Barriers
and Possible Pathways to Effective Technology Instruction
Pat
Reid writes in “Barriers to Adoption of Instructional Technologies” that we can
minimize barriers to give adoption of technology a better chance in our
schools. Current literature discusses
those barriers of “administration, environment, faculty, technology, and
process” (Reid, page 383) with varied experience and significance, depending on
the school being assessed. With the understanding that all schools have unique
dynamics, funding, and structure, it may be helpful to see one school’s
response to these barriers.
Illinois Central College addresses “barriers” of
technology adoption in the following ways:
1. Administration: From the Academic Quality Improvement
Program: “INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT AND COMMITMENT The
College has provided for the faculty an instructional technology specialist, a
graphic technician, a faculty Teaching and Learning Center, and the Office of
Instructional Innovation and Faculty Development that serves all faculty––both
full-time and adjunct.” This means to
me that I am fully supported as an instructor with technical experts in their
fields who established a department to serve the staff and students at
ICC. ICC is committed to growth in technology
education for their students and staff.
2. Environment:
Each institute has a culture that guides how
technologies are adopted. (Reid, page 394) Some challenges that arise in the
school environment regarding technology education are tensions between
administration and faculty, legal issues, and effectiveness of technology
instruction. Illinois Central College
has established a “Blue Print for the Future” that was written in collaboration
with students, staff, and administrators. This “meeting of the minds” insures
that all stakeholders have a voice in the integration of technology in the
curriculum. Legal issues are also
addressed by the Teaching and Learning Center and Office of Instructional
Innovation. The college itself has
developed an associate degree in Secure Software, where students learn the
legal ramifications of software issues, as well as protecting systems from
hacking and compromised functionality.
3. Faculty:
Instructors
are often enthusiastic to embrace new technology tools. The challenge is 1) choosing the appropriate
type to augment instruction of specific lessons that support student learning, and
2) knowing how to use the new technology with sufficient expertise to teach it
to students. Professional development
for instructors is widely needed. Then the question arises as to funding, and
instructing qualified teachers, with the time and space necessary for providing
this instruction. How do schools pay for professional development of teaching
digital literacy, and provide special personnel who support existing teachers
in their endeavors to use technology in their lessons? According to the Office of Educational
Technology in the Federal Department of Education, Title II-A funds can be used
to hire technology advisors within a school. (ESEA, sec. 2123(a)(5)(A). Blended professional learning can be provided
by Title I-A funds. (ESEA, secs. 1114(a)(1), (b)(1)(D); 1115(a), (c)(1)(F). College to Career educators can use
TitleII-A funds for sharing content aligned with CCR standards. English
language learners can receive enhanced instruction through funds provided by ESEA,
secs. 3115. Technology to Communicate with Parents States may use IDEA Part D
State Professional Development Grants (SPDG) to enhance both special education
and general education teachers’ ability to effectively integrate technology to
communicate with parents of students with disabilities. IDEA, sec.
654(a)(2)(C). Use Technology to Connect Educators with STEM Professionals
States may use Title II-B Math Science Partnership funds to purchase software
and devices that provide digital science instruction.
4. Technology
and Process: Many programs available
to instructors and students were not originally designed for classroom use,
according to Hastings, 2009. The limitations and complexity can cause
confusion. (Reid, page 386) Instructors also struggle to assess which
technologies best fit their students’ learning benchmarks. Some instructors
feel that this process takes an inordinate amount of time and effort, and may question
the value of the technology tool added to their lesson plan.
What ICC has
provided the teachers is technology instruction within the Teaching and
Learning Center, as well as a program called Atomic Learning, available on
Blackboard, to assist the teachers as they integrate technology in their
lessons and classrooms. Each semester the Teaching and Learning Center offers a
series of weekly posts on technology tools to enhance instruction. A new
technology tool is introduced on Tuesday of each week. Technology seminars are
also offered; “14 tools to flip over”, and “Student Assignment Alternatives”
and “Google Apps and Tools” were offered this year so far. Office 365 is available to staff and students
with online guidance. The Faronics Insight Software is available in some
classrooms where the instructor can see the work of the students as they study
on individual computers. The Atomic Learning software is available to students
and staff for Microsoft software tutoring.
Because of the
support ICC gives me, I am able to incorporate technology in my ESL lessons. I had been unable to use digital instruction
when I taught offsite at other locations, simply because I did not have the
support or equipment. I believe this element alone is integral to our self-efficacy
as technology users and teachers.
Sources:
No comments:
Post a Comment