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