You are here:

Sabbaticals for Technology Integration
PROCEEDINGS

, , , University of Hawaii, United States

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Vienna, Austria ISBN 978-1-880094-65-5 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC

Full Text

Abstract

This study focused the Technology Intensive Enhancement Series (TIES), at the University of Hawaii, a program meant to develop technology proficient teachers who mentored others in infusing technology into curriculum. TIES and the Hawaii Department of Education developed a partnership where participants on sabbatical were able to focus their time on developing their knowledge and skills to integrate technology. Three case studies of participants showed the impact of the TIES program on a teacher’s ability to integrate technology. Specifically, this study measured the enabling and limiting factors of technology integration and whether TIES was able to address those factors. Through data gathered from pre and post non-participant observations, pre and post surveys, a one-on-one interview, a collection of documentation and a focus group session, the study showed that TIES was able to address some important issues.

Citation

Fulford, C., Main-Anakalea, C. & Boulay, R. (2008). Sabbaticals for Technology Integration. In J. Luca & E. Weippl (Eds.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2008--World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 660-669). Vienna, Austria: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 14, 2024 from .

© 2008 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Abdal-Haqq, I. (1996). Making Time for Teacher Professional Development. ERIC Digest. ERIC Clearinghouse on Teaching and Teacher Education Washington D.C. 2001.
  2. Brannen, J. (1992). Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches: an overview. Avebury, Ashgate Publishing Company. Brooks, M.G. And J.G. Brooks (1999). The Constructivist Classroom: The Courage to be Constructivist. Educational Leadership. 57(3).
  3. CEOForum (2000). The CEO Forum School Technology and Readiness Report, Year 3, CEO Forum.
  4. Dugger, W.E., Jr. (2001). Standards for Technology Literacy. Phi Delta Kappan: 513-517.
  5. Grant, C.M. (1996). Professional Development in a Technological Age: New Definitions, Old Challenges, New Resources. Cambridge, MA, TERC.
  6. Hinnant, E. (1997). Strategies for the integration of technology into Teacher education programs. Technology Tools for Today’s Campuses. Available online: http://horizon.unc.edu/projects/monograph/CD/
  7. Kosaki, R.H., & Kosaki, M.D. (1998). Expanding Teacher Education Opportunities in American Samoa. Lewbel, S.R. And K.M. Hibbard (2001). Are Standards& True Learning Compatible? Principal Leadership: 16-20.
  8. Main-Anakalea C. (2003). Sabbaticals for Technology Integration: Case Studies on the Professional Development of Teachers in Hawaii. Unpublished Masters paper, Department of Educational Technology, College of Education, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii.
  9. Moersch, C. (1999). Assessing Current Technology Use in the Classroom: A Key to Efficient Staff Development and Technology Training. Learning and Leading with Technology. 26: 40-49.
  10. National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (1996). National Standards for Technology in Teacher Preparation: ISTE accreditation and standards committee. [Online]. Available: http://www.iste.org/Standards/NCATE/index.html [1999, Aug]
  11. Pierson, M.E. (2001). Technology Integration Practice as a Function of Pedagogical Expertise. Journal of Research on Computing in Education. 33: 413-31.
  12. Robb, L. (2000). Redefining Staff Development: A Collaborative Model for Teachers and Administrators. Portsmouth, NH, Heinemann.
  13. Vannatta, R.A. (2000). Evaluation to Planning: Technology Integration in a School of Education. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education. 8: 231-246.
  14. Wenglinsky, H. (1998). Does It Compute? The Relationship Between Educational Technology and Student Achievement in Mathematics. Princeton, Educational Testing Service, Policy Information Center: 38.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References