 |
Disclaimer
of Endorsement
Please direct questions and comments to the Webmaster Last Modified May 5, 2002©University of Maryland |
Summary and Suggestions
A. Design Institute Evaluation
B. Participants' Development of Technology Integration Skills and Attitudes
C. Result of Focus Group Discussion
July 2000.
It is clear in focus group discussions that project participants were impressed with, and excited by, the technology presented at the Design Institute. The discussion also suggests some ideas for consideration in modifying future Design Institutes and structuring project teams. The following recommendations are based on major themes resulting from the focus group discussions:
- Clarify the goals and objectives of the Design Institute to participants, and improve communication prior to the event. Although participants were impressed with the technology they learned about during the Institute, many were unclear as to how the presentations could be related to their technology projects. There was also concern about lack of advance information about requirements for participants; i.e., meeting with team members in August to complete projects.
- Review the balance of time devoted to presentations with that allocated for assimilation of material and meeting in groups. As the Institute progressed, more participants spoke to their feelings of being overwhelmed with information, and their frustration with not having time to review what they had learned.
- Structure some activities to allow participants to meet each other. Several participants commented that they felt they could have learned from others attending the Institute as well as from the presentations.
- Create more opportunities for participants to use, and interact with, the technology presented at the Institute.
- Look for presentations that illustrate the power of technology to enhance learning in ways not achievable by non-technical, or less sophisticated, techniques.
- Allow participants to choose presentations of most interest and relevance to them. It is a challenge for the Institute to design presentations interesting to all attendees given the diversity in age, experience, and grade levels of interest. This might also address the feeling of "information overload" expressed by many participants.
- Look for ways to match the interests of students with those of mentors. One idea suggested was to recruit both students preparing to do their in-service placement the following semester and their supervising teacher.
In this group of participants interested both in technology and teaching, it was widely acknowledged that students need to learn to use technology. Students gave resounding support to the importance of technology in making learning interesting, and the growing expectations on the part of students that technology will be an integral part of the classroom. The unresolved question stated by teachers was whether technology adds enough to the learning of content to make the investment in time, training, and equipment worthwhile.
In general, comments by BLT participants conveyed enthusiasm and optimism for teaching and for the role of technology in enhancing learning. Freed from the practical implications of making such a program work, participants offered useful suggestions for improving BLT project activities. The following general recommendations are suggested by the focus groups:
- Structure training opportunities to provide as much hands-on experience as possible, and provide tutorials and documentation whenever possible to allow participants to review what they have learned on their own.
- Broaden examples in workshops and exemplar modules to include other disciplines in addition to the social sciences.
- Provide as much time as possible for teams to meet together during training institutes.
- Form teams with leaders and students sharing similar content and grade-level interests.
- Provide information on how to procure grants for technology funding.
Although focus group discussions suggested that experiences with the BLT project have expanded participants' skills in formulating and designing technology-enhanced learning projects, participants still made the point that teaching subject content is their primary goal. Despite their enthusiasm for using technology in the classroom, these current and future educators are wisely considering how and when technology enhances learning, and which content areas lend themselves to its use.
D. Participants' Responses to Monthly Meetings
Overall, participants found the monthly meetings with the BLT staff very useful. They appreciated the staff's individualized attention and encouragement. During these meetings, they received technical support and exchanged ideas with the staff. The most common beneficial aspect identified was keeping the participants on track because the meeting pushed them to continue to plan and improve their instructional unit. However, some participants responded to the pressure generated by the meeting adversely if they were not ready or had no progress to report. Therefore, BLT staff needs to be more aware of the participants' levels of performance and their individual needs.
The major issue identified was to schedule a time that worked for everyone and the importance of flexibility was recognized. Responses to this issue of time were diverse. Some hoped to meet more frequently even though scheduling was difficult, while some thought it was not necessary to meet often. Participants expressed the need for an agenda for each meeting so they would have specific goals and come prepared. They would like to learn more software and some suggested doing so on-line. They also expressed the need for more hands-on components in the meeting.
|
Disclaimer
of Endorsement
Please direct questions and comments to the Webmaster Last Modified May 5, 2002©University of Maryland |