Advertisement

TechTrends

, Volume 63, Issue 1, pp 68–78 | Cite as

(Re)Imagining an Undergraduate Integrating Technology with Teaching Course

  • Julia ParraEmail author
  • Carolyn Raynor
  • Azadeh Osanloo
  • Rene O. Guillaume
Original Paper
  • 41 Downloads

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to provide information from a research study that looked at the (re)imagining of a learning technologies course, Integrating Technology with Teaching (ITT). The course was (re)imagined to meet the needs of students who will be preservice and future teachers. Course design for the (re)imagined course was based on 1) current literature related to TPACK, ISTE Standards and current issues in classroom technology integration and 2) a design framework including ADDIE principles and blended learning. The study was conducted during Spring 2018 in a face-to-face (F2) version of the ITT course at a Southwestern university in the US. Evaluation and feedback were collected from twenty-two students who completed the course. In addition to providing study findings, the article concludes with recommendations for the next course iteration and faculty members interested in (re)imagining learning technology courses.

Keywords

ADDIE Blended learning Educational technology Learning design Preservice teachers TPACK 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Conflict of Interest

Dr. J. Parra is a member of the board of directors for Online Learning Consortium. C. Raynor, M.A. declares that she has no conflict of interest. Dr. A. Osanloo declares that she has no conflict of interest. Dr. R.O. Guillaume declares that he has no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Baran, E., Chuang, H. H., & Thompson, A. (2011). TPACK: An emerging research and development tool for teacher educators. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 10(4), 370–377.Google Scholar
  2. Brenner, A. M., & Brill, J. M. (2016). Investigating practices in teacher education that promote and inhibit technology integration transfer in early career teachers. TechTrends, 60(2), 136–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chai, C. S., Koh, J. H. L., & Tsai, C.-C. (2010). Facilitating preservice teachers' development of technological, pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK). Educational Technology & Society, 13(4), 63–73.Google Scholar
  4. Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011). From game design elements to gamefulness: Defining gamification. In Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments (pp. 9–15). ACM.Google Scholar
  5. Foulger, T. S., Graziano, K. J., Schmidt-Crawford, D., & Slykhuis, D. A. (2017). Teacher educator technology competencies. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 25(4), 413–448.Google Scholar
  6. Freire, P. (2009). Teachers as cultural workers: Letters to those who dare teach with new commentary by Peter McLaren, Joe L. Kincheloe. Hachette UK.Google Scholar
  7. Frenzel, S. (2018). 4 proven ways to get teachers to use technology. Retrieved from https://www.eschoolnews.com/2018/04/05/4-proven-ways-get-teachers-use-technology/. Accessed 29 Nov 2018.
  8. Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95–105.Google Scholar
  9. Gee, M. K., & Ullman, C. (1998). Teacher/ethnographer in the workplace: Approaches to staff development.Google Scholar
  10. Graziano, K. J., Foulger, T. S., Schmidt-Crawford, D. A., & Slykhuis, D. (2017). Technology integration and teacher preparation: The development of teacher educator technology competencies. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2336–2346). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).Google Scholar
  11. Hargrave, C. P., & Hsu, Y. S. (2000). Survey of instructional technology courses for preservice teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 4, 303–314.Google Scholar
  12. Hodell, C. (2011). ISD from the ground up: A no-nonsense approach to instructional design. American Society for Training and Development.Google Scholar
  13. Hooks, B. (2003). Teaching community: A pedagogy of hope (Vol. 36). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. ISTE (2016). ISTE standards for students. International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). Retrieved May 10, 2018 from https://www.iste.org/standards/for-students
  15. Katz, M. S., Noddings, N., & Strike, K. A. (1999). Justice and caring: The search for common ground in education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  16. Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60–70.Google Scholar
  17. Lincoln, Y. S. (1995). Emerging criteria for quality in qualitative and interpretive research. Qualitative Inquiry, 1(3), 275–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mai, J. (2009). Ethnographic interviews - Interviewing and observing users. Retrieved May 12, 2018 from https://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/UX/Ethnographic+Interviews+-+Interviewing+and+Observing+Users. Accessed 29 Nov 2018.
  19. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. In Revised and expanded from "Case study research in education". San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Google Scholar
  20. Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Kereluik, K. (2009). Looking back to the future of educational technology. TechTrends, 53(5), 49.Google Scholar
  21. Noddings, N. (1995). Teaching themes of care. Phi Delta Kappan, 76(9), 675.Google Scholar
  22. Parra, J. (2016). Moving beyond MOOC mania: Lessons from a faculty-designed MOOC. Current Issues in Emerging eLearning (CIEE), 3(1), 173–204.Google Scholar
  23. Schwartz, D. L., Tsang, J. M., & Blair, K. P. (2016). The ABCs of how we learn: 26 scientifically proven approaches, how they work and when to use them. New York, NY: WW Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  24. Trust, T. (2018). 2017 ISTE standards for educators: From teaching with technology to using technology to empower learners.Google Scholar
  25. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. (2017). Reimagining the role of Technology in Education: 2017 National Education Technology Plan Update. Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  26. University of Michigan, School of Education. (2018). High-leverage practices. Teaching Works. Retrieved November 29, 2018 from http://www.teachingworks.org/work-of-teaching/high-leverage-practices. Accessed 29 Nov 2018.

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications & Technology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.New Mexico State UniversityLas CrucesUSA

Personalised recommendations