BAGWELL COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
Ed.S./Ed.D. Program
Instructional Technology - ITEC 8400
Evaluating K-12 Instructional Technology
Kennesaw State University
Bagwell College of Education
Department: Instructional Technology
Department phone number:
Semester: XXXX
Credit Hours: 3
INSTRUCTOR:
TEXTS:
e-mail:
Web page:
Office Phone:
Alessi, S. & Trollip, S. (2002) Multimedia for Learning. Boston:
Allyn& Bacon.
COURSE CATALOG DESCRIPTION:
Prerequisites:
Admission to the Ed.S. or Ed.D. program in Instructional Technology or approval of the
Instructional Technology Department to enroll in this course as an elective course.
This course addresses processes for evaluating the potential of existing and emerging K-12
technology products for recommended purchase. The course also addresses evaluating the
implementation of technologies in K-12 classrooms and the impact of those implementations on
learning.
PURPOSE/RATIONALE:
Technology professionals have often struggled with evaluating the impact of technology
purchases and implementations. This difficulty often stems from weaknesses in selection and
implementation. Technologies are often selected without proper evaluation, coordination, and
alignment to learning goals. For these reasons, this course prepares technology facilitators to lead
collaborative processes in selecting technologies, to articulate expected outcomes, and to
implement an evaluation plan that illustrates whether there was a return on investment.
KSU CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK SUMMARY
Collaborative Development of Expertise in Teaching and Learning
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
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 1
of 14
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 at the doctoral level develop into leaders for learning and 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.
Knowledge Base:
Teacher development is generally recognized as a continuum that includes four phases:
preservice, induction, in-service, renewal (Odell, Huling, and Sweeny, 2000). Just as Sternberg
(1996) believes that the concept of expertise is central to analyzing the teaching-learning process,
the teacher education faculty at KSU believe that the concept of expertise is central to preparing
effective classroom teachers and teacher leaders. Researchers describe how during the continuum
phases teachers progress from being Novices learning to survive in classrooms toward becoming
Experts who have achieved elegance in their teaching. We, like Sternberg (1998), believe that
expertise is not an end-state but a process of continued development.
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 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. They will
master use of productivity tools, such as multimedia facilities, local-net and Internet, and feel
confident to design multimedia instructional materials, and create WWW resources.
Field Experience:
While participating in all field experiences, you are encouraged to be involved in a variety of
school-based activities directed at the improvement of teaching and learning. Activities may
include, but are not limited to, attending and presenting at professional conferences, participating
in leadership activities, attending PTA/school board meetings, and participating in educationrelated community events. As you continue your field experiences, you are encouraged to explore
every opportunity to learn by doing.
Diversity:
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
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 2
of 14
methods and materials for every student. Among these attributes are ethnicity, race,
socioeconomic status, gender, giftedness, disability, language, religion, family structure,
sexual orientation, and geographic region. 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 (770-423- 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. For more information
contact the Student Life Center at 770-423-6280.
Doctorate of Education (EdD)
The knowledge, skills and dispositions (KSD’s) of the graduates of the The Kennesaw
State University Doctorate of Education program of the Bagwell College of Education reflect the
unique aspects of this degree. Collaboratively developed by faculty from across the university
and in consultation with community/school partners, these outcomes and proficiencies delineate
the high expectations we have for graduates who will be Leaders for Learning. Clearly, the
proficiencies reflect the complex nature of student learning in advanced degree programs leading
to a terminal degree. Consequently, many of the proficiencies listed below incorporate aspects
of knowledge, skills and dispositions within a single proficiency. These proficiencies are clearly
linked to our conceptual framework, The Collaborative Development of Expertise in Teaching,
Learning and Leadership.
Graduates from the Doctorate of Education Program at Kennesaw State University
1. Demonstrate leadership as advocates for students and education. Candidates
a. synthesize and apply the latest research on learning, leadership, developmental theory
advocating the implementation of best practices and assist colleagues to do the same to
ensure all students learn.
b. are knowledgeable, articulate and think critically about educational practice, policy and
issues on national and international arenas.
c. understand, respond to , and influence the larger political, social, economic, legal, and
cultural context in matters related to education.
d. are knowledgeable about the factors contributing to safe physical environments for
education.
e. develop, articulate, implement, and steward a vision of learning supported by the
school community
2. Demonstrate leadership as agents for change, collaboration and collegiality. Candidates
a. understand the complexity of schools and the ambiguous nature of educational issues.
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 3
of 14
b. act in concert with and/or on behalf of colleagues to improve teaching and learning in
the classroom as supported by effective school, district, state level policies and
operations.
c. facilitate shared-decision making and teamwork.
d. improve teaching and learning by intentionally and systematically building networks of
influence at local, state, national and international arenas.
e. impact student learning for all and mentor other educators to do the same by effectively
working within the structures and culture of schools, families and communities.
f. support the teaching and learning process by soliciting all sources of funding and
educational resources.
3. Demonstrate leadership as mentors. Candidates
a. support and guide teachers to improve teaching and learning for all.
b. are committed to improving student learning by improving teaching and the learning
environment.
c. model routine, intentional, and effective use of technology while mentori8ng and
encouraging others to do the same.
4. Demonstrate leadership as expert teachers and instructional leaders. Candidates
a. are creative and flexible in their thinking and in seeking solutions to educational
challenges.
b. are knowledgeable of assessment, evaluation and accountability practices and critically
synthesize and utilize the data to improve student learning.
c. are master-teachers and instructional leaders possessing and demonstrating content and
pedagogical expertise who are able to make international comparisons in both areas.
d. develop and/or support appropriate, meaningful curricula that positively impact student
learning for all and assist others to do the same.
e. facilitate and support curricular design, instructional strategies, and learning
environments that integrate appropriate technologies to maximize teaching and
learning.
f. use technology to collect and analyze data, interpret results, and communicate findings
to improve instructional practice and student learning.
5. Demonstrate leadership as models of professionalism. Candidates
a. effectively design and conduct educational research which positively influences
educational practice or policy.
b. exhibit ethical behavior in all professional and personal interactions.
c. respect others, value differences and are open to feedback.
d. believe that for every problem there is a solution and actualize that belief when
engaging colleagues, students, families and community partners.
e. seek out responsibility and are accountable for their actions.
f. maintain current knowledge and best practices through continued professional
development.
6. Demonstrate leadership in meeting the needs of diverse constituents. Candidates
a. value and recognize the strength and power of diversity.
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 4
of 14
b. incorporate global perspectives and cultural richness in curriculum planning and
decision making.
c. address exceptionalities in planning, teaching, and assessment and respond to diverse
community interests and needs by mobilizing community resources.
d. proactively and intentionally advocate for and work to build educational environments
that are inclusive and supportive of diverse students, families and colleagues.
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES: (Aligned to Content Standards)
Candidates will be able to lead collaborative selection processes; set goals for technology
implementations; and evaluate the impact of technology implementations. (ISTE/NCATE TF
Standards III, IV, V, VI, and VIII).
In pursuit of these goals, the learning objectives of this course include:
1. Selecting and promoting the use of instructional technologies that support learnercentered strategies that address the diverse needs of students, including adaptive and
assistive technology. (TF III)
2. Selecting and promoting the use of instructional technologies that encourage problem
solving, creativity and the development of students’ higher order thinking skills and
creativity (TF III)
3. Selecting and promoting the use of technologies that are aligned with district/region/state/
national content and technology standards and that are designed according to researchbased instructional principles (TF III)
4. Examining the validity and reliability of technology resources to collect and analyze data,
interpret results, and communicate findings to improve instructional practice and
maximize student learning.
5. Applying multiple methods of evaluation to determine students' appropriate use of
technology resources for learning, communication, and productivity (TF IV)
6. Recommending evaluation strategies for improving students' use of technology resources
for learning, communication, and productivity (TF IV)
7. Analyzing data from a research project that includes evaluating the use of a specific
technology in a P-12 environment (TF IV)
8. Using resources and professional development activities/information available from
professional technology organizations to locate and evaluate K-12 instructional
technology solutions (TF V)
9. Implement policies that encourage collaborative review and selection decisions about
instructional technologies in order to provide district-wide professional growth
opportunities for staff, faculty, and administrator (TFV)
10. Continually evaluating and reflecting on professional practice to make informed
decisions regarding the selection and use of technology in support of student learning (TF
V)
11. Testing and supporting the integration of advanced features of word processing, desktop
publishing, graphics programs, and utilities to demonstrate professional products (TFV)
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 5
of 14
12. Selecting and testing software to help others in locating, selecting, capturing, and
integrating video and digital images, in varying formats for use in presentations,
publications and/or other products (TF V)
13. Testing, selecting, and facilitating the use of specific-purpose electronic devices (such as
graphing calculators, languages translators, scientific probeware, or electronic thesaurus)
in content areas (TF V)
14. Selecting and supporting the integration of appropriate tools for communicating concepts,
conducting research, and solving problems for an intended audience and purpose (TF V)
15. Selecting and supporting the integration of emerging programming, authoring or problem
solving environments that support personal/professional development (TF V)
16. Setting and manipulating preferences and defaults of operating systems and productivity
tool programs, and troubleshooting problems associated with their operation (TF V)
17. Staying abreast of current telecommunications tools and resources for information
sharing, remote information access, and multimedia/hypermedia publishing in order to
nurture student learning (TF V)
18. Selecting and supporting the adoption of collaborative learning tools, such electronic
mail, online conferencing and web browsers (TF V)
19. Analyzing and recommending appropriate technology resources to enable and empower
learners with diverse backgrounds, characteristics, and abilities (TF V)
20. Analyzing and recommending appropriate adaptive/assistive hardware and software for
students and teachers with special needs and assist in procurement and implementation
(TF V)
21. Recommending appropriate technology resources to affirm diversity and address cultural
and language differences (TF VI)
22. Recommending appropriate technology resources to promote safe and healthy use of
technology.
23. Considering how instructional technologies recommended for purchase would be best
implemented in classroom environments (TF VIII)
24. Staying abreast of local mass storage devices and media to store and retrieve information
and resources.
25. Differentiating among issues related to selecting, installing, and maintaining wide area
networks (WAN) for school districts, and facilitate integration of technology
infrastructure with the WAN (TF VIII)
26. Analyzing software used in classroom and administrative settings including productivity
tools, information access /telecommunication tools, multimedia/hypermedia tools, school
management tools, evaluation/portfolio tools, and computer-based instruction (TF VIII)
27. Evaluating instructional software to support and enhance the school curriculum and
demonstrate recommendations for purchase (TF VIII)
28. Staying abreast of current procedures related to troubleshooting and preventive
maintenance on technology infrastructure (TF VIII)
29. Locating and disseminating current research on product availability, design, and use in
educational technology (TF VIII)
30. Understanding the history of development and availability of instructional technology
tools (TF VIII)
31. Applying effective group process skills to support the selection and evaluation of
instructional technologies in school settings (TF VIII)
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 6
of 14
32. Disseminating best practices in effective group process skills to support the selection and
evaluation of instructional technologies in school settings (TF VIII)
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES – aligned to Program Standards
The Professional Teacher Education Unit prepares learning facilitators who understand their
disciplines and principles of pedagogy, who reflect on their practice, and who apply these
understandings to making instructional decisions that foster the success of all learners. As a
result of the satisfactory fulfillment of the requirements of these courses, the candidate will
demonstrate the following outcomes:
Course objective
Doctoral
KSDs
1. Selecting and promoting the use of
4e
instructional technologies that support
learner-centered strategies that address
the diverse needs of students, including
adaptive and assistive technology
2. Selecting and promoting the use of
4d
instructional technologies that encourage
problem solving, creativity and the
development of students’ higher order
thinking skills and creativity
3. Selecting and promoting the use of
4e
technologies that are aligned with
district/region/state/ national content and
technology standards and that are
designed according to research-based
instructional principles
4. Examining the validity and reliability
of technology resources to collect and
analyze data, interpret results, and
communicate findings to improve
instructional practice and maximize
student learning.
4f
5. Applying multiple methods of
evaluation to determine students'
4b
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Distributed
School
Leadership
Roles*
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
PSC/NCATE
Standard
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
Learning &
Development
Leader
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
Learning &
Development
Leader
Data Analysis
Curriculum,
Instruction &
1.8
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
Page 7
of 14
appropriate use of technology resources
for learning, communication, and
productivity
6. Recommending evaluation strategies
for improving students' use of
technology resources for learning,
communication, and productivity
7. Analyzing data from a research
project that includes evaluating the use
of a specific technology in a P-12
environment
8. Using resources and professional
development activities/information
available from professional technology
organizations to locate and evaluate K12 instructional technology solutions
9. Implement policies that encourage
collaborative review and selection
decisions about instructional
technologies in order to provide districtwide professional growth opportunities
for staff, faculty, and administrator
10. Continually evaluating and reflecting
on professional practice to make
informed decisions regarding the
selection and use of technology in
support of student learning
11. Testing and supporting the
integration of advanced features of word
processing, desktop publishing, graphics
programs, and utilities to demonstrate
professional products
12. Selecting and testing software to
help others in locating, selecting,
capturing, and integrating video and
digital images, in varying formats for
use in presentations, publications and/or
other products
13. Testing, selecting, and facilitating
the use of specific-purpose electronic
devices (such as graphing calculators,
languages translators, scientific
probeware, or electronic thesaurus) in
content areas
14. Selecting and supporting the
integration of appropriate tools for
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Assessment
Leader
4b
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
Learning &
Development
Leader
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
5f
Learning &
Development
Leader
1.2, 1.5
1b
Process
Improvement
Leader
1.5
5a
1.2, 1.5
Operations
4b
Learning &
Development
Leader
1.2, 1.5
3c
Learning &
Development
Leader
1.2, 1.5
3c
Learning &
Development
Leader
1.2, 1.5
3c
Learning &
Development
Leader
1.2, 1.5
3c
Learning &
Development
1.2, 1.5
Page 8
of 14
communicating concepts, conducting
research, and solving problems for an
intended audience and purpose
15. Selecting and supporting the
integration of emerging programming,
authoring or problem solving
environments that support
personal/professional development
16. Setting and manipulating
preferences and defaults of operating
systems and productivity tool programs,
and troubleshooting problems associated
with their operation
17. Staying abreast of current
telecommunications tools and resources
for information sharing, remote
information access, and
multimedia/hypermedia publishing in
order to nurture student learning
18. Selecting and supporting the
adoption of collaborative learning tools,
such electronic mail, online
conferencing and web browsers
19. Analyzing and recommending
appropriate technology resources to
enable and empower learners with
diverse backgrounds, characteristics, and
abilities
20. Analyzing and recommending
appropriate adaptive/assistive hardware
and software for students and teachers
with special needs and assist in
procurement and implementation
21. Recommending appropriate
technology resources to affirm diversity
and address cultural and language
differences
22. Recommending appropriate
technology resources to promote safe
and healthy use of technology.
23. Considering how instructional
technologies recommended for purchase
would be best implemented in classroom
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Leader
3c, 5f
Learning &
Development
Leader
1.2, 1.5
3c
Operations
1.5
5f
Learning &
Development
Leader
1.2, 1.5
2c
Learning &
Development
Leader
1.2, 1.5
6a, 6c, 6d
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
6a, 6c, 6d
6a, 6c, 6d
4e
4e
Learning &
Development
Leader
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
Operations
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
1.5
Page 9
of 14
environments
24. Staying abreast of local mass
storage devices and media to store and
retrieve information and resources.
25. Differentiating among issues related
to selecting, installing, and maintaining
wide area networks (WAN) for school
districts, and facilitate integration of
technology infrastructure with the WAN
26. Analyzing software used in
classroom and administrative settings
including productivity tools, information
access /telecommunication tools,
multimedia/hypermedia tools, school
management tools, evaluation/portfolio
tools, and computer-based instruction
27. Evaluating instructional software to
support and enhance the school
curriculum and demonstrate
recommendations for purchase
5f
Leader
Operations
1.5
4e
Operations
1.5
4e
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
4e
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
28. Staying abreast of current
procedures related to troubleshooting
and preventive maintenance on
technology infrastructure
5f
29. Locating and disseminating current
research on product availability, design,
and use in educational technology
30. Understanding the history of
development and availability of
instructional technology tools
31. Applying effective group process
skills to support the selection and
evaluation of instructional technologies
in school settings
32. Disseminating best practices in
effective group process skills to support
the selection and evaluation of
instructional technologies in school
settings
1a
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
1b
2c, 4e
1a, 4e
Learning &
Development
Leader
Operations
Leader
Learning &
Development
Leader
Learning &
Development
Leader
Learning &
Development
Leader
Relationship
Leader
Learning &
Development
Leader
1.2, 1.5
1.2, 1.5
1.2, 1.5
1.6
1.2, 1.5
Page 10
of 14
*Georgia’s Leadership Institute for School Improvement & Georgia Committee on Educational
Leadership Preparation’s Distributed School Leadership Roles
COURSE OUTLINE:
1. Taxonomies of available tools
2. Trends in classroom uses of technology
a. 1:1 initiatives
b. wireless learning environments
c. handheld devices
d. online/virtual learning
e. e-texts
f. parent/school communications
g. student assessment systems
3. Critical evaluation components
a. content standards
b. technical support
c. interface
d. affective considerations
e. robustness
f. features
g. pedagogy
h. supplementary materials
i. interoperability
j. digital safety
4. Building evaluation tools
5. Selecting and training evaluators
6. Principles of field testing
7. Evaluating emerging technologies
8. Researching specifications
9. Evaluating implementation
COURSE REQUIREMENTS/ASSIGNMENTS:
1. Candidates will participate in a series of online discussion forums and in-class activities
responding to assigned readings, recommended websites, and critical issues related to the
professional learning and instructional technology. Candidate responses should relate not
only to the question(s), but also to the comments made by classmates and/or instructor.
These responses should clearly demonstrate that candidates have read the required
articles, thoroughly examined recommended websites, and participated fully in course
assignments and exercises. Responses should be relevant to the topic and should serve to
move the discussion forward—not simply agree or disagree with what has already been
stated. Candidates should interact with classmates constructively and respectively,
allowing for everyone to participate. Candidates should follow the rules of netiquette to
be provided in class.
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 11
of 14
2. In small groups, candidates will evaluate a group of comparable instructional technology
products as if they were being considered for purchase. Groups will develop a rubric for
evaluating the products and they will use this rubric to conduct an evaluation of products
as if they were a selection committee.
3. The group will also develop field test instruments for their selected technology products.
Instruments will depend on the type of the product. They may include observation
guides, interview protocols, focus group questions, or another type of informationgathering tool. Groups submit the following along with their field test instruments for
grading: (1) a description of how the instruments will be administered; (2) a description
of how collected data will be analyzed; (3) a description of how the field test will inform
product selection; and (4) a reflection of what they learned through the process and what
unanswered questions/issues about evaluating products still remain. Each individual
group member will conduct a field test and all result will be compiled.
4. Group will develop a plan for evaluating the impact of a specific technology in a school
and/or district
5. Groups will present their evaluation projects (#2-4) to the class.
EVALUATION AND GRADING:
Online and In-class Discussion of Readings (25% of grade)
Product Evaluation Project (35%)
Field Test (15%)
Impact Evaluation Plan (15%)
Group presentation on Product Evaluation (10%)
A:
B:
C:
F:
92% - 100%
84%-91%
75%-83%
74% or lower
Note: All written work should reflect careful organization of material and the high standards of
investigation associated with college-level studies. Papers should be typewritten, on 8 1/2 x 11 in. paper.
Action research work submitted should follow APA format. Manuscripts must be proof read to ensure
accuracy in spelling, punctuation, and grammar. Written work should be attractive and neat -ESPECIALLY WITH MATERIALS INTENDED FOR STUDENT USE.
ACADEMIC HONESTY STATEMENT:
The KSU Graduate Catalog states “KSU expects that graduate students will pursue their
academic programs in an ethical, professional manner. Any work that students present in
fulfillment of program or course requirements should reflect their own efforts, achieved without
giving or receiving any unauthorized assistance. Any student who is found to have violated these
expectations will be subject to disciplinary action.”
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 12
of 14
PROFESSIONALISM: CLASS ATTENDANCE/PARTICIPATION POLICY:
Attendance is required for each class session, and candidates are expected to be on time. Part of
your success in this class is related to your ability to provide peer reviews and feedback to your
group members regarding group projects. Furthermore, responding effectively and appropriately
to feedback from your peers and the professor is another measure of one’s professionalism. Since
each class meeting represents one week of instruction/learning, failure to attend class will impact
your performance on assignments and final exams. Class discussions, group work, and activities
require that everyone be present. There is no way to “make up” this class. Please be prepared
with all readings completed prior to class. You are expected to ask insightful and pertinent
questions.
REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Anderson, B. (1993). The stages of systemic change. Educational Leadership, 51 (1), 1418.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (2000). (Eds.), How people learn: Mind, brain,
experience and school, Expanded Edition. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
(Co-author).
ASCD. (1997 Yearbook). Rethinking educational change with heart and mind. Editor:
Andy Hargreaves, Alexandria, VA: ASCD Publications.
Bernhardt, R., Hedley, C., Cattaro, G., and Svolopoulos, V. (eds.). (1994). Curriculum
leadership: Rethinking schools for the 21st century. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Caine, R., and Caine, G. (1997). Education on the edge of possibility. Alexandria, VA:
ASCD Publications.
Coppola, B. P., Stewart, I. S. (2002, August). Technologies for student-generated work in a
peer-led, peer-review instructional environment. In G. Reiss Romoli (Ed.), Proceedings
of the 2002 International Conference on Advances in Infrastructure for Electronic
Business, Science, and Education on the Internet, L'Aquila, Italy.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). The right to learn: A blueprint for creating schools that
work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
DiGiano, C., Yarnall, L., Patton, C., Roschelle, J., Tatar, D. G., & Manley, M. (2002).
Collaboration design patterns: Conceptual tools for planning for the wireless classroom.
Proceedings of WMTE 2002 (pp. 39-47).
Doll, R. Curriculum improvement: Decision making and process. (9th ed.). Boston:
Allyn and Bacon.
Glickman, C. (1998). Revolutionizing America’s schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Gray, J. & Tatar, D. (2004) Sociocultural analysis of online professional development: A
case study of personal, interpersonal, community, and technical aspects. In Barab,
S.A., Kling, R., & Gray, J. H. (Eds.). Designing for virtual communities in the service
of learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kozma, R. (Ed.) (2003). Technology, innovation, and educational change: A global
perspective. Eugene, OR: International Society for Educational Technology.
McNeil, J. (1996). Curriculum,: A comprehensive introduction. (5th ed.).New York:
HarperCollins.
Pea, R.D., Gomez, L. M., Edelson, D.C., Fishman, B. J., Gordin, D. N., & O’Neill, D. K.
(1997). Science education as a driver of cyberspace technology development. In K. C.
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 13
of 14
Cohen (Ed.), Internet links for science education (pp. 189-220). New York, NY:
Plenum Press.
Ranney, M. & Schank, P. (1998). Toward an integration of the social and the scientific;
Observing, modeling, and promoting the explanatory coherence of reasoning. In S.
Read & L. Miller (Eds.), Connectionist models of social reasoning and social behavior, pp.
245-274. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Schank, P., Fenton, J., Schlager, M.S., & Fusco, J. (1999). From MOO to MEOW:
Domesticating technology for online communities. In C. Hoadley (Ed.), Computer
Support for Collaborative Learning (CSCL) 1999, pp. 518-526, Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc..
Schlager, M. S., & Schank, P. (1997). TAPPED IN: A new on-line community concept for
the next generation of Internet technology. In R. Hall, N. Miyake & N. Enyedy (Eds.),
Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Computer Support for
Collaborative Learning, pp. 231-240. Hillsdale, NJ; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Inc..
Sprenger, M. (1999). Learning & memory: The brain in action. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum development.
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 14
of 14