Prior
to entertaining the thought of obtaining a specific graduate degree or
receiving any instruction on integrating educational technology into my
classroom, I was approached to participate in a special program that would
forever alter my approach, perception, and dedication to improving instruction,
as well as ultimately, inspire me to pursue additional research in curriculum
development and assessment through formal study at the University of
Delaware. My involvement with the National Science Foundation grant
program, Project UPDATE (Upgrading the Practices of Design And Technology
Education), as sponsored through The College of New Jersey empowered a
select group of teachers, like myself, to use integrated science, math, and
technology concepts in the delivery of their required curriculum. Through
these Contextual Learning Units (CLUs), students would receive the
necessary tools, materials, and knowledge to tackle real-world dilemmas using
problem solving strategies and critical thinking skills coupled with their
perceptions from past experiences and of their current environment.
My
particular participation in &
TCED 592: Curriculum Construction - Extended
Theory and Practice and &
TCED 691: Evaluation in Technology Education -
Assessing Student Capability furnished my instructional 'bag
of tricks' with an overwhelming supply of teacher-tested techniques and
university-researched strategies, and provided a springboard from which I could
conduct further investigations in a tailored area of focus. Approved as
transfer credits for The Study of Teaching and Models of Instruction
core area classes, these two classes in addition to an earlier UPDATE offering,
TCED 581: Technology Education Workshop, established a foundation for my attempt at overhauling the entire
structure of my visual art and technology education classrooms. Through
observation of technology education classrooms across the United Kingdom and
inquiry into their National Design and Technology Standards program, tutelage
from Cambridge University professors instilled an awareness of the need for
implementing alternative instructional methods into American classrooms to
accommodate our students' various learning styles. Furthermore, existed
the quest in preparing or producing competent individuals for release into our
society who could work cooperatively as well as individually to assess
situations and solve real-world problems.
United
with providing adequate and fair assessment procedures for such program
revisions and implementations was my internal desire for introducing educational
technology into my classrooms. Upon conclusion of the first UPDATE course,
I was fortunate to have enrolled in a seminar presentation of &
EDUC
632: Using the
Internet for Curriculum Applications during a spring in-service day
gathering within the Caesar Rodney School District. Presenter, Pat Sine
immediately drew upon my personal and professional interests in incorporating
'computers' in the delivery of my curriculum. Preparation and
design of mini-Web Quests and implementation of 'safe' surfing strategies for
students became nearly impossible to comprehend in just one day; I desired more
knowledge and extended practice in this new field of study that I recognized as an
avenue to fulfill my instructional interests in meeting my students'
needs. Therefore, I enrolled as a Continuing Education student in the
graduate version of the aforementioned course, and embarked on a two-week
marathon to discover an alternative to the ordinary means by which I serviced my
students interests.
Bound
by commitment to authoring curriculum materials during the fourth and final
summer gathering for Project UPDATE, I placed my formal graduate enrollment in
the back of my mind, but continued to incorporate the issues, concerns, and
techniques introduced by Pat Sine into my curricular interests and the design of
future Project UPDATE CLUs. Though the above courses afforded me
the opportunity to utilize alternative instructional methods through the
effective use of mainly computer hardware, I desired additional tools to
pre-assess or survey my students' instructional needs. Several course
offerings at the University of Delaware as well as an off-campus computer
seminar in computer-based instruction offered such opportunity for exploration
that I did not hesitate to pursue both directions. I simultaneously applied
for admission into the Master of Instruction program in an effort to expand upon
the initial improvements to my instructional repertoire, and I have since, barely
stopped to smell the roses!
Dr.
Kae Everhart Keister taught &
EDUC 680: Educational Diagnosis during the Spring Semester
2000. After reviewing the course description and recognizing the need for
a competent and informed teacher to be well-versed in IEP -- Individualized
Education Plan -- meeting terminology, I chose to
research both formal and informal pre- and post-assessment strategies to
determine possible learning difficulties among middle school students.
Following the design and development of two informal tests, one in reading and
another in math, I immediately began to perceive and evaluate certain students
in my classrooms from quite a different perspective. Adapting my
existing lessons and providing for new methods in achieving the
necessary content objectives for these students concurrently raised overall
student achievement in both the visual art and technology education
environments. The act of conducting two Case Studies through the
administration of formal assessments provided me with yet, increased
supplemental data for techniques to enhance my instructional practices.
Incorporating
these amendments into a recently revised curriculum in both the Visual Art
and Technology Education courses soon became second nature as I strived to gather even
more information in the development of interdisciplinary curriculum without
sacrificing my supporting content areas. Training in Pittsburg, Kansas at
the Synergistic Laboratory and the election to develop computer-based curriculum
further enhanced the way that I could facilitate knowledge, specifically in the
Technology Education Lab at the Dover Air Middle School. Once again,
recognized as transfer credit from Pittsburg State University, the strategies
explored in the computer-based seminar, &
CURIN 840-99: Seminar: Teaching Using
Self-Directed Delivery, addressed a vast array of concerns
including those most recently researched -- accommodating special needs.
Revising the structure of the modular offerings and providing a tailored
sequence of study for each individual student consumed an incredible amount of
preparation effort and time. Nevertheless, once employed by myself, as the
instructor, the Student Information System (or SIS) built within the
networked system scheduled and maintained all student data relevant to eight
modular rotations throughout the semester. Utilizing additional planning and
restructuring, my eighth grade students were able to select desired pathways of
study that proved meaningful to them, and facilitated their individual needs in
knowledge acquisition while meeting District, State, and National Standards in Technology Education.
As a positive outcome, each adolescent traversed one step
closer to evolving as a productive member of our society.
Though
the Winter Session offering of &
EDUC 639: Developing Interactive Educational Materials
also addressed ways in which to incorporate alternative instructional delivery
via multimedia productions using Macromedia Authorware 5 (an authoring
program), an extended illness prohibited me from fully realizing this software's
potential
impact in either the tech-ed lab or visual art classroom. The most effective computer-based instructional
system provides for a variety of subject offerings as well as implements various
methods of knowledge delivery to address individual learning styles. While Pitsco and Synergistic have compiled
nearly seventy modular units in Math, Science, Technology, Family Living
& Consumer Science, Business, Agriculture, and Health issues, a majority of
specialized student interests remains untapped. Therefore, in planning for
curriculum delivery via these pre-packaged modular systems, I chose to
incorporate ten ready-made units and to design additional teacher-created modules
devoted to specific student concerns.
The
stand alone units that survey student knowledge before and after the delivery of
the desired content are housed at the four remaining modular areas.
Relying heavily on existing software applications and/or teacher-created Web
Quests for information retrieval as well as hands-on activities, the presented
material is modified with each rotation to meet the students' needs.
Nevertheless, the interactivity provided at the Synergistic modules is greater
and allows for increased organization through the interactive computer system; the stand
alone units require that students be extremely systematic in the arrangement of
their daily materials for documentation and teacher presentation. Though I have been witness to
teens with impeccable organization skills, the majority require some amount of
guidance in acquiring special skills. Needless to mention, with fourteen
content directions
occurring simultaneously, I have found it difficult in addressing this aspect
within these specialized content areas while providing guidance in computer
skills, troubleshooting system failures, and caring for a host of other middle
school dilemmas. An authoring tool, like Macromedia
Authorware 5, can truly alleviate such concerns -- provide for increased
student interactivity, and organize the student's modular experience through a
flow line model of content delivery and data management. To date, I near completion
for one such module, Amusement Park Physics, and plan to
implement the instructional software component during the Spring Semester of the 2001-2002
academic year.
Without
a doubt, my graduate experiences at The College of New Jersey and Pittsburg
State University leading to formal program enrollment and an intensive focus in
instructional research at The University of Delaware, have yielded the
attainment of my original Statement of Goal One. Additionally, the
reflective process in compiling the Master of Instruction portfolio has created
an expansive realm of instructional quandaries upon which I may amend during my future
endeavors as I continually seek to provide
each student with an opportunity in Visual Art and Technology Education that is
exciting, memorable, and applicable to his or her world, and tailor the
instructional delivery to meet the needs of all students regardless of learning
ability.