Models for Faculty Training in Technology - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Models for Faculty Training in Technology PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 55ca25-YTYwM



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Models for Faculty Training in Technology

Description:

The basic workshops were very structured and introductory in nature while the advanced workshops were project-oriented and open-ended in ... Photoshop ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:152
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 30
Provided by: Depto88
Learn more at: http://www.engr.sjsu.edu
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Models for Faculty Training in Technology


1
Models for Faculty Training in Technology
  • Patricia Ryaby Backer
  • Chair, Departments of Aviation Technology
  • San José State University
  • www.engr.sjsu.edu/pabacker
  • Email pabacker_at_email.sjsu.edu

2
My background
  • Faculty member in the Department of Technology
  • Early adopterdeveloped web-based module and
    two multimedia CDs for current General Education
    course, Technology Civilization. These modules
    are used by all faculty in all sections
  • Technology faculty-in-residence for AY 1999-2001
    for SJSUs Center for Faculty Development
    Support
  • Became chair of the Departments of Aviation
    Technology in June 2001

3
Background SJSU
  • SJSU has used many different faculty training
    models since 1997.
  • SJSU is an urban university, located in the heart
    of Silicon Valley. It is part of the CalState
    university system and its primary mission is
    teaching.

4
Background SJSU
  • Faculty have high teaching loads (generally 4
    lecture classes each semester).
  • Most technological course development is done on
    top of the regular teaching load.
  • There are limited funds for summer technology
    stipends or curriculum development (Learning
    Productivity Program grants)

5
Models
  • First training was funded by MASTEP, a NSF-funded
    project to improve science and math education in
    the San Francisco Bay Area. http//www.mastep.sjsu
    .edu
  • Training model was extended to SJSU in Fall 1999.
    Funded by SJSU Center for Faculty Development
    Support, http//cfds.sjsu.edu/

6
First Year MASTEP Workshop Model (Summer 1997)
  • Attendees CC and university instructors in
    science and math
  • Format One week beginner's workshop Three week
    advanced workshop
  • Two sessions

7
Model 1 MASTEP Workshop Model (Summer 1997)
  • Workshop participation in the basic workshop
    ranged from 15 to 25 attendees.
  • Attendance in the advanced workshops was much
    lower and ranged from 4 to 10 daily.
  • The basic workshops were very structured and
    introductory in nature while the advanced
    workshops were project-oriented and open-ended in
    format.

8
Results
  • Lack of appreciation for the complex nature of
    multimedia software and hardware. Participants
    came into the advanced workshops with the
    expectation that they could create "plug and
    play" products.
  • Resistance from participants to active learning
    (participation and creation). Many faculty
    assumed the workshop would have a traditional
    "chalk and talk" format.
  • Lack of Skills Many participants had few
    computer skills.
  • Lack of Time Many participants did not devote
    enough time and energy to the workshops since
    they were not compensated in monetary terms.
    Attendance and attrition during the advanced
    workshops was a problem. 

9
Year 1 Examples
  • Hands-on Math -- A teaching/learning module for
    elementary mathematics education students 
  • RUReady -- A jeopardy-based game for mathematics
    review in high school 
  • Bayland Web -- A presentation for 4rth grade
    students

10
Model 2A MASTEP Workshop Model (Summer 1998)
  • Attendees K-12, CC, and university instructors
    in science and math
  • Format Divided into four one week sessions. 12
    faculty participated in June 1998 higher
    education workshop.
  • Week 1 Focused on a pedagogical and
    philosophical introduction to the use of
    computers and education. 
  • Week 2 Development of desktop multimedia for the
    classroom.
  • Week 3 Development of WWW materials.
  • Week 4 Special projects.
  • Week 1 was mandatory for all participants, Weeks
    2-4 were optional

11
Results
  • Participant feedback The participants felt the
    best aspects of this workshop were the emphasis
    on and time for hands-on experience, the
    tutorials, the excellence of resources, and the
    staff technical knowledge.
  • Instructor feedback Most of the faculty had
    highly defined, preconceived ideas of what they
    wanted to do. In many ways, students were
    resistant to any suggestion or teaching that did
    not fit into their paradigm.
  • Outcomes The higher education instructors
    completed two multimedia and two web projects
    during the workshop time but these projects
    varied considerably in the degree to which they
    incorporated design principles and features.
    Several HE faculty were resistant to learning.  

12
Examples
  • Kurt McMullin's WWW page
  • Summer 1998 version
  • Online course CE 265 Fall 1999 
  • Buff Furman's WWW page
  • Summer 1998 version
  • ME 106 Fundamentals of Mechatronics Fall 2001
    version

13
Model 2B MASTEP Workshop Model (Summer 1998)
  • Attendees K-12 teachers in science and math
  • Format Divided into four one week sessions. Nine
    K-12 teachers participated in July 1998
  • Week 1-3 Same as June.
  • Week 4 The students were paired up and produced
    two sets of teaching modules.
  • All four weeks were mandatory

14
Results
  • Resistance at first. The teachers expected that
    the workshops would follow a "chalk and talk"
    format. In addition, the teachers were dismayed
    that they had to actively learn and produce
    tangible products.
  • High Motivation. These participants received
    college credit, monetary compensation and the
    promise of a multimedia station at their school
    sites upon successful completion of the
    workshops.
  • High Level of Compliance. The K-12 teachers were
    required to produce specific multimedia project
    outcomes in Weeks 2 and 3 and group-designed
    activities in week 4. All but one completed the
    4-week session.

15
Outcomes
  • Week 2 Each K-12 instructor was required to
    design a interactive, non-tutorial, multimedia
    mini-lesson in math or science using Authorware
    or PowerPoint.
  • Misconceptions in Science A presentation/example
    for high school students
  • A Powerpoint presentation on DNA (grades 11-12),
    created by Maria Abilock, Andrew Hill School

16
Outcomes
  • Week 3 The basic requirements for the
    mini-lesson were the same but the multimedia
    projects were designed using Adobe Pagemill.
  • A Powerpoint presentation on the water cycle
    (grade 4), created by Barbara Bicknell, Pomeroy
    School
  • A photo essay on the desert, created by Myra
    Flagg, Russell Middle School
  • The Food Web Game A biology classification game
    for a high school integrated science class
  • Week 4 The participants were divided into
    collaborative pairs to devise eight
    student-centered learning activities for use in
    the math science clubs.

17
In-between activities
  • Spring 1997, 1998, 1999
  • I taught a class in multimedia development for my
    department. Many instructional changes were
    piloted in these classes
  • Fulbright in Peru, Fall 1997
  • to train faculty in the use of multimedia and the
    web.
  • I went to nine universities, and two secondary
    schools for approximately one week each. In
    addition, I did a four day workshop for the
    Ministry of Education for 75 students, divided
    into a morning session and an afternoon session.
  • Each university decided on the format for its
    week. This led me to develop an entire series of
    tutorials and materials for learning multimedia.

18
Observations from Year 1 and 2
  • In 1997 and 1998, the workshop time commitment
    was too great for most faculty.
  • Extending training to mainstream faculty rather
    than just serving the pool of early adopters.
  • This led to a change to a topic-specific training
    model with short one to four day training
    sessions
  • Each topic specific workshop required that a mini
    project be completed after initial tutorials.

19
Model 3 Short, focused workshops
  • Summer 1999 (MASTEP). Three topic-specific
    workshops Basics of HTML, Premiere, and
    Authorware
  • Fall 1999 (SJSU). Eight 2-3 hour workshops for
    faculty
  • Summer 2000 (MASTEP). Three topic-specific
    workshops Evaluating WWW Materials for the
    Classroom, Basics of networking, and Developing a
    Web Site

20
Fall 1999 Workshops
  • Three activities
  • Two to three hour workshops held at CFDS
  • Portfolio Series -- Open lab at the Alquist
    Center
  • Specially designed on-site workshops based upon
    departmental needs
  • Observations
  • The best attended were workshops offered at the
    beginning of the semester or those that were
    introductory or narrowly focused on a particular
    software application.
  • Portfolio Series underutilized by faculty
  • On-site workshops popular and well-attended 

21
Model 4 Workshop Series
  • Spring 2000 (SJSU). Faculty received release time
    to complete a workshop series. Six groups who
    attended 5-6 workshops and completed a project.
    http//www.engr.sjsu.edu/pabacker/Workshops.htm
  • Faculty had to commit to developing a
    technology-based project

22
Spring 2000 Workshops
  • Three different series (2 cohorts in each series)
  • Basic Multimedia and Web Design
  • Advanced Multimedia
  • Web CT
  • Enrollment extended to additional faculty w/o
    release time. These faculty received a stipend.

23
Observations
  • Enrollments quickly filled with faculty on
    waiting lists.
  • Attendance excellent due to specified
    expectations.
  • Compliance with requirements high 
  • However, the amount of projects finished by Fall
    2000 low
  • Conclusion Even with release time, faculty did
    not have the time to finish their projects during
    the academic year

24
Model 5 Week long workshop
  • Summer 2000, CFDS offered two one-day
    introductory workshops (total enrollment 21
    faculty) and a one-week session in August that
    enrolled ten faculty members.
  • Nine of the ten faculty members in the August
    workshop successfully completed their web-based
    projects by the end of the week

25
Model 5B 25 day workshop
  • Two-day introductory workshop followed by a
    five-day advanced workshop. They also had to
    present their project at a Technology Open House.
  • The faculty were split into platforms Mac or PC.
  • Thirty-two faculty completed the workshop series
    in Summer 2001 (23 have completed all
    requirements)

The projects completed by faculty in the Summer
2001 workshops are linked to the following page
http//www.mastep.sjsu.edu/Alquist/Summer2001/facu
lty_web_pages.htm
26
Examples
  • Stephanie Coopman, online class (Sp 00),
    http//online.sjsu.edu/COMM110/
  • Prof. Lee Bernstein, Department of Humanities,
    (Summer 00) http//www.sjsu.edu/faculty/lbernstein
    /hum190.html
  • Gregory L. Young (Summer 00), http//www.engr.sjsu
    .edu/glyoung/
  • Bo Mous homepage (Summer 01), http//cfds.sjsu.ed
    u/workshop/june-04-01/Bo_Mou/
  • All faculty work from Summer 2001 can be viewed
    at http//www.mastep.sjsu.edu/Alquist/Summer2001/
    faculty_web_pages.htm

27
Reflections
  • The use of technology is spreading slowly
    throughout SJSU
  • Only a small percent of FTF use the CFDS (out of
    approximately 1000 FTF at SJSU)
  • Need to develop further outreach for faculty

28
Current training at SJSU
  • AY
  • Technology brown bags
  • Short, targeted workshops
  • WebCT
  • Basic desktop multimedia (Powerpoint, Excel,
    Photoshop)
  • Introductory Web design
  • Intermediate Web design
  • Limited consultation by CFDS staff
  • Summer

29
Patricia Ryaby Backer Chair, Departments of
Aviation Technology San José State
University www.engr.sjsu.edu/pabacker Email
pabacker_at_email.sjsu.edu
About PowerShow.com