The video case studies were very interesting to watch from several perspectives. That of the teacher (pre-service, new teacher, teacher and retiring teacher), the student (elementary, secondary, post-secondary and post-degree), as well as the male- female dichotomy and finally what I will term confidence (with or without reason) and non-confidence (with or without reason) the confidence factor could be applied to student or teacher at every level.
If I were to create a blog on all the notes I took watching the videos I think this entry would be several pages long. I watched and re-watched the videos with a different lens and spent a few days mulling over what I thought was the most important take away for me. After much consideration, my mind constantly returned to the struggle of the teacher (pre-service, new teacher, teacher and retiring teacher). I will admit however, that I likely returned to this struggle because it is an area of interest I would like to explore further when I have completed the MET program.
1. Teacher Confidence: Teacher Confidence played a role in the use of technology at every grade level. Teachers who were confident in their material and understood what I will call the bigger picture seemed to seek out using technology to engage their students and deepen their knowledge. (I will state here however that a couple of the teachers seemed to use technology in less effective ways and it seemed to me, the viewer, that it was more to entertain than educate).
The STEM teacher (Case 1), the math teacher (Case 2), the physics teacher (Case 3) and Glenn Pellerin (Case 7) the college professor, all appeared to use technology to get the students more active in their learning. As the physics teacher said “more transactive, than transmissive”. I applauded the STEM teacher’s comment that he no longer stressed about sticking to the curriculum guide because he found the students were making more connections and deeper connections. The STEM class seemed like an awesome place to work. A makerspace every day. Students exploring concepts in a self-directed setting that allowed for problem solving and critical thinking.
Conversely, several other teachers were much less confident in their ability to use technology well. This theme emerged like a red flag with new, preservice and retiring teachers.
New and preservice teachers felt they were not educated on the use of technology in the classroom, and many seemed overwhelmed at the prospect. There was so much to learn, there was so much to do, they hadn’t been taught much if at all in preservice programs, and all were wary of how much time it took. As for the retiring teacher, honestly part of me thought she was retiring because technology was taking her on a route she was uncomfortable with and felt that she perhaps was not as effective as those who could implement technology more confidently. (What I did like about the retiring teacher was her willingness to try some technology and let her students show her how it worked. Many retiring teachers I have watched, shy away from technology and avoid it completely).
2. Teacher Education: As I have worked my way through the MET program I have become increasingly frustrated by a) the lack of technology training for preservice teachers and b) the lack of professional development and time for training for new and regular teachers. I would love to develop a technology course for elementary preservice teachers and implement it at the local Faculty of Education. It could be a full year course in focused modules that explore the depth and breadth of the technology available, as well as time for students to work with the programs and become confident using them before they ever step into a classroom.
Pre-service teacher education and professional development is sorely lacking, at least in my area of Ontario.
Classroom teachers are wary of technology for several reasons.
A) they worry that it is next bandwagon the board is jumping on; they will try to use it and implement it only to have it tossed by the wayside the next year for the next best thing. For many long-time teachers, they have “great idea” fatigue.
B) Teacher in-service usually consists of quick modules presented on a PA Day where they sit and watch someone “show” them technology. They do not get an opportunity to try it at most workshops and many don’t know where to find the time to practice what they learned on their own. Many lack the motivation as well.
C) Many of the teachers in the case studies (Strawberry Hill, lead teacher Case 5) as well as the confident teachers mentioned earlier in this blog sought out technology on their own time, at times investing their own money in courses or equipment. They went to meetings and professional development sessions outside of their regular day. Teachers often feel so overwhelmed and that time is a limiting factor anyway that they are not able to take advantage of these opportunities.
D) Availability of hardware, software and bandwidth. As mentioned in several cases where preservice teachers were interviewed many felt they did not know the devices or systems well enough and were concerned about relying on technology as part of a lesson and being able to trouble-shoot if a problem popped up. Classroom teachers know the reality of not being able to access Chromebooks or iPads, systems crashing and poor internet connectivity. To most going ahead with their regular lesson and style of teaching is less of a risk.
As I mentioned this problem is one I would love to help solve. I have a niece and nephew who are now in their second year of teaching. Both attended a faculty of Ed three years ago. They had no real technology classes and had no idea what was available to them in the classroom. They graduated with the B.Ed. with the same level of tech training as I did 27 years ago. How can that be?
We have spent time in this past summer and on holidays working together. I have shown them makerspaces, digital storytelling, stop motion animation, on line programs. They have eagerly learned about it, tried some of it in their classrooms and are always asking me to send them more. We need to capitalize on the enthusiasm of our preservice and new teachers and provide the opportunities for them to learn technology before they try teaching with it. Does anyone know of a preservice program that does a great job of introducing technology to preservice teachers? How do we go about helping to implement changes in other programs that do not?
As for teachers already established in their careers and skeptical of the benefit of technology I look forward to the day that that changes. Unfortunately, until good professional development opportunities and time to use the technology is available I must hope that they will see technology being used in other classes and seek out how to use it from their co-workers.
Finally, the use of technology must not take over the reason for the lesson. Teacher’s must be able to assess work on an ongoing basis not just at the end of the assignment. If the teacher has to spend all their time troubleshooting hardware or other issues this on going assessment is going to be lacking. This is when misconceptions can be missed and sadly, I believe if a student has a misconception that is not caught and corrected, all we have done is reinforce their misconception as correct.
Catherine
Hi Catherine,
To add to your list of needs for developing tech skills, I would strongly advocate for leveraging a staff’s early adopters as mentors. These are the people who are intrinsically motivated to play with technology. The attitude of fun and enjoyment these people give off makes them great for reducing teacher’s fears around technology.
Mentors also have better insight into how technologies fit in to the class. Most teachers that I have met who are intimidated by technology seem to think that it is an all or nothing approach. A good mentor can break technology integration down into smaller tasks and sort out where to begin and what will get you the most bang for your buck.
With all that said, these people are often undervalued and overtaxed within their organizations. Release time, especially in terms of reduced course load, is necessary to fully capitalize on their potential. If mentoring peer is just one more thing that takes away from prep and planning time, you will loose these mentors very quickly.
HI Daniel,
I totally agree, but as you say these mentors are, at least in my school district, are absolutely voluntary. The teachers help others as mentors because they see the benefit, but this also leads to burnout. The mentors get no help from the school or school board in return. There is no reduced course load or release time. As the new teacher in the Strawberry Hill School stated, she had received help from the other teacher she felt that she could not ask for more help without feeling like she was taking advantage of the other teacher’s skills while getting nothing in return. I believe many teachers who get help from a mentor feel the same way, that they are a burden.
Catherine
Hi Catherine,
I, too, would love to be an instructor of technology use in the classroom for pre-service teachers. There is definitely not enough instruction or training for them, or anyone, on how to integrate technology well into the classroom. All the teachers I know who even attempt to do this have found the information and training on their own, and have practiced it for themselves and their students. Most teachers who think they are integrating technology are generally just using it to replace a pen and paper task, rather than using it to effectively transform learning.
Anne
Your final point regarding technology troubleshooting as a potential interference of learning is such a frustrating challenge. With certain groups of students who lack sufficient problem solving or perseverance skills to figure out their own computer challenges, I often spend a third of my class time in technology-heavy periods answering questions that they should be able to figure out on their own (i.e. “The website doesn’t work.” “Did you doublecheck to make sure you typed the code in correctly?” “Yes, I checked twice.” and then I go to their workstation to find that they most certainly did not do it correctly) or that are issues beyond what I am able to do (i.e. issues that need an administrator password). In those periods, my students who have questions about the actual assignment or content often have to wait too long for answers to their questions. One of my goals for the next semester is to create a set list of steps they must follow for technology problems before they ask me for help. I am hoping that this will build independence and allow me more time to work with those students who are at risk of getting lost in the project or developing misunderstandings about concepts.
Hi Catherine,
I found it very interesting to learn from the case studies (and your reference to your niece and nephew) that teachers just graduating and entering the work force are in many cases (it would appear) receiving little to no more training than I received when I completed my B.Ed. I had assumed that my lack of digital technology training was related to the fact that I graduated fourteen years ago (which is not really that long ago, but technology has come a long way!), but it unfortunately sounds like, in some cases, not much has changed since then, which was a bit of a shock to hear. Whereas some programs (i.e., Case 8) obviously do integrate technology training for preservice teachers, others obviously still lack it (as stated in Case 5 and learned through your own experience). While the MET program has helped me significantly in understanding how and when to integrate technology into my classroom, I have to admit that I, too, agree with many of those interviewed that professional development workshops on digital technology have not been particularly beneficial to me. The majority of the time, workshops I have attended were only about two hours long (if that), and consisted either of a list of steps to follow, or a variety of “apps” or programs (given all at once) that someone had found helpful. Rarely have I attended a workshop that allowed time to interact with the technology/do some on-the-spot trouble-shooting, or that has lasted long enough to provide a solid look at how a program or application would look once well-integrated into the classroom.