1. Implementation of a technology-enhanced problem-based learning curriculum: A year-long study of three teachers Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) Conference Chicago, IL October 22, 2004 Time: 12:15-12:45 Location: 4B Sung Hee Park Purdue University Jeff Cramer Taylor University Peg Ertmer Purdue University

2. Agenda Theoretical framework Purpose of the study Methods Results Discussion and Implications

3. Theoretical Framework Technology in K-12 classroom –99% of public school teachers have computers in their schools –Internet connectivity has increased 65% (1996) 95% (1999) 2/3 of teachers don’t feel well-prepared to use technology in teaching Teachers’ preparation and training is a key factor (NCES, 2000)

4. Theoretical Framework Barriers to staff development –Opportunities to practice –Access to resources and expertise –Support from the community –Having on-site assistance and support (Lewis, 1998) Importance of having instruction related to both technology skills and integration ideas instead of having just one (Trotter, 1999)

5. Theoretical Framework Problem-Based Learning (PBL) approach –An effective way to integrate technology –“Experiential learning, organized around the investigation and resolution of messy, real-world problems” (Sage, 2000) –Teacher technology development can use the same problem-centered method that is suggested for students in problem-based learning (Hill, 1999) –Technology is a critical tool information searching modeling task or content decision making, and presenting solutions during PBL activities –Technology integration with PBL can be a meaningful learning experience for both teachers and students (Jonassen, Howland, Moore, & Marra, 2003).

6. Purpose of the Study What are teachers’ perceptions of, and pedagogical beliefs about, technology-enhanced PBL? What kinds of barriers and support do teachers encounter while implementing technology-enhanced PBL? What kinds of strategies are needed to provide effective staff development in using technology- enhanced PBL?

7. Methodology July, 2002 ~ June, 2003 Quantitative data –Preliminary survey data Qualitative data –Interview, journal, field notes, classroom observations 3-stage data collection –2 week summer institute: Survey, interview, journal –Fall semester, 2002: Interview, field notes, observation –Spring semester, 2003: Survey, interview, field notes

8. Methodology Case study Participants –3 teachers from the same middle school NameSubjectGradeExperience CarrieScience & Social studies6th4 years JakeSocial studies6 th & 7th2 years DavidSocial studies & Reading6th3 years

9. Results 1 st Stage : The Summer Institute Improving technology skills & knowledge Increasing confidence through hands-on activity Gaining insights –the role of the teacher –connection with PBL and implementation in the classroom Suggestions for Improvement More examples of PBL units that work in the classroom

10. Results 2 nd Stage (Fall semester) Frequent use of technology Increased comfort with various software applications Barriers –losing the team preparation time –working around standardized tests required by the state: little time to introduce technology and to practice mini-PBL strategies

11. Results 3 rd Stage (Spring semester) Implementing PBL unit –6 th grade –Topic: history of their community Survey data –technology expertise: 0.4 increase –their beliefs about student centered learning: 0.3 increase Qualitative data –teachers’ technology comfort level increased –teachers’ role as a facilitator and students’ role as a researcher and instructor to other students –time and resource barriers

12. Result Change in teachers ’ pedagogical beliefs –More comfort in using technology –Realization that students were more engaged in learning Ideal staff development for tech integration –Beginner: other teachers with different levels of technology and PBL experience –Intermediate some practical guidelines that could refresh their knowledge, new technology skills, more hands-on activities with their own units to modify feedback from other teachers outside of their own groups.

13. Discussion and Implications 1 st stage Feel “comfortable” with technology Feel overwhelmed and isolated 2 nd stage Team preparation time Administrative support to impact implementation of new teaching method 3 rd stage Shift in pedagogical beliefs in using technology enhanced PBL Adopt mini-PBL activities before PBL unit Collaboration among teachers

14. Questions?

15. More information Tech-Know-Build Project website http://research.soe.purdue.edu/challenge/ Related presentation –A Symposium of PBL-Using Teachers: Teacher Experiences and Student Impact –1:15 ~ 2:00 –Conference 4-M - 4th Floor

16. Contact Information Sung Hee Park park32@purdue.edu Jeff Cramer jfcramer@tayloru.edu Peg Ertmer pertmer@purdue.edu