I've just read the Dias article* about integration. I have a few thoughts which tie in a little with my PD ideas outlined in an earlier post (particularly the notion of SOUTH). Dias contends that
"technology is integrated when it is used in a seamless manner to support and extend curriculum objectives and to engage students in meaningful learning." and "Technology enriches the activity and enables the students to demonstrate what they know in new and creative ways." (p. 11). These definitions are important because there is a wide variation of interpretations of the idea of "integration". At my school, some see it as using a web 2.0 tool like wordle extraneously just to "prove" they've been using technology - at a micro level, this is characteristic of Michael Fullan's ideas about how and why schools adopt innovation, as outlined by Tony in Study Guide 6. These teachers need lots of support in many ways to get them past this entry/adoption stage of learning (see below). According to Dias, the qualities of "learner-centred" classrooms/teachers - which generally refers to those which have (co-) constructivism and perhaps a dash of connectivism at the heart of their pedagogy. This also suggests that some teachers have to change much of their practice to create an environment conducive to ICT integration. thankfully, most teachers at my school operate a classroom/practice based in co-constructivist theory. At a more subtle level though, some teachers may need to change the way they view their role in the class from knowledge provider to context creator.
Dias lists the barriers to integration as time, training, resources and support. In my experience, these all overlap to make a sizeable wall in many cases. For example, even with training given, teachers often need follow up opportunities to tinker with an ICT so that they are sufficiently confident with it, before they can integrate it fully with their students. Where do they get the time to do this? Usually they are expected to do this in their own time and, with little motivation, this will often fall by the wayside making the initial investment in training a waste of money.
Dias categorises the stages of integration as entry, adoption, adaptation, appropriation and invention. These stages present another problem: in my school different teachers are at different stages, and with limited time/resources for PD it is very difficult to support each teacher at an appropriate level. We have had to opt for generic training which can leave more advanced teachers frustrated or beginners overwhelmed.
Dias raises some very valuable points and whilst this post may seem a little depressing and pessimistic, the challenges I have outlined here are not necessarily insurmountable. I would like to start to address some of them in subsequent posts in this blog, and in response to some of the frameworks made available to us (e.g. TPACK).
Refs
*Dias, L. B. (1999). Integrating technology: Some things you should know. Learning and Leading with Technology, 27(3), 11-13, 21
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHi Louis,
ReplyDeleteI found the Dias (Dias, 1999) article interesting too. Dias discusses the importance of teachers developing clarity around what they see what she calls technology integration, (e-learning integration)would actually look like. I like this idea, it sits very well alongside the pedagogy of assessment for learning. Her questions would certainly be useful when conducting a school review on this area. Dias (1999), suggests that addressing these questions could assist schools to clarify their expectations.
1.“What is technology integration, and what isn’t it?
2.Where does technology integration happen?
3.What are the barriers to technology integration?
4.What are the stages of technology integration?”
She contends that addressing these questions is rarely done in schools and that they need to be addressed as part of the journey of creating a collaborative vision to initiate the journey. Well I guess for most of us the journey is well started and the vision needs revisiting, as it is an iterative process, it takes time but it also takes a lot of focus. Answering these questions with our teachers would be a good start to recreating our e-learning plans.
The TPACK framework is interesting too and I am wondering if it could be adapted to develop an e-learning development plan. Both of these will be the focus of my assignment 2 - it is quite timely as the Dias gives a set of questions to work on in the revisioning with staff and the TPACK framework ( Koeler & Mishra, 2009) gives a different way forward in the development of an action plan.It would have to be adapted though to suit our context. How do you think you might utilise the ideas contained in these articles and do they relate to what you are doing for assignment 2?
I have put more of my thoughts on this on my blog - I would enjoy your feedback too.
Sandy
Dias, L. B. (1999). Integrating Technology: Some things you should know. Learning and Leading with Technology , 27 (3), 11-13, 21.
Mishra P., & Koehler M.J., (2009). What is Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technolgy and Teacher Education , 9 (1), pp. 60-70.