John B. Keller, jbkeller@indiana Lee H. Ehman, ehman@indiana

1. Professional development that increases technology integration by K-12 teachers:The influence of the TICKIT Program. John B. Keller, jbkeller@indiana.edu Lee H. Ehman, ehman@indiana.edu Curtis J. Bonk, cjbonk@indiana.edu Indiana University April 21, 2003 AERA Chicago

2. TICKIT Teacher Institute for Curriculum Knowledge about Integration of Technology http://www.iub.edu/~tickit

3. Overview of TICKIT • In-service teacher education program • Rural schools in central & southern Indiana • Supported by participating school systems, Arthur Vining Davis Foundations and Indiana University • Cohorts of 4-6 teachers from 4-6 school corporations

4. TICKIT Goals • Knowledge, skill, & confidence • Thoughtful integration of technology • Leadership cadres in schools • Link schools and university • Help schools capitalize on their technology investments

5. Program Structure • Teachers attend three workshops at I.U. for a total of 4 days • Curriculum-based, technology supported classroom unit or lesson each semester • In-school workshops to support teachers in their unit or lesson design • Final products are two action research reports • Reports to colleagues and school “giveback”

6. Program Structure • Various online activities using a course management tool (COW, Virtual University, Blackboard, Web CT, Oncourse) • Article critiques • Chats with technology experts (Bernie Dodge, Annette Lamb) • Free Tool Reviews

7. TICKIT Project Gallery

8. Example Projects

9. TICKIT Teachers

10. Research Question Do teachers who have been through the TICKIT program differ from teachers who have not on dimensions of computer integration?

11. Structure of Paper • How the TICKIT program compares with the literature on effective professional development. • Results of the study. • Discussion of the relative impact of the TICKIT program. • Limitations, Future Directions, Conclusion

12. New Vision: Darling-Hammond (‘97) Palincsar (1999) Technical vs. Intellectual View of teaching Richardson & Placier (‘01) Normative-Reeducative Characteristics of: Little (1993) Loucks-Horsely et al. (1998) Hawley and Valli (1999) Professional Development Literature

13. Effective Professional Development Structure Core Garet, Porter, Desimone, Birman, and Suk-Yoon, 2001

14. Effective Professional Development Structure    Core   ?? Garet, Porter, Desimone, Birman, & Suk-Yoon, 2001

15. Methodology 1/3 Study Design • TICKIT Completers • Teachers from the first four years of TICKIT • The survey is a post measurement • Dropouts. . . • TICKIT Applicants • Teachers who applied for the fifth year of TICKIT • The survey is a pre measurement

16. Methodology 2/3 Participants • Schools • Rural • Central and southern Indiana • Better than average technology infrastructure • Teachers • Cohorts of 4-6 teachers from each school • Average teaching experience 11.5 years

17. Methodology 3/3 Instrumentation Two Part Survey • Demographics and TICKIT-Related Questions • Levels of Technology Implementation Survey (LOTI) Moersch (1994, 1995, 2001).

18. Results 1/3 Survey Returns= 79 %

19. Results 2/3

20. Results 3/3 **p< .01 ; ***p< .001All effect sizes favor TICKIT group Lower scores on factors two and three indicate more positive responses  The ‘n’ for each comparison varies due to incomplete data. We used list-wise deletion of missing data (Completers n=66-77; Applicants n=18-20)

21. Relative Impact 1/2

22. Multiple Sources Relative Impact 2/2 From which individuals do you seek primary guidance, information, and/or direction relating to the integration of technology into your curriculum?

23. Internal Motivation Influences • I want to be able to help provide the most challenging, interesting lessons for students. As a result of this I need to keep current. • I’m not required to use the technology but do so to learn for myself and help the students. • Even before the TICKIT experience, I was looking for ways to integrate technology into my classroom. I am enthusiastic and committed to this.

24. TICKIT Teacher Voices • “This class was very helpful. I gained a lot of confidence as a technology user from this class.” • “The door is now open. I will continue to try to find technological ways to teach them.” • “This was the best program I have ever been involved with as a teacher.”

25. Limitations • Non-random sample • Participants not representative • Above average infrastructure • Above average interest in technology • Self-reported data • No correlation to corroborate the constructs identified by factor analysis • Ex post facto analysis limits ability to infer change due to the TICKIT program

26. Impact • Researchers and Teacher Educators • K-12 Teaching and Administrators • Government Officials and Politicians

27. Future Directions Additional Research • Growth of current cohort over the course of this year • Correlation of other data sources with current findings (i.e. observation, document analysis) • Impact of technology integration on student learning

28. Discussion/Questions

29. References 1/2 Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). The right to learn. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945. Hawley, W. D., & Valli, L. (1999). The essentials of effective professional development. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 127-150). San Francisco: Jossey Bass Publishers. Little, J. W. (1993). Teachers' professional development in a climate of educational reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15(2), 129-151. Loucks-Horsely, S., Hewson, P. W., Love, N., & Stiles, K. E. (1998). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press.

30. References 2/2 Moersch, C. (1994). Levels of Technology Implementation. Retrieved February 13, 2002, from http://www.learning-quest.com/LoTi/lotihome.html Moersch, C. (1995). Levels of technology Implementation (LoTi): A framework for measuring classroom technology use. Learning and Leading with Technology, 40-42. Moersch, C. (2001). Next steps: using LoTi as a research tool. Learning and Leading with Technology, 29(3), 22-27. Palincsar, A. (1999). Response: A community of practice. Teacher Education and Special Education, 22(4), 272-274. Richardson, V., & Placier, P. (2001). Teacher change. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 905-950). Washington D. C.: American Educational Research Association.