KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
: SIMPLE COURSE CHANGE
Cover Sheet 10-15-02 (draft)
Course Number/Program Name ITEC 7400 21 st
Century Teaching and Learning
Department Instructional Technology
Degree Title (if applicable) Master’s Degree in Instructional Technology
Proposed Effective Date Spring 2012
Minor Changes:
1.
Minor changes are defined as a change to one of the following a.
_____ change to the title of a course b.
__X___ simple editing changes to a course description c.
_____ course deletion d.
_____ course numbering change e.
_____ degree program name change
2.
f.
_____ credit hour change
Multiple changes to any combination of title, numbering, or description DO NOT constitute a Minor Change, and must go through the full course revision proposal
3.
4.
approval process.
Changes that appear to be more than simple editing changes must go through the full course proposal approval process (committee chair discretion).
Proposals that meet the criteria as being minor changes, are exempt from the twoweek submission prior to the first reading rule
Submitted by: Dr. Traci Redish
Faculty Member Date
Not Approved Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Department Curriculum Committee Date
Department Chair Date
College Curriculum Committee Date
College Dean Date
GPCC Chair
Dean, Graduate College
Date
Date
Vice President for Academic Affairs Date
President Date
1

KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE COURSE MINOR CHANGE FORM
I. Current Information
Page Number in Current Catalog P. 282
Course Prefix and Number ITEC 7400
Course Title 21 st
Century Teaching and Learning
Class Hours___3___Laboratory Hours___0___Credit Hours___3____
Prerequisites Admission to the M.Ed. program in
Instructional Technology.
Description:
This course introduces the design and facilitation of learning environments that apply technology-enhanced instructional strategies to maximize student learning.
Candidates will apply current research and instructional design principles to design a 2st century learning experiences for students.
II. Proposed Information (Fill in the changed item)
Course Prefix and Number ________________________________
Course Title ___________________________________ ________
Class Hours______Laboratory Hours______Credit Hours_______
Prerequisites
Description
This course introduces candidates to technology-supported, research-based pedagogical strategies to maximize student learning in the content areas. Candidates will apply current research and instructional design principles to a digital age learning experience for students. This course is a content pedagogy course in the candidate’s certification field.
REVISED:
This course introduces candidates to the technologies most commonly purchased by school districts and explores technology-supported, research-based pedagogical strategies to maximize student learning in the candidate’s certification field. Candidates will apply current research and instructional design principles to a digital age learning experiences for students using interactive white boards, student response systems, instructional software and other frequently-purchased productivity tools.
2

III. Justification
This course is in the Master’s Degree program in Instructional Technology (ITEC). Recently, the
Georgia Professional Standards Commission approved an educator preparation rule (505-3.54) for the Master’s Degree in Instructional Technology requiring a minimum of twelve (12) semester hours (or 4 courses) of advanced level coursework focused on the content or content pedagogy of a certificate field held by the educator. ITEC 7400 is one of the 4 required content pedagogy courses in our M.Ed. in Instructional Technology. Upon the advice of the Associate
Dean of Accreditation in the BCOE, Dr. Beverly Mitchell, we edited our course descriptions to more clearly identify this course as a content pedagogy course within our Master’s Degree in
ITEC.
3

VII. COURSE MASTER FORM
This form will be completed by the requesting department and will be sent to the Office of the
Registrar once the course changes have been approved by the Office of the President.
DISCIPLINE Instructional Technology
COURSE NUMBER
COURSE TITLE FOR LABEL
ITEC 7400
21 st Century Teaching & Learning
(Note: Limit 30 spaces)
CLASS-LAB-CREDIT HOURS
Approval, Effective Term
Grades Allowed (Regular or S/U)
If course used to satisfy CPC, what areas?
3-0-3
Spring 2012
Regular
Learning Support Programs courses which are
required as prerequisites
APPROVED:
__________________________________________________
Vice President for Academic Affairs or Designee __
4

COURSE SYLLABUS (Attach here)
ITEC 7400 21 st Century Teaching and Learning
Department of Instructional Technology
Kennesaw State University
Fall Semester, 2010
Instructor : Dr. Jo Williamson
Asst. Professor/Instructional Technology
KH 3104
678 797 2232
GA View email jwill157@kennesaw.edu
(use this if you need quick response)
Class Session s: Thursdays, 5-10 p.m. and Online. 8/19 F2F ; 9/2 Online; 9/16 F2F ; 9/30 Online; 10/14 F2F ;
10/28 Online; 11/11 Online; 12/2 F2F
Text(s) Required:
Roblyer, M.D. (2004). Integrating Technology into Teaching , (4 th
ed) ,
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Text Recommended:
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2006). Understanding By Design (2 nd ed.). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Other required readings as assigned by instructor in syllabus
______________________________________________________________________________
_
Referenced Journals:
AACE Journal (AACEJ), http://www.aace.org/pubs/aacej/
Contemporary Issues in Technology & Teacher Education (CITE), http://www.aace.org/pubs/cite/default.htm
Information Technology in Childhood Education (ITCE) Annual, http://www.aace.org/pubs/itce/
International Journal on E-Learning (IJEL) http://www.aace.org/pubs/ijel/default.htm
Journal of Educational Technology and Society http://www.ifets.info
Journal of Research on Technology in Education (JRTE), http://www.iste.org
(choose publications)
Journal of Computing in Teacher Education (JCTE), http://www.iste.org
(choose publications, SIG publications)
Journal of Technology Education (JTE), http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE
Journal of the Research Center for Educational Technology (RCETJ), http://rcetj.org/
Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia (JEMH) http://www.aace.org/pubs/jemh/default.htm
Journal of Technology and Teacher Education (JTATE) http://www.aace.org/pubs/jtate/default.htm
Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching (JCMST), http://www.aace.org/pubs/jcmst/default.htm
Journal of Interactive Learning Research (JILR) http://www.aace.org/pubs/jilr/default.htm
5

Catalog Description :
Prerequisite: Admission to the Instructional Technology M.Ed. program or approval of instructor
This course introduces the design and facilitation of learning environments that apply technology-enhanced instructional strategies to maximize student learning. Candidates will apply current research and instructional design principles to design a 21st century learning experiences for students.
Purpose/Rationale:
In an era when the needs of students are rapidly changing, schools are not providing 21 st
century learners with the types of environments that parallel the connectivity and social interaction patterns that they are accustomed to outside of school. This disparity threatens to further alienate youth and encourage the already-growing student perceptions that schools are outdated and irrelevant to their interests and goals. In a similar vein, current instructional practices and academic curricula are not producing students who have the knowledge, skills, and dispositions needed for twenty-first century work and citizenship. While students may be skilled in using technology to pursue their own social and entertainment purposes outside of school, they are still unprepared to use technology to pursue post-secondary studies, daily work in various professional and technical fields, life-long learning, and civic engagement.
Conceptual Framework:
COLLABORATIVE DEVELOPMENT OF EXPERTISE IN
TEACHING, LEARNING and LEADERSHIP
The Professional Teacher Education Unit (PTEU) at Kennesaw State University is committed to developing expertise among candidates in initial and advanced programs as teachers and leaders who possess the capability, intent and expertise to facilitate high levels of learning in all of their students through effective, research-based practices in classroom instruction, and who enhance the structures that support all learning. To that end, the PTEU fosters the development of candidates as they progress through stages of growth from novice to proficient to expert and leader. Within the PTEU conceptual framework, expertise is viewed as a process of continued development, not an end-state. To be effective, teachers and educational leaders must embrace the notion that teaching and learning are entwined and that only through the implementation of validated practices can all students construct meaning and reach high levels of learning. In that way, candidates are facilitators of the teaching and learning process. Finally, the
PTEU recognizes, values and demonstrates collaborative practices across the college and university and extends collaboration to the community-at-large. Through this collaboration with professionals in the university, the public and private schools, parents and other professional partners, the PTEU meets the ultimate goal of assisting Georgia schools in bringing all students to high levels of learning.
Use of Technology
Technology Standards for Educators are required by the Professional Standards Commission.
Telecommunication and information technologies will be integrated throughout the master teacher
6

preparation program, and all candidates must be able to use technology to improve student learning and meet Georgia Technology Standards for Educators. During the courses, candidates will be provided with opportunities to explore and use instructional media, especially microcomputers, to assist teaching.
They will master use of productivity tools, such as multimedia facilities, local-net and Internet, and feel confident to design multimedia instructional materials, create WWW resources, and develop an electronic learning portfolio.
Diversity Statement
A variety of materials and instructional strategies will be employed to meet the needs of the different learning styles of diverse learners in class. Candidates will gain knowledge as well as an understanding of differentiated strategies and curricula for providing effective instruction and assessment within multicultural classrooms. One element of course work is raising candidate awareness of critical multicultural issues. A second element is to cause candidates to explore how multiple attributes of multicultural populations influence decisions in employing specific methods and materials for every student. Among these attributes are age, disability, ethnicity, family structure, gender, geographic region, giftedness, language, race, religion, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic status . An emphasis on cognitive style differences provides a background for the consideration of cultural context.
Kennesaw State University provides program accessibility and accommodations for persons defined as disabled under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 or the Americans with Disabilities Act of
1990. A number of services are available to support students with disabilities within their academic program. In order to make arrangements for special services, students must visit the Office of Disabled
Student Support Services (ext. 6443) and develop an individual assistance plan. In some cases, certification of disability is required.
Please be aware that there are other support/mentor groups on the campus of Kennesaw State University that address each of the multicultural variables outlined above.
Statement for Field-based Activities
While completing your graduate program at Kennesaw State University, you are required to be involved in a variety of leadership and school-based activities directed at the improvement of teaching and learning. Appropriate activities may include, but are not limited to, attending and presenting at professional conferences, actively serving on or chairing school-based committees, attending PTA/school board meetings, leading or presenting professional development activities at the school or district level, and participating in education-related community events. As you continue your educational experiences, you are encouraged to explore every opportunity to learn by doing.
Professional Portfolio:
A required element in each portfolio for the Graduate Program is the portfolio narrative. The purpose of the portfolio narrative is to ensure that every candidate reflects on each of the proficiencies on the CPI with regard to what evidence the candidate has selected for his/her portfolio. In your portfolio, you need to include a narrative that includes descriptive, analytic and reflective writing in which you reflect on each proficiency and how you make the case that the evidence you have selected in your portfolio supports a particular proficiency, using the Portfolio Narrative Rubric as a guide. The narrative should be comprehensive, documenting research-based best practices.
7

Goals and Objectives:
Candidates will be able to:

Identify and explain the needs of 21 st Century learner

Choose teaching practices and tools best suited to meeting the needs of 21 st Century learners

Assist teachers in designing and delivering technology-enhanced instructional strategies to support the diverse needs of learners.

Assist teachers in improving their instructional practices to support 21 st Century learning.

Apply current research on teaching and learning with technology when planning learning environments and experiences.

Plan for the management of technology resources within the context of learning activities.

Plan strategies to manage student learning in a technology-enhanced environment

Promote the integration of technology into standards-based, research-based instruction.

Promote the integration of technology standards into classroom instruction.
The Technology Facilitation Standards addressed in this class are as follows:
Planning and Designing Learning Environments and Experiences (TF-II). Educational technology facilitators plan, design, and model effective learning environments and multiple experiences supported by technology.
Teaching, Learning, and the Curriculum (TF-III). Educational technology facilitators apply and implement curriculum plans that include methods and strategies for utilizing technology to maximize student learning.
Assessment and Evaluation (TF-IV). Educational technology facilitators apply technology to facilitate a variety of effective assessment and evaluation strategies.
Educational technology facilitators are able to exhibit expert performance and help others move toward higher levels of performance in the following areas:

Design developmentally appropriate learning opportunities that apply technologyenhanced instructional strategies. This includes providing resources and feedback to teachers as they design. (TF.IIA, II.A.1)

Apply research on teaching and learning with technology when planning learning environments and experiences. (TF-II.B, II.B1; TF III A, III.A.2; TF III.E, III.E.2)

Identify and locate technology resources and evaluate them for accuracy, suitability, and appropriateness to address specific learning needs (TF-I.A, I.A.2; TF-II.C, II.C.1)

Manage resources and student learning in a variety of technology-enriched learning environments settings (individual, small group, classroom, and/or labs). (TF-II.D, D1;
TF-IIE, E1, TF-IIID, D. 1)

Design, facilitate, and model technology-enhanced experiences that address required content standards and National Educational Technology Standards for Students (NETS-
S). (TF II.C, II.C.2; TF-III.A, A.1, 3-7; TF-III.E, E.2)

Use technology to support learner-centered strategies that address the diverse needs of students, including adaptive and assistive technology as needed (TF II-A, A.3; TF-IIIB,
B.1; VI.B, VI.B.1, VI.B.2)
8


Apply technology to demonstrate students' higher order thinking skills, problem solving and creativity (TF-III.C, C.1)

Consult with teachers as they design methods and strategies to teach computer/technology skills within the context of classroom learning (TF-II, II.A.2)

Apply and model the use of technology in assessing student learning of subject matter using a variety of assessment techniques (TF-IV.A, IVA.1, IVA.2)

Develop methods of evaluating current technology implementation in schools and continually reflect on professional practice to make informed decisions regarding the use of technology in support of student learning, communication, and productivity. (TF-
IV.C, IV.C.1; TF-V, V.B.1)
Course requirements:
1.
ENGAGED LEARNING PROJECT : Individual or group work. Assist a classroom teacher in developing an extended student learning experience that meets the following criteria:
Criteria:
-Involves students for 10 or more hours of classroom instruction/outside class work.
-Models appropriate and innovative uses of technology to support Engaged Learning Indicators, especially indicators dealing with collaboration, student roles, teacher roles, and authenticity.
- Meets criteria for LoTi Level 4a or above, which requires higher levels of Bloom’s taxonomy
-Linked to Georgia Performance Standards
-Linked to Georgia Technology Integration Standards
-Linked to ISTE NETS-Students (2007)
-Includes assessment strategies/instruments to manage student learning during the learning experience
-Assesses technology skills students must have to fully participate in the learning experience and includes strategies for teaching those skills in the context of classroom learning
-Includes adaptations/adaptive technology resources or students with learning disabilities, limited English
Proficiency, and physical disabilities
-Includes list of instructional resources needed to implement the learning experience, including technology, advice on how the technology should be arranged and why, and tips to manage students/technological resources during the learning experience
(Template, samples, and rubric on Web CT)
Present your engaged learning project to the class and reflect on the facilitation process.
400 POINTS (300 pts. for final project/20 pts. for “idea”/50 pts. for draft/50 pts. for presentation)
NOTE: A GRADE OF “B” or Better on this assignment is needed to receive a “B” or Better in the class.
A Grade of “C” or better is required to pass the class (D or Better).
2.
ENGAGED LEARNING VIDEO ASSIGNMENT: Individual assignment. Locate a video of engaged learning in a classroom from an online video source and provide a one-page summary/analysis of the video. Pick the BEST example you can find. Suggested Web sites to locate the video include:


Intel Foundation , http://www97.intel.com/education/
George Lucas Foundation , http://www.edutopia.org/ (highly recommended)

Apple Learning Exchange , http://www.apple.com/education/community/ali.html

Teacher Tube, http://www.teachertube.com/
In a posting on GA VIEW (NOT an attachment), provide the following information in your analysis: a.
Title and URL of Video
9

b.
Grade level and Content Area: For what grade levels is this lesson appropriate? What content is being addressed? What are students learning? c.
Summary of Classroom Learning Experiences: What are students and teachers doing in this video? (i.e. taking a virtual trip across the country, etc.) What roles do students assume? d.
Analysis of Engaged Learning Indicators: Which indicators of EL are strong and why? Which indicators of EL could be strengthened in this project? How might this be accomplished? Is the project truly
“authentic?” How could it be more authentic? e.
Analysis of Academic Rigor and Higher Order Thinking: Is the project academically rigorous? Are standards being addressed? Is the project promoting higher order thinking? Where does student thinking fall on Bloom’s taxonomy and why? How could the project be more rigorous and/or targeted toward standards? f.
Analysis of Student Motivation Potential: On a scale of 1-10 how motivated/excited do you think the students be to participate in this learning experience? Why? g.
Analysis of Technology Use: Is technology use critical to the project? Could the project be completed without technology? What would be lost? Does it model effective use of technology? Would it inspire others to use technology? How else might technology be used to enhance the learning experience? h.
Analysis of LoTi Level: What is the LoTi level and why? i.
Analysis of Potential as a professional learning model for teachers/administrators? Why would you use this as a model of best practice? Do you have any reservations about using it as a model? If so, explain. j.
What remaining questions do you have about the Engaged Learning Indicators and/or the EL project you will design? k.
What ideas are rolling around in your head for your EL project right now?

50 points
3.
ENGAGED LEARNING WEB SITE SUBMISSION: Individual assignment
Locate, submit, tag, and annotate a web site that could be used with students in a K-12 classroom to promote engaged learning.
50 points
4.
CORE CONTENT AREA REPORT : Individual Assignment
Make a brochure or a handout, a presentation that explains to teachers what technologies are available to them to teach a specific content area in a specific grade level. Your product should include URLs, articles, or examples of best practice where colleagues can seek more information as appropriate. Choose the chapter of
Roblyer (9-15) to serve as a guide for your research, but also explore beyond this chapter. Highlight the resources that are most promising for supporting engaged learning and higher LoTi levels in your school. If there are tools that seem promising, but they are not yet available in your school, include them in a “Maybe for the Future” section. Make your project in Word or a Desktop Publisher. Save and submit/post it as a PDF.
Your product will be evaluated for content and for presentation using rubrics from the text.
100 points
5.
BASIC OR BEYOND-THE-BASIC PRODUCTIVITY TOOL PRODUCT: Select a basic or a beyond-thebasic productivity tool (defined in Chapters 4 & 5 and in class) that is available in your school, but you’d like teachers to use more. Design an example of how that tool could be used in a class with students to show to teachers and to stimulate their interest. This product can support your Engaged Learning project, but it doesn’t have to.
75 poi nts
6.
ONLINE/CLASS DISCUSSIONS/PARTICIPATION/PROFESSIONALISM: Participate in classroom and online discussions as assigned by instructor. Graduate study requires students to come prepared to contribute meaningfully to class discussions and activities. Participation requires more than attendance. It is expected that you will keep up with the readings and share your ideas in class, as well as listen to and be respectful of the ideas of your peers. You are expected to participate in cooperative learning activities in class enabling you to
10

apply new knowledge and skills. Students are expected to be punctual, and attentive to the professor and colleagues. SIDE CONVERSATIONS ARE UNPROFESSIONAL AND UNACCEPTABLE . Quizzes may be given to ensure readings are completed and course content is understood and synthesized. If a student is absent or late and misses a quiz, a zero will be awarded on the quiz. It is required that all assignments be submitted on time. Late assignments will receive significant credit reduction. Attendance in class is a requirement. If you miss a class , it is your responsibility to get the notes and assignments from a classmate. One absence due to illness, family, or unavoidable professional activities as approved by the instructor will require you to complete additional make-up work on a topic assigned by your professor AND lose participation points.
Any additional absences will result in the student being asked to withdraw from the course. ALL
ASSIGNMENTS MUST BE COMPLETED TO RECEIVE CREDIT FOR THE COURSE. LATE
ASSIGNMENTS RECEIVE NO POINTS!
Approximately 250 points
(Approxmately 15 Discussions/Summaries/Peer Feedback assignments, 10-20 pts. each;
Class Participation for 4 F2F classes, 15 pts. each)
Grades will be based on the following criteria:
TOTAL POINTS FOR CLASS: Approximately 925
A: 90% - 100%
B: 80% - 89%
C: 70% -79%
F: 69% or lower
Academic Integrity Expectations :
Every KSU student is responsible for upholding the provisions of the Student Code of Conduct, as published in the Graduate Catalog. Section II of the Student Code of Conduct addresses the
University's policy on academic honesty, including provisions regarding plagiarism and cheating, unauthorized access to University materials, misrepresentation/falsification of
University records or academic work, malicious removal, retention, or destruction of library materials, malicious/intentional misuse of computer facilities and/or services, and misuse of student identification cards. Incidents of alleged academic misconduct will be handled through the established procedures of the University Judiciary Program, which includes with an
“informal” resolution by a faculty member, resulting in a grade adjustment, or a formal hearing procedure, which may subject a student to the Code of Conduct's minimum one semester suspension requirement.
COURSE SCHEDULE
Class One, 8/19 F2F
Class Topics/Activities:
Intro to course and GA View
Gather missing job assignment information
11

Choose Content Area for Report
Getting Started with the Engaged Learning Project:

Models of EL

Review of EL template and samples

State Study
Review of Class Two and Three assignments
Class Two, 9/2 ONLINE
Assignments Due:
1. Follow-up Reading to Class One
By Thursday, Sept. 2, read pp. 33-49 of your text to review the difference between direct instruction and constructivist learning. Especially study Figure 2.7 on p. 45. Post a two-three paragraph reflection in the discussion forum on what you’ve learned so far from the text and in class about technologies supporting specific learning theories. Include a reflection on how this might affect your actions as a technology user/facilitator in the future! [Ch2Post-10 pts.]
2. Learning about TPACK
By Thursday, Sept. 2, read about TPACK on pp. 48-50 of your text. Post a summary of what you think TPACK is and why it might be useful to you as a technology facilitator. Using the four “Phase I” questions on pp. 52 as a guide, post a two-three paragraph reflection of where you think YOU and your COLLEAGUES are in the
TPACK model. Also reflect on what you think it will take to move you and your colleagues forward. Also post any questions you have on TPACK . [TPACKPost-10 pts.]
3. Engaged Learning Video Assignment ( see Syllabus, p. 5) RESPOND TO ALL
By 10 p.m. Wednesday, Aug. 25, post a link to your video and your one-page response. (Note: for this assignment, it is easier if you post directly in discussion forum so we don’t have to open attachments.) See
Syll., p. 5 for guiding questions. [VID-50 pts]
By 10 p.m. on Thursday, Sept.2, review ALL the videos posted by ALL your peers, read their analyses, post a response, and vote for the video that you think is the BEST example of all the EL indicators. Don’t forget to include a comment of why you chose that video over all the other great examples.
By 10 p.m. on Monday, Sept. 6, finish your discussion of the EL videos in the forum—especially review the comments that your peers left for you and provide a closing summary. [VIDRESP-15 pts.]
Class Three, 9/16 F2F
Assignments Due:
1. Finish up Discussions on Constructivist Learning/Direct Instruction and TPACK
By 5 p.m. on Thursday, 9/16, read and respond to your peers’ postings
(as assigned by instructor) on direct instruction/constructivist learning and TPACK in the Class Two discussion forums. [ Ch2RESP-10 pts.]
2. Integrating the Internet into Teaching and Learning
Read Roblyer, Ch. 6, pp. 197-199 (Web 2.0 Tools), Ch7, 210-223, Ch. 8, all
By 5 p.m. on Thursday, 9/16,post a one-page response to the reading. Your answers should include, but not necessarily be limited to the following:

What terms/concepts did you learn from the reading and how are they helpful to you as an aspiring technology facilitator?

Which resources were most interesting and why?

What are the differences between blogs, wikis, and podcasts? (you may have to do some other research?)

Are Internet projects, blogs, wikis, and/or podcasts used at your school? If so, list them and describe how they are used. If they are not used, provide an explanation of why.

In general, what do you think about the potential of Internet projects and Web 2.0 authoring tools to support high-quality instruction and student achievement in schools? What do you think about their ability to support engaged learning? Which Internet resources seem to have the most potential for higher-order thinking and constructivist learning?

Do you think your school is maximizing the use of Internet resources for instruction?

If asked, what actions would you propose to improve the availability and/or the use of these tools to
12

support student learning?

Do you see any resources you can use in your project?
 If you haven’t already, please discuss CIPA, Internet Safety, and the relationship of these concepts to
Internet use in the classroom? I’d also like to know what you think of Judy Harris’ activity structures and Web Quests.

What questions do you have about the concepts presented in these chapters? [IntnetPost-15]
Class Topics/Activities:
Wrap up discussion of Constructivist Learning/Direct Instruction and TPACK
Discussion of readings
Evaluating WebQuests
Judy Harris’ Activity Structures
Finding Online Projects
Evaluating Web Sites/Online Projects
KSU Next Step Project
Discuss EL project and assignments for Classes Four and Five
Class Four, 9/30 ONLINE
Assignments Due:
1. Engaged Learning Project Ideas (See p. 5 syllabus, and resources in Class One in GA View)
By 10 p.m. on Sat., 9/25 describe your project and the teacher(s) who have agreed to work with you. What were their concerns/questions? How did you respond to them? How much input did they provide into the project? What factors are affecting their level of involvement? Also attach the post the following sections of the project template for instructor review and feedback: Title of Project, Subjects, Grade Levels,
Abstract, Learner Description/Environment Listen to narrated PowerPoint for suggestions from the instructor. Also see Syllabus, p. 5 and review template and samples of abstracts/projects, Class One folder
GA VIEW. One posting per group, but include names of all group members for credit. [ELIdea-20 pts.]
By 10 p.m. Thursday, 9/30, read/respond to peers’ postings (as assigned by instructor) [IdeaResp-10 pts.]
2. Next Steps Project s
By 10 p.m. on Sat., 9/25 submit at least one “Next Step Project” to www.edtechleader.net/nextstep [ Nxt-10 pts.]
By 10 p.m. Thursday, 9/30 review the submissions to “Next Steps” and make comments on at least four submissions . [NxtCom-10 pts.]
3. Instructional Software, e-Books, and electronic reference materials
Read Chapter 3, all, and Chapter 6, pp. 170-180 (stopping at Intro to Multimedia) and view the following websites to learn about emerging trends in instructional software (multi-user gaming, intelligent tutors, virtual reality, etc.) Games for Learning and Assessment: http://www.edutopia.org/no-gamer-left-behind ,
Globaloria project, http://www.globaloria.org/ , Tabula Digita, http://www.dimensionm.com/ , ALEKS http://www.aleks.com/ , Carnegie Learning http://www.carnegielearning.com/
By 10 p.m. on Sat., 9/25 of text and post a two-five page response to the readings. Your answers should include, but not necessarily be limited to the following:

What terms/concepts did you learn from the reading and how are they helpful to you as an aspiring technology facilitator?

What commercial instructional software, e-Books, and electronic reference materials are provided for teachers at your school? (note: these probably cost money). What free Internet resources are officially promoted by the school district? Include the specific titles, URLs (if appropriate), a description of the product/Web site, and the content areas/grade levels for which they are intended.

How do teachers use these materials and how often do teachers use these materials? What factors influence how teachers use these materials?

How are the decisions to purchase instructional software made in your district? Are teachers able to request a product and if so, how? (see if you can find out if you don’t know.)

What free Internet-based instructional software (games, simulations, tutorials) or reference materials
13

have teachers found on their own to support classroom instruction? Include the titles, URLs (if appropriate), a description of the resource, and the content areas/grade levels for which they are intended.

Based on your own research, post three free, online instructional resources that would be classified as instructional software, e-books, or electronic reference materials.

In general, what do you think about the potential of instructional software, e-Books, and electronic reference materials to support high-quality instruction and student achievement in schools? What do you think about their ability to support engaged learning? Which products/genres seem to have the most potential for higher-order thinking and constructivist learning?

Do you think the availability of instructional software, e-books, and reference materials in your school is adequate or not? Why? If asked, what actions would you propose to improve the availability and/or the use of these tools to support student learning? [Ch3Post-15]
By 10 p.m. Thursday, 9/30, read your peers’ postings (as assigned by instructor) and post ONE summary response by “creating new post” instead of “replying” to each individual. Guiding Questions:
 Do you agree/disagree with your peers’ perceptions of instructional software, e-Books, and electronic reference materials and their impact on instruction, in general, and engaged learning, in particular?

Are there trends in what instructional software, e-Books, and electronic reference materials are provided for teachers across different schools?

Are there trends in how often and how instructional software, e-Books, and electronic reference materials are used in schools? Are there similar or different factors that affect the use of these products across schools?

What did we learn about how these instructional materials are purchased and/or promoted in most districts?

Are there some teacher-found, free Internet-based instructional software (games, simulations, tutorials) or reference materials that seem to be widely-used/popular?

Of all the resources in your text book or posted by peers, which ones can you target for use in your own class and for sharing with others? Why do you select these to promote? [Ch3Resp-10]
Class Five, 10/14 F2F
Assignments Due:
1. Basic and Beyond-the-Basic Productivity Tools
By 10 p.m. on Saturday, 10/9, read Ch. 4, all, Ch. 5, all, and Ch. 6, pp. 180-197 (stopping at Web 2.0 tools) and post a one-page response to the reading. Your answers should include, but not necessarily be limited to the following:

What terms/concepts did you learn from the reading and how are they helpful to you as an aspiring technology facilitator?

What basic and beyond-the-basic productivity tools are provided for teachers at your school? (note: these probably cost money). What free Internet-based productivity tools are officially promoted by the school district? Include the specific titles, URLs (if appropriate), a description of the product/Web site, and the content areas/grade levels for which they are intended.

How do teachers use these materials and how often do teachers use these tools? What factors influence how teachers use these tools?

How are the decisions to purchase productivity tools made in your district? Are teachers able to request a product and if so, how? (see if you can find out if you don’t know.)

What free Internet-based productivity tools have teachers found on their own to support classroom instruction? Include the titles, URLs (if appropriate), a description of the resource, and the content areas/grade levels for which they are intended.

Based on your own research, post three free, online productivity tools that could be used in classroom instruction or in preparing instructional materials?

In general, what do you think about the potential of productivity tools to support high-quality instruction and student achievement in schools? What do you think about their ability to support engaged learning? Which products seem to have the most potential for higher-order thinking and constructivist learning?

Do you think the availability of productivity tools in your school is adequate or not? Why? If asked,
14

what actions would you propose to improve the availability and/or the use of these tools to support student learning? [Ch45Post-15]
By 5 p.m. on Thursday, 10/14, read your peers’ postings (as assigned by instructor) and post ONE summary response by “creating new post” instead of “replying” to each individual. Guiding Questions:
 Do you agree/disagree with your peers’ perceptions of productivity tools and their impact on instruction, in general, and engaged learning, in particular?

Are there trends in what productivity tools are provided for teachers across different schools?

Are there trends in how often and how productivity tools are used in schools? Are there similar or different factors that affect the use of these products across schools?

What did we learn about how these instructional materials are purchased and/or promoted in most districts?

Are there some teacher-found, free productivity tools that seem to be widely-used/popular?

Of all the resources in your text book or posted by peers, which productivity tools do you want to target for use in your own class and for sharing with others? Why do you select these to promote?
[Ch45Sum-10]
Class Topics/Activities:
Discussion of reading/postings
Hands-on experience with productivity tools
Time for EL project collaboration
Class Six, 10/28 ONLINE
Assignments Due:
1. Technology for Special Needs
Read Chapters 10 & 15 to learn about how technology can be used to support gifted students and the needs of students with physical disabilities (limited sight, hearing, mobility), learning disabilities, and limited
English proficiency. There is no written assignment on these readings. You will need this information to complete the “Accommodations for Students with Special Needs” section of your EL Project Template.
Complete the online module on Understanding by Design and how to write Essential Questions and
Enduring Understandings. There is no written assignment on these readings. You will need this information to complete the “Enduring Understandings” and Essential Questions” section of your EL
Project Template. Note: This online module will not substitute for reading Understanding by Design . If you haven’t read it, you ought to!
By 5 p.m. on Thursday, 10/28, complete and post a complete draft of your EL project template for instructor review. See Syllabus, p. 5 and review template and samples of abstracts/projects, Class One folder GA
VIEW. One posting per group, but include names of all group members for credit. Include a summary of how your partner teacher(s) participated in the design and what they thinks of the project so far. How comfortable are they in implementing the plan? What have you/will you do to try to alleviate any discomfort? [EL Draft-50]
Work on your Beyond the Basic Project and your Content Report
Class Seven, 11/11 ONLINE
Assignments Due:
1. Provide Blind Peer Feedback on EL Projects
By 10 p.m. on Saturday, Nov. 6, post blind feedback to peers’ EL projects as assigned by the instructor.
This will be another exercise to put you in a technology facilitation role and help you provide constructive
15

feedback to others. [EL Fdbk-20 points]
2. Content Report
By 10 p.m. on Saturday, Nov. 6, post your content area report. [ConRpt-100 points]
By 10 p.m. on Thursday, Nov. 11, post feedback to your peers’ content area reports as assigned by the instructor. [ConFdbk-10 pts.]
Class Eight, 12/2 F2F
Assignments Due:
1. EL Final Projects
Complete the online module on how to present your EL project in class and prepare and post your actual presentation by .5 p.m. on Thursday, 12/2 [ELPres-50 pts.]
By 5 p.m. on Thursday, 12/2 post your final EL Project Template and attach assessment rubrics. One posting per group, but include names of all group members for credit. Include a final summary your experience working with your partner teachers and what you learned about facilitating technology use— especially at high levels of technology implementation—with colleagues. [EL Final-300 pts.]
By 5 p.m. on Thursday, 12/2, post your Productivity Tool project. Be ready to share briefly in class.
[Prod-75 pts.]
Class Topics/Activities:
EL Presentations [ELPres-50 pts.] and Anonymous Feedback (more facilitation practice!)
Reflections on conceptual change and facilitation
Course Evaluations
Bibliography:
Conceptual Framework Summary References:
Odell, S. J., Huling, L., & Sweeny, B. W. (2000). Conceptualizing quality mentoring, background information. In
S. J. Odell & L. Huling (Eds.), Quality mentoring for novice teachers (pp. 3-14). Indianapolis, IA: Kappa Delta
Pi.
Sternberg, R. J. (1996). Educational psychology has fallen, but it can get up. Educational PsychologyRreview, 8(2) ,
175-185.
Sternberg, R. J. (1998). Metacognition, abilities, and developing expertise: What makes an expert student?
Instructional Science, 26 , 127-140.
Course References:
Arizona Department of Education. (2006). 2005-06 Student Technology Literacy Assessment. Retrieved August
25, 2007, from http://www.ade.az.gov/technology/
Ausband, L. (2006). Instructional technology specialists and Curriculum Work. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39 (1), 1-21.
Ashburn, E. & Floden, R., (Eds.) (2006). Meaningful learning using technology: What educators need to know and do . New York: Teachers College.
Boss, S. & Krauss, J. (2007). Reinventing Project-based learning: Your field guide to real-world projects in the digital age.
Eugene, OR: ISTE.
Bransford, J., & Cocking, R. (Eds.). (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school . Washington,
DC: National Academy Press.
CDW-G. (2005). Teachers Talk Technology survey. Retrieved August 23, 2007 from http://newsroom.cdwg.com/features/feature-08-29-05.htm
Creighton, T. (2003). The principal as technology leader . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
16

Consortium for School Networking. (2005). Digital Leadership Divide from http://www.cosn.org/resources/grunwald/index.cfm
Fishman, B. (2005). Adapting innovations to particular contexts of use In C. Dede, J. Honan & L. Peters
(Eds.), Scaling up success: Lessons from technology-based educational improvement San Franciso:
Jossey-Bass
Educational Testing Service. (2006). ICT literacy assessment: Preliminary findings. Retrieved August 27, 2007, from http://www.ets.org/Media/Products/ICT_Literacy/pdf/2006_Preliminary_Findings.pdf
Fullan, M. (1999). Change forces: The sequel . London: Falmer.
Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change . San Francisco: Jossey Bass
Gates Foundation. (2006). Why do kids drop out? . Retrieved August 25, 2007, from http://www.gatesfoundation.org/nr/downloads/ed/TheSilentEpidemic3-06FINAL.pdf
Grabe, M., & Grabe, C. (2007). Integrating technology into meaningful learning (Fifth ed.). New York: Houghton
Mifflin.
Hall, G., & Hord, S. (2005). Implementing change: Patterns, principles, and potholes (Second ed.). Boston: Allyn
Bacon
Hitlin, P., & Rainie, L. (2005). Teens, technology, and school Retrieved 2007, August 20, from http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Internet_and_schools_05.pdf
Honey, M., Fasca, C., Gersick, A., Mandinach, E., & Sinha, S. (2005). Assessment of 21st Century Skills: The
Current Landscape (Pre-publication Draft) Retrieved June 11, 2007, from http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/images/stories/otherdocs/Assessment_Landscape.pdf
Jones, B., Valdez, G., Nowakowski, J., & Rasmussen, C. (1995). Plugging in: Choosing and using educational technology . Oakbrook, IL: North Central Regional Laboratory
Kaiser Foundation. (2005). Generation M: Media in the lives of 8-18 year-olds. Retrieved August 20, 2007, from http://www.kff.org/entmedia/upload/Generation-M-Media-in-the-Lives-of-8-18-Year-olds.pdf
Ketelhut, D., McCloskey, E., Dede, C., Breit, L., & Whitehouse, P. (2005). Core tensions in the evolution of online teacher professional development In C. Dede (Ed.), Online professinal development for teachers .
Cambridge, MA: Harvard.
Marzano, R., & Kendall, J. (2007). The new taxonomy of educational objectives . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Matzen, N., & Edmunds, J. (2007). Technology as a catalyst for change: The role of professional development.
Journal of Research on Techology in Education 39 (4), 417-433.
Means, B. (1993). Introduction: Using technology to advance educational goals In B. Means (Ed.), Technology and school reform: The reality behind the promise (pp. 1-22). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A Framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108 (6), 1017-1054.
Moersch, C. (2001). Next steps: Using LoTI as a research tool. Learning and Leading with Technology, 29 (3), 22-
27.
Moersch, C. (2002). Beyond hardware: Using existing technology to promote higher-order thinking Eugene, OR:
International Society for Technology in Education.
NetDay. (2006). Speak up. Retrieved August 27, 2007, from http://www.tomorrow.org/speakup/index.html
Partnership for 21 st Century Skills. (2006). Are they really ready to work: Employers' perspectives on the basic knowledge and applied skills of new entrants to the 21st century U.S. workforce. Retrieved August 24,
2007, from http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/documents/FINAL_REPORT_PDF09-29-06.pdf
Pierson, M. (2001). Technology integration practice as a function of pedagogical expertise. Journal of Research on
Computing in Education 33 (4), 413-430.
Roblyer, M. D. (2006). Integrating Technology into Teaching (Fourth ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Rogers, E. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (Fourth ed.). New York: Free Press.
Schulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57 (1),
1-22.
Solomon, G. & Schrum, L. (2007). Web 2.0: New tools, new schools. Eugene, OR: ISTE.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2006). Understanding by design (Second ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
17