowledge and skills to operate the innovation. 3.Resources - Access to the materials and supplies to make the innovation work. 4.Time - Those implementing the innovation must have time to learn, adapt, integrate, and reflect on their use of the innovation. 5.Rewards & Incentives - Some type of reward, either intrinsic or extrinsic, must be present to provide a reason to change. 6.Participation - The innovator must be involved in the decision- making process or it is unlikely the innovation will be implemented. 7.Commitment - Support from administrators and managers must come directly to those who are implementing the innovation. 8.Leadership - Support for innovators from those considered to be the leaders. Source: Ely, D. P. (1990, 1999)

PLT VS. OTHER GROUPS a Adapted from Ensminger & Surry, 2008 b Adapted from Nawawi et al., 2005 c Adapted from Surry & Ensminger, 2002

WHAT DO YOU THINK? A simple survey Use the “clickers” to respond

THIS IS A TEST 1.Yes 2.No

I AM CONFIDENT IN MY ABILITY TO USE TECHNOLOGY TOOLS WHEN TEACHING WITH THE PLT CURRICULUM. 1.Strongly Disagree 2.Disagree 3.Somewhat Disagree 4.Neutral 5.Somewhat Agree 6.Agree 7.Strongly Agree

RANK YOUR LEVEL OF FAMILIARITY WITH TECHNOLOGY CONNECTION AS PRESENTED IN THE K-8 GUIDE 1.Not familiar 2.Somewhat familiar 3.Familiar 4.Very familiar

WHICH TECHNOLOGY DO YOU USE MOST? (PICK ONE ONLY!) 1.Word processing 2.Spreadsheet 3.Presentation software 4.Graphic software 5.Graphic organizer 6.Digital/video cameras 7.Peripherals 8.Internet

IT IS IMPORTANT TO INCORPORATE TECHNOLOGY TOOLS WHEN IT IS RECOMMENDED IN THE K-8 ACTIVITY GUIDE. 1.Strongly Disagree 2.Disagree 3.Somewhat Disagree 4.Neutral 5.Somewhat Agree 6.Agree 7.Strongly Agree

BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTATION 1.Status Quo - The feeling that things could be better if something changes. 2.Knowledge & Skills - Those who will implement the innovation must have adequate knowledge and skills to operate the innovation. 3.Resources - Access to the materials and supplies to make the innovation work. 4.Time - Those implementing the innovation must have time to learn, adapt, integrate, and reflect on their use of the innovation. 5.Rewards & Incentives - Some type of reward, either intrinsic or extrinsic, must be present to provide a reason to change. 6.Participation - The innovator must be involved in the decision- making process or it is unlikely the innovation will be implemented. 7.Commitment - Support from administrators and managers must come directly to those who are implementing the innovation. 8.Leadership - Support for innovators from those considered to be the leaders. Source: Ely, D. P. (1990, 1999)

WHAT IS YOUR GREATEST BARRIER? (PICK THE ONE THAT AFFECTS YOU MOST) 1.Status Quo - The feeling that things could be better if something changes. 2.Knowledge & Skills - Those who will implement the innovation must have adequate knowledge and skills to operate the innovation. 3.Resources - Access to the materials and supplies to make the innovation work. 4.Time - Those implementing the innovation must have time to learn, adapt, integrate, and reflect on their use of the innovation. 5.Rewards & Incentives - Some type of reward, either intrinsic or extrinsic, must be present to provide a reason to change. 6.Participation - The innovator must be involved in the decision- making process or it is unlikely the innovation will be implemented. 7.Commitment - Support from administrators and managers must come directly to those who are implementing the innovation. 8.Leadership - Support for innovators from those considered to be the leaders. 0% 47% 7% 40% 7% 0%

SUGGESTED ACTION Build technological knowledge (TPACK) Students & teachers PLT educators, facilitators & state coordinators Content Knowledge (CK) Pedagogical Knowledge (PK) Technological Knowledge (TK)

HOW TO INCREASE “TK” What you can do Learn to do it yourself Collaborate with an instructional technologist Pilot test; Seek facilitator who is interested What National PLT can do Next major revision of PreK-8 EE Activity Guide should have major revision of Technology Connections Develop online tutorials Make technology (skills & application) part of this conference

CAN WE TALK? What do you need to increase the use of technology in your state? Where would you seek assistance to help implement technology? Other questions or ideas?

THANK YOU! Did you expect more from me?