Kennesaw State University
Bagwell College of Education
Department of Educational Leadership
Course Prefix/Number: ITEC 3100
Course Title: Improving Learning with Technology in Elementary Classrooms
_________________________________________________________________
Instructors/Contact Information: (TBD)
Course Meetings:
3 hours per week in a Cobb County, Area Two Elementary School
Required Texts:
Roblyer, M. & Doering, A. (2009). Integrating Technology into Teaching, (5th ed.), Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Course Description:
Teacher candidates learn to use technologies to promote student achievement in elementary contentarea and technology literacy standards. Special topics include using technology to improve students'
English language learning, to assess student learning, and to differentiate instruction. Candidates
also learn to manage their digital activities in ways appropriate for a professional educator; advocate
for students without beyond-school access; and teach K-12 students how to use technology safely,
ethically, and legally.
Purpose and Rationale:
In an era when the needs of students are rapidly changing, schools are not providing digital-age
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encourage the already-growing student perceptions that schools are outdated and irrelevant to their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 digital-age 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 postsecondary studies, daily work in various professional and technical fields, life-long learning, and
civic engagement. Students and teachers may also lack the skills to engage in safe and responsible
use of technology for work and learning. Research suggests that these disparities are more
pronounced and bear greater economic consequences for students in urban settings. Providing
students with instruction on how to engage in safe and responsible use is required by the Children’s
Internet Protection Act (CIPA) and comprises one of the major standards categories in both the
National Education Technology Standards for Students and for Teachers (NETS-S, NETS-T).
Standards Addressed:
PTEU OUTCOMES AND PROFICIENCIES FOR INITIAL PROGRAMS:
OUTCOMES & PROFICIENCIES
OUTCOME 1: Subject Matter Expert
1.1 Candidate possesses knowledge of discipline content, methods of inquiry, and
connections to other disciplines and applications to common life experiences.
1.2 Candidate knows and represents content accurately in multiple explanations,
technology integration, and the application of various instructional strategies.
1.3 Candidate uses content and pedagogical knowledge to assist students in the mastery
of subject matter knowledge.
OUTCOME 2: Facilitator of Learning
2.1 Candidate demonstrates knowledge of how learners develop, learn and think about
subject content, as well as successful strategies to motivate students to learn.
2.2 Candidate uses knowledge of the influences of society, culture, community, and
family on schools and learning to create and implement instruction that embodies
multiple cultures and a rich, diverse curriculum.
2.3 Candidate creates effective, well-managed and active learning environments that
reflect high expectations for student achievement.
2.4 Candidate designs and implements instruction that makes effective use of a variety of
methods, materials, and technologies to positively impact learning of all students.
2.5 Candidate utilizes a variety of assessments to evaluate student learning and uses the
results to improve the quality of instruction that is differentiated to accommodate
students’ diversities.
OUTCOME 3: Collaborative Professional
3.1 Candidate reflects upon and improves professional performance based on
professional standards, feedback, best practices and effective communication.
3.2 Candidate builds collaborative and respectful relationships with colleagues,
supervisors, students, parents and community members.
3.3 Candidate displays professional and ethical behavior consistent with recognized
educational standards and codes of ethics.
KSD
NCATE STANDARD
K
Content
S
Pedagogical Content
S
Pedagogical Content
K
Pedagogical & Professional
K
Pedagogical & Professional
S
Pedagogical & Professional
S
Pedagogical & Professional
Student Learning
Pedagogical & Professional
Student Learning
S
D
Disposition
D
Disposition
D
Disposition
EDUCATION TECHNOLOGY STANDARDS FOR TEACHERS
(International Society for Technology in Education, 2008)
1. Facilitate and Inspire Student Learning and Creativity
Teachers use their knowledge of subject matter, teaching and learning, and technology to facilitate experiences that advance student
learning, creativity, and innovation in both face-to-face and virtual environments. Teachers:
a.
promote, support, and model creative and innovative thinking and inventiveness.
b. engage students in exploring real-world issues and solving authentic problems using digital tools and resources.
c.
promote student reflection using collaborative tools to reveal and clarify students' conceptual understanding and thinking,
planning, and creative processes.
d.
model collaborative knowledge construction by engaging in learning with students, colleagues, and others in face-to-face and
virtual environments.
2. Design and Develop Digital-Age Learning Experiences and Assessments
Teachers design, develop, and evaluate authentic learning experiences and assessment incorporating contemporary tools and
resources to maximize content learning in context and to develop the knowledge, skills, and attitudes identified in the NETS•S.
Teachers:
a.
design or adapt relevant learning experiences that incorporate digital tools and resources to promote student learning and
creativity.
b.
develop technology-enriched learning environments that enable all students to pursue their individual curiosities and become
active participants in setting their own educational goals, managing their own learning, and assessing their own progress.
2
c.
customize and personalize learning activities to address students' diverse learning styles, working strategies, and abilities using
digital tools and resources.
d.
provide students with multiple and varied formative and summative assessments aligned with content and technology
standards and use resulting data to inform learning and teaching.
3. Model Digital-Age Work and Learning
Teachers exhibit knowledge, skills, and work processes representative of an innovative professional in a global and digital society.
Teachers:
a.
demonstrate fluency in technology systems and the transfer of current knowledge to new technologies and situations.
b.
collaborate with students, peers, parents, and community members using digital tools and resources to support student
success and innovation.
c.
communicate relevant information and ideas effectively to students, parents, and peers using a variety of digital-age media
and formats.
d.
model and facilitate effective use of current and emerging digital tools to locate, analyze, evaluate, and use information
resources to support research and learning.
4. Promote and Model Digital Citizenship and Responsibility
Teachers understand local and global societal issues and responsibilities in an evolving digital culture and exhibit legal and ethical
behavior in their professional practices. Teachers:
a.
advocate, model, and teach safe, legal, and ethical use of digital information and technology, including respect for
copyright, intellectual property, and the appropriate documentation of sources.
b.
address the diverse needs of all learners by using learner-centered strategies providing equitable access to appropriate
digital tools and resources.
c.
promote and model digital etiquette and responsible social interactions related to the use of technology and information.
d.
develop and model cultural understanding and global awareness by engaging with colleagues and students of other cultures
using digital-age communication and collaboration tools.
5. Engage in Professional Growth and Leadership
Teachers continuously improve their professional practice, model lifelong learning, and exhibit leadership in their
school and professional community by promoting and demonstrating the effective use of digital tools and resources.
Teachers:
a.
participate in local and global learning communities to explore creative applications of technology to improve
student learning.
b.
exhibit leadership by demonstrating a vision of technology infusion, participating in shared decision making
and community building, and developing the leadership and technology skills of others.
c.
evaluate and reflect on current research and professional practice on a regular basis to make effective use of
existing and emerging digital tools and resources in support of student learning.
d.
contribute to the effectiveness, vitality, and self-renewal of the teaching profession and of their school and
community.
COURSE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
3
Course Goals
Teacher candidates will:
PTEU
Outcomes/
Proficiencies
for Initial
Program
NCATE
Standards
National
Education
Technology
Standards
for Teachers
(NETS-T)
Assignments &
Activities
(Bold Denotes a Fieldbased Assignment)
1. Identify and explain the diverse
needs of digital-age learners,
especially students failing to
meet academic standards and/or
successfully complete high
school.
2. Identify, select and be able to
use research-based teaching
practices and instructional
resources/tools best suited to
meeting the diverse needs and
wants of digital-age learners and
to teaching concepts/standards in
individual content areas.
3. Design learning experiences for
students that use technology and
authentic, interdisciplinary,
inquiry-based, student-centered
teaching practices to motivate
students and to foster students’
higher-order thinking, creativity,
and academic achievement of
state and national learning
standards in the content areas.
Outcomes 2.1, 2.2
Pedagogical
&
Professional
Standards 1.ad
Outcomes 2.3, 2.4
Pedagogical
&
Professional
Student
Learning
Standards1.ad; 2.a-d
Outcomes 2.3, 2.4
Pedagogical
&
Professional
Student
Learning
Standards1.ad; 2.a-d
Instructional Technology
Projects/Context Papers
4. Design technology-rich, researchbased learning experiences that
address the content area learning
needs of English Language
Learners and Special Education
students.
Outcomes 2.2,
2.3, 2.4
Pedagogical
&
Professional
Student
Learning
Standard 2.c
Instructional Technology
Projects/Context Papers
5. Reflect on implementation of
technology in schools and
develop strategies for moving
toward technology uses that
focus on authentic,
interdisciplinary, inquiry-based,
student-centered learning
experiences in the classroom.
Outcomes 3.1
Digital-age Learners
Readings/Discussions/
Reflections
Instructional Technology
Projects/Context Papers
Core-content area project
Chapters 3-15, Text and
Discussion Questions
In-class demonstrations
Chapter 9, Text and
Discussion Questions
Lecture/Demonstrations
Disposition
Standards1.ad; 2.a-d; 4.d;
5.c
Instructional Technology
Projects/Context Papers
In-class discussion of video
models
4
COURSE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES (continued)
Course Goals
Teacher candidates will:
PTEU
Outcomes/
Proficiencies
for Initial
Program
NCATE
Standards
National
Education
Technology
Standards for
Teachers
(NETS-T)
Assignments &
Activities
6. Strive to provide students with in
technology-rich learning
experiences, even when students
may lack beyond-school access
to computers and to technologybased content that is responsive
to their cultural backgrounds and
experiences.
7. Use research-based strategies,
including technology-based
solutions, to assess student
learning and differentiate
instruction to accommodate
students’ diversities.
8. Use information and
communication technologies to
engage parents and other
community members in
improving students’ academic
achievement in the content areas.
9. Promote and model safe, legal,
and ethical use of technology
when working and learning,
especially in highly social and
collaborative environments
enabled by information and
communication technologies.
10. Develop strategies to engage in
ongoing professional learning
about teaching, learning, and
instructional technology.
Outcome 2.2, 3.3
Pedagogical
&
Professional;
Disposition
Standards1.a-d;
2 a-d;
Digital Equity
Readings/Discussions/
Reflections
Outcome 2.5
Pedagogical
&
Professional
Student
Learning
Standard 4b
Instructional Technology
Projects/Context Papers
Outcome 3.2
Disposition
Standards 3.b-c
Outcome 3.1, 3.3
Disposition
Standards 4.a-d
In-class
discussion/modeling of
technology-supported
assessment and
differentiation strategies
Digital Equity
Readings/Discussions/
Reflections
Chapter 8, text
Readings/Discussions/
Reflections
Other assigned Readings
on Web 2.0, Internet
Safety, and respect for
copyright and intellectual
property
Outcome 3.3
Disposition
Standards 5.a-d
Professional Learning
Reflections in Study
Guides
Course Expectations
Professionalism: A professionalism component is included in the evaluation of the Urban Education Field Experience.
It is expected that future teachers will conduct themselves with the professionalism required of practicing teachers.
Please note that meeting expectations for teachers is usually what others consider to be exceeding expectations. Urban
Education teacher candidates are entering a profession of extremely high standards and they are expected to live up to
that standard daily. Keep in mind that the way that you interact with peers, faculty, the KSU Team, and the
collaborating teacher has proved to be indicative of how you will interact with your future students, colleagues, and
administrators.
Professional behavior will be monitored in this course. Your collaborating teacher will submit a Professionalism Form
at the mid-term and at the end of your field experience. At the end of the field experience, you, your collaborating
teacher, and your KSU supervisor will evaluate your professionalism on the CPI. Should concerns arise regarding an
individual teacher candidate, the instructors of this course will communicate these concerns to the teacher candidate and
5
to the middle grades education program coordinator with the purpose of drawing attention to deficiencies so that they
may be remedied before further field placements.
IF, AT ANY TIME, AN URBAN EDUCATION INSTRUCTOR, SUPERVISOR, COLLABORATING
TEACHER, OR SCHOOL PRINCIPAL QUESTIONS A TEACHER CANDIDATE’S PROFESSIONAL
CONDUCT, APPROPRIATE ACTION WILL BE TAKEN. SUCH ACTION MAY INCLUDE THE
DEVELOPMENT OF A PLAN FOR THE TEACHER CANDIDATE TO COMPLETE BY THE END OF THE
SEMESTER OR THE REMOVAL OF THE TEACHER CANDIDATE FROM THE URBAN EDUCATION
FIELD EXPERIENCE. A TEACHER CANDIDATE MUST DEMONSTRATE ACCEPTABLE PROFESSIONAL
BEHAVIOR AND HAVE A SUCCESSFUL FIELD EXPERIENCE TO RECEIVE A PASSING GRADE IN
TOSS.
Course Requirements and Assignments: Announcements, important dates and assignments will be available
electronically on Georgia View. It is the candidate’s responsibility to check Georgia View daily.
Academic Honesty: Every KSU student is responsible for upholding the provisions of the Student Code of Conduct, as
published in the Undergraduate and Graduate Catalogs http://www.kennesaw.edu/judiciary/code.conduct.shtml. 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 either 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.
Attendance: Attendance is required for all classes. Instructor can excuse absences at his or her discretion. Excused
absences require prior notification. Excused absences only include unavoidable circumstances, including illness and
other immediate family emergencies. Make-up assignments are only allowed for excused absences. Students missing
more than three class periods (excused or otherwise) during the semester cannot earn more than a C in the course.
Late work: Late work will be accepted for up to two assignments submitted within three days of original due date/time.
One letter grade will be deducted per day for late assignments. All assignments must be completed to receive a passing
grade for the course, even though zeroes will be awarded for assignments that are submitted after the three-day period
or for the third late assignment. Extensions can be granted in rare, extenuating circumstances and the student should
discuss this possibility directly with the instructor.
Laptop Policy: The use of laptops and/or PDA's in class for note-taking and other class activities is allowed and
welcomed. However, when using such devices, students must be doing the work of the class, and nothing else. If a
student is found to be using a laptop or PDA for purposes other than class work, he or she will no longer be allowed to
use either device in the class. This policy will be strictly enforced.
Conceptual Framework
Collaborative Development of Expertise in Teaching and Learning: The Kennesaw State University teacher
education faculty is committed to preparing teachers who demonstrate expertise in facilitating learning in all students.
Toward that end, the KSU teacher education community strongly upholds the concept of collaborative preparation
requiring guidance from professionals inside and outside the university. In tandem with this belief is the understanding
that teacher expertise develops along a continuum which includes the stages of preservice, induction, in-service, and
renewal; further, as candidates develop a strong research-based knowledge of content and pedagogy, they develop their
professional expertise in recognizing, facilitating, assessing, and evaluating student 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 believes 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 endstate but a process of continued development.
6
Use of Technology: Technology Standards for Educators are required by the Professional Standards Commission.
Telecommunication and information technologies will be integrated throughout the 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,
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 use
presentation software.
Diversity Statement: A variety of material and instructional strategies will be employed to meet the needs of different
learning styles of diverse learners in class. Students will gain knowledge, skills, and understanding to provide effective
instruction in multicultural classrooms. 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 help disabled students with their academic work.
In order to make arrangements for special services, students must visit the Office of Disabled Student Support Services
(ext. 6443) and arrange an individual assistance plan. In some cases, certification of disability is required.
Assignments:
1.
INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY PROJECTS (775 points): Individual projects. Work with cooperating
teacher to identify required content standards to be taught during your field experiences for other classes.
Design the following Instructional Technology Projects to address one or more of those learning standards:
Note: You will have hands-on instruction teaching you how to do all of the projects. Some will be completed in
class. Further criteria will be given in class.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
2.
Classroom Blog using EduBlogs or TypePad (50 Points)
Slide Show using PhotoStory (50 points)
Two-minute Instructional Video using MovieMaker (150 points)
Audio Podcast using Audacity, Lame, and iTunes (75 points)
A Beyond-the-Basics Project using one of the following (75 points)
 Kid Pix
 TimeLiner XE
 Inspiration or KidSpiration
 Community Construction Machine
 Neighborhood Map Machine
ActivInspire Flip Chart (150 points) and Learner Response System Component using ActivVotes or
iRespond (50 points)
Student SpreadSheet Activity using Excel or Graph Club (50 points)
Instructional Software Project using one of the following (50 points):
 Fastt Math
 FractioNation
 Accelerated Reader
 Go Solve
 MegaMath
A grade-appropriate Online Collaborative Project chosen from Nettrekker, the text book, or Dr.
Williamson’s collection at: edtechleader.net/nextstep (75 points)
CONTEXT PAPERS: With each technology project, submit a one-page Context Paper including the following
(50 points each, 450 points):
a.
b.
c.
Student Learning Outcomes: For what grade level is this project designed? What content standards are
being addressed? What Technology Literacy Standards? What are students learning? If applicable,
describe what Enduring understandings students will take away from this learning experience and
what Essential Questions will guide their learning.
Summary of Classroom Learning Context: Describe how this technology will be implemented in the
classroom. What will students and teachers do? How will the lesson be introduced? How long will it
take to complete? What will happen after the lesson?
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?
7
d.
e.
f.
g.
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?
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?
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?
Analysis of Level of Technology Implementation: What is the LoTi level and why?
(* NOTE: At least 3 out of the 9 projects must reach a LoTi Level 4 or above. For an A, at least 1 of your projects
should reach a LoTi Level 5 or above, which requires authenticity, collaboration and higher-order thinking.)
11. CORE CONTENT AREA PROJECT: Individual Assignment. Choose one of the following content areas: ELL,
Special Education, Science, Math, Social Studies, or English Language Arts. Complete a 10-15 minute narrated
PowerPoint presentation answering the following questions:
a. What technologies are available (free online or provided by the district) for supporting standards-based
learning in the specific content area/grade level in which you will student teach? (Choose the appropriate
chapter of Roblyer (9-15) to serve as a guide for your research, but also explore other chapters in the
book and beyond the book—Websites, teacher interviews, etc. Try to move beyond the basic technologies
we studied for the technology projects to include content-specific software, peripherals, and online
resources. Focus on technologies that can be used in the classroom with students. Cite sources of
information at the end of your presentation.)
b. How might you use these technologies in your student teaching? What standards will they support?
c. How can they support meaningful, engaging, authentic learning for digital-age learners?
d. What other technologies are not available that might be promising for the school/district to consider for
future instruction in the grade/content area where you will teach?
12. ASSIGNED READINGS/STUDY GUIDES/QUIZZES/ PARTICIPATION: Students are expected to complete
all assigned readings, complete Study Guides (30 each/300 points), and participate/contribute to class discussions
and activities. Instructor will award Participation Points for each class (10 points each class/160 total). If absent,
participation points will not be awarded. If late, inattentive, or disruptive points will be deducted. Approximately
three Quizzes (200 points total) will be given to ensure readings are completed and course content is understood
and synthesized.
Bibliography:
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.
8
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 21st 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
9
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), 122.
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.
10