University-Based Web Conferencing to Connect Pre-College Teachers in a Technology Curriculum Integration Project. Lee H. Ehman Indiana University

Transcription

1 University-Based Web Conferencing to Connect Pre-College Teachers in a Technology Curriculum Integration Project Introduction Lee H. Ehman Indiana University Paper delivered to the North Central Association Annual Meeting Chicago, April 12, 1999 The Teacher Institute for Curriculum Knowledge about Integration of Technology (TICKIT) is a yearlong, school-based professional development program, based at Indiana University in Bloomington. It involves 25 teachers from all grade levels in five rural, southern Indiana school districts. Each teacher develops and teaches a curriculum unit involving use of technology during each of the two semesters. In addition, the teams of five teachers in each district carry out a separate, yearlong project to influence technology awareness and use by colleagues in their schools. While there are three twoday workshops at the university during the year, most of the teachers work in TICKIT occurs in their schools, with TICKIT staff visiting schools and conducting workshops on technology use in teaching at the request of the teachers. Three graduate credit hours are awarded for each semester s accomplishments. As part of the effort to promote peer communication and support, a web-based asynchronous conferencing system (COW), is used by all teachers to post progress reports about their projects in the first of a two-week cycle. During the second week each teacher reacts, with commentary, criticisms and suggestions, to the progress reports of a critical friend with whom she or he is paired. TICKIT staff members add reactions, suggestions, and encouragement regarding the on-line discourse about project reports and critical friend exchanges. The conferencing also fosters communication among the teams of five teachers regarding their yearlong projects. This paper will describe the purposes and structure of the conferencing system, present findings and interpretations from analysis of the teachers postings, and draw conclusions and implications for higher educators engaged in school-based professional development. Purposes and Structure of Web Conferencing in TICKIT The COW conferencing has three main purposes for its teacher participants. First, the requirement that they post ideas about their work each week (alternating between progress reports to all 25 teachers and commentary only between the critical friend pairs) is intended to keep them focused on their projects rather than ignoring them in favor of other teaching demands. Second, the critical friend exchanges are a source of ideas for and validation of their own projects. Third, the electronic exchanges are an attempt to bring a heightened sense of professional connection and lessening of isolation, and to enlist them as colleagues and mentors of teachers from other schools. 1

2 In order to accomplish these purposes, the COW conferencing system was structured into various topics, permitting teachers to post and read the items required by the TICKIT program, as well as ideas that were optional. Table 1 shows the categories of these topics, along with the numbers of postings in each for the fall 1998 semester. Table 1: Conference Topic Categories and Posting Frequencies During Fall Semester Topic Category Number of Posts in Topic Category Workshop interactions (introductions, practice with COW) 55 Updates from TICKIT staff 5 Within-school team interactions 32 Individual project progress reports 152 Critical friend interactions [private] 185 Reading reactions 48 Total posts 477 NOTE: The critical friend posts could be read only by the two teachers and the TICKIT staff. All other topics could be read by all. The workshop interactions topic provided TICKIT teachers and staff to learn and practice using the COW system during their two-day workshop in mid-august. Each teacher posted at least two items: an introduction and an entry regarding ideas gained from workshop activities, and these constitute the 55 posts in the first category. There were communications to the teachers from the project staff about various expectations, assignments, and modifications throughout the semester, and most often they were made through direct . However, in five instances the TICKIT staff also posted this information on COW to insure receipt by all participants. A total of 32 within-school team posts were made in four of the five school district teams (one school did not use this method of communication.) This averages to be a modest 8 posts per team, and clearly the team members used face-to-face, phone, and methods much more often than electronic conferencing. Progress reports and critical friend reactions, two of the three required categories for the teachers, constituted the majority of postings during the semester. Two teachers dropped out of the program shortly after the semester began for personal reasons, and one of the remaining 23 did not post progress reports or critical friend interactions because of lack of a classroom or home computer and internet access. Each teacher was required to make at least five postings in each of the two categories, where for progress reports all participants could read them, but for critical friend exchanges only the two teachers plus the TICKIT staff had access to the posts. The 22 teachers averaged about seven posts in both the progress reports and critical friend topics. (In the latter category, the TICKIT 2

3 staff made three encouragement and reaction posts to each critical friend pair for a total of 32 during the period.) The final category, reading reactions, involved two required posts by each teacher in which they wrote a two or three paragraph reaction to articles about curriculum integrating of technology. A corollary assignment was for each person in the critical friend pairs to comment critically on the other s reading reaction; however, for some reason, perhaps lack of assignment clarity or lack of time, only nine of the 23 teachers actually made those posts in the critical friend topic. Findings and Interpretations Having described briefly the COW conference topic categories and frequencies of postings within them during the first semester of the TICKIT program, I now turn to a qualitative analysis and interpretation of the contents of the participants postings. Rather than considering the content within the conference topics, the two main categories of project progress reports and critical friend interchanges are combined to draw out meanings from the teachers ideas and feelings expressed electronically. These are reported in six categories. 1. Project reporting, focusing and modifying. As required, nearly all teachers reported every two weeks on progress made, plans laid, and problems encountered while working on their classroom projects. In addition to this primary descriptive material, teachers also sometimes gave reasons for modifying their plans as they addressed unforeseen problems. As the semester progressed, one trend that emerged was that several teachers began addressing their critical friend directly in the progress reports, rather than writing for all participants, as the staff had originally envisioned. It was apparent that for these pairs of teachers a more personal audience was preferable to writing generally to all teachers in the program. Related to this is the growing tendency for critical friends to begin or end their posts with personal information and questions, clearly in an attempt to establish social conversation in addition to the professional dimension of the conferencing. 2. Praise and encouragement. The critical friends interactions nearly always included some element of praise and encouragement for the other s work. Near the beginning of the semester this tended to be superficial, consisting of a few words or a couple of sentences. However, as time went on, the praise and encouragement become more extended, not just in length, but in kind. This extended encouragement often came in response to problems the other had reported, and an important way it was extended was for the writer to relate the problem or experience to her or his own ideas or experiences. For example, in response to critical friend s explanation of a lack of computer laboratory time for her class, the teacher might compare her situation to her own, and encourage her to work through the problem. 3

4 3. Reports of impact on projects of added resources. Throughout the semester teachers reported and discussed how additional resources added to their ability to complete their projects successfully. This information sharing sometimes sparked thinking in others about how similar resources, perhaps not previously considered, might benefit their own work. The range of added resources included: internet connectivity; new software or hardware; training received either from a colleague or technology coordinator in individual or group settings, or from the TICKIT staff during in-school workshops; and teaming with another teacher on a project (there were only two teacher pairs that reported this as a helpful resource.) 4. Review of what teachers accomplished and learned. One notable dimension of the COW posts was teachers celebrating their accomplishments and the fact that they were learning new knowledge and skills. Three subcategories of these celebratory messages were: learning to use a particular technology tool in their teaching; particular successes in creating and implementing parts of their classroom projects; and using student actions and feedback to illustrate the impact teachers were having through their curriculum technology integration work. There was a sense of professional pride in many of these communications of success; some teachers clearly wanted someone to tell but lacked a colleague or friend who would really understand the victory. TICKIT colleagues, especially critical friends, were likely to grasp their importance, and were a ready and often sympathetic audience. There are many critical friend posts with acknowledgements and praise of the other s celebration in a previous post. 5. Idea engagement among critical friends. This strong dimension was sometimes related to the teachers projects, and sometimes not. At times the ideas being discussed were not related to teaching at all, although pedagogical ideas tended to dominate. A more important distinction among the engagement with ideas is between one-way discussion of ideas, where only one of the two in the pair really carries the intellectual burden, and the other is mainly a listener, and reciprocal discussion, where the two are more equal in their contributions. Ideas were presented in four different forms during the on-line conferencing. First, questions and answers were used by a majority of critical friend pairs as a means for addressing mostly project-related issues. In one instance a teacher used a set of questions to herself to engage in thinking about needed considerations for her project (she then proceeded to analyze possible answers!) The second form is to compare the other s ideas or experiences to one s own situation or experience, often including some dimension or idea not included in the other s communication, perhaps as a way to suggest new thinking by the other teacher. The third category is the analysis of existing or anticipated problems, sometimes one s own, and sometimes the other s. There was a considerable amount of this kind of discourse. Finally, and related to problem analysis, is actual assistance, with ideas, for solving problems, modifying 4

5 approaches to parts of projects, or simply giving information. In this final category assistance is both asked for and offered. It was not always possible to tell whether the assistance in the form of these ideas actually helped, but there were several instances in which the person receiving the assisting ideas acknowledged them and explained how they were put to use in their project. There were also cases in which a person shared another s ideas with a third colleague for use in their classroom; this is an important example of the potential for electronic conferencing to impact beyond just those posting and reading. 6. Feelings expression. There was an unexpected amount of feelings of various kinds expressed electronically. One dimension of feeling was excitement and pleasure conveyed about accomplishments. This often (but not always) accompanied the celebrations, or listing of what was learned, discussed above. Another aspect of feelings was expression of frustration. Important in these instances were complaints about lack of time to work on projects, or even to post brief messages on the COW conference. Like any teacher who volunteers for a new program, and especially those trying to learn to apply new technology to their classrooms, these teachers were pressed to fit everything, new and old, into their already full professional and personal lives. Time is the enemy, one seasoned veteran bemoaned. Another source of frustration was the many technical problems encountered through the semester. Things sometimes just didn t work. Related to that is a third major problem teachers complained about some had to wait for as much as two months to have internet connectivity for the school computer they depended upon for COW postings and project work in spite of their schools pledge to provide connectivity at the beginning of the school year. Finally, the COW structure and expectations bedeviled a few of the teachers, particularly during the first month, and that was an initial frustration that made its way into the conference postings. A striking part of the feelings expressed between critical friends was sympathy and empathy for the other s problems and frustrations. Many times a teacher replied to her frustrated colleague that she had a similar or identical problem, and she knew just how the other felt. Misery loves company, as one participant put it. Some teachers also expressed feelings of inadequacy about their knowledge and skill in using technology in preparing instruction or actually teaching in their classrooms. This was somewhat surprising, given the self-selected nature of the participants in TICKIT, all of whom, in their applications to be in the program, had written statements indicating substantial computer experience and competence. Finally, there was a minor undercurrent of guilt in the posts, both regarding lack of progress on their classroom projects, and being tardy in making the required posts in COW. Discussion and Implications 5

6 Drawing back from the analysis of COW contents, several important issues come into focus. First, use of the critical friend device seemed to work well to cement the exchange of ideas about and mutual support of teachers classroom projects. Further, it was seen that the teachers tended to prefer more personal, one-on-one, electronic conversations rather than simply broadcasting reports and observations to their large group of peers in the program. This has implications for how such on-line conferencing is structured, and what expectations project staff might have for participation. While the TICKIT teachers did broadcast progress reports to all in the program, most wanted a person, not a group, as an audience. Establishing devices like the critical friend pairs used in this project is one way to accommodate to that preference, and increase the level and quality of participation in the electronic communications. Also apparent from the frequency data in Table 1, if participants lack a structure of clear expectations and requirements for using web-based conferencing, they tend not to use it. The three required categories of Table 1 progress reports, critical friend interactions, and article reactions constitute the bulk of the posts. There were several other categories and subcategories set up for optional use, but they were seldom used. The implication for program staff is clear. Don t assume that participants will use the conference tool if there is not a clear use for it, particularly if they are severely constrained by time demands for doing other things. Providing a useful structure, clear expectations, and a sense of value, are important issues to address. Very little teacher-teacher interaction was found outside the critical friend topic. That is, there was nearly no lurking a teacher reading other teachers progress reports (other than her or his critical friend s), or the posts among a school s team, and commenting on them. Only two of the 22 teachers participating in COW were obviously lurking, and this petered out halfway through the semester. One reason for this is the sheer number of postings that accumulates, combined with individual teachers lack of time. Unless there is a specific reason, including an assignment or other specific expectation, busy teachers are unlikely to jump outside their regular conference reading and initiate new conversations. Finally, the range and extent of feelings expressed in the postings were unexpected. While electronic conferencing requires precious time that many of our TICKIT teachers lacked, many still used COW as an outlet to show their excitement, pleasure, frustration and even guilt about various aspects of their work. In reflecting on this finding, it seems clear that a need was being met, albeit an unanticipated one. It might be that this aspect should be built into the conference expectations and training from the beginning, rather than have project staff simply assume it might work out as a benefit to the teachers. The education profession is full of important feelings. The implication is to incorporate this into the electronic conferencing of teachers, promoting ventilation, sharing, and often celebration of their feelings. Therefore, sharing both feelings and ideas should be considered in the creation of structures and expectations for these conferences. Finally, it is important to return to the three original goals of the COW conference as it was used in the TICKIT program. It is impossible to determine if the first goal, keeping 6

7 the teachers on task with their classroom projects, really was promoted by teachers participation. The fact is that all completed their projects; the most that can be said is that it didn t seem to hurt them. The second goal, that teachers use the COW exchanges as a source of ideas and validation for their projects seems to have been accomplished at least for some of the critical friend pairs, because of the explicit acknowledgment and use of ideas offered during the electronic exchanges. The third goal, heightening sense of professional connection and lessening of isolation, also appears to have been accomplished. Critical friend pairs exchanged ideas, feelings, praise and encouragement. Some teachers seemed to be reaching out to a colleague electronically in a way not available to her down the hall, at least in the sense that these ideas and feelings would be completely understood and appreciated by a local colleague. TICKIT colleagues shared things that teachers next door did not and therefore on line conferencing appeared to add valuable connections to most of the teachers professional lives. If this analysis is valid, then it is clear that web-based conferencing is a valuable tool to enhance professional communication among pre-college teachers in university-based professional development programs. Acknowledgments I wish to thank my TICKIT staff colleagues, Curt Bonk, Emily Hixon, and Lisa Yamagata-Lynch, for their valuable participation, suggestions and support of the electronic conferencing during the fall 98 semester. Thanks also to Steve Malikowski for setting up and administering the COW conference. The work reported in this paper was supported financially by the Ackerman Foundation, Indiana University, and the five school districts from which the TICKIT participants come. Finally, I express my appreciation to all of those teachers who participated in the electronic conference and who were willing to have their postings analyzed. C:\U\Lee\TICKIT\NCA Paper Jan '99.doc 7