Running head: COLLABORATION & TECHNOLOGY 1. Collaboration and Technology: Everyone Wins. Student Name. Full Sail University

Transcription

1 Running head: COLLABORATION & TECHNOLOGY 1 Roxanne 2/26/13 7:12 PM Comment: Running head created in the Header The h is lowercase. The abbreviated title should be no more than 50 characters including spaces. It is the first part of the literature review title. Roxanne 2/26/13 7:12 PM Comment: Note that Running head only appears on the title page Roxanne 2/26/13 7:12 PM Comment: Page number begins on title page Collaboration and Technology: Everyone Wins Student Name Full Sail University Roxanne 2/26/13 7:14 PM Comment: Font for your literature review is 12 pt Times New Roman, double- spaced, 1 inch margins. Roxanne 2/26/13 7:13 PM Comment: Title Page is centered on page. Not Bold Roxanne 2/26/13 7:14 PM Comment: Add first and last name here. Then below list the institution

2 COLLABORATION & TECHNOLOGY 2 Collaboration and Technology: Everyone Wins Introduction Action research strengthened relationships amongst colleagues and teacher directed research was more likely to succeed because it fostered constant reflection from within and outside of the school (Goodnough, 2011; Postholm, 2009). Having choice was also crucial in incorporating Multiple Intelligences into the classroom because when choices were given for classroom assignments, students worked and thought harder with more enthusiasm and energy, had high levels of motivation and engagement with longer-term retention (Gardner, 2011; McCoog, 2007; Özdemir, Güneysu, & Tekkaya, 2006; Schrand, 2008; Sword, 2007). Roxanne 2/26/13 7:16 PM Comment: Repeat title at the top of the first text page. Center bold (Level 1 title) Use Times New Roman, 12pt, with a one inch margin on all sides of the page for all body text. Subtopic title- Level 2 title align left Bold Roxanne 2/26/13 7:15 PM Comment: Introduce your paper by giving a framework for the upcoming three sections. If you introduce new ideas, you must cite your sources. Roxanne 2/26/13 7:16 PM Comment: Author s Last name and year only to support the research Understanding the teacher and students potential and ability was key because it allowed the development of effective instructional practices using Multiple Intelligence theory (Douglas, Burton, & Reese-Durham, 2008). Multiple Intelligence theory and technology such as computers and web 2.0 tools went together perfectly because they both changed the way teachers approached their instructional practices (McCoog, 2007). Technology needed to be integrated into lesson plans and not merely added-on and it was shown that informal collaboration in short burst of time was the most effective method of incorporating technology (Kanaya, Light, & Roxanne 2/26/13 7:16 PM Comment: One space after punctuation Roxanne 2/26/13 7:17 PM Comment: Double space consistently throughout the document. Indent (1 tab or 5 spaces) for a new paragraph. No extra line between paragraphs. Culp, 2005; Means, 2010; Stevenson, 2004; Wright, 2010). Action Research Can Foster Meaningful Collaboration Action research was a viable, systematic process that had been talked about since Dewey in the early 1900s because it revolved around a change that was planned, implemented, observed and reflected upon (Ambrose, Lang & Grothman, 2007; Goodnough, 2011; Postholm, 2009). Postholm (2009) believed one challenge was the assumption that teachers used theory to Roxanne 2/26/13 7:17 PM Comment: Written in past tense, third person, active voice. Formal scholarly language Roxanne 2/26/13 7:17 PM Comment: Nice analysis and synthesis. Especially since the synthesis is in one sentence!

3 COLLABORATION & TECHNOLOGY 3 understand and change when they reflected and analyzed practices therefore presented research that teacher directed development within schools was better because top down initiatives rarely succeeded in changing teacher practice. Goodnough (2011) indicated that action research strengthened colleague relationships because the reflective process fostered the idea of sharing ideas and resources. Roxanne 2/26/13 7:18 PM Comment: Paraphrase research but support with author and year. No commentary. When paraphrasing do not repeat the authors key words. Always give credit to the author or it can be considered plagiarism A component of good teaching was being skilled at research and development and action research was key because it enabled teachers to move from the predetermined product style of teaching to a style that valued the collaborative, creative process (Ambrose, Lang & Grothman, 2007; Postholm, 2009). Technical action research used an outside researcher, practical action research allowed teachers to take ownership and critical action research was focused on power Roxanne 2/26/13 7:19 PM Comment: Excellent example of analysis it provides the Why of the research. Roxanne 2/26/13 7:19 PM Comment: List all authors first time Et. al, can be used after the first full listing. issues that would change the culture which is important because it was found that knowledge of the types of action research would minimize some of the chaos associated with research (Goodnough, 2011; Jaipal and Figg, 2011). Cook (2009) deemed that this mass of information and the mess it caused, was crucial to the process and needed to be articulated to validate researchers approaches because growth did not fully happen without the embrace of the chaos that occurred with an overwhelming amount of data. Three purposes for action research were presented: personal growth, professional understanding and political empowerment and Goodnough s (2011) research proved that teachers benefitted from collaborative action research because it played a vital role to establish teacher identity. Goodnough (2011) therefore, deemed that teacher education programs would have been more helpful if research components were added because action research was collaborative, systematic, teacher-driven, student focused, and reflective, making it the most effective type of professional development. Goodnough (2011) stated that formation of teacher identity was imperative to learning

4 COLLABORATION & TECHNOLOGY 4 how to teach and teacher identity encompassed values, beliefs and emotions as well as fears, hopes and goals as related to teaching therefore, increased teacher identity led to more inquirybased experiences for the students. Postholm (2009) acknowledged that it took two years for well skilled, confident teachers to open their classrooms for observation but those teachers realized the great importance of constant reflection, inward and outward, in a school. Jaipal and Figg (2011) highlighted that self-selected action research was best because higher interest was more prevalent. However, Postholm (2009) believed there was a gap between practice and theory and that teacher and researcher should work together because action research was effective when teacher and student learning were the focus. Jaipal and Figg (2011) asserted that as long as action research was personally relevant then the result would be sustained changes in teaching practices. Postholm (2009) remarked the teachers in the study were initially paid but as a result of action research being so beneficial; they continued without the pay. Ambrose, Lang & Grothman (2007) believed the most innovative angles for teaching came from professionals that used creative approaches because without creative approach, teaching was more mechanical. According to Postholm (2009) teachers were already technicians that implemented the curriculum therefore action research was a way to regain control of the classroom. Goodnough (2011) indicated that teachers engaged in action research became critical learners that were more willing to take risks in their teaching because they were able to diversify instruction and focus on the whole child therefore it allowed teachers to value assessment that emphasized effort and creative process (Goodnough 2011). The best researcher was the teacher because the collaboration alone was sufficient to keep teams engaged in action research (Jaipal and Figg, 2011; Postholm, 2009). Reflection was key to action research because giving up some of the control made teachers better educators Roxanne 2/26/13 7:20 PM Comment: In each section, use a left- justified, bold heading at the beginning. Each section should have at least four new citations that are used to reinforce all of the thoughts and statements made in that section.

5 COLLABORATION & TECHNOLOGY 5 (Ambrose, Lang & Grothman, 2007; Goodnough, 2011). Goodnough (2011) found that many teachers continued to use components of action research several years later because of the Roxanne 2/26/13 7:21 PM Comment: Example of in text citation benefits to their teaching practice. Using Multiple Intelligences With Technology Integration Teachers believed that everyone could learn; Multiple Intelligence theory (MI) defined how by identifying different types of knowledge therefore educators have embraced Gardner s MI theory for over twenty years (Douglas, Burton, & Reese-Durham, 2008; McCoog, 2007). An important distinction for MI instructional practices versus other methods was because of the Roxanne 2/26/13 7:20 PM Comment: Acronyms spelled out the first time; letters used afterwards Roxanne 2/26/13 7:22 PM Comment: Example of end of sentence citation realization of potential and ability, by both student and teacher (Douglas et al, 2008). The easiest way to incorporate MI into the learning environment was by giving a choice of activities and McCoog (2007) felt that students chose their strongest intelligence but as evidenced by Gardner (2011) students picked their group first and activity second, which led students to reach out past their primary intelligence. High levels of motivation and engagement Roxanne 2/26/13 7:22 PM Comment: Read your paper out loud to catch mistakes or awkward sentences. Have someone proofread your paper before submitting. were noted when given multiple options on assignments that align with MI practices as evidenced by students that experienced a freeing feeling and they worked and thought harder with more enthusiasm and energy (Gardner, 2011; Schrand, 2008; Sword, 2007). Furthermore, students were allowed to take responsibility for their own learning which fostered collaboration and community (Gardner, 2011). MI instruction was better than direct instruction because it resulted in longer-term retention for students and a considerably higher math score was achieved (Douglas et al, 2008; Özdemir, Güneysu, & Tekkaya 2006). Gardner articulated that comparing the brain to a computer was inaccurate because it did not allow for creativity that was needed for higher-level achievement (Weiss, 2000). While McCoog (2007) felt that technology and MI were a great combination, Weiss (2000) claimed

6 COLLABORATION & TECHNOLOGY 6 that some educators feared that technology put learners in charge, which undermined the authority of the instructor. Schrand (2008) claimed that multimedia use transformed the classroom into an active, collaborative, observant public space because he observed the authentic, productive nature of the students through their use of multimedia that allowed their diverse talents to be respected. If technology use was treated as an educational tool, and not an educational goal, that was purposefully designed; then it was beneficial because it improved student achievement and aided in differentiation (Weiss, 2000; McCoog, 2007). Effective instruction was the primary link between technology and MI instructional practices because combined with innovative and differentiated lesson plans; teachers increased academic, emotional and social areas for the students (Douglas et al, 2008; McCoog, 2007). Successful Technology Integration Using Collaboration According to Means (2010) one problem with new technology implementation was the struggle with time because teachers already had to do so many things in the classroom. Many teachers viewed technology as something that was present or not, like an add-on, therefore they struggled with trying to squeeze the technology in instead of integrating it into their instruction (Means, 2010; Wright, 2010). Technology professional development and collaboration was necessary to use technology effectively because teachers learned from the successes and failures of other teachers (Means, 2010; Wright, 2010). Kanaya, Light, & Culp (2005) maintained that technology focused professional development programs must be developed from where the teacher is in readiness and interest because then teachers found opportunity, goals and motivation all on their own. Stevenson (2004) defined informal collaboration as two or more colleagues who

7 COLLABORATION & TECHNOLOGY 7 voluntarily work toward a common goal and found it to be more effective than school organized professional development. According to Huber (2010) internal expertise was rarely taken into account and often schools relied on insights from the outside, which caused new information to not be integrated as thoroughly. Kanaya et al (2005) agreed that professional development in short periods of time were best as evidenced by the apparent commitment to focus on goals and achievement whereas, long, formal trainings had little commitment. Conclusion Action research allowed teachers to focus on a change and collaborate to put that change into action. Allowing time for informal collaboration proved to be more beneficial than outside Roxanne 2/26/13 7:22 PM Comment: No new information or citations in the conclusion; summarize what you previously stated. The conclusion should be a substantial paragraph at minimum. directed professional development efforts. Multiple Intelligence theory practices in the classroom allow for more technology integration in which greater enthusiasm, retention and depth were all shown. The most effective means of technology focused professional development was shown to be ordinary talk amongst teachers who shared a common goal. Schools that have created a culture for this type of informal collaboration were the most successful in technology integration.

8 COLLABORATION & TECHNOLOGY 8 References Ambrose, D., Lang, K., & Grothman, M. (2007). Streamlined reflective action research for Roxanne 2/26/13 7:22 PM Comment: Reference title is centered not bold creative instructional improvement. Educational Action Research, 15(1), doi: / Cook, T. (2009). The purpose of mess in action research: Building rigour though a messy turn. Educational Action Research, 17(2), doi: / Roxanne 2/26/13 7:23 PM Comment: Every article that is mentioned in the intro, body, or conclusion is also listed on the Reference page. DON T include references that are not mentioned in the literature review. All resources found will be located on the LR Resource page Douglas, O., Burton, K., & Reese-Durham, N. (2008). The effects of the multiple intelligence teaching strategy on the academic achievement of eighth grade math students. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 35(2), Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database. Roxanne 2/26/13 7:23 PM Comment: Alphabetize all citations by authors last name. Gardner, H. (2011). Promoting learner engagement using multiple intelligences and choice-based instruction. Adult Basic Education & Literacy Journal, 5(2), Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database. Roxanne 2/26/13 7:23 PM Comment: Titles are all lowercase except first letter, the first letter after a colon, or a proper noun Goodnough, K. (2011). Examining the long-term impact of collaborative action research on teacher identity and practice: The perceptions of K-12 teachers. Educational Action Research, 19(1), doi: / Jaipal, K., & Figg, C. (2011). Collaborative action research approaches promoting Roxanne 2/26/13 7:23 PM Comment: Each journal needs a doi # or database professional development for elementary school teachers. Educational Action Research, 19(1), doi: / Roxanne 2/26/13 7:24 PM Comment: Journal titles are upper and lowercase. Similar to a traditional title. Always italicized. Kanaya, T., Light, D., & Culp, K. (2005). Factors influencing outcomes from a technologyfocused professional development program. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37(3), Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database. Roxanne 2/26/13 7:24 PM Comment: Volume numbers are always italicized

9 COLLABORATION & TECHNOLOGY 9 McCoog, I. J. (2007). Integrated instruction: Multiple intelligences and technology. Clearing House, 81(1), Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database. Means, B. (2010). Technology and education change: Focus on student learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database. Özdemir, P., Güneysu, S., & Tekkaya, C. (2006). Enhancing learning through multiple intelligences. Journal of Biological Education (Society of Biology), 40(2), Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database. Postholm, M. (2009). Research and development work: Developing teachers as researchers or just teachers?. Educational Action Research, 17(4), doi: / Schrand, T. (2008). Tapping into active learning and multiple intelligences with interactive multimedia: A low-threshold classroom approach. College Teaching, 56(2), Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database. Stevenson, H. J. (2004). Teachers' informal collaboration regarding technology. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37(2), Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database. Sword, H. (2007). Teaching in color: Multiple intelligences in the literature classroom. Pedagogy, 7(2), doi: / Weiss, R. (2000). Howard Gardner talks about technology. Training & Development, 54(9), 52. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database. Roxanne 2/26/13 7:24 PM Comment: Please refer to the APA 6 th Edition for examples and rules for citing sources. Use the document guidelines located under Literature Review

10 COLLABORATION & TECHNOLOGY 10 Wright, V. H. (2010). Professional development and the master technology teacher: The evolution of one partnership. Education, 131(1), Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database. Refer to the Document Guidelines on the AR Informational site for requirements.