Ideas for stimulating teachers to integrate technology into their teaching

In the last post I mentioned that I will be talking about my ideas to stimulate teachers to think about technology integration in their teaching.

Integrating technology into content and pedagogy is a creative task. A teacher is an education designer at the micro level. She has the context of her school and classroom, she has her audience as children, she has her goals as the standards to be achieved and like a designer and she needs to design a relevant and effective lesson plan which teaches the required concept through and appropriate pedagogy using appropriate technology. It can be just her using it or better, helping her students use it to arrive at an understanding about the topic being taught.

This is no simple task and is a skill learnt over time with practice. It requires creativity, to think differently than the normal and to push oneself into an uncomfortable zone, which teachers usually resist. It means trying out new things, being comfortable with failures and mistakes and learning on the job. i.e.  while teaching.

Why would teachers want to be creative? How can we as educational designers create environments where teachers become more creative and have fun being curious and discovering new things? One of the critical factors is the school environment. Some systems can kill creativity and other ones can foster it. If creativity, innovation, critical thinking is valued, then the members of that system soon learn to adopt it.

Integrating technology can cause chaos in the beginning. Teachers will try different pedagogies and content. They will try to use different activities and in the process accept some and reject some. This can only happen in a school context which accepts that chaos is inevitable, but out of this chaos will come the real semblance of the order. An order which is developed and owned by teachers themselves. So the first idea is a nurturing environment which encourages creativity and exploration!

The second idea seeing is believing. It means that to get conviction into something is difficult if just talked about as a concept. We need a live example, a model or a demonstration that it works. Therefore it can be liberating to show teachers an example of technology integration into teaching. Therefore observations  and site visits of other schools and classrooms doing it is an important way to open minds to re-look at their current way of thinking of teachers and breaking the belief that it is not possible.

Easy access and a repertoire is the basis for stimulating teachers to think about any technology. For example, how a camera, a digi board, a CD rom, a TV can be used. Just letting teachers fidget and explore these technologies can get them thinking of ideas as to when, where and how these can be used.

Another important way of stimulating teachers is talk about technology integration, to dialogue about the issues and challenges and possible solutions. Dialogue helps teachers put into words their fears, apprehensions, constraints and all the barriers they have towards technology. It can be insightful for both teachers and for the education designers – the education designers can know what are the resistance and can address them through dialogue or other interventions.

The fifth idea or strategy is to always start with few enthusiastic teachers. There are always two or three teachers who know and are willing to know technology integration. Once these teachers start doing, slowly a critical mass will develop. These catalysts will talk about the benefits and slowly the other bunch of non doers will be forced to think about it.

Stimulation increases with participation and ownership. Teachers need to feel the need for technology integration. If it is just imposed, technology just might be used, but not integrated. Teachers need to own the process of integration. It might be in making ICT policy at school or making new curriculum with technology or just simply using the technology. They need to be in charge of the process. The others as school administration and management and experts should be on the periphery to provide support as and when needed.

An interesting aspect is of all these ideas/ strategies/ approaches is that one needs to understand where teachers are and what are their barriers and therefore slowly try and address these. Each of these ideas can be used as a part of professional development program, in the organizational structure. A combination of these ideas can definitely help teachers shed their old ways of thinking and being more creative in their use of technology in their classrooms rather than just using them. 

Reflections on process of course design and working with TPACK

Process of designing a course as an education designer and working with TPACK:

In the last leg of this course, we took up the role of an education designer to design a professional development course or a lesson plan based on TPACK in groups of four people. Our group decided to work on teacher professional development program based on TPACK. We had to present it last week  to the class. We also have to write individual reflections on it. This blog post and the next one will be dedicated to my reflections on doing this assignment. This blog post will deal with my reflections on the process of designing the course as an education designer and working with TPACK. The next blog post will deal with my ideas to stimulate teachers to integrate and not just use technology in classrooms.

Designing this course was one of the best parts in the entire course on Pedagogies for flexible learning supported by technology. It challenged me to think and apply all that we have learnt about TPACK, professional development, designing, technology integration etc. It was interesting for me also from a different point of view. I have been co –designing professional development programs in India both for the organization I work and for governmental school principals. However, what I always felt a need for was a frame work for reference, for guidance to make decisions regarding content and pedagogy. There was very little technology used in these programs. I lacked the systematic, scientific way of thinking, designing, measuring etc. This experience was different.  Though the context was a fictitious one, I learnt how theory and frameworks can guide systematic thinking and designing. TPACK being one of them. We borrowed a lot from the course, the reading materials and from the model of TPACK itself. I will talk about this more in the section of ‘working with TPACK’.

A robust analysis of the context, the needs of the learners, the key stakeholders and a good framework for designing and evaluation is half the job done. For me a thorough understanding of the context, the needs are critical to designing relevant and effective programs. Programs which do not address the needs of the learners are not appreciated well. However, I also feel that this was not the real case and therefore I guess we could make a assumptions suited to our design.  For example, we said teachers are sufficiently motivated, but not confident or skilled. It can be both, that because teachers are not confident, they are also not motivated to try. I guess, it would still be a challenge to design a course in a real life situation for a real school!

Of course, the implementation has its own complexities, but a detail planning and thorough design leaves less room for errors. We did pay a lot of attention to the details in the context and found it vital for our design. This also helped us in therefore defining our goals and activities with ease.

While we did refer to the theories and used it in our course design, what I think could be improved was to formulate design principles based on the context (needs analysis) and different theories including TPACK. This would be more helpful to show explicit connections from theory to design to implementation.  

It seems like we made our assignment simple by deleting the motivation issues of the teacher, in retrospect, even tackling self efficacy issues, I think is not simple. I really like that we focused on improving skills and giving positive experiences to teachers to improve their confidence in integrating technology in classrooms. We strongly therefore suggested to begin from whatever technology the teachers knew and to integrate that first and slowly learn other technologies. Small successes give real boost to self confidence and motivation of teachers.

Another interesting aspect was our role as education designer. In our assignment we said that we, education designers were also the instructors. In my work experience, this is the reality. I was an education designer, an instructor or trainer and the manager for implementation all three at the same time. So I designed, then I delivered and simultaneously managed other things like logistics and bringing in experts etc. This was quite challenging and quite stressful. But it can be true. Gradually as the program became more complex, there were experts as instructors and I had a team to manage aspects of logistics.

Evaluation was something which I feel was another area where we made some good design. We thought of instruments which not only measure knowledge on the seven domains of TPACK, but also the attitudes and beliefs. Especially as our design focused on changing the beliefs and self efficacy of teachers towards technology, it was important to measure its progress both in a formative and summative ways.

I really enjoyed the process of working in the group. I think there are new ideas, complementary skills, more creativity when collaborating on an assignment as challenging as this. I enjoyed the process with my classmates and felt as if I added value despite coming from a completely different context.

Working with TPACK:

Working with TPACK as a framework for integrating technology into the professional development course was easy. The ease lies in its simplicity. It is a generic model and therefore makes integration and achieving TPACK looks a lot more simplistic than what is in reality. Being simple and generic has its positives. Almost anybody who works with teachers or is a teacher can understand it and cannot disagree with it.  The model in itself is easy. One can start from any of the circles and one has to ensure that each of the circle and its interrelations are developed to attain TPACK. Yet, the challenge is in the how of reaching TPACK. It’s not as simple as the framework itself. For example, in the course we developed, the C was TPACK, the P was collaborative learning and experiential learning and the T was an online portal with resources. Yet how teachers use it and how they reflect on it is critical to transform their own thinking about the T, the C and the P. The only way to demonstrate the interrelations was to demonstrate it in their own learning process. Even theory says that each of the seven domains can’t be learnt independently. They have to be learnt by doing.  Most teachers are aware that PCK is achieved after a lot of teaching practice and making mistakes. Similarly TCK and TPK would be also achieved through trial and error, experimentation and reflecting on what works and what doesn’t.

The only way therefore to ensure TPACK is to constantly do it and learn it. However this has implications and this is where a supportive context, environment and constant scaffolding are needed. The pre requisite for this experimentation is a secure environment where teachers are not pre occupied to bring results. Yes learning performance is important, but it will come as a result of improving learning process or environment. It’s seen that initially when teachers are learning new things, the learning levels of the children in their classroom dips instead of increasing. The school leadership and management should be able to understand and empathize with this. Once teachers are confident and have learnt new ways, it does bring remarkable differences in the learning environment and learner levels.

Another interesting thing about TPACK is that it’s complimentary to other theories about learning by doing, collaborative learning, and teachers as reflective practioneers. To help teachers build their professional competencies, the content is best taught by collaboration, design, implement, evaluate cycle, plan, enact, and reflect cycle. Collaboration and professional learning communities and their contributions in giving teachers on-going support are well researched and proven. And the use of online portals, blogs, online professional communities and web based tools for planning, evaluation and reflections are examples of how technology can be used to make it more flexible and suited to teacher’s needs. Thus TPACK as a framework helps bring all these components together to design an environment where teachers can see how it is integrated and used for their own learning.

TPACK is achieved as a result of neatly defined processes for tackling beliefs, improving skills, starting from the strengths of where teachers are, creating small successes to increase motivation, all within a supportive, and nurturing environment. This helps teacher to be creative and creativity, as my next blog post will show is really essential to attain TPACK.

Therefore though the model appears simplistic, it is now, after designing a course do I realize that it’s not as simple to attain TPACK. It’s a combination of addressing individual and contextual factors that make attaining TPACK with teachers possible.

TPACK and flexible learning

In my blog on reflections I had mentioned about how in this course I learnt about each term ‘flexibility’ ‘pedagogy’ and ‘technology’ independently and how I thought they started making sense to me only after a while and the important lessons learnt from each of these classes. In my last blog, which looks like a conceptual paper, I attempted to explain the TPACK model as I have understood from readings and discussion going around for quite some time not only in Petra’s class but Amber’s class as well.

In this blog I tie together these loose threads to see how TPACK and flexibility are related as the other two- pedagogy and technology are a part of the TPACK model. However when we talk about TPACK, we I guess essentially talk about teachers and the knowledge components that teachers need to build for designing lessons that integrate technology into their classrooms. I look at this notion of flexibility though from the point of view of the students and the teacher.

When we talk of flexibility or lack of it, it is I think a result of using or not using technology with the pedagogical approaches and content knowledge- the TPK and the TCK. When TPK, a right kind of technology with right pedagogical approach, I think it opens the possibilities for flexible teaching for teachers and flexible learning for learners. For example, using digital media, teachers are no longer the only source of information. Children learn from the TV, internet, peers etc.

Teachers no longer drive the learning process. Using technology can make more collaborative learning environment. Students direct their own learning and teacher manage the overall timeline, assessment and inter group co-ordination. This means more flexibility for the teacher as well as the students. But this demands teachers to be creative, to be comfortable in their new roles as facilitators, which most teachers face difficulty with.

Similarly TCK is an understanding how content dictates use of certain technology and vice versa. In this respect using a particular content with particular technology restricts the flexibility of what all can be offered to the learner for learning.With these two changing, the overall what is taught and how it is taught changes dramatically. So does the role of the teacher and student and so do the flexibility aspects. Thus TPACK and flexibility have direct co-relation and in designing any lesson, if flexibility is needed, technology plays a crucial role and the pedagogy and content get defined by this need.

Thus TPACK is a model of integrating technology, content and pedagogy. This process of integration could lead to more flexibility or less flexibility for the learner as well for the teacher and most of these decisions would be influenced by the context, the needs of the learner, the goals of the institution and the larger standards set up by the policies at the macro level. 


TPACK is a simple model and in its simplicity lies its added value. One can really see that if the basic three components or their three inter-relations are not taken care of TPACK is not achieved. Moreover you can see each of these components or their relations separately and really pin point where is the gap in teacher's knowledge. Is it CK, PK or TK or PCK, TPK or TCK. therefore it can be used as a diagnostic as well as design tool. 
Another value add about this model is that one can begin from any circle and gradually move to complete it. It can start by TK or the technological push or PK where the need is to have a pedagogy which affords flexibility and therefore the other two components have to integrate to create a whole. This is the case in reality too. 
And TPACK has an essential component of the context within which these components interact. This framework therefore provides a simple way of looking at the essential components needed to integrate technology successfully.

My Understanding of TPACK

When I first heard about this model for technology integration into teaching learning, TPACK, I thought it to be simplistic and almost stating the obvious, but as in the last class when we learnt about TPACK in detail and even did a small exercise of developing a quick lesson plan, I understood the complexity in this simple straightforward model. So in this blog I describe the model as I have understood i.e in my own words.

TPACK model talks about the core knowledge areas and their interrelationships which need to be taken into consideration while integrating technology into the curriculum or the teaching learning in the classrooms. The TPACK model is represented by a Venn diagram with three overlapping circles. The three main circles form the basis of the TPACK model, CK (Content knowledge), the PK (the Pedagogical Knowledge) and the TK (Technological Knowledge).  

 By CK (Content Knowledge) we mean the knowledge of the subject matter or the content of a particular subject domain. It includes concepts, theories knowledge of procedures, evidences for proofs etc. For example, history, natural sciences or language. Each of these disciplines differs in their nature and has their own epistemology or ways of knowing. For example, the nature of science as a discipline will influence what is worth knowing in science and therefore how to teach science. Science essentially is to know phenomena through systematic inquiry. Therefore scientific inquiry or experiments is central to how knowledge is formed in science and that is the most essential thing children need to cultivate. A scientific bent of mind!

PK (Pedagogical Knowledge) means the knowledge of how to teach. It means the understanding of human learning processes, various stages of cognitive development, various techniques and strategies to be adopted for teaching various levels. How to teach would therefore also affect the class structure, teacher and student role etc. What I have experienced, knowledge about different pedagogies not sufficient, how they get enacted with different students in different contexts is essential for a teachers understanding. Therefore I feel understanding and not only knowledge of pedagogy is what makes PK in teachers. This essential comes through trial and errors and years of experience.

TK (Technological Knowledge) is the knowledge about technological devices, how they function and their implications in our everyday lives, how they help and hinder some of our work and relationships. It is not only about how a mobile or camera works, but about how that technology is used to make tasks simpler or what implications therefore does it have on other aspects. This has implications on my daily working and flexibility it provides. The model also depicts the interrelations among each of these parts, which are equally essential as knowing these individual parts.

PCK (Pedagogical Content Knowledge) essentially is the core of teaching. What is to be taught and how is it to be taught. This though seems simplistic is the most nuanced skill of the teacher. Some of the essential questions which teachers struggle with are- which pedagogy is best suited for which kind of subject or concepts., how to structure the learning process for the learners so that they achieve the required knowledge and skills and so on.

The TCK (Technological Content Knowledge) is the interaction between technology and content. This knowledge means an understanding of what content is best taught with what kind of technology. It also means how technology has influenced that discipline. It also means knowledge of how technology can constrain teaching some content and vice versa. Not all technologies are useful in teaching all kinds of content. This nuances interrelation requires teacher to have both thorough technological and content knowledge.

TPK (Technological Pedagogical Knowledge) is knowledge of how technology can be used in teaching. In what ways using technology affects pedagogy or the way of teaching learning. Does it have implications on teacher role, communications, class management etc. similarly how pedagogies can become different when used with technology. For example, in a science classroom, bring in one computer would change the way teacher teachers respiratory system. She used charts and models of the respiratory system supported by her explanation. Now she can just use a CD or an online stimulation/movie which explains its functioning with demonstrations too.

And now the TPACK, which is the convergence of all the three circles. TPACK is achieved when the teacher is able to integrate the three in seamless ways with each other. Its achieved when the choice of content, the choice of pedagogy and the choice of technology synchronize to let learning happen.  TPACK model has one most essential component. The Blue line which talks about the context. Context is very important as it defines what and how each of these elements would be played out.

Thus the TPACK is a simple model which points out to the essential basis or knowledge foundation to integrate technology into classrooms.  It talks about the three components and how they play out with each other. One can really place the teacher and say she knows TCK and PCK but not TPK. And then one can really focus on supporting teachers in parts where they are weak.

However its interesting that this model talks about knowledge and not competencies – a mix of knowledge, skills and attitude. It does talks about application of content, pedagogical and technical knowledge in practice, but the model does not represent it. And there is no mention of teacher beliefs about technology, about education, although it is seen that these are essential barriers to integration of technology. Is it that through addressing the knowledge gaps , the model seeks to address skill and attitude gaps? If yes, how ? 

Reflections!!

                        Well, when I first joined this course, I thought well now we will be starting to learn about this fantastic model of TPACK right away! In the first lecture, I slowly realized that we are first going to inspect and understand each element of the title of this course ' Pedagogies for flexible learning supported by technology'. The title did seem to intrigue me at first. I knew something about pedagogy and technology, but I was wondering about what is flexible learning! As I started reading articles about flexibility, pedagogy and technology and writing it on my blog, slowly they started to make sense, just like a jigsaw puzzle. The initial anxiety and excitement of starting a blog and feeling a little lost seems to now slowly give way to understanding about this course. 

                         

                        Few things that struck me like an aha! moment are: flexibility is not just about distance learning..anything which gives the decisions regarding learning in the hands of the learner is flexible learning. for eg: the students can choose how they would want to express what they have learnt or what should be the criteria of assessment or what to learn when and how. And as you unfold this further, the implications for learner, teacher and the course organizer can be better understood.

                         

                        The second one was the difference between the pedagogical approach and delivery method. I had read about blended learning and posted an article on blogging as a form of blended approach. Blended approach is a instruction delivery method where there is a blend of a web based and face to face interaction. Its not like problem based or inquiry based method of learning. A significant difference!  In the technology class, i realized how narrowly i was perceiving technology as digibord, computers and iphones. But during the exercise i saw that cameras, GPS, on-line games etc. are all technologies that can be creatively integrated in making learning fun and meaningful!

                         

                        So here we have pedagogies that can make learning flexible and fun if used with appropriate technology. Sound simple, but i guess its not as simple to practice..like most simple things in life:) I keep wondering though how would they actually translate into practice, in a real life situation. There can be so many permutations and combinations of these three and other factors like context, teacher capacities, school polices, resource availability would be influential too! Hope to learn about these in coming days!

                         

ACOT2 and Challenge Based Learning - its worth a look!

In my last blog i wrote about the five pedagogical approaches. In this blog I mention a new approach called 'Challenge based Learning'. Its an approach to learning developed by Apple Classrooms of Tomorrow and Today (ACOT2). According to ACOT2, 

"Challenge Based Learning is an engaging multidisciplinary approach to teaching and learning that encourages students to leverage the technology they use in their daily lives to solve real-world problems. Challenge Based Learning is collaborative and hands-on, asking students to work with other students, their teachers, and experts in their communities and around the world to develop deeper knowledge of the subjects students are studying, accept and solve challenges, take action, share their experience, and enter into a global discussion about important issues". 

Here is the link to the site: http://ali.apple.com/cbl/components.html

Why I am posting this on the blog. Two reasons. One, the approach is relevant with project based learning approach and use of technology to address real life problems and initiate young minds to start critically thinking about them. And second, may be obvious to most, yet intriguing for me is the fact that increasingly, players who create technological advances like Apple and even Oracle invest in education as a medium where technology and pedagogy can merge and make education relevant to the advances of the technological age. for eg: ACOT2 by Apple and ThinkQuest by Oracle (www.thinkquest.org)

I guess it also shows how technological push can also create new approaches to teaching - 'challenge based learning'. 

Interesting and Intriguing nevertheless!

The High Five!!

There are many pedagogical approaches which instructors worldwide use. Each of these approaches influence the instruction strategy, the role of the learner and the teacher and the role of the overall learning environment where learning takes place. Increasingly the role of the technology and web based tools to help learners and teachers offer flexibility and learning environments is significant. In this assignment, I have described (in short) five pedagogical approaches with an indication as to how they can be used in an environment like blackboard.

Well, when we talk of pedagogical approaches to instruction, there are five basic ones which mostly instructors use to design their instructions.

Traditional approach:

A popular approach, widely used even today in most of the educational settings, the main characteristic of this approach is that it is teacher centered. There is direct, face to face interaction between the teacher and the student.  The role of the teacher is to impart knowledge students are seen as passive recipients of knowledge. The teacher takes all decisions regarding instruction, assessment, and resources to be used.  

The blackboard environment can reinforce what teachers have presented in classrooms and provide structured practices for students to learn and apply the knowledge learnt in classrooms. Teachers can use blackboard to give such individual assignments and exercises, can use blackboard for online grading. The role of the student, though limited can be for asking questions or clarifying concepts and knowledge learnt.

Workplace Learning:

As more and more people become part of the ever changing work world, they also become life long learners. Workplace learning offers professionals opportunity to learn while they earn. In broad term workplace learning is the learning of specific competencies while working or on-the-job. There are usually coaches at the workplace as well as the institute/college where the learner is enrolled.

Major benefits of workplace learning, especially in the professional courses stem from experiential learning. This bridges the gap between theory and practice. There is application of the knowledge learnt, reflection after practice and therefore essential knowledge, skills and attitudes are internalized.

An environment like Blackboard (BB) can be used to create professional learning communities, which can interact, share and learn from each other as well as experts.

Collaborative learning:

Collaborative learning is a situation, where more than two people learn something together. The essential component here is that there should be people to collaborate on a common goal or objective. The main characteristic is that the knowledge and responsibility is shared amongst the members. Members create meaning out of their interactions and understanding amongst themselves. Such groups can be externally supported by a facilitator or a teacher who usually have the role of presenting the group with the objective or the task and guiding the group where necessary.

With Blackboard kind of an environment, collaboration can happen in the virtual world. It is not necessary for the learners to meet face to face. Even the teacher/ facilitator can meet the group through this virtual world.

Inquiry Learning:

Inquiry based learning means that students start with something to inquire about. This is open learning where the results of the inquiry are not known. The students, individually or through collaboration seek to inquire about a phenomenon systematically through a step by step process. Usually there is a teacher who helps guide the students through the various stages of inquiry learning and helps them draw conclusions from their findings. Inquiry learning is extensively used for science education, though there are other subject areas where it can be used

Blackboard like environment can be used effectively for helping students seek information or data, process that data and draw conclusions, find evidences, share results, seek expert advice and present findings, all online without the need for direct interaction.

Problem based approach:

Problem-based learning (PBL) is a student-centered instructional strategy in which students collaboratively solve problems and reflect on their experiences. (Wikipedia, 2010). There is a problem which is a real life problem and the students are asked to work in teams to solve that problem. Through this process, students not only learn the content knowledge, but also its application, essential skills and attitude in problem solving and  learn to work in groups. It based on the constructivist theory where students create meaning out of their experiences and interactions with each other.

Blackboard environment can help students with essential problem solving mind tools, tools for communication and collaboration and tools to find resources to solve the problem at hand.

These pedagogical approaches have great influence on the kind of content that can be taught, the kind of learning goals that can be achieved, the kind of technology that can be used and the kind of assessment that can be used to measure learning. Each approach has an important influence on the role of teachers, students and the learning environment. When we add technology here, the content (what is to be taught) and pedagogy (how is it to be taught) also change. Ultimately the teachers have to strike a balance between these three to see that learning objectives are achieved. This is a difficult proposition and teachers need active support in doing so!!

References:

Reeves, T. C. (1994). Evaluating What Really Matters In Computer-Based Education. In: M. Wild & D. Kirkpatrick (Eds.), Computer Education: New perspectives, pp. 219-246.