An Assessment of the TA Web Certification Program: Four Years of Supporting the Use of Instructional Technology at the University of Minnesota Brad Cohen, Ph.D., U of MN Digital Media Center Bill Rozaitis, Ph.D., U of MN Digital Media Center J.D. Walker, Ph.D., U of MN Digital Media Center

The Program in a Nutshell Four week course integrating software training, multimedia design, pedagogy Students receive certificate of completion and software Offered six times per year Over 250 TAs have participated

Program Goals and Objectives To support faculty in the development and implementation of instructional technology leverage TAs as mentors and change agents TAs support faculty needs train future faculty to create and use instructional technology

Program Goals and Objectives To provide TAs with the skills and confidence to create instructional technology introduce TAs to a methodology for developing instructional technology integrate software training with thoughtful pedagogy provide opportunities for practice, reflection, and application so TAs can hit the ground running

Program Curriculum 4 Part Multimedia Development Process Pedagogy goals and objectives active learning strategies and tools learning styles Software Dreamweaver Photoshop WebCT

A History of Change Began in Fall 1998 three week course 21 instructional hours Spring 2000 increased to four weeks: open lab time 30 instructional hours

A History of Change Summer instructional hours plus 15 out of class added a full day of WebCT training streamlined the development process added a hands-on project: WebCT course site Since then… new course Web site active learning: face-to-face, online discussions careful integration of pedagogy

Program Evaluation Pre/post class surveys Follow-up questionnaire for all graduates n = 56 response rate 27%

Self-Reports of Learning: Technical Items HTML/web editors highest ranking WebCT lowest ranking

Self-reports of learning: technical items

Self-Reports of Learning: Technical Items Why low rating for WebCT? our teaching about WebCT stinks could reflect awareness of WebCT’s complexity compare with desire for more and different WebCT tools

Self-Reports of Learning: Technical vs. Pedagogical Overall, graduates gave lower ratings to pedagogical items than to technical ones: question 1 mean = 3.4 question 2 mean = 3.2

Self-Reports of Learning: Technical vs. Pedagogical Possible explanations: our teaching about pedagogy stinks polarization of TAs about usefulness of pedagogical components lack of (online) teaching experience Supporting evidence from U of Minnesota faculty survey

The Dominance of Information

Degree of dominance unusual Possibly explained by lack of experience More support from faculty survey

Correlations No significant correlations involving: age gender number of courses TAed/taught

Themes from Open-Ended Questions Positive perceptions of the effects of TEL on student learning Many graduates report increased comfort/confidence with technology

Themes from Open-Ended Questions Concern about “dehumanizing” education, echoed in faculty survey may reflect impoverished vision of the potential of TEL Desire for more pragmatic, troubleshooting exercises

Questions??

Two Challenges to Address TAs need and desire more advanced WebCT training (related to desire for more practical training in troubleshooting) Students are consistently polarized by the pedagogical material

WebCT: The Challenge Currently, we cover WebCT Basics and CMC Tools Time constraints prohibit adding formal training on more advanced features Pre-course surveys indicate TAs need Basics and CMC instruction

WebCT: The Solution Modify final project assignment to require the addition of an advanced tool (e.g., quiz or content module) Replace the requirement for a revised design plan with a WebCT trouble- shooting exercise set

Pedagogy vs. Technology: The Challenge Persistent and dramatic polarization Primary explanation for disdain of pedagogy is lack of experience TAs view Web sites primarily as resource containers

Pedagogy vs. Technology: The Solution Day 1: More explicitly emphasize dual nature of course and our reasons for it provide bibliography share results of faculty survey Infuse technical skills training with pedagogical material

Pedagogy vs. Technology: The Solution Require robust web sites as final projects Showcase pedagogically interesting sites Better utilize our online discussion forum to explore issues Require actual project?

The Future of TA Web Evolving skill set of graduate students Introduction of new technologies (e.g., iMovie, Flash) Increasing collaboration Reconceiving learning environments

Thank you! For more information, contact: Brad Cohen, Bill Rozaitis, J.D. Walker, © Brad Cohen, Bill Rozaitis and J. D. Walker, Digital Media Center, Office of Information Technology, University of Minnesota, The University of Minnesota is an equal opportunity educator and employer. This work is the intellectual property of the authors. Permission is granted for this material to be shared for non-commercial, educational purposes, provided that this copyright statement appears on this reproduced materials and notice is given that the copying is by permission of the authors. To disseminate otherwise or to republish requires written permission from the authors.