You are here:

Partnership Strategies for Systemic Integration of Technology in Teacher Education
Article

, , University of Florida, United States ; , Iowa State University, United States ; , University of Florida, United States

CITE Journal Volume 3, Number 4, ISSN 1528-5804 Publisher: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

Less than a decade ago the majority of teacher education programs in the country offered stand-alone technology courses that focused primarily on technical skills and trouble-shooting strategies to prepare teachers to use technology (U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment [OTA] 1995; Willis & Mehlinger, 1996). It is now recognized that such stand-alone courses are not sufficient to prepare effective technology-using teachers; hence, many teacher education programs have evolved to include content-specific technology courses (Niess, 2001), technology-based field experiences (Dawson & Nonis, 2000) and technology requirements in student teaching (Strudler & Grove, 2002). This evolution is aided by the development of standards related to technology integration in teacher preparation programs (International Society for Technology in Education [ISTE] 2002b; National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education [NCATE] 1997), national teacher education reports advocating technology integration (American Council of Education, 1999; National Commission on Teaching and America's Future, 1996), awards and recognition for teacher education programs demonstrating exemplary technology integration (American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, 2002; ISTE, 2002a) and federal grant initiatives that support the integration of technology in teacher education (United States Department of Education [USDOE] 2002).

Citation

Dawson, K., Swain, C., Johnson, N. & Ring, G. (2004). Partnership Strategies for Systemic Integration of Technology in Teacher Education. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 3(4), 482-495. Waynesville, NC USA: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education. Retrieved August 19, 2022 from .

© 2004 Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. (2002). Best practices awards. Retrieved July 1, 2002, from http://www.aacte.org/Awards/practice_awards.htm.
  2. American Council of Education. (1999). To touch the future, transforming the way teachers are taught: An action agenda for college and university presidents. Washington, DC: American Council of Education.
  3. Astin, A. (1985). Achieving educational excellence: A critical assessment of priorities and practices in higher education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  4. Bull, G., Sprague, D., & Bell, L. (2001). Establishing a technology and teacher education digital scholarship portal. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 1(4), 445-450.
  5. Cooper, J.M., & Bull, G.L. (1997). Technology and teacher education: Past practice and recommended directions. Action in Teacher Education, 19(2), 97 106.
  6. Courts, P.L., & McInerney, K.H. (1993) Assessment in higher education. Westport, CT: Praeger.
  7. Davis, N., Kemis, M., & Johnson, N. (2002). Generative evaluation to promote systemic change in learning to teach with new technologies. Paper presented at IFIP WG, Manchester.
  8. Dawson, K. (2000). Influencing local computer technology policy via a K-12/university collaboration. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 9(1), 53-78.
  9. Dawson, K., & Nonis, A. (2000). Preservice teachers' experiences in a K-12/university technology-based field initiative: benefits, facilitators, constraints and implications for teacher educators. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 17(1), 4-11.
  10. Dede, C. (2000, January). Implications for emerging technologies for states education policies. Paper written for January 2000 School Technology Leadership Conference of the Council of Chief State School Officers, Washington, DC.
  11. Ely, D. (1990). Conditions that facilitate the implementation of educational technology innovations. Journal of Research on Computing in Teacher Education, 23(2), 298-305.
  12. Fenstermacher, G.D. (1999). Teaching on both sides of the classroom door. In K.A. Sirotnik & R. Soder (Eds.), The beat of a different drummer: Essays on Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 3(4) educational renewal in honor of John Goodlad (pp. 186-196). New York: Peter
  13. Florida Education Standards Commission. (1999). Educators accomplished practices: Teachers of the twenty-first century. Retrieved November 24, 2003, from http://www.firn.edu/doe/dpe/publications/12practices.pdf.
  14. Goodlad, J. (1970). The reconstruction of teacher education. Teachers College Record, 72, 61-72.
  15. Goodlad, J. (1994). Educational renewal. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Hall, G,. & Hord, S. (2001). Implementing change: Patterns, principles, and potholes. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
  16. Havelock, R., & Zlotolow, S. (1995). The change agent's guide. (2nd ed.) Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications. International Society for Technology in Education. (2002a). Distinguished achievement awards. Retrieved July 1, 2002 from, http://www.cnets.iste.org/netsward/index.html.
  17. Johnson, N. (2002). Year one initial evaluation report for UFTTI. Ames, IA: Iowa State University.
  18. Kemis, M., & Lively, M.A. (1997). New Iowa schools training guide: Effective evaluation of school change: A manual for educators. Ames, IA: Iowa State University.
  19. Kilbane, C., & Milman, N. (2002). The digital teaching portfolio handbook: A how-to guide for educators. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
  20. Lortie, D.C. (1975) School teacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  21. National Commission on Teaching and America's Future. (1996). What matters most: Teaching for America's future. Washington, DC: National Commission on Teaching and America's Future.
  22. National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education. (1997). Technology and the new professional teacher: Preparing for the 21st century classroom. Washington, DC: Author. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 3(4)
  23. Niess, M.L. (2001). A model for integrating technology in preservice science and mathematics content specific teacher preparation. School Science and Mathematics, 101 (2), pp 102-110.
  24. Persichette, K. (1998, March). Examples of best practices in the use and integration. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education, Washington, DC.
  25. Ring, G. (2002, March). Year two of the electronic portfolio project at the University of Florida. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education, Nashville, TN.
  26. Ring, G., Cilesiz, S., Ali, N., & Chen, M. (2002, March) Implementing and sustaining a successful faculty development initiative in a College of Education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education, Nashville, TN.
  27. Ring, G., & Foti, S. (2001). Completing the electronic portfolio requirement at UF. Unpublished manuscript. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida.
  28. Sirotnik, K.A. (1999). On inquiry and education. In K.A. Sirotnik & R. Soder (Eds.), The beat of a different drummer: Essays on educational renewal in honor of John Goodlad (pp. 1-16). New York: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.
  29. Strudler, N., & Grove, K. (2002, March). Restructuring the field experience component of teacher preparation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education, Nashville, TN.
  30. Strudler, N., & Wetzel, K. (1999). Lessons from exemplary colleges of education: Factors affecting technology integration in preservice programs. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 63-81.
  31. Swain, C., & Dawson, K. (2002). Swirling in the winds of change? Consider the conditions for change, Florida Educational Leadership, 2(2), 34-37.
  32. Thompson, A., Schmidt, D., & Stewart, E. (1999). Technology collaboratives for simultaneous renewal in K-12 schools and teacher education programs. Ames, IA: Iowa State University.
  33. U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. (1995). Teachers and technology: Making the connection. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
  34. United States Department of Education. (2002). Preparing tomorrow's teachers to use technology. Retrieved July 1, 2002, from http://www.pt3.org.
  35. Willis, J.W., & Mehlinger, H.D. (1996). Information technology and teacher education. In J. Sikula, T. Buttery, & E. Guyton (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 978-1029). Macmillan Library Reference: Macmillan
  36. Wolf, K., & Dietz, M. (1998) Teaching portfolio: Purposes and possibilities. Teacher Education Quarterly, 25(1), 9-22.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Links