What is Integral to Integration? Exploring Student Teachers’ Experiences and Understandings of ICT Integration Kathleen T. Nolan University of Regina Regina, Saskatchewan Canada S4S 0A2
[email protected]
Abstract: It is believed that school classroom practice is unlikely to be significantly influenced by the possibilities of technology enhanced teaching and learning unless there is effective instruction and modeling of technology integration during the teacher education experience. The goal of this paper is to report the initial findings of a two-year action research process (2002-2004) in a Faculty of Education at a Canadian University. The research initiative, aimed at integrating Information and Communications Technologies (ICT) into the teacher education curriculum, is referred to as the iTeacher Ed project and involves faculty members, elementary school student teachers, and several teachers and school system personnel. This paper highlights in particular the experiences and understandings of elementary school student teachers as they learn about and reflect on the integration of technology into their classrooms.
Over the years, the Faculty of Education at the University of Regina has taken significant steps toward effective integration of technology into its teacher education program. The faculty firmly believes that school classroom practice is unlikely to be significantly influenced by the possibilities of technology enhanced teaching and learning unless there is effective instruction and modeling of technology integration during the teacher education experience (Couros 2002; Maeers, Browne & Cooper 1999). Studies have shown that, while the number of computers in classrooms has increased dramatically over the past few years (Ertmer et al. 1999), many barriers to effective integration still exist in teaching practice. These barriers include teacher anxiety, lack of knowledge and skills, and pedagogical belief systems (Saye 1998). The goal of this paper is to report on the initial findings of a two-year action research project (2002-2004) in the Faculty of Education, University of Regina, aimed at developing a model for the integration of Information and Communications Technologies (ICT) into teaching and learning for faculties of education. The research initiative, referred to as the i-Teacher Ed project, is sponsored by Industry Canada-School Net and involves faculty members, elementary school student teachers, and several teachers and school system personnel. Through the i-Teacher Ed project, the research team is attempting to understand more about how to effectively (and affectively) address the barriers and challenges to effective integration of ICT into school classrooms. In other words, the research team wants to determine what is integral to integration. A goal of this paper is to present the experiences and understandings of elementary school student teachers as they learn about and reflect on the integration of technology into their courses and school classrooms. In their role as participants in this action research project, these student teachers completed several technology modules, questionnaires, and teaching practicum reflections during their third (pre-internship) and fourth (internship) years in the teacher education program at the University of Regina. This paper presents significant findings that have emerged from these student teacher questionnaires and reflections.
Integrating ICT into Pre-Internship As part of the i-Teacher Ed research project, several technology modules were delivered to more than one hundred student teachers in their pre-internship year (third year of a four-year undergraduate teacher education program). The content of the technology modules includes basic technology skills such as web browsing and use of e-mail programs as well as instruction in higher level technology-based activities such as the critical assessment of online materials, using online resources to support instruction, and creating online resources such as electronic portfolios,
webpages and WebQuests (web-based inquiry-oriented activities). These modules are fully developed and available online at the i-Teacher Ed project website: http://education.uregina.ca/iteachered. In the first year of the project, all students, regardless of technology background or expertise, were required to participate in face-to-face instructional sessions for each of these technology modules. Feedback on this approach informed the i-Teacher Ed team that students preferred to have a choice regarding how they learned the content of the modules. In other words, they wanted to assess, module by module whether they required face-to-face instruction in the content of the module. Therefore, in the second year of the research project, students were provided with the opportunity to indicate how they wished to experience the technology modules in order to learn the content; they could choose to complete the modules individually online and at their own pace (“online” option), participate in scheduled technology labs where they would receive instruction in a face-to-face manner with an instructor (“face-to-face” option), or pre-interns could indicate that they already felt comfortable with all of the module content and, therefore, did not need to complete the modules at all (“not at all” option). For the most part, pre-interns were very supportive of being provided choice in the matter of technology module delivery. Even with the choice available, a large percentage of pre-interns (36% of those responding) still chose the option of face-to-face instruction for each of the modules. These students reported that without face-to-face instruction they would clearly have been lost and frustrated with the content. They indicated that the ability to ask questions, receive handouts, and elicit guidance through the module content was very beneficial. Others reported that they enjoyed the option of attending instructor-lead sessions on a few of the modules while opting to cover the rest of the modules online because they felt quite comfortable with the content. There were a few responses indicating that there just was not enough time in the day to attend optional modules but that if the modules were required then more of an effort would have been made to attend sessions and/or complete the modules online. This was an important learning experience for the i-Teacher Ed research team for two reasons. Firstly, it provided support for the notion that a goal or end product is key in motivating the pre-interns (in an already overly busy semester) to learn about and experience the integration of ICT into their teaching. Secondly, and even more importantly, the learning relates to the main question being asked in this paper, that is, what is integral to integration? It became obvious that pre-interns viewed the learning of technology skills and the integration of ICT into their planning, instruction, and student learning as “add-on” aspects of teaching and learning. In the pre-internship year, learning the skills and techniques involved in lesson planning, classroom management, and first-time teaching in the classroom (for extended periods of time) appeared to be the issues first and foremost on the minds of pre-interns. They indicated that there were too many things to think about and too little time to think beyond survival of the basics, with most pre-interns indicating that they did not see the integration of ICT as a critical aspect of these basics. One pre-intern commented, “… there’s just not enough time to do something of that magnitude in the semester, in addition to all of the other expectations.” The practical implications of using ICT, and the anticipated anxieties associated with integrating it into the classroom, were obvious barriers for many students in their preinternship classroom. After the completion of the technology modules during the Fall and Winter semesters, questionnaires were distributed to determine the influence of the technology modules on students’ evolving ideas of integrating ICT into their teaching. As pre-interns during these two semesters, the students had several opportunities to teach in elementary classrooms while they were simultaneously engaged in the modules and other courses at the university. The questionnaires asked the student teachers to comment on the use and value of the technology modules in terms of their perception and understanding of the integration of technology into their pre-internship classroom and into classrooms in general. The i-Teacher Ed research team was interested in knowing how or if these students integrated technology into their pre-internship classroom and how the modules might be improved upon in order to have a greater impact on teaching practice. One significant finding emerging from the questionnaire responses indicated that the module approach to learning ICT skills and pedagogy seemed isolated and that a course on technology integration (called ECMP355; already in existence but only taken a by a small portion of students) should be made mandatory for all students in the elementary program. It is interesting to note that although students felt the module approach was “isolated”, or not integrative enough, they suggested making a course on technology integration mandatory rather than making reference to the issue that very few curriculum courses within the teacher education program were effectively modelling technology integration. Ultimately, the i-Teacher Ed team believes that effective modelling of ICT should be in place throughout all curriculum classes, to such an extent that a separate course devoted to technology skill development and pedagogy would be unnecessary, and even pedagogically unsound. As an emerging theme and significant finding of the i-Teacher Ed research project, this issue of what ICT integration looks like in a teacher education program weaves into the much larger issue of the perpetuation of
(mis)understandings of the meaning of integration. More discussion of this learning will occur in the next section of this paper, when reporting on the internship experience of ICT integration.
Integrating ICT into Internship During the internship semester, all elementary interns returned to the university for a full day of reflection and discussion on the internship experience thus far. The i-TeacherEd team used this time as an opportunity to ask interns to reflect on their experiences thus far with the integration of ICT into their internship and to understand what types of experiences student teachers require in their pre-internship year, and in the teacher education program in general, in order to integrate ICT into their internship classroom. Intern responses on questionnaires provided a rich source of data as they painted realistic pictures of schools, students, computer environments, and pedagogical experiences and beliefs related to the integration of ICT. Their responses can, by no means, be synthesized to yield one picture of ICT in the schools but they do direct one’s attention to two significant learning issues worth discussing here. Diversity of school environments related to students, computers and expectations In an expression, one could say the internship experiences of school environments were “all over the map”. In terms of ICT equipment, some interns reported fully equipped classrooms and computer labs, while others indicated there were not enough computers available and those that were available could not be counted on (computers freezing up, computers down). In addition, some interns reported the availability of smart boards, data projectors, new computers, digital cameras and a high level of support by staff and technology personnel, while others reported old computers that were constantly not working, with missing chords, slow connections, and impatient students awaiting the elimination of “those little glitches”. It was clear that this latter situation created a fair amount of anxiety as one intern stated that they were surprised by “how easily technology can fail you and there is nothing else to turn to when your assignment is on the computer.” In terms of the school environment for ICT integration potential, some interns reported being comfortable with a mini-lab configuration in the classroom, while others indicated through their responses that they could not integrate technology effectively because there was not one computer per student in the lab. For example, one intern responded: “There are not enough computers to have all the students working at the same time.” In terms of expectations and support, most interns described their cooperating teachers as supportive and encouraging, but added that many of the cooperating teachers did not use or integrate technology themselves so they were not very helpful in this respect for intern growth and development. When students were asked about what surprised them so far about the use of technology and their internship, a common theme emerging from the questionnaires related to the diversity of students’ technology skills. Some interns indicated surprise at the advanced technological skills of their students, with one intern responding: “The kids are so smart, wanting to do more with technology than I know what to do”. On the other hand, several interns also reported that they spent too much time doing basic keyboarding skills and teaching students “the basic things like how to move around on the Internet.” Diversity of student pedagogical experiences and beliefs related to technology Another aspect of crucial importance to the i-TeacherEd team relates to how prepared the interns felt in terms of integrating ICT into their internship classroom. The focus of the i-Teacher Ed research team during the preinternship year was on the delivery of ICT modules to provide experiences common to all pre-interns. Many of the students, however, gained extensive ICT experiences through a course on computers in the classroom (ECMP 355), leading to a wide range of skills and knowledge across the pre-intern, and hence the intern, population. It was evident that many students learned from taking both the modules and ECMP 355 together, finding that the two experiences reinforced one another. Other students experiencing only the modules indicated that perhaps it was not enough: “I felt that what we did in those modules was helpful at the time, but most was forgotten; it didn’t teach me enough that I feel comfortable teaching it.” According to the questionnaires in general, however, very few interns reported that they did not yet feel comfortable enough with their skills and ability to integrate technology into their teaching. One question on the intern questionnaire asked the students to indicate their level of agreement or
disagreement with the statement: “I still do not feel comfortable enough with technology myself to integrate it into my teaching”. Only approximately 20 % of interns agreed with this statement. It seems that, according to the interns, the limiting factor was not so much their skills and knowledge in ICT, but the school and classroom environments. Approximately 42% of pre-interns responding agreed with the statement: “The conditions of my school and/or classroom are not conducive to integrating technology in a meaningful way.” The question of what interns believe it means to integrate in a “meaningful way” still remains, however. Based on the open response questions on the questionnaire, the i-TeacherEd team is inclined to believe that meaningful integration (according to the interns) is dependent on numbers and quality of computers available as well as the amount of time a teacher has to plan and implement technology focused lessons. Two questionnaire responses supporting this belief were: “We have only four computers in the classroom and no lab in the school, so it’s challenging to get them all on the computers.” “I am surprised that time limitations made it such that I can’t use it as much as I wanted.” As a research team, we believe that these comments speak directly to issues of pedagogical beliefs about ICT integration. Many interns still view technology as an add-on tool that can only be integrated into teaching once they feel comfortable with all the other basic teaching skills and concerns. Pre-service teachers stress the importance of teaching “the basics” first before tackling a technology integrated and interactive approach to teaching and learning. This means prioritizing their time in such a way that they aim to understand and practice the basics first and then experiment with pedagogy that incorporates technology. What they have not yet integrated into their thinking is the importance of critical reflection on teacher-directed approaches as only one of many possible instructional strategies. Often, pre-service teachers convey the belief that alternative instructional approaches are “add-ons” to incorporate once the more traditional approaches have been used to “cover” the content. It was also clear that many interns learned about ICT integration through (the wrong kind of?) modeling. In other words, their experiences of using technology in teacher education courses primarily revolved around full class trips to the computer lab and so it follows that they view computer labs as a necessity. Requiring all students to be on the computer at the same time seems to parallel traditional beliefs about teaching all students the same concepts at the same time and expecting the same end product. As a research team, we understand that more modeling of the minilab environment by faculty at the university is a necessary step in expanding student views on effective integration of ICT into teaching and learning.
Significant Learnings and Recommendations In summary, this paper has presented and discussed a few key aspects of the initial findings of the i-Teacher Ed twoyear action research project, highlighting in particular several aspects of the student teachers’ experiences of integrating Information and Communication Technologies from their pre-internship year through to the end of their internship. Based on the data gathered through the research process and presented briefly in this paper, two key recommendations have been made in order to more fully understand what is integral to integration. The first and primary recommendation made by i-Teacher Ed research team and reported in A Shifting Landscape: Integrating Information and Communication Technologies into a Faculty of Education (Friesen, Maeers, Nolan & Couros 2004) relates to the recurring issue of the meanings and interpretations of “meaningful integration” of ICT into planning, teaching, and learning. Reflection on the meaning of ICT integration needs to be part of the development of a model for integration of ICT in teacher education. What it means to integrate ICTs appears to be individually interpreted depending on previous experience… We recommend that students in faculties of education be exposed to a host of examples of ICT integration in school classrooms, and provided time to discuss the reasons for ICT integration in planning, teaching, student learning and professional learning. (p. 61) Emerging out of this recommendation is the principle that “a broad range of technical and pedagogical experiences and support for students and faculty must be provided to meet the wide diversity of knowledge, skills, and beliefs related to ICT” (Friesen et al. 2004, p. 71). This implies that the degree to which meaningful ICT integration occurs relies on a reflexive and dialogical approach to examining one’s pedagogical beliefs and understandings.
This first recommendation focuses to some extent on the theory of integration and how a teachers’ understanding of what it means to integrate will have a significant impact on their practice. A second key recommendation relating to the issues discussed in this paper is concerned with what is integral to, or at the centre of, teacher education. Through this research it became clear that the modeling of ICT integration by faculty and instructors in a teacher education program is unlikely to be effectively realized through an individualized approach. In fact, even though individual faculty members and instructors achieve varying degrees of success with their own personally-driven desires to integrate ICT into their curriculum classes (approaches varying from the use of presentation software to course webpages to discussion boards), what seems to be integral to integration is a community of practice. The move to new ways of teaching with ICT at the university level involves a high degree of change involving paradigm shifts in beliefs and practices related to teaching and learning. Professional development that promotes this change must be based on what we know about how people learn. Learning theory alerts us to the importance of learners constructing knowledge (constructivism) by sharing their experiences and ideas within groups of individuals with common needs and interests (reflective practice within a community of practice). (Friesen et al. 2004, p. 66) Keeping up with the fast pace of ICT changes and advances is a major challenge for many faculty members, especially since it is often not a central focus in their research and teaching. The move to new ways of teaching with ICT at the university level involves a high degree of change and paradigm shifts in beliefs and practices related to teaching and learning. To adopt a reflective approach means to be determined to critically assess and bridge the developing gaps between university, schools, and society when beliefs and practices do not mesh. Faculty and instructors in teacher education programs must be willing to critically assess when and where ICT integration becomes enabling and empowering in student learning, and be willing to work toward effectively modeling such practices. This takes a considerable amount of time and effort but it is important that such an effort be consistent throughout a faculty of education. As it is, pre-service teachers seldom see extensive modeling of ICT integration in school classrooms so a paradigm shift is unlike to occur in education unless teacher educators at the university take a collaborative and united approach to changes in ICT practices. Emerging out of this discussion on what is integral to integration in faculties of education is a second key recommendation. This recommendation can be stated succinctly through the principle that “communities of practice should guide the development of ICT use in faculties of education” (Friesen et al. 2004, p. 70). Community of practice groups (faculty, students, teachers) could provide a networked opportunity to share experiences, to learn from one another and to generate further enthusiasm for the potential that ICT integration offers in enhancing teaching and learning.
References Couros, A. (2002). Preparing teachers for the Information Age: Challenges of faculty and instructors in a preservice teacher education program. Melbourne, AU: Common Ground. Ertmer, R., Addison, P., Lane, M., Ross, E., & Woods, D. (1999). Examining teacher beliefs about the role of technology in the elementary classroom. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32(1), 54-58. Friesen, D., Maeers, M., Nolan, K., & Couros, A. (2004). A Shifting Landscape: Integrating Information and Communication Technologies into a Faculty of Education. The Final Report of the iTeacherEd Project published by the Saskatchewan Instructional Development and Research Unit (SIDRU), University of Regina, Regina, SK, April 2004. Maeers, M., Browne, N., & Cooper, E. (1999). Pedagogically appropriate integration of information technology in an elementary preservice teacher education program. In J. Price, J. Willis, D.A. Willis, M. Jost, and S.B. Mehall (Eds.), Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education Annual Conference, 1157-1162. Saye, J. (1998). Technology in the classroom: The role of dispositions in teacher gatekeeping. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 13(3), 210-234.
