jteduplatform.weebly.com€¦ · web viewi can confidently and proficiently use my laptop for...

Mentoring: Effective ICT professional learning for secondary

school teachers

James Taylor

Master of School LeadershipMonash University

October 15, 2012

1

Contents

Introduction: 3 – 5

Literature Review: 6 – 10

Methodology: 11 – 14

Findings: 15 – 25

Conclusions & Recommendations: 26

References: 27, 28

Introduction

2

Due to increased levels of Information Communication Technology (ICT) within many

Australian schools, there is greater pressure on teachers to change their pedagogy.

Since 2008, schools have improved their student-to-computer ratio due to the Federal

Government’s Digital Education Revolution. The focus is now on the sustained

implementation of 1:1 computing, whereby every student has access to a portable,

wirelessly-enabled computer (e.g. netbook). There is a growing evidence-base to

support claims that purposefully integrated ICT can amplify student learning, and shift

pedagogy from teacher-directed instruction to student-directed learning (e.g. Black,

2009; Larkin, 2010; Karsenti & Collins, 2011). Underpinning this argument is the

assumption that student-directed learning is beneficial. According to Hattie (2009,

p.22), “When students become their own teachers they exhibit the self-regulatory

attributes that seem most desirable for learners.”

Teacher reluctance is a significant issue hindering ICT-integration. According to Bebell

and O’Dwyer (2010, p.9), it is “impossible to overstate the power of individual teachers

in the success or failure of 1:1 computing.” There is a difference between teacher

resistance and teacher reluctance. Teacher resistance can be understood as behaviour

stemming from a deeply-entrenched belief that ICT has no place in education due to

being potentially harmful (or, at best, a novelty that adds little to student learning).

Reluctant teachers, on the other hand, tend to recognise the educational benefits of ICT,

but for a range of reasons are hesitant to increase classroom ICT-use. Complicit in this

reluctance is a lack of effective ICT professional learning (PL) (e.g. Goos & Bennison,

2008).

The University High School (UHS) has experienced a considerable increase in access to

ICT. There have also been ample ICT PL opportunities. However, the issue here is

perhaps less to do with the quantity of opportunities and more to do with the quality.

ICT-related structural changes are encouraging some teachers to change their pedagogy,

albeit slowly. In 2010, UHS students were surveyed and interviewed regarding the

Student Netbook Program (Wallace, 2010). In 2011, a student survey based on

Wallace’s approach was conducted. In the 2010 survey, 26% of students selected

“hardly ever” with regard to how often they brought their netbooks to class (p.27). 12%

of students selected this option in 2011. Despite some improvement in students

bringing netbooks to class, both surveys indicated that many students were not

regularly using netbooks. In 2010, 55.8% of students selected “hardly ever” with regard

3

to how often they used their netbook for learning purposes in class (p.27). This

decreased to 46% in 2011. Many students stated that teachers were not providing

opportunities for the use of netbooks (p.35). It is evident that greater access to

technology alone does not significantly transform pedagogy. The reluctance of teachers

at UHS to integrate ICT is an issue that needs to be explored and addressed.

Research regarding ICT in schools is largely focused on its impact on student learning,

and on identifying factors that hinder or encourage its use. Teacher beliefs and ICT PL

are routinely cited as key factors influencing student ICT-use (e.g. Lloyd & Albion, 2009;

Underwood & Dillon, 2011). However, a ‘research gap’ seems to be the implementation

and evaluation of effective ICT PL for secondary school teachers. In particular, there

needs to be further investigation into the impact of mentoring; an approach that has

been identified as effective in primary schools (e.g. Jones & Vincent, 2010). Accordingly,

this action research project (ARP) sought answers to the following question: what

impact will mentoring have on the confidence and capability of secondary school

teachers to purposefully integrate ICT in their pedagogy? The concept of mentoring was

aligned with contemporary definitions. For instance, as Jamissen and Phelps (2006,

p.11) explain, “mentoring . . . places more focus on providing support, building self-

confidence and competencies, and improving working relationships.” Teacher

confidence was defined as the extent to which the teacher was willing to take risks,

persist despite obstacles, and possess an openness to learning. Teacher capability was

understood as the teacher’s ability to use various ICT tools and to purposefully integrate

ICT in their pedagogy.

This researcher/mentor met one-on-one with each mentee on four occasions during a

10-week school term. The three teachers selected regarded themselves as reluctant

ICT-integrators. To measure the impact of the mentoring, a mixed-method methodology

was employed. Quantitative data was derived from pre and post-project questionnaires.

Qualitative data was gathered from a researcher/mentor journal, audio-recorded

mentoring sessions, and post-project interviews. Findings suggest that participation in

regular, one-on-one mentoring – that is focused on the pedagological use of ICT, and

addresses the mentee’s specific PL needs – can lead to improvements in both the ICT

confidence and capability of reluctant teachers.

This article consists of four main sections. Literature Review aims to provide an

evidence-based rationale for this ARP. Methodology provides an outline of the research

4

approaches employed. Findings describes the impact mentoring had on each mentee.

Conclusions & Recommendations summarises the significant findings, and provides

suggestions for effective mentoring and future research.

Literature Review

The educational benefits of 1:1 computing

5

Bebell and O’Dwyer state that, “participation [in 1:1 computing] . . . was associated with

increased student engagement . . . and modest increases in student achievement” (p.1).

These ‘modest increases’ in traditional notions of student achievement are often cited by

teachers as justification for not moving toward a 1:1 environment. In response, Black

(2009, p.16) explains that, “the most beneficial attributes of using ICT in learning are

difficult to measure, particularly when using traditional methods of assessment.” Such

attributes may include collaboration, creativity, and digital literacy.

Larkin (2010) investigated how netbooks affected student productivity and individual

learning in a Queensland primary school. According to Larkin, “The use of netbooks had

[a] significant impact on student productivity . . . but no impact on individualised

learning” (p.2). Larkin’s latter observation may be symptomatic of methodological

constraints, because students were only permitted to use netbooks as directed by the

teacher. By observing 1:1 laptop programs in Canadian primary and secondary schools,

Karsenti and Collins (2011) came to similar conclusions as Larkin. They found that 1:1

computing provides a range of educational benefits, including: increased access to

current, high quality information; and greater student motivation and attentiveness

(p.18). Unlike Larkin’s findings, the researchers note that 1:1 computing seemed to

encourage student autonomy when learning (p.18). With data gathered from an

external range and broad sample, these results are perhaps more valid than Larkin’s,

despite any variables related to cultural differences between Australia and Canada.

Evidence also suggests that 1:1 computing is shifting pedagogy. According to Larkin,

when students were used netbooks in learning activities, there was a considerable

decrease in “teacher talk” (p.147). Black argues that 1:1 computing encourages and

enhances student-directed learning (p.16). When the teacher is no longer the expert,

they may be encouraged or forced to become the facilitator of learning.

Key factors hindering the integration of ICT

According to Forgasz, teachers perceived “access to computers” as the most significant

factor hindering ICT-integration (2006, p.11). Despite gathering data from an external

range, conclusions are drawn from quantitative data only and should be regarded as a

lead-in to further research rather than as a detailed explanation of a phenomenon.

6

Wallace identified access to reliable computers as a significant issue. In a survey of 174

students, 55.8% selected “hardly ever” with regard to how often they used their

netbooks in class (p.27). Students identified two major factors contributing to the low

levels of netbook use: software restrictions; and teachers not providing opportunities

for students to use the netbooks (p.35). A major factor identified by teachers was the

unreliability of netbooks and the school’s Internet (pp.35).

In their investigation into ICT integration initiatives in Queensland, Jamieson-Proctor et

al. (2006) surveyed 929 teachers from 38 schools. Their aim was to measure student

ICT-use, with a focus on the teacher-level factors that shape this use. The researchers

found that, “teacher gender is significantly related to confidence in using ICT with

students”, with female teachers more likely to report limited ICT confidence (p.11).

Besides the limitations inherent with analysing only quantitative data, another variable

may have been the level of honesty used by respondents. To negate the possible

influence of this variable, subjects in this ARP were surveyed and interviewed.

Jamieson-Proctor et al. observed that there was a significant difference between

teachers identified as confident and lacking confidence with regard to how frequently

their students used ICT (p.13). The research also indicated that, “years of experience did

impact significantly on the teachers’ preferred student frequency of use” with early

career teachers preferring more student ICT-use than experienced teachers (p.13).

However, the researchers explain that years of teaching experience had “no significant

impact on the current frequency of student use of ICT” (p.14). This incompatibility

between beliefs and behaviour perhaps illustrates “espoused theory” and “theory-in-

use” (Allix, 2011; referencing Argyris and Schon, 1984). Allix explains that espoused

theories are “explicitly declared reasons for explaining and understanding actions”, with

theory-in-use the “theory that actually governs actions.”

To fundamentally change teacher behaviour, Sergiovanni (2005, p.25) argues that

school leaders need to identify, discuss and challenge existing “mindscapes” (or

theories-in-use). To examine teacher mindscapes, Lloyd and Albion (2009, p.1)

analysed the case studies of three “technophobic ” primary teachers. By identifying and

describing the teachers’ beliefs (via surveys, interviews and observations), the

researchers question the “somewhat simplistic placement of blame” on teachers for the

slow uptake of ICT (p.2). This approach supports the mixed-method methodology

employed in this ARP, since quantitative data alone may not adequately describe such

complex phenomena as teacher beliefs. The technophobic teachers held the following

7

beliefs: ICT is not a necessary component of education; constructivism and discovery

learning are questionable pedagological approaches; and a lack of PL hinders ICT-

integration (pp.10, 11).

Underwood and Dillon (2011, p.2) also question the “simplistic stereotyping of Luddite

teachers.” They argue that the slow uptake of ICT has less to do with teacher resistance,

and more to do with a lack of understanding of the time and effort required for change

initiatives to have measurable and desired impacts. With reference to a four-year

intervention called the ICT Test Bed Project, the authors highlight the concept of the

“technology dip” (p.6). According to the authors, “school performance on national tests

dipped in the years following the introduction of [ICT] resources” (p.6). However, in the

fourth year there was a “swift and strong” recovery (p.6). There was also evidence in

the fourth year of more innovative pedagogy, such as student-directed learning (p.6).

Many studies in this review found that a lack of effective PL was a significant factor

hindering ICT-integration. By surveying 485 secondary teachers, Goos and Bennison

(2008, p.118) found that, “the most striking aspect of the responses was the large

number of teachers . . . who wanted professional development on how to effectively

integrate technology.” Due to the voluntary nature of the surveys, the results may have

been biased, as teachers interested in ICT were perhaps more likely to respond than

reluctant ICT-users. Wallace also found that teachers perceived a lack of effective PL as

a significant issue hindering ICT-integration (p.36)

Mentoring and ICT professional learning

According to Leithwood and Reihl (2004, p.13), an important element of successful

school reform is “ongoing, optimistic, caring, nurturing professional development.” Due

to the rapid, large-scale changes that characterise attempts to sustain 1:1 computing,

and the importance of teacher capacity in the success of such initiatives, effective

teacher PL is important. Unfortunately, as Lieberman and Miller (1999, p.63) state, “a

large proportion of what passes for professional development has little connection to

the real dilemmas of practice they [teachers] face”, and there rarely exists “systematic

follow-up and support.” They explain that teachers must understand the rationale

behind any change, see demonstrations of the instructional practice in classrooms, have

time to practise, and have opportunities for coaching and feedback (p.63). Showers and

8

Joyce (2002, p.77) believe that a full range of PL practices should be implemented, in

particular peer coaching. They define peer coaching as teachers learning from each

other whilst “in the process of planning instruction, developing the materials to support

it, watching each other work with students”, and “thinking about the effect of their

behaviour on student learning” (p.94). Showers and Joyce explain that peer coaching

enables the effective transfer of knowledge into classroom practice in 95% of cases

(p.94).

A search for peer reviewed articles within the Eric and A+ databases found no research

relating to peer coaching as ICT PL for teachers. As a result, the concept of peer

coaching has been replaced with mentoring; a practice that is similar to peer coaching as

understood by the definition above. A refined search regarding mentoring as ICT PL for

teachers found a limited number of articles. Jones and Vincent (2010, p.3) explain that,

“Because classroom use of ICT is a relatively recent phenomenon, the body of research . .

. is not vast.”

By observing the mentoring between teachers from two Victorian primary schools, De

Wacht (2005, p.159) claims, “Participants uniformly reported . . . improved teacher skills

and knowledge with ICT, irrespective of the entry age and ICT ability.” De Wacht also

found there was some change in pedagogy, with teachers “allowing students to direct

some of the learning” (p.135). Gronn (2009) attempted to identify the benefits of

students mentoring primary teachers. Gronn identified an improvement in teacher ICT

skills and confidence, an impact on teachers’ classroom practices, and noted that

teachers were very positive about the program (p.1). Gronn observed that there was

“additional use of ICT in their teaching and the use of mentors in extending the use of

ICT in their classrooms” (p.49). One teacher commented that, “she felt it was okay to ask

a student for assistance” (p.54). This echoes De Wacht’s findings of pedagological shifts

from teacher-as-expert to teacher-as-co-learner. It is worth noting that the teacher

participants in Gronn’s study opted-in to the program, which may have biased the data

since they were perhaps more willing to learn and change than reluctant teachers.

The researchers cited in this review make a range of recommendations for effective ICT

mentoring. In their case study of ICT PL in Australian and Norwegian schools, Jamissen

and Phelps identify some effective mentoring practices. The researchers believe that

mentors need not be “ICT experts”, but should be “people already holding the trust and

respect of their colleagues” with “the ability to support collaboration and reflection”

9

(p.13). They explain that, “teachers need to be encouraged, but not pressured,

supported but not over-assisted” and be “stimulated by ideas” (p.13). They also state

that an “over-focus on specific technology is unlikely to prompt long-term, whole-school

change” (p.13). This highlights a possible limitation in Gronn’s study, because the

mentoring was focused solely on the use of digital cameras. Jones and Vincent also

recommend “non-expert mentoring” (p.13). They believe that mentoring reduces

teacher fear and stress related to ICT (pp.13, 14). The authors suggest that mentoring

be sensitive, involve active listening, and that mentors are researchers who “are able to

understand and analyse interactions between . . . technologies and the teachers and

students” (p.14). De Wacht attributes the improvement in pedagogy to the sustained

nature of the mentoring, and the “immediate application of new learning in the

classroom” (p.159). Gronn recommends mentors “be permitted to focus on the

pedagological side of professional development” and that participants have

opportunities for hands-on skills development (p.98).

Implications for this action research project

Mentoring appears to be an effective PL approach in developing teachers’ ICT skills,

confidence, and pedagogy. There is general agreement that mentors need not be ICT

experts. However, mentors should be researchers who are literate in effective pedagogy

related to ICT-integration. Research also suggests that mentoring should be: sustained

over long periods of time; focused on the development of ICT skill, confidence, and

pedagogy; and be directly related to the mentee’s classroom context. Other key

elements include: not limiting the focus to one ICT tool; active listening; mentors

offering ideas and support without over-assisting; and the usefulness of the ICT tools

made clear.

The majority of the research regarding ICT in schools is focused on its impact on student

learning, and on identifying factors that hinder or encourage its use. However, a

‘research gap’ seems to be the implementation and evaluation of effective ICT PL for

secondary school teachers. In particular, further investigation into the impact of

mentoring is required. Accordingly, this ARP sought answers to the following question:

what impact will mentoring have on the confidence and capability of secondary school

teachers to purposefully integrate ICT in their pedagogy?

Methodology

Objectives

10

This ARP was focussed on the implementation and evaluation of an ICT mentoring

program. This researcher sought answers to the following question: what impact will

mentoring have on the confidence and capability of secondary school teachers to

purposefully integrate ICT in their pedagogy?

School context

UHS is a co-educational metropolitan 7 – 12 public secondary school, with 1250

students and 104 teachers. With regard to the staffing profile: female (58%); Expert

Teachers (49%); Accomplished Teachers (23%); Leading Teachers (17%); Graduate

Teachers (11%). The school is regarded as an ‘academic school’ with strengths in

science and music. The school recently celebrated its Centenary, with the principal

stating that UHS will continue to celebrate tradition whilst embracing progress and

innovation. Despite this leadership stance, there is arguably a dominant, traditional

teacher-directed pedagogy.

Recently, there have been many improvements made to the ICT infrastructure. For

instance: a vast increase in the amount of classroom data-projectors; and major

improvements in the network, Internet and server infrastructure. In 2012, the Student

Netbook Program was expanded to include all students in Years 7 – 12. There have also

been ample ICT PL opportunities. In 2010, the school invited Bruce Dixon (an

educational ICT consultant) to challenge and inspire teachers. The 1:1 Curriculum

Sharing Expo’s during 2011 and 2012 have had some success in encouraging teachers to

purposefully integrate ICT.

Development of the action research plan

According to Shani and Pasmore (1985, p.439), action research (AR) can be defined as

“an emergent inquiry process in which applied behavioural science knowledge is

integrated with existing organizational knowledge and applied to solve real

organizational problems.” They argue that the purpose of AR is to bring about change in

an organisation through “developing self-help competencies in organizational members”

as well as contributing to “scientific knowledge” (p.439). As both the ICT Coordinator at

UHS and the researcher, this approach seems appropriate.

Coghlan and Brannick (2010, p.4) explain that “collaborative democratic partnerships”

are essential in AR. Accordingly, preliminary needs assessment data (i.e. Wallace’s 2010

11

evaluation of the Student Netbook Program, and quantitative data from the 2011

student survey) was analysed by this researcher in collaboration with the school’s ICT

Committee. Members on this committee include: the principal, five teachers, and a

computer technician. Data analysis and discussion occurred during several ICT

Committee meetings during Term 4 in 2010, and throughout 2011. From this

collaboration, a lack of effective ICT PL was identified as a root cause hindering ICT-

integration. The ICT Committee also assisted this researcher in identifying mentoring as

an appropriate intervention strategy. A professional network consisting of school

leaders involved in similar ARPs, provided advice on the development of a measurable

AR question and appropriate research methodology.

Before commencing this ARP, ‘low risk ethics approval’ was received from the Ethics

Committee of Monash University. An issue that needed to be addressed in the AR plan

was the potential for direct or indirect coercion due to the power relationship between

this researcher/mentor and the mentees. To negate this issue, it was made clear to the

mentees that: participation was entirely voluntary, with participants able to cease

involvement at any stage for any reason; the anonymity of participants would be

maintained in the publication of this research; and that the views shared by participants

would have no impact on their continued access to ICT PL provided by the school.

Mentees could also choose to have ‘participant advocates’ (i.e. peer teachers) in

attendance during the mentoring sessions and the post-project interview.

Research participants and the mentoring process

As an ICT Coordinator with experience in providing PL for teachers, this researcher has

developed proficient skill in a range of ICT tools, and a clear understanding of the

pedagological use of ICT. As identified in the Literature Review, it is recommended that

ICT mentors possess such abilities. This researcher is also provided some ‘time

allowance’ to support teachers with ICT PL. As such, this researcher assumed the role of

mentor.

The mentees (Teacher A, B, C) were selected from a small group of teachers who

regarded themselves as reluctant ICT-integrators and expressed interest in volunteering

in the study. Selection was based on the requirement that participants represented

different subject areas in order to broaden the usefulness of this ARP. Demographic

information (i.e. gender, age, years of teaching experience) was not used in the selection

of mentees. Besides a lack of conclusive evidence linking demographic information to

12

levels of ICT capability (e.g. Jamieson-Proctor et al.), preserving the anonymity of the

mentees was regarded as important. The use of the personal pronouns she and her in

this article serve only to improve the ‘flow’ of sentences, and does not relate to the

mentees’ gender. Due to the focus on ICT-integration in the mentees’ pedagogy,

specifying what they teach seemed appropriate: Teacher A, Science; Teacher B,

Humanities; and Teacher C, English.

This researcher/mentor met one-on-one with each mentee on four occasions during a

10-week school term. Each mentoring session lasted between 30 – 40 minutes and took

place during regular school hours within the school. To ensure that the mentoring was

responsive to their specific PL needs, the agenda for each session was directed by the

mentees.

Measuring the impact of the mentoring

To measure the impact of the mentoring, a mixed-method methodology was employed.

This approach can enable researchers to identify and describe aspects of complex

phenomena, such as teacher beliefs. The triangulation of quantitative and qualitative

data, derived from a range of sources, can also assist researchers in negating the

influence of extraneous variables. Pertinent to this ARP were variables such as: direct or

indirect coercion; researcher-bias due to the researcher being involved in the mentoring

and having a vested interest in ICT PL as the school’s ICT Coordinator.

Quantitative data was derived from pre and post-project questionnaires. The

questionnaires were divided into 6 categories: teacher mentee’s beliefs about the

educational use of ICT; teacher mentee’s beliefs about mentoring; teacher mentee’s

classroom use of ICT; teacher mentees’ students’ classroom use of ICT; teacher mentee’s

level of confidence with the purposeful integration of ICT in their pedagogy; and the

teacher mentee’s ability to purposefully integrate ICT in their pedagogy. To measure the

level of ICT pedagological skill, the design of the last two categories was influenced by

Puentedura’s SAMR model (2011). This model posits that there are four levels of ICT-

integration: substitution, augmentation, modification, and redefinition.1 Underpinning

this model is the assumption that there are greater levels of student-directed learning

1 Substitution is where ICT is merely used to replace ‘pen and paper’ curriculum. Augmentation refers to when ICT is used as a tool to achieve some functional improvement. Modification is where the original ‘hardcopy task’ becomes something very different in terms of the learning objectives, processes and finished product. Redefinition refers to when ICT-integration has allowed for new, previously inconceivable learning tasks to emerge.

13

involved in the modification and redefinition stages. A 5-point likert-scale was

employed for each statement/question (i.e. strongly agree – strongly disagree; every

session – never regarding the frequency of ICT-use in class on average per day). The

purpose of this design feature was two-fold: providing an adequate range to measure

changes; and negating any anxiety that the participants may experience due to

additional workload. To conduct a descriptive analysis of this quantitative data, pre and

post-project responses were collated into comparative tables.

Qualitative data was gathered from a researcher/mentor journal, audio-recorded

mentoring sessions, and post-project semi-structured individual interviews. Journal

entries were completed each week during the ARP, with reflection focused on the

mentoring and research processes. Each mentoring session was audio-recorded using

the researcher’s laptop and the program Audacity. These recordings were transcribed

and presented to the relevant mentee so that they could attest to their accuracy. To

analyse this qualitative data, reoccurring ‘themes’ were identified within each

mentoring session. To obtain a more detailed understanding of each mentee journey

and to gather suggestions for how to improve on the mentoring program, post-project

interviews were conducted. To stimulate the discussions, mentees had access to their

collated pre and post-project questionnaire data. These interviews were also audio-

recorded, transcribed and presented to each mentee for approval before the data was

analysed.

To analyse data derived from different sources, further collation was required. The 6

questionnaire categories were sorted under three main themes: beliefs (category 1 and

2), ICT confidence (category 5), and ICT capability (category 3, 4, 6). Significant changes

(i.e. changes of 2 or more scale points) and extreme responses (e.g. strongly

agree/disagree and every session/never) were then identified. Qualitative data was

transposed over these significant changes and extreme beliefs to provide some further

explanation.

Findings

Teacher A

Teacher A (TA) entered the program holding very positive views about the educational

benefits of ICT. In both questionnaires, TA selected strongly agree for the statements

ICT engages students with their learning and ICT improves students’ creativity. However,

14

in response to the statement The reliability of and access to ICT is not an issue hindering

the integration of ICT, TA selected strongly disagree. In the first mentoring session, TA

raised many technical issues that needed to be resolved, explaining “I would really love

to use more ICT . . . but I guess I don’t know if my computer is going to breakdown, and

the students don’t always have their netbooks.” With regard to mentoring, TA was

initially unsure how effective it would be in improving her ICT confidence and

capability. However, there was a significant shift in this belief post-project, from

undecided to strongly agree. In the post-project interview, TA explained that the

mentoring program “has been totally flexible to my needs, and . . . I’ve learnt a lot.”

Teacher mentee’s beliefs about mentoring

Mentoring is an effective professional learning strategy to improve professional relationships.

Mentoring is an effective professional learning strategy for changing teacher beliefs.

Mentoring is an effective professional learning strategy for changing teacher pedagogy.

Mentoring is an effective professional learning practice because it encourages reflection and collaboration in a supportive environment.

Mentoring is an effective professional learning strategy to improve the confidence and capability of teachers to integrate ICT in their pedagogy.

0 1 2 3 4 5

Post-projectPre-project

Strongly Agree (5), Agree (4), Undecided (3), Disagree (2), Strongly Disagree (1)

TA reported significant improvements in her perceived level of ICT confidence. Most

significantly, she shifted from disagree to strongly agree in response to the statement If I

don’t know how to purposefully integrate ICT . . . I will often seek assistance from another

teacher. Post-project, TA explained that she was initially reluctant to ask other teachers

for assistance out of respect for their existing workloads. By participating in the

program, TA felt she had “permission to ask” for PL support from the mentor. TA also

moved from disagree to agree in response to the statement If I don’t know how to

purposefully integrate ICT . . . I will often just take a risk and implement and evaluate this

use of ICT. Towards the end of the program, TA presented at the school’s 1:1 Curriculum

Sharing Expo.

Teacher mentee’s level of confidence with the purposeful integration ICT in their pedagogy

15

If I don’t know how to use particular ICT tools I will often seek assistance from another teacher.

If I don’t know how to use particular ICT tools I will often seek assistance from a student in my class.

If I don’t know how to use particular ICT tools I will often just have a go and play to discover the possibilities and limitations of the tool.

If I don’t know how to purposefully integrate ICT into my pedagogy to improve student learning I will often seek assistance from another teacher.

If I don’t know how to purposefully integrate ICT into my pedagogy to improve student learning I will often just take a risk and implement and evaluate the use of this ICT.

If I don’t know how to purposefully integrate ICT into my pedagogy to improve student learning I will often observe another teacher’s classroom practice.

0 1 2 3 4 5



TA reported improvements in how often she brought and used her laptop. The most

notable shift was the increased frequency of Internet usage in class; shifting from never

to some sessions. TA claimed to regularly use the school’s portal (an online curriculum

sharing platform) and Socrative (a web-based polling/surveying tool) with her students.

There was also an improvement in the frequency of students bringing their netbooks to

class (a couple of sessions to most sessions) and in the frequency of netbook use (never to

a couple of sessions). However, TA explained that these responses could vary depending

on what class was being referred to when completing the questionnaire.

TA’s perceived level of skill in the use of basic ICT tools (e.g. portal, data-projectors,

PowerPoint) was regarded as highly proficient, before and after the program. However,

TA’s reported level of skill in the use of some higher-end ICT tools (e.g. image and audio

recording/manipulation programs) remained very low. TA attributed these low levels

as being symptomatic of the teaching of Science, regarding this higher-end ICT as

“media-type tools.” However, TA reported a significant improvement (i.e. disagree to

agree) in her ability to create animations, videos and websites. There were also

improvements in TA’s perceived level of ICT pedagological skill. For instance, an

increase from strongly disagree to agree in response to the following statement: I can

design and implement lessons/learning sequences that allow students to transform class

16

content into a wide range of multimedia texts. Post-project, TA stated, “I’m now using a

number of different tools due to the program.”

Teacher mentee’s ability to purposefully integrate ICT in their pedagogy

I can confidently and proficiently use my laptop for basic computing (e.g. emailing, Internet searching, word processing).

I can confidently and proficiently use the basic functions of the school Portal (e.g. uploading and downloading documents, adding weblinks and images).

I can confidently and proficiently use a data-projector.

I can confidently and proficiently use digital presentation software (e.g. PowerPoint).

I can confidently and proficiently use a range of web 2.0 tools.

I can confidently and proficiently use image manipulation software.

I can confidently and proficiently use audio recording and audio manipulation software.

I can confidently and proficiently create a range of multimedia products (e.g. videos, animations, websites).

I can design and implement lessons/learning sequences that allow students to word process and access information on the Internet.

I can design and implement lessons/learning sequences that allow students to create digital presentations (e.g. PowerPoint) to accompany their oral presentations.

I can design and implement lessons/learning sequences that allow students to transform class content into a wide range of multimedia texts (e.g. films, animations, websites, podcasts).

I can design and implement lessons/learning sequences that allow students to collaborate with experts and/or other students beyond our school community.

I can design and implement lessons/learning sequences that allow students to create and use new ICT tools and unique multimedia products (e.g. iPhone apps, video games).

0 1 2 3 4 5



Teacher B

Teacher B (TB) shared overwhelmingly positive views about the educational value of

ICT. TB selected strongly agree in response to items claiming that ICT improves literacy

and numeracy, as well as creativity and innovation. However, TB selected disagree in

response to the statement The reliability of and access to ICT is not an issue hindering the

17

integration of ICT. TB associated her ICT-reluctance to technical problems and issues

related to access: “The whole issue of availability, this is the reason why I hate using

technology . . . it’s frustrating wasting a whole session because students aren’t organised

or the netbook is broken or not charged.” With regard to mentoring, TB was

overwhelmingly positive, selecting agree then strongly agree for each statement. Post-

project, TB explained that the program boosted her ICT confidence: “It was just about

having a go . . . that was the changing point, knowing that it’s not that hard . . . until then I

just avoided it [ICT-integration].” TB also acknowledged that there was a shift in her

pedagogy, explaining that, “doing it [using ICT] with the kids . . . and actually learning

from them as well has been valuable.”







0 1 2 3 4 5



TB reported being a reasonably confident ICT-integrator, with small increases evident in

the post-project questionnaire. During the second session, TB stated that, “In 30 years

of teaching . . . I never took this step to use the technology . . . I feel quite proud of

myself.” Post-project, TB explained that her confidence had grown to a point where she

“could comfortably sit in group [ICT PL] sessions.” TB added that she felt more willing

to show other teachers “how to do things” with ICT. In response to the statement If I

don’t know how to use particular ICT tools I will often seek assistance from a student in my

class, TB selected strongly agree. TB acknowledged that this co-learning approach was

beneficial in developing relationships with her students. The small increases in

confidence related to her willingness to learn via play and risk-taking, explaining that a

key factor in this improvement was “knowing what’s there, then having a go.”

18

Teacher mentee’s level of confidence with the purposeful integration of ICT in their pedagogy







0 1 2 3 4 5



Despite reporting some high levels of ICT confidence, TB displayed relatively low levels

of ICT capability. TB claimed to bring a laptop to every class, but only used it in some

sessions. In response, TB stated that, “I would rarely give [students] the work and sit at

my desk with my laptop . . . a lot of my teaching is interaction.” TB reported being more

comfortable using “the old chalk and board” rather than digital presentation tools, such

as the portal. She explained that, “it never occurs to me to use it as a teaching tool.” TB’s

own relatively low levels of classroom ICT-use perhaps translated to low levels of

student ICT-use. She indicated that students never use the portal or Photoshop in class.

However, TB later acknowledged, “Photoshop would be a good one for the students to

make cartoons.” There was an increase from never to some sessions with regard to the

students’ use of audio recording and manipulation software, which TB attributed to the

PL focus on Audacity during her mentoring sessions.

TB reported some significant improvements in ICT skill. Most notably, an increase from

strongly disagree to agree in response to the statement I can confidently and proficiently

use audio recording and audio manipulation software. Despite not using the portal in

class, TB reported an increase from disagree to agree in response to the statement I can

19

use . . . the basic functions of the portal. However, TB explained that this response related

to the “professional use” of the portal (e.g. accessing important documents). In terms of

ICT pedagological skill, there was a significant increase (from strongly disagree to

undecided) in response to the statement: I can design and implement lessons/learning

sequences that allow students to transform class content into a wide range of multimedia

texts. This increase may reflect the experience TB had in implementing Audacity and

MovieMaker in her pedagogy. However, TB reported very low levels of skill in the use

ICT tools to create multimedia texts.


20














0 1 2 3 4 5



Teacher C

21

Teacher C (TC) shared positive views about the educational value of ICT. Post-project,

TC selected agree or strongly agree to all but one of the statements in the first category.

TC selected undecided in response to the statement: ICT improves student numeracy

skills. TC shifted from undecided to agree with regard to the statement: ICT improves

student literacy skills. In relation to a conversation she had with her Literature students,

TC explained, “if you need to interpret a poem . . . technology can help you approach it in

a different way . . . and you’ll be amazed what you discover.” TC’s positive views of

mentoring increased from agree to strongly agree across all statements. Post-project, TC

stated that learning how to use and integrate ICT was now “not that hard” and that she

had become “more comfortable with IT.” TC also reported feeling less fearful about

participating in ICT PL group sessions. TC attributed the effectiveness of the mentoring

to the “open agenda” of the sessions, which “made me think about what I needed.”







0 1 2 3 4 5



TC reported some ICT confidence in terms of seeking assistance and possessing a

willingness to learn through play. However, TC retained some reluctance to take risks

with the integration of ICT in her pedagogy. TC explained that this ICT-reluctance

perhaps stems from “not being familiar with what things would be good to do” adding

that “it’s not until you do it [use ICT] that you know what to ask.”

Teacher mentee’s level of confidence with the purposeful integration of ICT in their pedagogy

22







0 1 2 3 4 5



There were some increases in the frequency of TC’s classroom ICT-use. There was an

increase from some sessions to most sessions in the frequency with which she brought

and used her laptop. TC stated that this increase was due to the mentor suggesting that

she “get into the habit of having the laptop in class” adding that “I also got it fixed.” This

latter point perhaps supports the recommendation that ICT Coordinators act as ICT

mentors. There were several increases in the frequency with which TC’s students used

ICT in class. For instance, increases from never to a couple of sessions with regard to the

use of audio and image recording/manipulation software. This increase was likely due

to the predominant focus during the program on the integration of Audacity and

MovieMaker in TC’s pedagogy.

There were several increases in TC’s perceived ability to use and purposefully integrate

ICT tools. TC reported a significant increase in her ability to use audio

recording/manipulation software (disagree to agree). TC recorded a significant increase

in her ability to integrate the use of digital presentation software in her pedagogy. TC

attributed this increase to the implementation of a multimedia poetry project with her

Year 12 Literature class. TC selected strongly disagree then undecided with regard to

statements related to the mentee’s ability to purposefully integrate ICT to facilitate

student collaboration beyond the school and to create innovative multimedia products.

With some experience supporting students in creating multimedia poems, TC perhaps

23

developed more belief in her ability to push ICT-integration further and generate

curriculum ideas previous not conceived due to a lack of ICT knowledge.















0 1 2 3 4 5



Researcher/Mentor

24

Although the general approach to the mentoring of each mentee was the same, the

nature of each mentoring relationship was subtly different. TA had a very clear

understanding of her PL needs prior to the program. She asked many questions,

demonstrated a willingness to engage in hands-on learning, and often solved problems

herself. There was evidence of the mentee becoming a mentor. There was very little

discussion during the sessions, with a great deal of hands-on learning and several

instances of co-learning. TB had an idea of the curriculum project that she wanted to

integrate ICT within. The sessions involved more ‘mentor-talk’ (e.g. explanations,

demonstrations, suggestions) and more discussion than TA’s sessions. There was less

hands-on learning and fewer instances of co-learning. TC had a very vague idea of what

her PL needs were prior to the program. In the first session, there was plenty of mentor-

talk and discussion. However, in the subsequent sessions, TC began asking more

questions and engaging with hands-on learning. The pace of the instruction and hands-

on learning was slower, with less ‘content’ covered than in TA’s sessions. Unlike TB’s

sessions, there were some instances of co-learning.

Beyond benefits related to ICT confidence and capability, there were other positive ‘side

effects’. For instance: mutually beneficial co-learning; the strengthening of professional

relationships; and the generation of “buzz around the school”, with other teachers

requesting to participate in the program.

Conclusions & Recommendations

25

Despite the ICT-related structural improvements at UHS, the reluctance of teachers to

integrate ICT remains a significant issue. Complicit in this reluctance is the lack of

effective ICT PL. Previous research suggests that mentoring is an effective ICT PL

approach for primary school teachers. The objective of this ARP was to implement and

evaluate an ICT mentoring program for secondary school teachers. This ARP sought

answers to the following question: what impact will mentoring have on the confidence

and capability of secondary school teachers to purposefully integrate ICT in their

pedagogy? A mixed-method methodology was employed, with quantitative data derived

from questionnaires, and qualitative data from a researcher/mentor journal, audio-

recorded mentoring sessions, and interviews. The mentoring program involved regular,

one-on-one sessions focused on the pedagological use of ICT. The agenda for these

sessions was directed by the mentees to ensure that the mentoring directly addressed

their specific PL needs.

The findings suggest that this form of mentoring can lead to significant improvements in

the ICT confidence of reluctant teachers, particularly in terms of a willingness to seek

assistance from teachers and students. Smaller improvements were evident with regard

to the teachers’ willingness to take risks and learn through play. According to each

teacher mentee, a significant factor contributing to their reluctance to integrate ICT was

the frustration experienced due to technical issues (e.g. unreliable netbooks).

Participation in the mentoring program appears to have improved the frequency with

which the reluctant teachers and their students used ICT in class. There were also

improvements in the teachers’ ability to use various ICT tools and purposefully integrate

ICT in their pedagogy.

This researcher recommends that some modifications be made to the mentoring

program implemented and evaluated in this ARP. Mentees should engage in critical

reflection prior to and during the program to identify specific PL needs. The SAMR

model could be employed to help inform this reflection. The program could span a

semester instead of a term, to consolidate the mentee’s learning. By critically evaluating

the methodology employed, recommendations for future research have been identified.

To more accurately measure the impact of mentoring, the following research methods

could be utilised: pre and post-project classroom observations; the analysis of the

mentees’ curriculum samples; and student survey data.

References

26

Allix, N., Monash University. (2011). EDF6902 – Leading learning communities. Organisational learning. [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from http://muso.monash.edu.au/webct/urw/lc19907.tp0/cobaltMainFrame.doebct

Bebell, D., & O’Dwyer. L. M. (2010). Educational outcomes and research from 1:1 computer settings. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 9 (1).

Black, G. (2009). This changing world: technology, teaching and learning. Teacher, (203), 16-19.

Coghlan, D., & Brannick, T. (2010). Doing action research in your own organization (3rd ed.). London: Sage.

De Wacht, P. W. (2005). The effect of the ‘City to Surf’ online collaborative mentoring (C2SOCM) project on teacher professional development. PHD, Monash University, Melbourne.

Forgasz, H. (2006). Factors that encourage or inhibit computer use for secondary mathematics teaching. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 25 (1), 77-93.

Goos, M., & Bennison, A. (2008). Surveying the technology landscape: Teachers use of technology in secondary mathematics classrooms. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 20 (3), 102-130.

Gronn, D. (2008). Teachers mentored by students in using ICT. PHD, Trescowthick School of Education, Melbourne.

Hattie, J. A. C. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London and New York: Routledge.

Jamieson-Proctor, R. M. et al. (2006). ICT integration and teachers’ confidence in using ICT for teaching and learning in Queensland state school. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 22 (4), 511-530.

Jamissen, G., & Phelps, R. (2006). The role of reflection and mentoring in ICT teacher professional development: dialogue and learning across the hemispheres. Teacher Development, 10 (3), 293 – 312.

Jones, A., & Vincent, J. (2010). Collegial mentoring for effective whole school professional development in the use of IWB technologies. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 26 (4), 477 – 493.

Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (2002). Student achievement through staff development (3rd ed.) Alexandria: ASCD.

Karsenti, T., & Collin, S. (2011). Benefits and challenges of using laptops in primary and secondary school: An investigation at the Eastern Townships School Board. Summary of main results. Montreal, QC: CRIFPE.

Larkin, K. M. (2010). Investigating student netbook usage using Activity Theory. PHD, Griffith University, Gold Coast (QLD).

27

http://muso.monash.edu.au/webct/urw/lc19907.tp0/cobaltMainFrame.doebct

Lieberman, A., & Miller, L. (1999). Professional development for the new social realities of teaching. Teachers: transforming their world and their work (pp. 59 – 79). New York: Teacher’s College Press.

Lloyd, M. M., & Albion, P. R. (2009). Altered geometry: A new angle on teacher technophobia. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 17 (1), 65-84.

Puentedura, R. (2011). Metaphors, models, and flows: elements for a cartography of technology in learning. [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/2011/11/23/MetaphorsModelsFlows.pdf

Sergiovanni, T. J. (2005). Strengthening the heartbeat: Leading and learning together in schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Shani, A. B., & Pasmore, W. A. (1985). Organizational inquiry: towards a new model of the action research process. Contemporary organization development: current thinking and applications (pp. 438-448). Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.

Sheppard, B. (2000). Organizational learning and the integration of information and communication technology in teaching and learning. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.

Underwood, J., & Dillon, G. (2011). Chasing dreams and recognising realities: teachers’ responses to ICT. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 20 (3), 317-330.

Wallace, N. (2010). Evaluation of a School Wireless Computer Program. Masters, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne.

28

http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/2011/11/23/MetaphorsModelsFlows.pdf

http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/2011/11/23/MetaphorsModelsFlows.pdf

jteduplatform.weebly.com€¦ · web viewi can confidently and proficiently use my laptop for...

Documents