Introduction
Think back to the months
preceding your sixteenth birthday. The excitement of earning a
driver’s license was almost overwhelming. Most likely, you
spent a great deal of time learning the finer points of becoming a
capable driver. Through experimentation and some direct instruction you
learned that driving involved many processes that had to be integrated
into one seamless operation. At first, you conscientiously thought
about each step and maybe even approached the whole affair with
trepidation. After a few months, you became confident in the use of all
the driving techniques you learned and eventually, you became the
driver you are today. Imagine now that your driving instructor thought
that the most important part of being a responsible drive was parallel
parking and you spent all of your time and effort learning how to
become a parallel parking expert. More than likely, your current
driving experience would be quite different because you concentrated on
only one aspect of driving. Without knowledge of other important
aspects of driving and how to integrate those aspects into high-quality
driving skills, you would have struggled to earn that all-important
license.
Unfortunately, the driving
analogy is similar to the experience that many educators find when
completing technology training. From my own experience, most technology
training focuses simply on “how to” rather than how
the technology can be used to increase student learning. For this
reason, teachers fail to see relevance of the technology, and more
importantly, how the technology can be integrated into their daily
classroom experience to improve learning and to increase the motivation
of their students.
The school being examined
in this study is a large public suburban school in the southeastern
United States. It recently underwent a massive technology upgrade.
Educators at the school have a unique opportunity to use advanced
technology to make a significant impact on the way students learn. For
the first time in school history, teachers have multiple computers in
their classrooms, access to ample computer laboratories and mobile
laptop carts (all with a high speed internet connection),
course-specific software, and many productivity tools designed to make
teaching more efficient. Teachers have received a great deal of
instruction in the form of how-to staff development. Unfortunately, the
staff development sessions failed to spark interest in the staff and,
in turn, the teachers are not only failing to use the technology, but
are also failing to see the potential of technology in the classroom.
Therein lies the problem. Because the focus of the training sessions
concentrated on teaching staff members the ins and outs of software,
most teachers had a difficult time visualizing ways to apply what they
were learning. For some teachers, these past several months have been
frustrating as they find themselves in unfamiliar territory and
unfamiliar situations. In a way, many have become students again as
they attempt to learn how to use the numerous tools at their disposal.
Based on current research regarding staff development and adult
learning theories, the faculty and students would benefit from a major
shift in technology training that focuses on how technology can best be
used to improve student learning and motivation.
As staff development
becomes more important in the local school districts, designers are
focusing more and more on adult learning. Many staff development
designers are examining the question “what is meant by adult
learning and how does it differ from the traditional staff development
models that have dominated technology related staff development for the
preceding few decades?” The most simplistic way to contrast
adult learning with pedagogy is to assert that adult learning provides
a greater opportunity for learners to involve themselves in activities
that correspond with the learner’s interests, needs, learning
styles, and developmental stage.
Most would agree with the
assumption that educators are a unique group of adult learners.
Teachers are professionals with extensive experience in educational
practice. During the course of their formal education, most educators
have proven themselves as capable adult learners with a wide range of
experiences they bring to any training program. These experiences
affect how they learn. While reviewing the literature on adult
learning, many common descriptors emerge that must be considered when
designing technology staff development.
Literature Review
Without
Technology Our Children Will Be Left Behind
Driven by No Child Left
Behind, local school systems are focusing on standards and
accountability to show that a certified and qualified teacher teaches
every child (US Department of Education [USDOE], 2005). The National
Staff Development Council has proposed an additional goal: that all
teachers in every school should receive quality professional learning
by 2007 (National Staff Development Council [NSDC], 2005). For that
reason, effective staff development is more important than ever.
Results-driven education for students will require results-driven staff
development for educators. The success of a staff development class
will be judged not by how many teachers and administrators participate
in staff development programs or how they perceive its significance,
but by whether it changes instructional behavior in a way that benefits
students (Salpeter 2003). The primary goal of any staff development and
other improvement efforts should always be improved performance by
students, staff, and the organization (Salpeter 2003).
In its January 2003
report, “No Dream Denied: A Pledge to America's
Children”, the National Commission on Teaching and America's
Future argues that the primary challenge schools face in their search
for competent teachers is not recruiting, but retention (Hunt, 2003).
According to NCTAF, the key to retaining qualified teachers is
effective staff development. The missing ingredient is finding a way
for school systems to organize the work of qualified teachers so they
can collaborate with their colleagues in developing strong learning
communities that will sustain them as they become more accomplished
teachers (Hunt, 2003).
When Teachers
Become Students
While many staff
development designers contend that the reluctance to use new
technologies is simply rooted in a lack of skill and confidence, there
is evidence from Becker (1999) and Fullan (1996) that teachers need to
be recruited to change. The participants must be convinced of the
significance of the new activities and then given ample time to work on
teams to invent effective lessons (Becker, 1999). In many schools,
teachers operate as islands. Teachers are isolated from each other and
preoccupied with what Fullan (1996) calls "the daily press" of getting
through their schedule. They are focused, according to Becker, on
objectives. Many of these educators are likely to pursue to the
habitual customs they have enjoyed in the past until they are equipped
and encouraged to find a suitable and dependable replacement (Becker,
1999).
Face-to-face
presentations, some of them including hands-on lab sessions, are still
at the basis for most staff development programs involving technology
(Salpeter, 2003). However, in recent years there has been a call to
modify these staff development sessions. The focus of most technology
staff development is the how-to of technology, but the time has come to
change that (Bents & Howey, 1981). The focus now should be on
instructional strategies and needs. In other words, how do you use
technology to improve student achievement? Teachers trained in one
mind-set sometimes find themselves stagnated into traditional lessons
and ideas. Put into a new technological environment, they continue to
see themselves in terms of what is comfortable and familiar (Deal
& Peterson, 1998). The computer, for example, is viewed as a
specialized typewriter with superior editing capabilities rather than
what it can be. To understand the computer's powerful capabilities, one
must take a computer home, live with it, and write with it. Only by
embracing the technology can teachers experience the kind of immersion
that breaks through superficial understandings to a deeper level of
involvement (McKenzie, 1991).
This creative exploration,
invention, testing and reflection will require a change in school
culture from one that promotes isolation to one that encourages
collaboration and provides ample time for staff development. The work
of many experts makes it quite clear that the most effective learning
strategies require a change in the ways teachers spend their time and
the ways that they work together (Deal & Kent, 1998; Fullan,
1991; Joyce, 1990; Lieberman & Miller, 1990). Frequently these
researchers have noticed how informal support systems, partnerships,
teams and other collaborative structures may be the most important
elements in any massive change effort.
Staff development can make
a powerful difference in performance of both students and teachers.
According to Joyce and Showers (1983), effective programs require
sustained, ongoing efforts with proper funding. Participants must be
acquainted with what Joyce (1983) calls the problem of transfer. As
teachers learn new skills and attitudes, they should consider the
obstacles to make these skills work in their classrooms (Joyce
& Showers, 1983). Before trying the new skills in their
classrooms, teachers should have ample opportunity to practice the
skills in relatively controlled and safe environments until a
significant degree of confidence and "executive control" has been
maintained (1983). Executive control refers to teachers learning how to
learn and how to transfer new technologies to their classroom. Over
succeeding weeks and months, coaching by peers and sustained practice
are essential if the new approaches are to take root (1983).
James Hunt (2005) makes
the distinction between two major kinds of staff development. The more
popular model is concerned with changes in specific teaching behaviors
and strategies. The second type of staff development is concerned with
the shifting of the structure of a teacher's educational perspective
and belief system—this type of training almost always
requires immersion (Hunt, 2005). This approach involves the recognition
that teachers are adult learners with individual learning styles,
different stages of development, and quite divergent interests and
needs (Bents & Howey, 1981). The challenge to the training
developer is to provide a seminar that strives to match learners with
their experiences.
To support such a change,
schools need to apply a different model of adult learning (McKenzie,
1991). The historical solution to the problem of changing teacher
behaviors - traditional staff development - cannot begin to meet this
challenge. At worst, staff development is a waste of time and resources
(1991). Many teachers can tell horror stories of being crowded into hot
rooms to hear some outside expert describe the latest trend in
education. In many school systems the obligatory technology staff
development occurs once per year and does little or no good getting
teachers excited about using technology (1991). In other districts,
teachers gather after a full day of teaching for workshops with the
same result. These workshops often give teachers inadequate opportunity
to practice new skills and offer little or no ongoing support or
follow-through during the next several months. As a result, there is
frequently negligible transfer of the new skills from the workshops to
the classrooms. Teachers sometimes see exciting demonstrations of new
techniques, but they rarely experience the immersion that would allow
them to master the new techniques (1991).
The Past
Informs the Future
Much too often, teachers
sit passively listening to technology staff development messages. The
assumption seems to be that one quick look at a new method or approach
is sufficient to empower the audience to use the technology to make
significant changes in their classrooms (McKenzie, 1991). Important
changes in beliefs and behavior depend upon active involvement,
experience and role-playing. Active involvement in exploration, which
results from struggling with experiences and attempting to integrate
them into an understanding, leads teachers to feel more committed to
the process of changing their perspective (1991).
Adult learners exist in
situations separate from the learning context. They are motivated to
learn by changes in their situations and learn best when new concepts
apply in practical ways and/or are relevant to the changes in their
situations (Merriam & Caffarella, 2001). Going further, adults
tend to be problem-centered learners rather than subject-centered
learners and learn best when confronted with practical applications of
what they have learned (2001). Unlike the most current training models,
adult learning is primarily concerned with creating the conditions, as
well as the motivation to transfer new tools and skills into daily
practice. While traditional training usually occurs outside of context
and frequently ignores issues of transfer, adult learning is all about
combining practice with context (Smith, 1982). Adult learning should
help learners identify obstacles to implementing new tools and skills
and plan for removing those obstacles (1982).
Where We Are In
Life Determines Where We Will Go
Adults learn throughout
their lives. Contrary to widely held belief, age does not reduce a
person's ability to learn but may reduce the speed at which learning
takes place (Zemke, 1988). In addition, because of time elapsed since
earlier learning experiences, many adults underestimate their own
abilities to learn and may need additional time to adjust to new
learning conditions. Adults exhibit a variety of learning styles at
different times for different reasons. Consequently, there is no one
right way of learning for everyone. The adult learner is a person with
a well-developed sense of self, that combines all experiences, both
personal and professional, to affect new learning. Previous experience
affects what the learner understands and is the foundation for current
learning. Adults learn best when new content is presented in a manner
that is closely tied to previous knowledge and current situation (Zemke
& Zemke, 1988).
Adult learners' stages of
development, whether personal (cognitive, moral, ego, conceptual),
chronological (early adulthood, mid-life, etc.) or professional (new or
experienced teacher, etc.), profoundly affect their learning. The
optimum role of the adult learner is that of a self-directed,
self-motivated manager of personal learning who collaborates as an
active participant in the learning process and takes responsibility for
learning (Merriam, 2001). The adult learner controls what is learned,
selects new information and decides how to use it. Adult learners must
be treated as adults and respected as self-directed learners. They
learn best in non-threatening environments of trust and mutual respect
(Zemke & Zemke, 1998).
Staff development must
appeal to learners at a variety of developmental stages.
Teachers coming to
sessions differ with regard to their stage of development as teachers,
their stage of life as adults and their level of concern about specific
technology. These differences can ultimately encumber or deeply support
learning, depending on the match between learning experience and
learner stage. In a perfect situation, teachers should be allowed to
select from a list of courses. The list should describe the types of
activities that will occur in each course. This process of selection
increases the probability of a good fit between learner and course and
works to create a highly motivated adult learner (Zemke &
Zemke, 1998 ).
Grow the
Individual to Grow the Organization
Adult learners have the
ability to assess their own strength and weaknesses. As a result, some
school districts have found that initiating a program that allows
teachers to reflect on their abilities has resulted in high levels of
teacher buy-in. A key component of such a program is the professional
growth plan (PGP) (McKenzie, 1991). This document becomes the road map
to guide each teacher’s learning during the year and helps
the principal to be an effective supervisor, providing resources,
training and other support as needed.
The process begins with
assessment. Where am I now? Perhaps each person completes a survey like
the Mankato Scale which is available online
(http://www.bham.wednet.edu/tcomp.htm). This activity helps them
identify areas deserving the most attention. The teacher then selects
from a rich and varied menu of opportunities to help them meet their
goals. Typically, the teacher lists 2-3 main areas for growth along
with the activities most likely to promote the growth. One goal might
be to acquire the technology and instructional skills to launch
classroom research projects using a model such as WebQuests or Problem
Based Learning Activities. If the district has made a major investment
in new technologies, all teachers might be asked to include a
technology integration goal (Becker, 1996; Fullan, 1991). Each person
commits to try new skills and tools with students in classrooms. The
building administrator commits resources and support. They meet
regularly to discuss progress.
To Win With
Technology, Coaching is Essential
The use of study groups
has been shown to be an effective way to promote adult learning.
Teachers gather in small groups of their own choosing to meet on a
weekly basis for an hour or more to pursue shared growth goals as
listed in their PGPs. Together, they determine the best path toward
completion of the goals. In keeping with the tenets of adult learning,
teachers learn best when they can make choices in content, pacing and
styles while enjoying the support of a team of like-minded fellow
learners. Carlene Murphy, Dale Lick and others have developed and
tested study group models that fruitfully engage every teacher in such
activities (Murphy & Lick, 1998).
One example of a team is a
Curriculum and Development team. When teams of teachers gather to build
standards-based units that they can actually use with their students,
some remarkable technology learning takes place. These groups are
particularly effective when skeptical teachers are on the same team
with early adopting, enthusiastic teachers (Murphy & Lick,
1998). Just as novice musicians and artists benefit from the support of
more experienced players and painters, most schools find that teachers
can make excellent progress with the types of learning associated with
new technologies if they have skilled partners working alongside during
the lesson development and implementation stages (McKenzie 1998). Some
districts assign classroom teachers to this mentor and coaching role
full time for a year or more so that classroom teachers have a built-in
support system to take them through the most difficult early stages.
The mentor’s involvement involves scaffolding new learning
and then fading the assistance as the novice teacher develops skill and
confidence.
Using a similar approach,
schools create leadership cadres with a broad mix of teacher types who
take the time and trouble to explore new practices and sort through the
often inflated claims to help the rest of the teachers focus their
learning on opportunities worth pursuing (McKenzie, 1998). The cadre
becomes a prime aspect of planning the professional development
opportunities to be offered to the rest of the staff. In Omaha,
Nebraska, schools made peer coaching and the cadre a key ingredient of
its highly successful grant supported project, "the Learning Web."
Invention teams from surrounding school districts gather each summer to
invent curriculum units with strong technology elements (McKenzie
1998).
While technology plans and
mentors are very important aspects of adult technology training, many
teachers feel intimidated when using technology related resources
independently. Many schools are working to make assistance available on
a day-to-day basis so that any teacher, who is frustrated, blocked or
having difficulties is likely to find help within just a few minutes.
Instead of relying upon a few specialists who will never seem
available, the school makes sure that one third of the staff is quite
good at something and can be called upon to support colleagues who are
looking for guidance, encouragement and timely trouble-shooting
assistance (McKenzie 1998).
Perhaps the biggest thing
that has changed about technology-related professional development over
the years is the recognition that it needs to be ongoing. Monica Beglau
(1998), instructional program leader for Missouri's statewide eMINTS
(Enhancing Missouri's Instructional Networked Teaching Strategies)
program, agrees strongly with the need for sustained professional
development. She insists that any sort of technology training must be
followed up with support and mentoring. One tool is the classroom
visit. These visits help teachers translate what they learn in
professional development sessions into actual classroom practice; this
is the piece that seems to be missing in most professional development
programs (Beglau, 1998).
Technology can be an
important tool to help with collegiality and sustained learning. As the
NCTAF author of No Dream Denied put it, "Technology is perhaps the most
important-and most underutilized-tool for providing teachers access to
the targeted professional development they need, when and how they need
it. Online courses, informal support groups, and other
network-supported resources open the door to professional development
opportunities far beyond what any school or district might be able to
offer (Hunt, 2005)."
According to research
conducted by Bruce Joyce and Beverly Showers (1988), coaching may be
the most effective way to convert reluctant colleagues into
enthusiastic users of new technologies. Technology training programs
that emphasize coaching and mentoring encourage the growth of both
technology enthusiasts as well as the technology challenged. The
driving force behind this method is the customization made possible
when a coach or mentor works alongside individuals (Joyce &
Showers, 1988). The training methods are matched to the skill level and
preferences of each teacher. Technologies are infused in ways that
support teacher goals and student learning (Joyce & Showers,
1988).
To launch a coaching
program, a district sets aside funding for full time staff positions
that are meant to last anywhere from 3-5 years. Each coach can team
with 20-35 teachers per year in projects that last anywhere from one to
two weeks. The goal is to reach every teacher within a 3-5 year time
period in a succession of waves. Each project begins with planning
sessions during which the coach and the partner identify a chunk of
curriculum that might be well served by the use of electronic
technologies. The coach and the teacher then develop and implement a
unit plan to implement and test as a team (Joyce & Showers,
1988).
When compared to other
adult learning strategies, peer coaching has the greatest chance of
changing teacher behaviors. At the same time, we have learned that some
coaching and mentor programs work better than others. Factors
associated with success include the following: effective mentors,
planning, respect, clear expectations, support, customization, and time
(Joyce and Showers 1983).
The most effective coaches
put their partners at ease. While it is sometimes tempting to hire the
most technologically advanced people as coaches, the most important
criteria have to do with the diplomacy, tact and relationship building
necessary to earn the trust of partners. In many cases, a
mentor’s superior attitude and performance might actually
hamper the building of important relationships with their colleagues
(Joyce and Showers 1983).
Effective mentors must
have the ability to plan for technology use with the colleague. It is
not uncommon for classroom teachers to view the mentor as someone to
teach technology to the students (Joyce, 1990). Instead of
participating as full partners in the design and delivery of technology
rich lessons, they might prefer to sit at the back of the room while
the coach elucidates the technology involved in the lesson. It is the
mentor’s job to make clear that the teacher will always
remain the teacher. Coaches are not substitutes. They are partners.
Both the coach and the partner must feel shared responsibility for the
technology infused lessons. Both participate in the development and the
testing of lessons (Joyce and Showers, 1988).
Coaches must be cautious
about attitude. Many teachers who do not make much use of electronic
tools are extraordinarily effective and talented professionals. If
coaches view their role as correcting deficiencies, the chances of
creating trusting partnerships are remote.
According to McKenzie
(1991), the time it takes to invent technology rich units intensifies
the shared ownership of the project. For each week long unit to be
developed and implemented, the coach and the partner will need as much
as a day away from pressing classroom demands to work on the lesson
planning. Joint planning time is essential. Without the common planning
time, it is easy for the coach to step in with lessons created without
the partner's engagement (McKenzie, 1991). The coach contributes
encouragement as well as knowledge to help the partner find new ways to
use technology in the classroom to achieve success. The collaboration
partner contributes curriculum savvy and experience to guide the
planning process. This is a case of mutual support as two professionals
consider the best ways to blend new technologies into classroom life
(McKenzie, 1991).
Coaching is not about
showing teachers to teach the way the coach would teach. The coach
empowers the partner to make use of technologies in ways that mesh with
the collaborators teaching style. Going further, one goal of an
effective coach should be to expand his or her partner’s
instructional tool-kit (Joyce, 1990). Those who have relied mostly on
direct instruction may come to value the student learning that can
result when students are required to do more of the work.
Don’t
Underestimate the Power of Wonder and Excitement
In order to promote change
in attitude and perspective, the learning experience must harness a
teacher’s passion. All too many technology training sessions
are at best boring and dry. There is often little attempt to relate the
learning to the questions, doubts, and beliefs that drive the learners.
Attention to dramatics, body language, energy level and strategies for
welcoming the questions of learners will kindle enthusiastic
involvement in the course (McKenzie, 1991).
None too often, technology
training stops after showing teachers menus and scripts. The
predominant message seems to be that there is only one way to use
technology in the classroom. There is usually little time allocated to
script writing, lesson development and the invention of technology-rich
units. As a consequence, the individual develops dependency upon
routines designed and presented by others. In contrast, Bard William's
(1993) "innovation-based" model assists participants in discovering the
excitement and potentials of new technologies. "How can you use this CD
and its 1000 videos to reach your human anatomy students? How might it
change their learning? How will it change attitudes toward science?"
(1993).
Emphasis on skill
development usually leads to training agendas that are over ambitious
as the instructor tries to present hundreds of functions, tricks or
features per half hour. According to Bard Williams (1993), it is much
better to cover fewer functions and leave at least half of the time for
individual a group planning for how the technology will be integrated
into classroom practice. In order to make significant changes in
teachers’ attitudes they must be given the opportunity to ask
important questions such as the following: What does this mean to my
classroom? How will it improve student achievement? What needs to be
changed? How can I make it work? (Williams 1993).
Sprinthall and Sprinthall
(1980) have proposed a model for staff development that blends
immersion and reflection. Their model emphasizes the significance of
learning through active involvement in real situations, an appropriate
match of teacher levels of development with experience, continuous
guided reflection, extension of the program over a significant period
of time (two to three years), and the provision of personal support for
the learner, along with a reasonable level of challenge. Bents and
Howey (1981) offer a demonstration of how a teacher might translate
this approach into staff development. They also explain how staff
development can be adjusted to respond to the different levels of
concern teachers may have regarding specific innovations.
Reflection plays an
important role in adult learning. Simmons and Schuette (1988) suggest
that the current paradigm for teachers is that of teacher as reflective
practitioner--one who makes instructional decisions consciously and
tentatively, critically considers a full range of pertinent contextual
and pedagogical factors, actively seeks evidence about the results, and
continues to modify these decisions as the situation warrants (1988).
New learning should be followed by reflection to facilitate
incorporation and application of new knowledge and/or skills. After
all, the effectiveness of any training program is judged by what
happens in the classroom when the training is complete. Continued
learning depends on achieving satisfaction, especially in the sense of
making progress toward learning goals that reflect the learner's own
goals (1988).
As stated in the opening
section of this paper, adult learners must be involved in the planning
of their learning. Training designers must involve teachers
substantially in the planning of their continuing education,
identifying the types of courses teachers’ desire by using
interviews and surveys as well as inclusion of teachers on planning
committees. Evaluations of courses should be completed routinely by
participants so that the staff developer can identify which elements
and strategies are most effective, as well as which courses address
teacher interests and concerns. A shift from the current attitude of
“you need this to be a better teacher” to a more
congenial attitude is needed as some teachers resist being told that
they are not satisfactory (McKenzie, 1991).
Especially when they are
breaking new ground, exploring new territory or trying new
technologies, many teachers will feel some degree of anxiety (McKenzie,
1991). Like the beginning driver’s first trip alone, teachers
may experience heavier breathing and a sense of risk. The staff
development designer, instructor or group leader should have specific
strategies for identifying anxious learners as well as strategies for
easing their anxieties (1991). Similarly, staff developers have noticed
that when new technology is presented, teachers have an early burnout
stage when they become saturated with new knowledge (1991). Pacing
becomes an essential issue. When having to decide between the amount of
material to present and learner comfort, it pays off to lean towards
learner comfort. In teaching spreadsheet construction, for example, it
is smart to teach beginners five or six commands in the initial lesson,
just enough to support them in creating a functional spreadsheet. Once
they understand the commands, they should practice until they all
announce, "This is easy!" Additional commands and directives are
presented in small doses that support the self-efficacy of the
learners.
Support for the
Skeptics
Many times teachers fail
to use technology in the classroom because they do not want to appear
unprepared in front of their technology savvy students. These teachers
could benefit from a form of staff development called
“just-in-time support”—a tool that is
readily available when the need arises. Sometime the technology used is
as simple as a PowerPoint presentation or a PDF file with textual
instructions and diagrams. In Richmond, however, a new technology
tool-one customized for the district by Sonic Foundry, the maker of
Mediasite Live-is helping professional development instructors turn
live presentations into online multimedia workshops for just-in-time
learning. Richmond's WebCast Academy grew out of concerns about
scheduling and release-time problems that made it difficult for
teachers to attend workshops at times convenient to them. Since January
2003, the Richmond school district has been offering its most popular
presentations in a lab where the voice and computer displays are
recorded digitally. Usually, the sessions are live, with some audience
members in the lab and others at remote sites from where they can
submit questions via e-mail or use polling software to respond to
queries sent by the instructor to their computer screens. Afterward,
the session, along with optional extras such as classroom video
footage, serves as raw material for the WebCast Academy version of the
class.
Another collegial approach
that focuses on mentorship and best practices is the type of "lesson
study" used effectively for professional development in Japan. The
lesson study process, popularized in this country by James W. Stigler
and James Hiebert (1999), involves extended observations of individual
lessons by groups of educators who then meet to analyze the approaches
and outcomes observed. A prototype for this approach was developed in
1999 by researchers at the University of California, Irvine, in
collaboration with the Orange County Department of Education, Apple
Computer, and several other universities and colleges. Located online
at www.gse.uci.edu/cli, the project features videos of exemplary
teachers involved in standards-based math instruction, accompanied by
commentary that helps practicing and pre-service educators understand
the reasoning behind each lesson. According to UCI's Joan Bissell
(2000), the site has been used on an experimental basis in preparing
new teachers. Preliminary research shows positive impacts of experience
with the California Learning Interchange video cases on the teachers'
ability to teach mathematical concepts in the elementary grades.
Supplementing this adult
support would be support from students — what one media
specialist calls her "tech tutors" — students who are taught
how to support others in their technology efforts (Salpeter, 2003).
Technology staff development need not come solely from adult
instructors. Just as many companies are finding that customers can get
timely assistance through help desks and online resources, schools
could and should provide many more of these kinds of support systems so
that teachers can swiftly find answers to commonly asked questions and
frequently encountered problems. Unlike most teachers, students do not
know a world without computers. The students are an untapped resource
in many schools. The willingness to take technology risks may be
encouraged by the availability of a friendly person to erase the sense
of isolation and frustration (Salpeter, 2003).
Skeptics of technology can
see significant shifts in behavior and understanding can occur when
they have a chance to see more of the outside world. Typically isolated
from new developments in the workplace or in other schools, teachers
have little basis for shifting their own behaviors and little
opportunity to appreciate technology in practice around them. A day
spent behind the scenes in an architectural office, a shipping company,
or a newspaper office can help teachers see how technology is used
outside of the school walls. Proponents of this type of staff
development suggest that teachers spend the first half of the day
exploring, watching, questioning, interviewing, and recording the role
of information technologies and skills in the organization they are
visiting. The second half of the day is devoted to reflection (McKenzie
1991). Teachers are encouraged to ask questions of themselves: "So
what? What did we learn? What are the implications for schools and our
students? What do we need to do to prepare students for this kind of
work?"
Summary
As mentioned earlier, the
teachers at this southeastern United States suburban high school are
entering into one of the most exciting times in school history. During
the past five years, the principal of the school has worked very hard
to change the culture of the school from one of isolation to one of
collaboration and from teaching to student learning. Combining the
change in school culture with a complete upgrade of technology,
teachers have a wonderful opportunity to positively increase the level
of student learning and student achievement. However, the new
technology might be wasted should the teachers continue to receive
antiquated technology training and support.
While every school is
unique in their school culture, atmosphere, and personnel, there are
several facets of adult learning and technology training that the
technology team and administration must consider as they plan training
and support for their teachers. First, a formal technology growth plan
will help teachers stay focused on the areas that they feel are most
important to their own professional development. Second, teachers need
to be given choices. Motivation tends to remain high when teachers are
allowed to choose from an extensive menu of staff development choices.
Going further, teachers need to be given continued “just in
time” instruction and support in the form of peer and/or
student coaches. Busy teachers need to have their problems address in a
friendly, non-threatening, and timely manner. Finally, teachers need to
have time built into the school day to meet with other teachers and
observe tech savvy teachers in action. With proper support and training
for the teachers, the potential for increases in student learning and
motivation are limitless.
Methods
The purpose of this study
is to determine the effects of including adult-learning theory to
technology training. Specifically, I collected data regarding the
Dreamweaver content learned, the retention of content, and attitude of
the participants towards technology staff development.
Participants
This study took place at a
large suburban high school in the southeastern United States. The
participants (N=23) were all certified staff at the school and included
teachers (N=20), guidance counselors (N=2), and an administrator (N=1).
Most participants had completed the Gwinnett Technology Academy for
Teachers (GTAT), a general technology training seminar. For the
purposes of this study, participants volunteered to participate in a
series of Dreamweaver® training seminars to fulfill a
technology competency requirement for recertification.
Design and
Instruments
Participants were asked to
complete a short questionnaire in order to gain some insight regarding
the current level of technology use, comfort level using technology,
and experience using Dreamweaver (see, Appendix A).
The participants were
divided into two groups. One group received traditional instruction
regarding the use of Dreamweaver® while the second group
received instruction with embedded adult-learning principles. The
traditional course was delivered bi-weekly in a face-to-face setting.
Each class was instructor focused, and based on an off-the-shelf
training manual, Teach Yourself Macromedia Dreamweaver®
MX 2004 in 24 Hours (Bruce, 2004). The instruction was the
typical “how to” lecture combined with guided
practice.
Likewise, the adult
learning focused group received training over a four week period. The
instruction began with two face-to-face meetings with the remaining
sessions completed in an independent study manner. I designed practice
scenarios to mimic issues that could arise in the typical school
setting. Additionally, participants in the adult learning focused group
were assigned to small cooperative learning groups that met
face-to-face once each week to discuss issues that arose during their
independent study and to discuss possible uses of Dreamweaver®.
While the material was presented in a different manner for each group,
the content objectives were identical for each version of the seminar. Appendix B
outlines the instructional differences in two courses.
Immediately
following instruction, the participants were interviewed regarding
their feelings about the training process (see, Appendix C). To assess the
level of content learned, each participant completed a performance
assessment (see,
Appendix D). I evaluated each performance assessment using a
simple scoring rubric (see,
Appendix E). Four weeks after completing the
Dreamweaver® training, participants completed the performance
assessment for a second time. This round of testing was designed to
provide data regarding the retention of content. To conclude this
study, I interviewed each participant regarding how he or she had used
Dreamweaver® in the time since the instructional phase
concluded (see,
Appendix F). During the interview I collected the addresses
of any websites the participants had created using
Dreamweaver®. I checked to see that the site actually existed
and evaluated the site for quality.
Data Analysis
I evaluated the data to
determine if adult learning focused training resulted in a higher level
of learning, higher retention rates, and produced a more positive
attitude towards technology staff development. After the participants
completed both performance assessments, one immediately following the
instruction and another approximately one month after the instruction
concluded, I used Microsoft Excel to calculate the average score, the
range, and the standard deviation for each test group. The average
score on the first performance assessment showed the level at which the
groups learned how to use Dreamweaver® while the score on the
second assessment showed how much of the content was retained. Finally,
based on the results from a survey and individual interview, I gathered
gather both qualitative and quantitative data regarding what the
subjects thought about their specific mode of training. Specifically,
subjects were asked to give their opinions regarding technology staff
development, the ease of learning Dreamweaver®, the quality of
instruction, use of Dreamweaver®, and the importance of
instruction. After reviewing all of the answers to the open ended
questions I categorized the responses so I was better able to see
trends within each group.
Results and Discussion
Based on the results of
the initial technology survey, the two groups involved in this study
had a similar level of technology knowledge and years of experience in
education (see,
Table 1). After completing their Dreamweaver® course,
each group completed a performance task designed to assess their
knowledge of the application. The group that received the traditional
instruction amassed an average score of 24.7 points out of a total of
26 points (SD=1.16) (see,
Table 2). On the same test, the adult learning focused group
scored an average of 24.4 points (SD=2.10)(see, Table 3). Approximately six
weeks after the initial performance assessment, the participants
completed a second assessment designed to measure the retention of
their Dreamweaver® knowledge. The traditional group scored 24.3
out of a possible 26 points (SD=2.45) while the adult learning focused
group scored an average of 23.9 (SD=2.40) (see, Tables 2 and 3).
At the conclusion of the
second performance assessment participants completed a perception
survey. While the two groups gave similar responses to some questions,
there are some important differences in the two study groups (see, Table 4).
First, when asked to respond to the statement “I saw
practical classroom and personal application for
Dreamweaver®”, 93% of the adult learning focused
group chose “strongly agree” as opposed to only 30%
of the traditional group. When asked to assess the convenience of the
training schedule, 86% of the adult learning focused group strongly
agreed that the training schedule met their time constraints.
Responding to the same question, 30% of the traditional group agreed
that the training schedule was convenient. Finally, when participants
were asked if they would participant in future technology training if
the training used the same format, 79% of the adult learning group
responded that they would definitely participate while 40% of the
traditional group would participate.
Finally, I interviewed
each group to see how they had used Dreamweaver® since the
conclusion of their instruction. Approximately 80% of the adult
learning group had created either a web site while 50% of the
traditional group had created a website. Of those that had created a
website, 75% of those in the adult learning group were satisfied with
the appearance of their website. Many of these individuals indicated
that the cooperative learning groups helped to stimulate creativity.
Approximately 60% of the participants in the traditional group who had
constructed a website reported that they were satisfied with the
appearance of their site. Finally, I led the groups in a discussion of
how they had used Dreamweaver® to improve classroom
instruction. Every member of the adult learning group reported that
they had used Dreamweaver® to supplement classroom instruction.
Many participants had designed class web site where they could post
important class documents, homework calendars, and communication with
students and parents. Several had worked on collaborative internet
based projects with members of their course teams. When the same
question was posed to the traditional group, approximately 50% of the
participants had used Dreamweaver® to improve instruction. The
uses were similar to the ones reported by the adult learning group.
Conclusions
The data indicates that
the type of instruction does not affect the amount of learning or the
retention of the learning. It is when one examines the attitude
regarding technology training and the application of learned technology
that the differences become evident. The majority of the adult learning
focused group ended the training session with a positive attitude
towards technology training as evidenced by the number of participants
who said that they would participate in technology training that
followed the same training methods. The participants agreed that they
enjoyed the flexibility that the course allowed. Unlike the traditional
instruction, the adult learning group focused on ways that
Dreamweaver® could be used to improve student learning and
instruction. Consequently, members of the adult learning group were
more likely to use Dreamweaver® outside the course. Finally,
members of the adult learning group enjoyed the collegial aspect of the
training. Cooperative work groups provided a forum for asking
questions, brainstorming ideas, and designing projects.
Given my results it may
be beneficial for instructional designers to consider adult learning
theories when planning technology training for educators. The aspects
of adult learning that I included in my Dreamweaver®
instruction were simple to incorporate and could prove beneficial to
other training programs. By focusing on practical applications of
technology, creating a convenient training schedule, and providing
support in the form of collaborative learning groups I showed that
teachers can learn the necessary content but more importantly that they
end the training with a positive impression of technology training.
References
Becker, Henry. (1999). Internet
Use by Teachers. Retrieved February 4, 2005 from
http://www.cr.to.uce.edu/TLC/FINDINGS/internet-use/startpage.htm
Beglau, Monica. (1998) Changing
the Face of Education in Missouri. Retrieved February 4,
2005 from http://www.newhorizons.org/
strategies/technology/beglau.htm
Bents, R. and Howey, K.
(1981). Staff Development-Change in the Individual. Staff
Development-Organization Development. Edited by D. Day,
Alexandria, Virginia.
Bruce, B. (Ed.). (2004). Sams
Teach Yourself Macromedia Dreamweaver® MX
2004 in 24 Hours. Indianapolis, IN: Sams Publishing.
California Learning
Exchange. (n.d.). California Learning Exchange: An Apple
Learning Exchange Associate. Retrieved January 29, 2005,
from http://www.gse.uci.edu/cli/.
Deal, Terrence E. and
Peterson, Kent D. (1998) Shaping School Culture: The heart
of Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Fullan, Michael G. (1991) The
New Meaning of Educational Change. New York: Teachers
College Press
Fullan, Michael G. (1996) What'sWorth
Fighting For in Your School. New York: Teachers College Press
Hunt, D. (1971) Matching
Models in Education. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies
in Education..
Hunt, James B. NoDream
Denied: A Pledge To America's Children. Retrieved February
11, 2005 from http://www.nctaf.org/documents/nctaf/report.pdf
Joyce, B and Showers, J.
(1988) StudentAchievement Through Staff Development,
New York: Longman.
Joyce, B. (1990) Changing
School Culture Through Staff Development. Alexandria, VA:
ASCD.
Joyce, B. and Showers, J.
(1983). Improving In-service Training: The Messages of Research. Educational
Leadership, 37(5), 379-385.
Lieberman, Ann and Miller,
Lynne. (1990) Teachers--Transforming Their World and Their
Work. New York: Teachers College Press
Macromedia. (2004).
Dreamweaver MX 2004. [Computer software] San Francisco: Macromedia.
Mann, Dale. Technology
Training for Teachers; A Better Way. E-School News Online.
Retrieved February 11, 2005 from
http://eschoolnews.com/news/showstory.cfm?
ArticleID=4856&CFID=1511762&cftoken=40675452.
Marsick, V.J. and Watkins,
K.E. (2001). Informal and Incidental Learning. New
Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 89, 25-34.
McKenzie, Jamie. (1991)
Designing Staff Development in the Information Age. From Now
On, 1 (4). Retrieved February 2, 2005 from
http://www.fromnowon.org fnoapr91.html
Merriam, S.B. (2001)
Androgogy and Self-Directed learning: Pillars of Adult Learning Theory.
New Directions for Adult and Continuing
Education, 89, 3-14.
Merriam, S.B. and
Caffarella, R.S. (1999) Learning in Adulthood: A
Comprehensive Guide. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc.
Murphy, Carlene and Lick,
Dale. (1998) Whole-Faculty Study Groups: A Powerful Way to
Change Schools and Enhance Learning. Newbury Park, Ca,
Corwin Press.
Question Pro. (2004).
Question Pro Survey Software. [Computer software] Retrieved June 26,
2005 from http://www.questionpro.com
Salpeter, Judy. (2003) Professional
Development: 21 st Century Models. Retrieved February 5,
2005 from http://www.techlearning.com/
showArticle.jhtml?articleID=13000492.
Simmons, J.M., and
Schuette, M.K. (1988) Strengthening Teachers' Reflective Decision
Making. Journal of Staff Development. 9, 3. 18-27
Smith, R.M. (1982). LearningHow
to Learn: Applied Theory for Adults. Chicago: Follett
Publishing Company.
Sprinthall, N. and
Sprinthall, L. (1980). Adult Development and Leadership
Training for Mainstream Education. Concepts to Guide the Training of
Teachers. Edited by D. Corrigan and K. Howey. Reston, VA:
Council for Exceptional Children.
Stigler, J.W. and Hiebert,
J. (1999). The Teaching Gap: Best Ideas from the World's
Teachers for Improving Education in the Classroom. New York:
Free Press.
Wade, S. and Hammick, M.
(1999). Action Learning Circles: Action Learning in Theory and
Practice. Teaching in Higher Education, 4,
163-179.
Williams, B. (1993) Skill
Fixation in Staff Development. The Educational Technology
Journal. 4, 7.
Zemke, R., and Zemke, S.
(1988) 30 Things We Know For Sure About Adult Learning. Training
25:7, 57-61
Appendixes
Appendix A
Demographic Survey
Classification:
Teacher Administrator Counselor Other
If you are a teacher, what is your subject
area? __________________
Years of experience in education:__________________
Highest degree attained:___________________________
Have you
completed GTAT or the equivalent technology certification course/test
option? Yes No
How many
technology related professional development courses have you
participated in during the past year?
Please
indicate your experience with the following applications
|
1.
Internet explorer
___No experience.
___Some experience but I unfamiliar with the use of the application.
___Experienced—I am comfortable using the application.
___Much experience—I could teach others how to use the
application.
|
5. MS
Excel—or other spreadsheet application
___No experience.
___Some experience but I unfamiliar with the use of the application.
___Experienced—I am comfortable using the application.
___Much experience—I could teach others how to use the
application.
|
|
2.
Lotus notes
___No experience.
___Some experience but I unfamiliar with the use of the application.
___Experienced—I am comfortable using the application.
___Much experience—I could teach others how to use the
application.
|
6. MS
PowerPoint
___No experience.
___Some experience but I unfamiliar with the use of the application.
___Experienced—I am comfortable using the application.
___Much experience—I could teach others how to use the
application.
|
|
3.
Inspiration
___No experience.
___Some experience but I unfamiliar with the use of the application.
___Experienced—I am comfortable using the application.
___Much experience—I could teach others how to use the
application.
|
7.
Macromedia Dreamweaver
___No experience.
___Some experience but I unfamiliar with the use of the application.
___Experienced—I am comfortable using the application.
___Much experience—I could teach others how to use the
application.
|
|
4. MS
Word—or other word processing application
___No experience.
___Some experience but I unfamiliar with the use of the application.
___Experienced—I am comfortable using the application.
___Much experience—I could teach others how to use the
application.
|
8.
ClassXP
___No experience.
___Some experience but I unfamiliar with the use of the application.
___Experienced—I am comfortable using the application.
___Much experience—I could teach others how to use the
application.
|
| |
9.
Integrade Pro
___No experience.
___Some experience but I unfamiliar with the use of the application.
___Experienced—I am comfortable using the application.
___Much experience—I could teach others how to use the
application
|
Appendix
B
Instructional Differences
|
Traditional
Instruction
Day
One:
Creating a website, uploading pages,
Dreamweaver Desktop,
Day
Two:
Page Design, manipulating
backgrounds, fonts, special effects.
Day
Three:
Links—creating links to
external website, anchored links, and imported documents.
Day
Four:
Tables
Day
Five:
Graphics—using the hotspot
tool. Sound
Day
Six:
Navigation (drop down menus, etc)
Day
Seven:
Site organization, uploading, local
and remote views
Day
Eight:
Independent Work on Classroom page
|
Adult
Learning Focused Instruction
Day
One: What make a good classroom webpage? Look at some
good examples and some poor examples. Create a simple web page (change
the background color, manipulating fonts, adding a link to an external
source). How to save the page.
Day
Two: How can a website be used to enhance student
learning? Create cooperative learning groups—based on
location in the building or on department. Cooperative learning groups
will meet once per week to discuss progress and to have “how
did you do that” sessions.
Day
Three-Eight: Complete the following tutorials at own
pace (within the four week period), at convenient time and location. Tutorials:
Using graphics, creating navigation, site organization, tables, adding
sound, and importing and creating links to external documents. Creating
your website and uploading to the NGHS server. All lessons will be
based on creating a classroom webpage.
|
Appendix
C
Available online at t
http://www.questionpro.com/akira/TakeSurvey?id=257596
//www.questionpro.com/akira/TakeSurvey?id=257596
Appendix D
Dreamweaver Assessment
Complete
the following tasks. . .
First, log on to your
school account and be sure that you have access to your H: drive.
Part I
1. Open Dreamweaver
2. Create a new site that has three pages. **You will not be posting
this to the NGHS server so you don’t have to be concerned
with the server technology questions.
Part II
3. Call the first page
“Index”
4. Change the background color to one of your choice—any
color other than white will work.
5. Add a title (in a large font) to this page—“My
Index Page”.
6. Under the title, in a different sized font type the words
“ North Gwinnett High School”. Link these words to
the North Gwinnett Homepage (www.northgwinnett.com)
Part III
7. Open the second page. Call this page
“page 2”.
8. Add a title (in a large font) to this
page—“Navigation Tools”
9. Create a table that has 2 rows and three columns.
10. Change the background color of the first row of cells. You pick the
color. Again, any color other than white will work.
11. Use the first row of cells to create a simple navigation menu for
your web site. Create links to the other pages in your site. It should
look similarly to the following when you are finished. . .
| Index |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
| Document
1 |
Document
2 |
Document
3 |
12. In the second row of
the table, create links to three small, previously created documents
you have saved in your Hydride. It doesn’t matter which
documents you use. Make sure you import the documents into your site.
Part IV
13. Open the third page. Call this page
“page 3”.
14. Add a title (in a large font) to this
page—“Graphics”.
15. Create a drop down menu to this page. Create links to the other
pages in your site as well as one to the North Gwinnett homepage.
16. Using vectors, create a simple drawing of a house. Make sure that
your house has a door!
17. Make the door a hotspot that links www.uga.edu.
18. From the North Gwinnett website, import the NGHS seal and put it on
your page. Center the graphic on the page.
Part V
19. Organize your site into three folders:
pages, graphics, and documents.
20. Save your site for evaluation.
Appendix E
Scoring Rubric
(All questions are worth 1 points unless otherwise noted)
| |
Completed
Independently (Full Credit)
|
Completed with
minimal assistance (Half Credit)
|
Not completed or
Completed with extensive assistance ( No Credit)
|
|
Part
I
|
|
|
|
|
Open Dreamweaver.
|
|
|
|
|
Created 3 page
site. (2 points)
|
|
|
|
|
Part
II
|
|
|
|
|
Page correctly
titled.
|
|
|
|
|
Background color
changed.
|
|
|
|
|
Page correctly
labeled “My Index Page”.
|
|
|
|
|
North Gwinnett link
works correctly.
|
|
|
|
|
Part
III
|
|
|
|
|
Page correctly
titled.
|
|
|
|
|
Page correctly
labeled “Navigation Tools”.
|
|
|
|
|
Table created
correctly with the right number of rows and columns. (2 points)
|
|
|
|
|
Background color in
first row is changed.
|
|
|
|
|
Navigation menu
works correctly. (2 points)
|
|
|
|
|
Documents are
correctly linked.
|
|
|
|
|
Documents are
imported correctly.
|
|
|
|
|
Part
IV
|
|
|
|
|
Page correctly
titled.
|
|
|
|
|
Page correctly
labeled “Graphics”.
|
|
|
|
|
Drop Down menu is
correctly created including working links. (2 points)
|
|
|
|
|
Drawing of a house
is included.
|
|
|
|
|
The door is a hot
spot.
|
|
|
|
|
The hot spot link
works correctly.
|
|
|
|
|
Graphic correctly
imported.
|
|
|
|
|
Graphic centered.
|
|
|
|
|
Part
V
|
|
|
|
|
Site is organized
into folders
|
|
|
|
Appendix F
Interview Questions:
- Have you created a Dreamweaver Website? If
no, proceed to question 7.
- Did you create a site for personal or
professional use?
- How often do you update your website?
- Are you satisfied with the appearance of your
site?
- Is there anything you would like to do with
your website that you don’t feel comfortable doing now?
- How have you used Dreamweaver to supplement
your daily classroom teaching?
- What type of support do you need in order to
begin creating your website?
Appendix
G
Scoring Rubric for Website Evaluation
| Category |
3 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
|
Attractiveness
|
Makes excellent use
of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance the website.
|
Makes good use of
font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance website.
|
Makes use of font,
color, graphics, effects, etc. but occasionally these detract from the
website.
|
Use of font, color,
graphics, effects etc. but these often distract from the website.
|
|
Organization
|
Content is well
organized using headings or bulleted lists to group related material.
|
Uses headings or
bulleted lists to organize, but the overall organization of topics
appears flawed.
|
Content is
logically organized for the most part.
|
There was no clear
or logical organizational structure, just lots of facts.
|
|
Originality
|
Product shows a
large amount of original thought. Ideas are creative and inventive.
|
Product shows some
original thought. Work shows new ideas and insights.
|
Uses other people's
ideas (giving them credit), but there is little evidence of original
thinking.
|
Uses other people's
ideas, but does not give them credit.
|
|
Navigational Links
|
All Links are
active
|
Most Links are
active
|
Some links are
active
|
None of the links
are active
|
|
Navigation Within
The Site
|
Navigation within
the site is completely intuitive. Each page contains a navigation menu.
|
Navigation within
the site is somewhat self explanatory. A navigation menu is missing
from some pages.
|
Navigation within
the site is present but takes much thought to operate. Navigation menus
are absent from most pages.
|
Navigation menus
are absent from the website.
|
|
Is the Site
Updated?
|
Yes, all the
information on the site is current.
|
Most of the
information on the site is current.
|
Some of the
information on the site is current.
|
None of the
information the site is current.
|
Table 1
Biographical Information for Study Participants
|
Adult
Learning Focused Group
Subject Number
|
Classification
|
Subject Area
|
Years in Education
|
Degree
|
GTAT
|
|
1
|
teacher
|
science
|
7
|
BS
|
y
|
|
2
|
teacher
|
science
|
8
|
MEd
|
y
|
|
3
|
teacher
|
science
|
6
|
MEd
|
y
|
|
4
|
teacher
|
science
|
15
|
MS
|
y
|
|
5
|
counselor
|
na
|
4
|
MEd
|
y
|
|
6
|
teacher
|
math
|
12
|
MEd
|
y
|
|
7
|
teacher
|
math
|
8
|
BS
|
y
|
|
8
|
teacher
|
math
|
2
|
BS
|
y
|
|
9
|
teacher
|
social studies
|
2
|
MEd
|
y
|
|
10
|
teacher
|
social studies
|
1
|
BA
|
n
|
|
11
|
administrator
|
na
|
21
|
EdD
|
y
|
|
12
|
teacher
|
social studies
|
10
|
BA
|
y
|
|
13
|
teacher
|
foreign language
|
17
|
EdS
|
y
|
|
14
|
counselor
|
na
|
16
|
MS
|
y
|
|
|
|
group
average:
|
9.2
|
|
|
|
Traditional
Instruction
Subject Number
|
Classification
|
Subject Area
|
Years in Education
|
Degree
|
GTAT
|
|
1
|
teacher
|
math
|
9
|
MS
|
y
|
|
2
|
teacher
|
social studies
|
2
|
BS
|
y
|
|
3
|
teacher
|
social studies
|
1
|
BS
|
n
|
|
4
|
teacher
|
foreign language
|
21
|
EdD
|
y
|
|
5
|
counselor
|
na
|
26
|
MEd
|
y
|
|
6
|
teacher
|
foreign language
|
13
|
BS
|
y
|
|
7
|
teacher
|
fine arts
|
11
|
MEd
|
y
|
|
8
|
teacher
|
fine arts
|
11
|
BA
|
y
|
|
9
|
teacher
|
language arts
|
16
|
MEd
|
y
|
|
10
|
teacher
|
language arts
|
4
|
BA
|
y
|
|
|
|
group
average:
|
11.4
|
|
|
Table 2
Results of Performance Assessment
Traditional Group
|
Traditional
Instruction Subject Number
|
Classification
|
Subject Area
|
Initial Exam (max
score=26)
|
Exam after 6 weeks
|
|
1
|
teacher
|
math
|
26
|
26
|
|
2
|
teacher
|
social studies
|
24
|
25
|
|
3
|
teacher
|
social studies
|
26
|
20
|
|
4
|
teacher
|
foreign language
|
24
|
26
|
|
5
|
counselor
|
na
|
23
|
25
|
|
6
|
teacher
|
foreign language
|
26
|
26
|
|
7
|
teacher
|
fine arts
|
24
|
23
|
|
8
|
teacher
|
fine arts
|
26
|
26
|
|
9
|
teacher
|
language arts
|
24
|
26
|
|
10
|
teacher
|
language arts
|
24
|
20
|
|
|
|
group
average:
|
24.7
|
24.3
|
Table 3
Result of Performance Assessment
Adult Learning Focused Group
|
Adult Learning
Group
Subject Number
|
Classification
|
Subject Area
|
Initial Exam (max
score=26)
|
Exam after 6 weeks
|
|
1
|
teacher
|
science
|
26
|
26
|
|
2
|
teacher
|
science
|
24
|
25
|
|
3
|
teacher
|
science
|
26
|
20
|
|
4
|
teacher
|
science
|
24
|
26
|
|
5
|
counselor
|
na
|
20
|
25
|
|
6
|
teacher
|
math
|
26
|
26
|
|
7
|
teacher
|
math
|
24
|
24
|
|
8
|
teacher
|
math
|
26
|
26
|
|
9
|
teacher
|
social studies
|
26
|
26
|
|
10
|
teacher
|
social studies
|
24
|
20
|
|
11
|
administrator
|
na
|
24
|
22
|
|
12
|
teacher
|
social studies
|
26
|
24
|
|
13
|
teacher
|
foreign language
|
26
|
25
|
|
14
|
counselor
|
na
|
20
|
20
|
|
|
|
group
average:
|
24.4
|
23.9
|
Table
4
Results of Training Perception Survey
|
Results
of Survey (Adult Learning Group)
|
Strongly
Agree
|
Agree
|
Neutral
|
Disagree
|
Strongly
Disagree
|
|
I am confident in
my ability to use Dreamweaver to create a website
|
57%
|
43%
|
0%
|
0%
|
0%
|
|
I am likely to
create a website for my personal use
|
29%
|
64%
|
7%
|
0%
|
0%
|
|
I am likely to
create a website for my professional use
|
64%
|
36%
|
0%
|
0%
|
0%
|
|
Dreamweaver can be
used to supplement my daily teaching activities/responsibilities
|
79%
|
21%
|
0%
|
0%
|
0%
|
|
Dreamweaver is a
simple to use tool
|
50%
|
36%
|
7%
|
7%
|
0%
|
|
I am satisfied with
my Dreamweaver training
|
100%
|
0%
|
0%
|
0%
|
0%
|
|
I feel like the
time I spent in training was not wasted
|
93%
|
7%
|
0%
|
0%
|
0%
|
|
I am satisfied with
the support I received from my instructor
|
100%
|
0%
|
0%
|
0%
|
0%
|
|
I saw practical
classroom and personal applications for Dreamweaver
|
93%
|
7%
|
0%
|
0%
|
0%
|
|
The training
schedule was convenient
|
86%
|
14%
|
0%
|
0%
|
0%
|
|
Am I more likely to
participate in future training using the same training format.
|
79%
|
21%
|
0%
|
0%
|
0%
|
|
|
|
Results
of Survey (Traditional Group)
|
Strongly
Agree
|
Agree
|
Neutral
|
Disagree
|
Strongly
Disagree
|
|
I am confident in
my ability to use Dreamweaver to create a website
|
50%
|
50%
|
10%
|
0%
|
0%
|
|
I am likely to
create a website for my personal use
|
30%
|
60%
|
0%
|
10%
|
0%
|
|
I am likely to
create a website for my professional use
|
50%
|
50%
|
0%
|
0%
|
0%
|
|
Dreamweaver can be
used to supplement my daily teaching activities/responsibilities
|
70%
|
20%
|
10%
|
0%
|
0%
|
|
Dreamweaver is a
simple to use tool
|
20%
|
50%
|
10%
|
10%
|
0%
|
|
I am satisfied with
my Dreamweaver training
|
90%
|
10%
|
0%
|
0%
|
0%
|
|
I feel like the
time I spent in training was not wasted
|
70%
|
10%
|
10%
|
10%
|
0%
|
|
I am satisfied with
the support I received from my instructor
|
90%
|
10%
|
0%
|
0%
|
0%
|
|
I saw practical
classroom and personal applications for Dreamweaver
|
30%
|
50%
|
0%
|
20%
|
0%
|
|
The training
schedule was convenient
|
30%
|
30%
|
10%
|
30%
|
0%
|
|
Am I more likely to
participate in future training using the same training format.
|
40%
|
30%
|
30%
|
0%
|
0%
|
