Action Research Project
Effective Technology Professional Development
RJ Dake and John Gable
Partnership Statement
RJ Dake is a High School Technology Coordinator and Business teacher. Through his
fifteen years of teaching, he has also worked at the Elementary level as a classroom
teacher and Chapter - 1 Coordinator and in Alternative Education as a Computer and
Independent Study Teacher. RJ contributed by handling the advertisement, scheduling,
and lab and software preparation for the professional development implementation. He
encouraged and participated in the examination of Advance Organizers and NonLinguistic Representations as part of the instruction via websites, tools built into word
processing programs such as Word, and software such as Inspiration. He is co-author of
the Review of Relevant Literature.
John Gable is a Computer Lab teacher and Technology Coordinator at the Elementary
level. He has been teaching with technology for almost 10 years. John contributed to the
project by writing the professional development portions of the Review of Literature,
developing the BlackBoard (see http://coursesites.blackboard.com/) website along with
many of the course materials, and writing the action research study.
Background
Data collected from nearly 1000 district teachers who completed the CTAP2 Technology
Use Survey (see http://ctap2.iassessment.org/) suggested that teachers needed more
technology professional development. Only 22% of the teachers used the Internet on a
daily basis for classroom instruction with 36% using it less than once a month or never.
When asked how well prepared they felt to use computers and or the Internet for
classroom instruction, 69% of the teachers said they were somewhat or not at all
prepared. 75% of the teachers surveyed had participated in 20 hours or less of
technology professional development in the past three years with 47% having 1 to 8
hours. Approximately 75% of the teachers also wanted training in integrating technology
into their curriculum. Their preferences for how the training should occur showed that
80% wanted the training to occur in small groups and 67% of the teachers preferred that
training to take place after school.
The district curriculum standards and benchmarks had technology requirements. The
requirements stated that students use and understand technology. Most of these occurred
in the writing standards beginning in the third grade, but such requirements were present
in the other language arts areas as well as science. Students were expected to know how
to use word processing and presentation software, and conduct research using a variety of
electronic sources including the Internet and databases. Technology use by students was
woven into many of the textbook adoptions. A look at the district level professional
development offerings for the previous year showed little if any courses designed to help
teachers with the technology requirements in the standards or the textbooks in use. A
recent state funded program that paid teachers to attend 40 hours of professional
development on the new Language Arts textbook adoption had not a single mention of
technology integration.
Although technology appeared in the district curriculum standards and benchmarks there
were no real requirements that teachers use technology in the classroom beyond taking
attendance online. Technology use was not mentioned during the biannual teacher
review process. There were only two full time technology integration specialists in a
district of over 50,000 students and they worked for technology services instead of the
curriculum division. Lastly, school site administrators had no incentive to promote
technology use at their schools and only those few who had a personal interest in
technology did so.
Description of the Project
The study measured the effectiveness of professional development training in the area of
technology integration. The study made an assumption that if the training was successful
and teachers were likely to implement strategies taught in their own classrooms, then
students might benefit. As shown in the review of literature, effective professional
development training with student achievement as the goal motivates teachers to learn
and use what they learned in the classroom. The course was offered to all teachers in the
district as a four session after school professional development workshop. Teachers
completed an online survey to determine their attitudes towards technology use before
and after the course. In order to receive district salary credit for the course teachers
attended four classes and completed weekly assignments.
Schedule
First Class
We started our course by introducing the idea of using research-based instructional
strategies with technology to increase student achievement. Although we were teaching
in a computer lab we let the teachers know the computers were only there as tools to help
them use the strategies. We knew that some teachers may already be using strategies but
we wanted to show them how easy they could be used with technology. We talked about
technology use in the classroom and what it meant to teaching with a quick survey of the
technology priorities for teachers. This along with a PowerPoint slideshow led to a short
discussion of technology use. We introduced the idea of using Blackboard.com as an
electronic syllabus and course facilitator and demonstrated how to set up an account with
another PowerPoint slideshow. After creating a Blackboard login teachers took the
survey created for the class online. We then discussed and demonstrated the need for
teachers to be capable of searching the Internet to find valid sources of information to
help them complete this class and as a tool for future use in their classroom. Teachers
then set out to complete the assignments for class one which included a Filamentality
Treasure Hunt.
Second Class
We started class two with a review of the first week assignments concerning locating and
validating information on the Internet. We tied the idea of how much information the
Internet offered into our second week goal, which was to explore ways of organizing
information using the computer. We discussed as a group using advance organizers,
scaffolding, concept attainment, and concept mapping. The class worked together on an
organization activity and then was introduced to the software program known as
Inspiration. After a brief demo, teachers set out to complete the Inspiration tutorial with
the idea of applying Inspiration to their own teaching. Throughout the second class and
all of the classes we encouraged the teachers to apply what they were learning to their
own classroom and provided guided practice with all the assignments. We quickly
analyzed the rough levels of technology use proficiency in the room through observation
and attempted to pair up teachers who could help each other. The fact that there were two
instructors to assist the students helped the class immensely.
Third Class
The goal of the third class was to explore adding web-based resources to a current
learning activity. After reviewing week two activities and a demonstration of creating
graphic organizers without Inspiration (a few teachers suggested this as they did not
know if their site would buy them Inspiration), we discussed adding technology to an
existing lesson. Using the ACOT method known as unit of practice we asked the
teachers to recall a recent lesson they enjoyed teaching and try to imagine it becoming
even more effective with technology. We demonstrated a technology-enhanced lesson
using Filamentality (see http://www.kn.pacbell.com/wired/fil/), a free web-based product
they all had used in a lesson one activity we devised. This time they would be creating
their own Filamentality product. Using the web resources we introduced in class one on
our Blackboard site, teachers had plenty of time in this session to discuss, think about and
create a technology-enhanced lesson.
Fourth Class
After sharing the Filamentality projects created in the third class, we explored the topic of
using rubrics to enhance learning. Most teachers knew about the idea, although not many
were taking the time to create them for use in the classroom. We viewed some of the
online resources for rubrics and then created one for the teachers to see using Rubistar
(see http://rubistar.4teachers.org/index.php). Teachers were next challenged to apply
what they saw to a unit, project or lesson in their own teaching that could benefit from a
rubric. The teachers then created their own rubrics. We had the teachers print copies of
their rubrics to share with the class. The course ended with teachers completing our
survey along with the generic district survey. We reminded teachers that the Blackboard
site would be live for a few weeks if they wanted to download any of the resources from
the class, bookmark the favorites we listed or contact us with questions.
Action Plan
Purpose of Research – Area of Focus
The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of effective technology professional
development on teacher attitudes towards technology use in the classroom.
Research Questions
1. How did teacher attitudes towards technology use in the classroom change with
effective technology professional development?
2. How could technology use be integrated into professional development designed
to improve teaching skills and student achievement?
Intervention
The intent of our project was to demonstrate that technology could be integrated into a
typical district level professional development course. We administered a pre and post
course survey to understand teacher attitudes towards technology use along with the
standard district professional development evaluation survey. We created an online
supplement to the course using Blackboard.com to provide teachers with all course
materials, resources and additional links to websites that extend the concepts discussed in
class. We designed assignments for teachers to complete in class that they could take
back to their own classrooms and use immediately. We modeled the concepts research
showed worked most effectively throughout the four classes and both taught all four
classes which effectively reduced our “student to teacher” ratio and provided attendees a
much higher level of service as needed during technology learning time.
Negotiations
We filled out a Professional Learning Workshop Proposal Form for a district-wide
workshop and after some revisions received authorization to conduct a workshop. The
workshop was advertised with a flyer sent via email to teachers throughout the district.
We had 30 teachers sign up for the course using the district phone registration system. At
the first class, we observed 22 teachers had signed in. Sixteen teachers actually attended
all four courses and received district credit. Teachers were advised that we were
conducting action research for a graduate project.
Timeline
In September we reviewed related literature (professional development, classroom
instruction and student achievement, and effective technology professional development)
and developed a course outline. Then in October we refined our course outline and
developed the course survey based on current research of technology attitude surveys.
We divided the course into four ninety-minute classes and planned course materials
needed along with constructing the BlackBoard.com web site. During November and
December we taught the course, collected data and began to analyze it.
Resources
The resources utilized for this course included a computer lab with Internet access,
handouts, digital projector and a Blackboard.com web site. Inspiration software was
introduced along with instructions on how to download a demo copy and purchase at
special district license pricing.
Data Collection
The researchers collected both qualitative and quantitative data and used triangulation to
ensure qualitative data was valid. The Pre-course/Post-course survey measured change in
attitude during course concerning the importance of technology to teachers, while
instructor observations along with district evaluation surveys measured teacher
satisfaction with material presented.
Discussion of Findings
Our research project was borne out of concern for the lack of technology professional
development in the district. We observed as technology teachers that the district
apparently had enough money to buy computers but not enough money to provide
teachers with the learning needed to use them in their teaching. Only when the district
received federal or state grants that required technology professional development, was
any training provided. These courses were then offered to those few teachers directly
involved in the grant. We decided to create an offering that would demonstrate how
technology use could be integrated into a typical district professional development course
that was available to all teachers.
Data Analysis
We started this project with the thought that all teachers, regardless of their current level
of technology use, could benefit from our idea of adding technology to a typical district
professional development course. Our course would address two important needs
simultaneously. First, teachers need to learn and use research-based strategies if their
students are going to achieve more. Second, teachers need to know how to integrate
technology into their curriculum. Our survey focused on teacher attitudes towards
technology use. We wanted to see if their attitudes would change after our course. We
used questions from research tools (see http://www.tcet.unt.edu/research/instrumt.htm)
involving teacher attitudes (see http://www.tcet.unt.edu/pubs/studies/index.htm) towards
technology developed by Gerald Knezek, Rhonda Christensen, and Keiko Miyashita at
the Texas Center for Educational Technology. (see http://www.tcet.unt.edu/) The
internal consistency reliability (see http://www.tcet.unt.edu/pubs/studies/reliable.htm) for
the question subsets we used ranged from .81-.98. The Texas Center for Educational
Technology is located at the University of North Texas and was established in 1990 by
the Texas legislature as part of the Texas Long-Range Plan for Technology.
Question 3 The challenge of learning about computers is exciting.
Pre-Survey
Post-Survey
Strongly Disagree
0%
0%
Disagree
14%
0%
Undecided
14%
12%
Agree
36%
56%
Strongly Agree
36%
31%
Question 17 Computers can help me learn
Pre-Survey
Strongly Disagree
0%
Disagree
0%
Undecided
5%
Agree
64%
Strongly Agree
32%
Post-Survey
0%
0%
0%
50%
50%
Question 18 Computers are necessary tools in both educational and
work settings
Pre-Survey
Post-Survey
Strongly Disagree
5%
0%
Disagree
0%
0%
Undecided
5%
0%
Agree
36%
38%
Strongly Agree
55%
62%
Question 19 Computers can be useful instructional aids in almost all
subject areas.
Pre-Survey
Post-Survey
Strongly Disagree
0%
0%
Disagree
0%
0%
Undecided
5%
0%
Agree
55%
56%
Strongly Agree
36%
44%
For Question 3, those who agreed with the statement rose from 36% in the pre-survey to
56% in the post. In Questions 3 and 18 those in disagreement disappeared from the preto post-survey. Question 17 saw those who strongly agreed with the statement rise from
32% in the pre- to 50% in the post-survey. In Questions 17, 18 and 19 those who were
undecided disappeared as well. Finally, in Question 19 those who strongly agreed with
the statement increased from 36% in pre-survey to 44% in the post.
At the end of our survey we included two questions that measured teacher levels of
technology adoption. This gave us the opportunity to analyze where teachers thought
they were upon entering and leaving the course. Question 22 uses the CBAM-LoU v1.1
(Concerns-based Adoption Model- Levels of Use) (see http://www.iittl.unt.edu/IITTL
/publications/studies2b/CBAM-LoUdesc.htm ) survey from the Institute for the
Integration of Technology into Teaching and Learning (see http://www.iittl.unt.edu/), a
research organization run by Gerald Knezek of the Texas Center for Educational
Technology described above. This survey is a quick self-assessment to gauge teacher
progress towards technology integration.
Question 22-Instructions: Please read the descriptions of each of the eight levels related
to adoption of technology. Choose the level that best fits where you are in the adoption
of technology.
Level 0: Non-use
I have little or no knowledge of information technology in education, no involvement
with it, and I am doing nothing toward becoming involved.
Level 1: Orientation
I am seeking or acquiring information about information technology in education.
Level 2: Preparation
I am preparing for the first use of information technology in education.
Level 3: Mechanical Use
I focus most effort on the short-term, day-to-day use of information technology with
little time for reflection. My effort is primarily directed toward mastering tasks
required to use the information technology.
Level 4 A: Routine
I feel comfortable using information technology in education. However, I am putting
forth little effort and thought to improve information technology in education or its
consequences.
Level 4 B: Refinement
I vary the use of information technology in education to increase the expected
benefits within the classroom. I am working on using information technology to
maximize the effects with my students.
Level 5: Integration
I am combining my own efforts with related activities of other teachers and
colleagues to achieve impact in the classroom.
Level 6: Renewal
I reevaluate the quality of use of information technology in education, seek major
modifications of, or alternatives to, present innovation to achieve increased impact,
examine new developments in the field, and explore new goals for myself and my
school or district.
Griffin, D. and Christensen, R. (1999). Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM) Levels of Use of an Innovation (CBAMLOU). Denton, Texas: Institute for the Integration of Technology into Teaching and Learning.
Concerns-based Adoption Model- Levels of Use
50%
44%
45%
40%
35%
27%
30%
27%
Pre
23%
25%
19%
20%
14%
15%
12%
12%
12%
10%
5%
5%
0%0%
0%
Post
0%
5%
0%
0%
0
1
2
3
4A
4B
5
6
Levels
The results of the Concerns-based Adoption Model-Levels of Use (CBAM-LOU) showed
movement among the levels. A large move occurred at Level 4 B: Refinement where in
the pre-survey 27% of the participants identified themselves and in the post 44%. Level
5: Integration identified by 5% of the participants in the pre-survey rose to 19% in the
post-survey. Lastly, a decrease occurred in those identifying themselves at Level 3:
Mechanical Use and Level 4 A: Routine.
4
3.933
3.866
Usefulness of
Information
This Workshop
Was
3.866
Quality of
Material/Informati
on
4.05
4
3.95
3.9
3.85
3.8
3.75
Quality of
Presentation/Pres
enter
Average Score (4 is maximum)
Professional Development Evaluation Form
Criteria
The teachers who attended our course were required to complete a standard district
Professional Development Evaluation Form which included a spot for written comments
along with number scores for Quality of Presentation, Quality of Material and
Information Presented, Usefulness of Information Presented and an overall score for the
workshop where the survey participants responded to “This workshop was”. The scale
for all the questions was: Excellent = 4, Good = 3, Fair = 2, and Poor = 1. These surveys
as all our surveys were done anonymously. The data here show teachers rated every
aspect of the course as excellent.
The comment section of the Professional Development Evaluation Form included two
questions for the participants. Although this was a generic form used in all district
professional development courses the answers offered by teachers provided useful data.
Teachers responded to the question “How will you use this information?” with comments
such as “Rubistar- Great for creating rubrics” “filamentality – very useful to provide info
to students,” “I will definitely share with my coworkers,” and “I have already used it
doing several webquests.” Responses to the second question Comments: (i.e., strengths,
weaknesses, suggestions): included “I enjoyed the hands on/follow along style of
presenting this material. I feel like I learned a lot,” “I love the ability to make graphic
organizers and make rubrics. Thanks!” “I thought the class was great! I was able to use
much of it immediately to enhance instruction & in the Open Court business theme by
creating a Kids in Business workshop! I’d like more classes like this one!” and “Last
three sessions were especially useful.” There were no negative comments although two
teachers did not respond to either of the questions and several teachers only answered the
first question. These comments corresponded with several key points from the review of
literature. The teachers were looking for tools they could use in their teaching that would
help their students and they enjoyed a course design that let them practice and apply what
they learned to their curriculum.
Data Interpretation
Although the data clearly indicate success, having taught many technology professional
development courses in the past, the researchers can also state that this experience was
different and significantly better. The teacher comments highlighted above along with
the near perfect ratings suggested teachers enjoyed their learning experience. We used
our review of the literature concerning professional development; research based
instructional strategies to improve student achievement and technology professional
development to create something useful for teachers. Some of our observations from the
four classes included:
 When teachers realized technology could save them time and improve what they did
with their students, they wanted to use it.
 Teachers enjoyed learning new ways of doing their job better.
 Teachers became excited when they could use technology that applied directly to
what they did in the classroom.
 When we let teachers apply the technology to their specific curriculum, they wanted
to try it.
 Teachers needed time to experiment applying what they learned to their own
classroom.
 Teachers learned new skills, but this course was just the first of many needed over
time if the teachers were to become proficient at integrating technology into their
classrooms.
The data from our initial survey suggested that teachers already had a favorable attitude
towards technology use. The post-survey results suggested that we could make that
attitude even stronger with effective technology professional development. The postsurvey data from the Concerns-based Adoption Model-Levels of Use (Question 22)
demonstrated that the course had a positive effect on the level at which teachers thought
they were in the adoption of technology in the classroom. Post-survey data showed a
significant drop in teachers who rated themselves in the lower levels of technology use
and corresponding increases of teachers who rated themselves at the higher levels.
Although the survey data could not begin to explain what we as researchers observed
during the four-week course, it did provide additional confirmation of those observations.
Teachers who had already worked an entire day in the classroom, left our 90 minute
classes excited to share what they had learned with their colleagues. Teachers who
started the course somewhat apprehensive of even using a computer had discovered how
easy it could be when they directly applied the technology to what they did in their
classroom. Perhaps the most encouraging aspect of the course was observing teachers
using new tools to enhance their teaching. When we let the teachers apply these tools to
their curriculum, it took very little time for them to understand the advantages of using
the technology.
Recommendations for Future Action
It was quite easy for teachers not to use technology in their classrooms at the time of this
study. The instructional emphasis for all teachers was improving student achievement on
standardized tests. Teachers needed to understand how technology could help them and
their students. Our research project set out to demonstrate one way to make it harder for
teachers to ignore the technology in their classroom. We demonstrated through a fourweek offering that technology could be effectively integrated into a course designed to
teach research based instructional strategies to improve student achievement. Our
suggestion for the future is the district look at how it could integrate technology into all
professional development courses. This would provide teachers with regular exposure to
technology integration skills every time they participated in a professional development
course.
Critical Factors For Successful Professional Development
The research suggested that with a focus on teaching, learning and student achievement
you could motivate teachers to learn. We certainly found this to be true in our own
research. The teachers as noted in the observations and as reported in the district surveys
displayed a high degree of satisfaction with the material and the way in which it was
presented. From a technology integration perspective, we again confirmed with our own
observations what the research said: Teachers needed to see how technology could fit in
the classroom and then they needed to be given the time to use it for their own
curriculum. We observed that when the technology was tied directly to the act of
teaching and learning, teachers at every level of technology use were encouraged to use it
as a tool to improve what they did with their students. Perhaps the only major part of the
professional development process we were unable to ensure was that teachers would
actually continue to use what they learned in our course. In order for that to occur we
might have incorporated some form of peer coaching into our design.
Appendix
Below is the course outline from the four classes along with links to many of the websites
used in the course. The comments from the district professional development in-service
evaluation form along with the CTAP2 survey results follow next. To view more of the
research and all the materials used through out course go to the show case section of our
online portfolio (see http://www.jetspost.com/eportfolio/showcase.htm) and follow the
course details and action research appendix links.
Course Outline
 First Class
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Goal-Introduce idea of increasing student achievement & technology
Introductions
What are your priorities? (Handout)
Teachers & Technology, Why Bother? (PowerPoint presentation)
Enrolling in Blackboard (PowerPoint presentation)
Survey
Course Direction
Tools
Why Start With the Internet?
Coursework
 Second Class
o Goal- Explore ways to organize information using a computer
o Review web exercises from last week & demo Search Engine with Venn
diagram (AND, OR, NOT) –handout (John)
o Introduce Chapter on Non-Linguistic Representations (John)
o Advance Organizers – concept introduction (RJ)
o Scaffolding – The process of pre-introduction and relating to past
concepts (RJ)
o Concept Attainment – (RJ)
o Use of Exemplars
o “Which one of these things is not like the others (Sesame Street)”?
o Positive examples and Negative Examples
o Concept Mapping – Graphic Organizers (RJ)
o Organization Activity – Words and Concepts – on board/screen (RJ)
o (organize this!)
o Inspiration Tutorial (John)
 Third Class
o Goal- Explore ways to add web-based resources to a current learning
activity
o Review Class 2 Non-Linguistic Representations and demonstrate how
without Inspiration software.
o Discuss & demonstrate use of Filamentality in the classroom. How &
why.
o Demonstrate process of creating Hotlist in Filamentality- (Hotlist
handout)
o Create- Teachers create Hotlist using Filamentality with at least five web
resources that could be used at their site.
o Web Resources (If you login to Blackboard you can save yourself the
trouble of typing these addresses into Internet Explorer)
 BlackBoard http://coursesites.blackboard.com/
 Filamentality http://www.kn.pacbell.com/wired/fil/
 Yahooligans http://www.yahooligans.com/
 Marco Polo http://www.marcopolo-education.org/home.aspx
 Google
http://www.google.com/
 Kid's Tools for Searching the Internet
http://www.rcls.org/ksearch.htm
 Search Here for Educational Web Sites
http://www.kn.pacbell.com/wired/bluewebn/
 Fourth Class
o Goal- Explore ways to use rubrics to enhance instruction.
o Review Class 3- Use of Filamentality in the classroom. Show examples
& share.
o Discuss & demonstrate online rubric resources.
o Demonstrate process of creating rubric using Rubistar
o Create- Teachers create and print a rubric that is intended to be useful in
their classroom.
o Wrap Up – Closing comments and completion of final surveys for
EGUSD and for course.
o Web Resources (If you login to Blackboard you can save yourself the
trouble of typing these addresses into Internet
Explorer)http://coursesites.blackboard.com/
o Rubistar http://rubistar.4teachers.org/index.php
o A tool to help the teacher who wants to use rubrics but does not have the
time to develop them from scratch.
o Rubric Builder http://www.landmarkproject.com/classweb/tools/rubric_builder.php3
o Teachnology Rubrics http://www.teach-nology.com/web_tools/rubrics/
o Filamentality http://www.kn.pacbell.com/wired/fil/
o Blue Web’n
http://www.kn.pacbell.com/wired/bluewebn/index.cfm#contents
All Comments From District Professional Development Evaluation
How will you use this information:
1. “Rubistar- Great for creating rubrics” “filamentality – very useful to provide info
to students”
2. “I will definitely share with my coworkers”
3. “This has been a very informative class and has encouraged me to feel
comfortable with trying new computer applications.”
4. “Developing, planning, executing and assessing”
5. “to generate info to students/parents and on our school’s web site”
6. “(1) to create rubrics for library TA’s (2) to create Filamentality hotlist to link
websites I want students to visit when I teach unit on Electronic research (3) I will
share some of these sites when I do the library orientation to new teachers on Feb
4”
7. “In classroom planning and research”
8. “I will offer this info to other teachers at my site”
9. “I’m sure I will find many ways to use information. The first idea I will use will
be the Rubrics. My students need clear areas of focus.”
10. “I have already used it doing several webquests”
11. “I will use it to enhance instruction & learning in my classroom”
12. “I learned during each class”
Comments: (i.e., strengths, weaknesses, suggestions):
1. “I enjoyed the hands on/follow along style of presenting this material. I feel like I
learned a lot”
2. “I love the ability to make graphic organizers and make rubrics. Thanks!”
3. “Awesome! How about designing classroom web pages next!”
4. “It wasn’t as nerve racking as I thought it would be!”
5. “Thank You!”
6. “Good class – covered a lot of material”
7. “Thank You!”
8. “Last three sessions were especially useful”
9. “I thought the class was great! I was able to use much of it immediately to
enhance instruction & in the Open Court business theme by creating a Kids in
Business workshop! I’d like more classes like this one!”
10. “great job”
District CTAP2 Survey Results