You are here:

Scaffolding Technology Integration of Middle School Science and Mathematics: Comparing the Results of Two Models of Teacher Professional Development
PROCEEDINGS

, , , NC State University, United States

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Charleston, SC, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-67-9 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Chesapeake, VA

Abstract

To serve teachers in distant, rural areas provides challenges for professional development that seeks lasting changes in practices. For the teachers, integration of technologies in classrooms involves the demands of technology knowledge, content knowledge, and technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Learning in communities offers promise in supporting teachers’ confidence and acceptance of new practices. This mixed-methods study reports on professional development follow-up carried out two ways. In one “traditional” model, thirty teachers were located in six school districts (averaging three teachers per school), with one superintendent-appointed “lead” administrator per district. In the second “community of practice” model, thirty teachers from two districts involved all of the mathematics and science teachers at two schools and two participant-teacher “coaches” per school. Teachers in the second model were less likely to need assistance from professional developers, more likely to teach a follow-up lesson, and more likely to continue with the project.

Citation

Blanchard, M., Grable, L. & Sharp, J. (2009). Scaffolding Technology Integration of Middle School Science and Mathematics: Comparing the Results of Two Models of Teacher Professional Development. In I. Gibson, R. Weber, K. McFerrin, R. Carlsen & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2009--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 4015-4019). Charleston, SC, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved March 25, 2019 from .

Keywords

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Adams, J.E. (2000). Taking Charge of Curriculum: Teacher Networks and Curriculum Implementation. New York, Teacher College Press.
  2. Annetta, L.A. & Matus, J.C. (2004). Analysis of satisfaction and perceived learning of science in different distance education delivery modes for rural elementary school teachers involved in a professional development project. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 1(3), 311-331.
  3. Blanchard, M.R. (2008). Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Mid-Atlantic Regional Association for Science Teacher Educators
  4. Blanchard, M.R. & Sharp, J. (2007). Technology Support and Teaching Survey. Retrieved April 10, 2008 from
  5. Dede, C., Ketelhut, D., Whitehouse, P., Breit, L., McCloskey, E. (2006, September). A research agenda for online teacher professional development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Graduate School of Education. Retrieved March 28, 2007 from
  6. Elluminate. (2007). Elluminate: Where bright ideas meet. Retrieved November 4, 2007, from http://www.elluminate.com/
  7. Grable, L.L., Blanchard, M.R., & Reed, R.R. (2008, October). Transforming Middle School Math/Science Outreach for the 21st Century. National Outreach Scholarship Conference, State College, PA.
  8. Grable, L.L., & Blanchard, M. (2008, January). Future ready science for middle school: Create a data-rich environment. American Association of Physics Teachers, Baltimore, MD.
  9. Grable, L.L. & Park, J.C. (2002, March). Expanding Teachers' Literacy in Science and Mathematics: Basing Technology Professional Development on Histories of Classroom Practice and Beliefs. In Crawford, C., Willis, D., Carlsen, R., Gibson, I., McFerrin, K., Price, J., & Weber, R. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2002 (pp. 652-653). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
  10. Hawley, W.D., & Valli, L. (1999). The essentials of effective professional development: A new consensus. In Handbook of Teaching and Policy. Edited by G. Sykes and L. Darling-Hammond. New York: Teachers College. Mimio. (2008). Turn any whiteboard into an interactive whiteboard! Retrieved October 17, 2008 from http://www.mimio.com
  11. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A new framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record. 108(6), 1017-1054.
  12. Putnam, R.T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29, 4-15.

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.

View References & Citations Map

Cited By

  1. Comparing Perceived Formal and Informal Learning in Face-to-Face versus Online Environments

    Ariella Levenberg & Avner Caspi, Open University of Israel, Israel

    Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects Vol. 6, No. 1 (Jan 01, 2010) pp. 323–333

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.