Latest Word: On the Leading Edge of Technology Integration in Higher Education
Listen and learn : Panel
Tuesday, June 26, 1:15–2:15 pm
Dr. Jennifer Courduff Dr. Samantha Fecich Dr. Dennis McElroy Dr. Susan Poyo Dr. Brandie Shatto Dr. Mia Kim Williams
Explore innovative practices among higher education faculty focused on integrating technologies and engaging learners through innovative pedagogy to prepare future-ready professionals. Then, engage in small groups to generate ideas and discuss how to impact educational contexts in higher education, all with a goal of improving innovation, technology and teaching in higher ed.
|Attendee devices:||Devices not needed|
|Topic:||Best practices for using the ISTE Standards|
|Grade level:||Community college/university|
|ISTE Standards:||For Educators:
Higher Education Faculty strive to inspire their students to develop creative and critical skills in order to graduate as professionals that are future-ready designers, communicators and thinkers. The intent of this session is to showcase some and generate many implementation ideas from meaningful teaching that impact various educational contexts at the higher education level with the goal of improving innovation, technology, and teaching in higher education.
This panel is organized by the ISTE Teacher Education Network as a focus on ISTE Standards for Educators applied in Higher Education.
This panel presentation will be an interactive experience for participants.
Opening: Brief showcase presentations by the panelists about innovative practices focused on educators and/or programs that integrate technologies and engage learners through innovative pedagogical practices. Each showcase will focus on a unique strategy, program, tool or innovation that is implemented in a higher education context in order to prepare professionals to facilitate and inspire their students to become future-ready learners. Practical application in various educational contexts will be discussed. (25 minutes)
Turn Your Higher Ed Classroom into an Escape Room
Higher Education faculty are notorious for lectures. But no matter how dynamic the lecture might be, a little play theory can go a long way in a higher education classroom! What started as an experiment in one innovative pedagogy class has become a highly requested learning activity among students. Tuning the physical adventure game where players solve a series of puzzles to complete the objectives and ultimately get out of the room into a learning activity embraces play and game theory and transforms a college learning space into a room where learners are engaged and focused on deep thinking and problem solving. Points to be discussed include:
1. Educator as designer. Play theory reshapes learning activities to encouraged learners to apply new knowledge in creative ways within a teacher-crafted, game-based learning space.
2. Using the escape concept as an assessment. Experiential learning and assessment allows students ownership over learned material and allows them to embrace strategies and skills in authentic contexts.
3. Learners as designer. How does the learning process change when students become the designers of the escape?
This section of the presentation will highlight the design process and learner feedback from engaging in escape activities for learning and assessment.
Creating Personalized Learning Paths with Technology
The ‘one size fits all’ industrial assembly line philosophy has too long guided curricular development and instruction in K12 classrooms, forcing students to learn the same thing at the same time regardless of their academic needs and interests. While personalized learning has been espoused as the solution to providing students with targeted learning experiences, there is not a clear framework for classroom implementation (Basham, Hall, Carter, Jr, & Stahl, 2016).
The Creating Personalized Learning Paths with Technology project was a collaborative initiative between faculty in the Master of Educational Technology and the Master of Science in Learning Design and Technology programs and educators from a high school in Maryland. The personalized learning project sought to develop a framework for designing personalized, autonomous, inquiry-driven learning experiences for K12 students. Outcomes of the project included:
1. Developing a framework for designing and implementing personalized learning projects.
2. Identifying changes in teacher role during personalized learning implementation.
3. Documenting students’ perceptions of their abilities and skills to support their own learning goals.
4. Integrating the framework into pre-service and in-service teacher education.
This section of the presentation will provide an overview of the project, the results, and the implications for higher education faculty.
Virtual Partnerships: Their Impact on Practice and Pedagogy
Teacher preparation programs include field experiences for their students to put into practice the knowledge, skills, and dispositions they are gaining as professionals. Few would argue the importance of these experiences in the development of effective teachers. Education is after all a practice profession (CAEP, 2010).
This section of the presentation highlights the affordances of opportunities for pre-service educators to collaborate with experts in the field, both traditional and online learning environments, as they design and develop digital age learning experiences. Pre-service teachers must practice careful selection of technology appropriate for the learning task by creating new, useful and imaginative solutions to authentic problems in lesson design. Affordances of virtual partnerships include:
1. Designing opportunities for authentic practice with students and teachers validates the pre-service teacher’s coursework and models effective pedagogical approaches for capitalizing on learner-centered knowledge construction.
2. Collaboration with virtual co-operating teachers empowers pre-service educators in their development of skills to evaluate learners, content, context and technology.
3. This practice provides students with confidence to explore new digital tools in other courses and in field experiences required for additional coursework (Poyo, 2016).
4. Pre-service teachers with high levels of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK, Koehler & Mishra, 2008) have high positive attitudes toward the educative and purposeful use of technology in the classroom (Sahin, et al., 2013). This gives preservice educators an authentic space to practice their edtech skills.
5. Provides students with the experience of seeing their PLN come to life. Using mediums such as Twitter and Pinterest to connect with practicing educators is crucial. It helps them to see practices come to life and opens up their classroom walls to the world.
Creating space for improved partnerships for general education and special education teacher candidates: How we did it.
This section of the presentation highlights the findings of a case study that focused on the development and implementation of co-teaching within six foundational courses in a teacher credential program in Southern California. General education faculty were paired with special education faculty in course delivery for six newly developed courses. This innovative approach to teacher preparation could serve as a model for other higher ed faculty who are working towards a co-teaching model. Findings to be shared will include:
1. How we did it: The planning process
2. Why we did it: To fulfill new state credentialing requirements, but also to bridge a known gap in communication and collaboration between general education and special education in-service teachers.
3. Barriers to collaboration
4. Bridges to collaboration
5. The use of innovative technology as a tool for planning, collaboration, and ultimately, successful preparation of our teacher candidates.
Using SAMR as a guide to using Augmented Reality in pre-service teacher education and the K-12 classroom.
Effective teaching demands the use of authentic and engaging experiences to capture the attention of and impact the learning by students at all levels. The SAMR model expresses the need to “redefine” learning by providing technology-enhanced experiences that were not previously feasible.
This section focuses on the use of Augmented Reality in the preparation of pre-service teachers and their application of AR in the K-12 classroom. The use of Augmented Reality created previously unavailable or unattainable experiential opportunities that enhanced and deepened student learning. These integration practices provided valuable information that will be shared including:
1. What Augmented Reality tools are available and applicable to the K-Higher Education classroom.
2. Examples of classroom activities that engage students through the use of Augmented Reality.
3. The impact of Augmented Reality infused experiences on the learning process.
Participant Engagement: Panelists will facilitate small group exploration of tools/ideas presented. Then, they will engage participants in discussions intended to generate implementation ideas for preparing teachers to impact various educational contexts. The intent of this interaction is to provide full audience participation and capture the wealth of expertise around ideas of improving innovation, technology, and teaching in higher education. (30 minutes)
Whole Group Summary: Facilitator will provide time at the end of the session for participants to have opportunities to share outcomes of small group discussions regarding teacher education, student learning, creativity and collaboration, innovative pedagogy, and/or any other noteworthy outcomes. (5 minutes)
Take away: The participant generated ideas will be compiled and combined with those of the presenters and made available in a digital resource during the conference.
Brown, P. (2016, July 10). A Guide for Bringing the SAMR Model to iPads - EdSurge News. Retrieved September 29, 2017, from https://www.edsurge.com/news/2015-02-06-a-guide-for-bringing-the-samr-model-to-ipads
Chookaew, Sasithorn & Sootkaneung, Warin & Howimanporn, Suppachai & Wongwatkit, Charoenchai. (2017). Motivating Pre-Service Teachers with Augmented Reality to Developing Instructional Materials through Project-Based Learning Approach.
Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2008). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK)? In AACTE Committee on Innovation and Technology (Eds.), Handbook of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) for Educators (pp.3-29). New York, NY: Routledge.
Sahin, I., Celik, I., Akturk, A.O., Aydin, M. (2013). Analysis of relationships between technological pedagogical content knowledge and educational internet use. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 29(4), 110-117.
Poyo, S. (2016). Transforming traditional practices of teacher preparation to meet changing needs of digital learners: A first step intervention by assessing and addressing needs of pre-service teachers in a dual learning environment (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Digital Repository@Duquesne University. (Paper 197770)
Courduff, J., & Rockinson-Szapkiw, A., & Wendt (2016). Grounded in what works: Exemplary practice in special education teachers’ technology integration. Journal of Special Education Technology, 1-13, DOI: 10.1177/0162643416633333.
Dickenson, P., Keough, P., & Courduff, J. (2017). Preparing Pre-Service Teachers for the Inclusive Classroom. Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-1753-5
Courduff, J., & Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. (2015). Using a community of practice to support technology integration in speech-language pathologist instruction. Journal of Special Education Technology, 30(1), 89-100.
Basham, J. D., Hall, T. E., Carter, Jr. R. A., and Stahl, W. M. (2016). An operationalized understanding of personalized learning. Journal of Special Education Technology, 31(3): 126-136.
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. (2015). Continued progress: Promising evidence on personalized learning. Retrieved from http://k12education.gatesfoundation.org/resource/continued-progress-promising-evidence-on-personalized-learning
Nicholson, S. (2016). Ask Why: Creating a Better Player Experience Through Environmental Storytelling and Consistency in Escape Room Design. Paper presented at Meaningful Play 2016, Lansing, Michigan.
Gee, J.P. (2007) What Video Games Have to Teach to Teach Us about Learning and Literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillian, New York.
Grant, P., & Basye, D. (2014). Personalized Learning: a Guide for Engaging Students with Technology. Eugene: ISTE.
Martín-Gutiérrez, J., Fabiani, P., Benesova, W., Meneses, M. D., & Mora, C. E. (2015). Augmented reality to promote collaborative and autonomous learning in higher education. Computers in Human Behavior,51, 752-761. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.093
Nicholson, S. (2015). Peeking behind the locked door: A survey of escape room facilities. White Paper available at http://scottnicholson.com/pubs/erfacwhite.pdf
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. (2016). Advancing Educational Technology in Teacher Preparation: Policy Brief. Retrieved from https://tech.ed.gov/files/2016/12/Ed-Tech-in-Teacher-Preparation-Brief.pdf
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. (2017). Reimagining the Role of Technology in Education: 2017 National Education Technology Plan Update. Retrieved from https://tech.ed.gov/files/2017/01/NETP17.pdf
Wolf, M. A. (2010). Innovate to educate: System [re]design for personalized learning—A report from the 2010 symposium. Washington, DC: Software & Information Industry Association. Retrieved from http://www.ccsso.org/Documents/2010%20Symposium%20on%20Personalized%20 Learning.pdf
Dr. Brandie Shatto is a collegiate professor and Program Chair at the University of Maryland University College where she leads the Master of Education in Instructional Technology program, a program designed to prepare educators to become experts in digital-age learning by using technology, mobile devices, and active learning techniques to transform the educational experience. Dr. Shatto has over 10 years of experience in K-12 as a classroom teacher, technology coach, and technology director. She is an active member of the Maryland Society of Educational Technology (MSET) and the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE).