You are here:

Supporting Change in Teacher Practice: Examining Shifts of Teachers’ Professional Development Preferences and Needs for Technology Integration

, , , , , Indiana University-Bloomington, United States

CITE Journal Volume 17, Number 4, ISSN 1528-5804 Publisher: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, Waynesville, NC USA

Abstract

Studies have shown that when K-12 school districts implement a new technology initiative, it is not always accompanied by effective teacher professional development (PD).  Many teachers have indicated that effective technology PD experiences should incorporate their individual PD needs.  The authors surveyed technology-using K-12 teachers at two points (2009 and 2015) to examine what they perceived as useful technology PD with regard to content and format.  Specifically, since technology changes quickly, we sought to examine whether there were any changes to what teachers perceived as useful content and format for technology PD.  Over 6 years, more teachers reported that personalized technology PD tended to be more effective.  Although some things remained consistent regarding content (e.g., utilizing Web 2.0 resources continued to be preferred PD content by teachers in both years), other content preferences changed (e.g., mobile applications and pedagogical-focused knowledge and skills).  Regarding PD format, the authors found that in 2015 more teachers perceived online and face-to-face workshops, personal learning networks, and conferences as useful.  Finally, teacher-led PD and in-class support were suggested as useful by more teachers in 2015.  Thus, more personalized, sustained, and situated PD is needed to effectively support K-12 teacher technology integration.

Citation

Liao, Y.C., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., Karlin, M., Glazewski, K. & Brush, T. (2017). Supporting Change in Teacher Practice: Examining Shifts of Teachers’ Professional Development Preferences and Needs for Technology Integration. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 17(4), 522-548. Waynesville, NC USA: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education. Retrieved August 18, 2018 from .

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. An, Y.J., & Reigeluth, C.M. (2011). Creating technology-enhanced, learner-centered classrooms: K-12 teacher beliefs, perceptions, barriers, and support needs. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 28(2), 54–62.
  2. Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT–TPCK: Advances in technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers& Education, 52, 154–168.
  3. Calvert, L. (2016). Moving from compliance to agency: What teachers need to make professional learning work. Oxford, OH: Learning Forward and NCTAF.
  4. Carpenter, J.P. (2016). Unconference professional development: Edcamp participant perceptions and motivations for attendance. Professional Development in Education, 42(1), 78-99.
  5. Carpenter, J.P., & Linton, J.N. (2016). Edcamp unconferences: Educators' perspectives on an untraditional professional learning experience. Teaching and Teacher Education, 57, 97-108.
  6. Ching, C.C., & Hursh, A.W. (2014). Peer modeling and innovation adoption among teachers in online professional development. Computers& Education, 73, 72-82.
  7. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education. New York, NY: Routledge.
  8. Cosmah, M., & Saine, P. (2013). Targeting digital technologies in Common Core standards: A framework for professional development. New England Reading Association Journal, 48 (2), 81-86.
  9. Creswell, J.W. (2002). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
  10. Curwood, J.S. (2011). Teachers as learners: What makes technology-focused professional development effective? English in Australia, 46(3), 68–75.
  11. Daly, T., & Conway, P.F. (2015). Moving beyond a state of stuck: school culture, mobile ICT integration and inclusion. In D. Butler, K. Marshall, & M. Leahy (Eds.), Shaping the future: How technology can lead to educational transformation (pp. 189-209). Chester
  12. Ertmer, P.A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A.T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 221-251.
  13. Ertmer, P.A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A.T. (2013). Removing obstacles to the pedagogical changes required by Jonassen’s vision of authentic technology-enabled learning. Computers& Education, 64, 175-182.
  14. Ertmer, P.A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A.T., Sadik, O., Sendurur, E., & Sendurur, P. (2012). Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: a critical relationship. Computers and Education, 59, 423–435.
  15. Gerard, L.F., Varma, K., Corliss, S.B., & Linn, M.C. (2011). Professional development for technology-enhanced inquiry science. Review of Educational Research, 81(3), 408-448.
  16. Gulamhussein, A. (2013). The core of professional development. American School Board Journal, 197(1), 22-26.
  17. Hanover Research Council. (2014). Professional development for technology integration. Retrieved from https://ts.madison.k-12.wi.us/files/techsvc/Professional%20Development%20for%20Technology%20Integration.pdf
  18. Hechter, R.P., & Vermette, L.A. (2013). Technology integration in K-12 science classrooms: An analysis of barriers and implications. Themes in Science and Technology Education, 6(2), 73-90.
  19. Hennessy, S., & London, L. (2013). Learning from International experiences with interactive whiteboards: The role of professional development in integrating the technology. Paris, FR: OECD publishing.
  20. Hew, K.F., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K–12 teaching and learning: Current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55, 223-252.
  21. Hixon, E., & Buckenmeyer, J. (2009). Revisiting technology integration in schools: Implications for professional development. Computers in the Schools, 26(2), 130-146.
  22. Inan, F.A., Lowther, D.L., Ross, S., & Strahl, J.D. (2010). Pattern of classroom activities during students’ use of computers: Relations between instructional strategies and computer applications. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 540-546.
  23. Keil, M.J., Rupley, W.H., Nichols, J.A., Nichols, W.D., Paige, D., & Rasinski, T.V. (2016). Teachers’ perceptions of engagement and effectiveness of school community partnerships: NASA’s online STEM professional development. Journal of Studies in Education, 6(2), 123.
  24. Kopcha, T.J. (2012). Teachers’ perceptions of the barriers to technology integration and practices with technology under situated professional development. Computers& Education, 59(4), 1109–1121.
  25. Lawless, K.A., & Pellegrino, J.W. (2007). Professional development in integrating technology into teaching and learning: Knowns, unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and answers. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 575–614.
  26. Liu, S.H. (2013). Teacher professional development for technology integration in a primary school learning community. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 22(1), 37–54.
  27. Lowther, D., Strahl, J.D., Inan, F.A., & Ross, S.M. (2008). Does technology integration “work” when key barriers are removed? Educational Media International, 45, 195–213.
  28. Martin, K., Miyashiro, D., & Baird, T. (2015, October). Technology integration in diverse contexts: Models of competency-based professional learning in three school districts. In T.Brown & H. Vander Merwe (Eds), The Mobile Learning Voyage-From Small Ripples to Massive Open Waters. Communications in Computer and Information Science, Vol 560. Switzerland: Springer, Cham.
  29. Merriam, S.B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  30. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
  31. Mouza, C. (2011). Promoting urban teachers’ understanding of technology, content, and pedagogy in the context of case development. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 44(1), 1–29.
  32. Newmann, F., & Wehlage, G. (1995). Successful school restructuring: A report to the public and educators by the center for restructuring schools. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press. NSD Technology Plan Update Committee. (2014 April). Technology master plan 20142018. Retrieved from http://nsd.us/district/plans/technology_plan.pdf
  33. OECD. (2015). Students, computers and learning: Making the connection. Paris, FR: Author.
  34. O’Hara, S., Pritchard, R., Huang, C., & Pella, S. (2013). Learning to integrate new technologies into teaching and learning through a design-based model of professional development. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 21(2), 203–223.
  35. Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A.T., Glazewski, K.D., Newby, T.J., & Ertmer, P.A. (2010). Teacher value beliefs associated with using technology: Addressing professional and student needs. Computers and Education, 55(3), 1321-1335.
  36. Patton, M. (2002): Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA. Sage. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 17(4)
  37. Pittman, T., & Gaines, T. (2015). Technology integration in third, fourth and fifth grade classrooms in a Florida school district. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(4), 539-554.
  38. Potter, S., & Rockinson‐Szapkiw, A. (2012). Technology integration for instructional improvement: The impact of professional development. Performance Improvement, 51(2), 22–27.
  39. Powell, C.B., & Mason, D.S. (2013). Effectiveness of podcasts delivered on mobile devices as a support for student learning during general chemistry laboratories. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(2), 148-170.
  40. Project Tomorrow. (2008). 21st century learners deserve a 21st century education. Selected National Findings of the Speak Up 2007 Survey. Retrieved from http://www.tomorrow.org/docs/national%20findings%20speak%20up%202007.pdf
  41. Project Tomorrow. (2013). Learning in the 21st century: Digital experiences and expectations of tomorrow’s teachers. Speak Up 2012 for Future Teachers National Data. Retrieved from http://www.tomorrow.org/speakup/speakup_reports.html
  42. Project Tomorrow. (2017). Trends in digital learning: Building teachers’ capacity and competency to create new learning experiences for students. Selected National Findings of the Speak Up 2016 Survey. Retrieved from http://www.tomorrow.org/speakup/speakup-2016-trends-digital-learning-june-2017.html
  43. Rybakova, K., & Witte, S. (2016, March). Professional development 2.0: Teaching teachers about technology. In G. Chamblee& L. Langub (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology& Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2301-2306).
  44. Saldaña, J. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  45. Shin, N., Sutherland, L.M., Norris, C.A., & Soloway, E. (2012). Effects of game technology on elementary student learning in mathematics. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(4), 540-560.
  46. Smolin, L., & Lawless, K. (2011). Evaluation across contexts: Evaluating the impact of technology integration professional development partnerships. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 27(3), 92–98.
  47. Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2014). Web 2.0 how-to-for educators. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
  48. Somekh, B. (2008). Factors affecting teachers’ pedagogical adoption of ICT. In J. Voogt& G. Knezek (Eds), International handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education (pp. 449-460). New York, NY: Springer US.
  49. Tondeur, J., Pareja Roblin, N., van Braak, J., Voogt, J., & Prestridge, S. (2017). Preparing beginning teachers for technology integration in education: Ready for takeoff? Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 26(2), 155-177.
  50. Trust, T. (2012). Professional learning networks designed for teacher learning. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 28(4), 133-138.
  51. Trust, T., Krutka, D.G., & Carpenter, J.P. (2016). “Together we are better”: Professional learning networks for teachers. Computers& Education, 102, 15-34.
  52. Twining, P., Raffaghelli, J., Albion, P., & Knezek, D. (2013), Moving education into the digital age: The contribution of teachers' professional development. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29, 426–437.
  53. U.S. Department of Education. (2014). The future ready district: Professional learning through online communities of practice and social networks to drive continuous improvement. Retrieved from the Office of Educational Technology website: http://tech.ed.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Section7-FutureReadyDistrictBriefFinal.pdf
  54. U.S. Department of Education. (2016). Future ready learning: Reimagining the role of technology in education. Retrieved from the Office of Educational Technology website: http://tech.ed.gov/files/2015/12/NETP16.pdf
  55. Virginia Department of Education. (2016). Technology in education: Professional development. Retrieved from http://www.doe.virginia.gov/support/technology/ Professional_dev/
  56. Vrasidas, C. (2015). The rhetoric of reform and teachers' use of ICT. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(2), 370-380.
  57. Walkers, A., Recker, M., Robertshaw, M.B., Osen, J., & Leary, H. (2011). Integrating technology and problem-based learning: A mixed methods study of two teacher professional development designs. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 5(2), 70-94.
  58. Wells, J.G. (2007) Key design factors in durable instructional technology professional development. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 15(1), 101–122.
  59. White, M.D., & Marsh, E.E. (2006). Content analysis: A flexible methodology. Library trends, 55(1), 22-45.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.