The Journey to My M.E.T. 1

Running Head: The Journey to My M.E.T.

The Journey to My Master of Educational Technology - Rational Paper

Barbara Herman

Spring, 2010

Boise State University

The Journey to My M.E.T. 2

Table of ContentsIntroduction.................................................................................................................................................3

AECT Standards...........................................................................................................................................4

Standard 1: Design...................................................................................................................................4

1.1 Instructional Systems Design (ISD)...........................................................................................4

1.2 Message Design.......................................................................................................................4

1.3 Instructional Strategies............................................................................................................5

1.4 Learner Characteristics............................................................................................................5

Standard 2: Development........................................................................................................................6

2.1 Print Technologies..................................................................................................................7

2.2 Audiovisual Technologies........................................................................................................7

2.3 Computer-Based Technologies...............................................................................................8

2.4 Integrated Technologies.........................................................................................................8

Standard 3: Utilization.............................................................................................................................9

3.1 Media Utilization......................................................................................................................9

3.2 Diffusion of Innovations.........................................................................................................10

3.3 Implementation and Institutionalization...............................................................................11

3.4 Policies and Regulations........................................................................................................11

Standard 4: Management......................................................................................................................12

4.1 Project Management.............................................................................................................12

4.2 Resource Management..........................................................................................................12

4.3 Delivery System Management...............................................................................................13

4.4 Information Management.....................................................................................................13

Standard 5: Evaluation...........................................................................................................................14

5.1 Problem Analysis....................................................................................................................14

5.2 Criterion-Referenced Measurement......................................................................................14

5.3 Formative and Summative Evaluation...................................................................................15

5.4 Long-Range Planning.............................................................................................................16

Conclusion.................................................................................................................................................16

References.................................................................................................................................................18

The Journey to My M.E.T. 3

IntroductionThis rationale paper illustrates my educational journey through the Master’s of

Educational Technology program at Boise State University. My educational journey began after high school. It started with receiving an Electronic Technician Diploma in Computer Programming for Business through DeVry Institute of Technology in Chicago, Illinois. I want on to receive an Associate’s Degree in Science from the College of DuPage in Glen Ellen, Illinois, followed by a Bachelor of Arts in Elementary Education from Governors State University in University Park, Illinois. I currently hold Illinois Standard Teaching Certificate that includes endorsements in Mathematics, Computer Applications, and Middle School. Currently I am teaching computer technology to students in kindergarten to fifth grade in suburb outside Chicago, Illinois. My teaching experience has led me to pursue a master’s degree in educational technology. Now that I am at the end of my journey to my Master Degree this rationale paper connects a variety of projects I completed to the Association for Educational Communications and Technology Standards (AECT); for which Boise State University bases its curriculum for their Master of Educational Technology program.

Keywords: AECT, education, technology

The Journey to My M.E.T. 4

AECT Standards

Standard 1: DesignCandidates demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to design conditions for learning by applying principles of instructional systems design, message design, instructional strategies, and learner characteristics.

1.1 Instructional Systems Design (ISD)Instructional Systems Design (ISD) is an organized procedure that includes the steps of analyzing, designing, developing, implementing, and evaluating instruction. Within the application of this definition, ‘design’ is interpreted at both a macro- and micro-level in that it describes the systems approach and is a step within the systems approach. The importance of process, as opposed to product, is emphasized in ISD.

I developed a clear understanding of standard 1.1 by designing the WebQuest, Internet Search Engines, for EdTech 503 Instructional Design. My Wetpaint Wiki contains the components I used to design the WebQuest and these components reflect the steps listed in the standard. The analyzing step is reflected in goal analysis, analyzing learner characters, and performance context and learning context analysis sections. The designing and development steps are reflected in the performance objects, development of instructional strategies and WebQuest sections. The last two steps, implementing and evaluating are represented in the last five sections of the wiki. An example of the macro- and micro-level of the ISD process is the needs assessment because it includes the initial student survey and the data that was used to determine if there was need to teach the use of Internet search engines. Dick, Carey & Carey (2005) indicate two reasons the ISD works. First, “is the focus, at the outset, on what the learners are to know or be able to do when the instruction is concluded” (p. 8). Second, “the careful linkage between each component, especially the relationship between instructional strategy and the desired learning outcome” (p. 8). I succeeded in creating a product using the ISD process that set out to teach students to search the Internet because of the data from the pre-survey compared to the post-survey data.

1.2 Message Design“Message design involves planning for the manipulation of the physical form of the message” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 31). Message design is embedded within learning theories (cognitive, psychomotor, behavioral, perceptual, affective, constructivist) in the application of known principles of attention, perception, and retention which are intended to communicate with the learner. This sub-domain is specific to both the medium selected and the learning task.

I selected the procedural image from EdTech 506, Instructional Message Design, to represent my understanding of standard 1.2. This visual promotes the constructivist learning theory by

The Journey to My M.E.T. 5

providing the learner with different experiences that connect to the textbook and the real world. The learner can clearly see the task at hand by reading the three steps of the discovery exercise and reinforce the activity by watching the video. Along with the Constructivist Learning Theory, a cognitive approach was achieved too by supporting what the learners see in the textbook. The instructional strategies for this visual follow the Scott Foresman textbook, and can be used independent of the textbook to build prior knowledge. Clark and Lyons (2004) provided five guidelines to follow when creating procedure visuals (p. 224-247). These guidelines give me a new perspective on the many ways a learner will interpret any given visual. The guidelines enhanced my awareness about cognitive loads on the novice learner and furthered my understanding of near and far transfer of visual information by the learner.

1.3 Instructional Strategies“Instructional strategies are specifications for selecting and sequencing events and activities within a lesson” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 31). In practice, instructional strategies interact with learning situations. The results of these interactions are often described by instructional models. The appropriate selection of instructional strategies and instructional models depends upon the learning situation (including learner characteristics), the nature of the content, and the type of learner objective.

I selected the WebQuest, An Out of this World WebQuest, created in EdTech 502, Internet for Educators because it incorporates inquiry-based learning. “Inquiry-based learning is a learning process through questions generated from the interests, curiosities, and perspectives/experiences of the learner” (Sincero, 2005). “A WebQuest is an inquiry-oriented lesson format in which most or all the information that learners work with comes from the web” (Dodge, 2007). I used the learner characteristics, 3rd to 5th graders, as a guide to the nature of content and the type of learning objective found in the WebQuest. The WebQuest format guides the learner through the lesson. Then, the learners’ interaction with the web via the WebQuest provided the learner with the knowledge necessary to create the final project. I liked creating this lesson using the WebQuest format because it makes learning fun the student.

Other examples of mastery of this standard are the Jigsaw activity, Searching the Internet Effectively, and the scavenger hunt, What’s Legal Scavenger Hunt, created in the same class. Aronson (2010) writes, “the jigsaw process encourages listening, engagement, and empathy by giving each member of the group an essential part to play in the academic activity.” Starr (1999) writes “Internet scavenger hunts are a way for students to practice problem solving, improve their reading and comprehension skills, and learn how to search the Internet.” These instructional strategies that I previously illustrated interact with the learning situation. Creating

The Journey to My M.E.T. 6

these web activities showed me how to integrate technology with learning strategies used before the computers found their way into the classroom.

1.4 Learner Characteristics“Learner characteristics are those facets of the learner’s experiential background that impact the effectiveness of a learning process” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 32). Learner characteristics impact specific components of instruction during the selection and implementation of instructional strategies. For example, motivation research influences the selection and implementation of instructional strategies based upon identified learner characteristics. Learner characteristics interact with instructional strategies, the learning situation, and the nature of the content.

I selected my Digital Divide White Paper from EdTech 501, Introduction to Educational Technology, to map this standard because the research sited in the paper shows that there is a divide in Internet access in the United States. The research shows that learner situations are influenced by the lack of Internet access, the more rural and economically disadvantaged the area the less likely they will have Internet access. The research supports the fact that there are limitations for instructional strategies that are integrated with technology, specifically the Internet. I am now aware that there are many people that do not have access to the Internet, thus are denied access to technology rich instruction.

I also included the character analysis done during the EdTech 503, Instructional Design, to represent my understanding of the standard 1.4. Analyzing the learner characteristics for the Internet Search Engine WebQuest directly impacted how I designed the project. After reviewing the data, I realized that the learners did not know what a search engine was, so I knew I needed to develop learning aids that would explain how the Internet works and the different types of searches. I created two videos, An Internet Search Begins with You and The Search Begins to assist the learner in understanding how to do an effective Internet search. I decided to create videos so the learners can review them at anytime, thus building on prior knowledge. Developing the character analysis showed me the importance of knowing the knowledge base of my learner before creating the lesson, and how the character analysis impacted my development of the lesson.

Standard 2: DevelopmentCandidates demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to develop instructional materials and experiences using print, audiovisual, computer-based, and integrated technologies.

The Journey to My M.E.T. 7

The complete Earth Unit Visual I designed in EdTech506, Instructional Message Design, fulfills each sub standard for Standard 2. The entire visual can be printed or used as a computer-based learning activity. Each lesson in the visual can be used by itself as a mini-lesson or as a whole unit lesson. There are many printable worksheets and the visuals can be printed to use without a computer (Standard 2.1). I created a variety of audiovisuals using different technologies such as Audacity, Microsoft Recorder, Demo Creator, and others (2.2). Along with the audiovisuals I created, I also used computer-based technologies from Adobe. For example, Adobe Fireworks was used to create and produce 90% of all the visuals within this project (2.3). Finally, I made the visual interactive by providing the learner with hyperlinks, videos to watch, automatically playing auto tracks, and much more (2.4). This visual has changed the way I look at online curriculum and I plan to create more visuals using these skills and methods.

2.1 Print Technologies“Print technologies are ways to produce or deliver materials, such as books and static visual materials, primarily through mechanical or photographic printing processes” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 37). Print technologies include verbal text materials and visual materials; namely, text, graphic and photographic representation and reproduction. Print and visual materials provide a foundation for the development and utilization of the majority of other instructional materials.

The principals image I created during EdTech 506, Instructional Message Design, is my example of the print technologies standard. Each image in the visual can be printed and used in paper form. I designed printable charts so the students could use them to document a plant growth experiment. I provided demonstration video on how to complete the charts which are self explanatory making is possible for the students to complete without the video aid. To manage the learners’ cognitive load I kept the words and images to a minimum. A second grade teacher I shared this visual with commented that the students enjoyed the interactivity, the videos, and the overall design. I have plans to make more interactive visual to assist learning after hearing that the students enjoyed the interactivity with technology.

2.2 Audiovisual Technologies“Audiovisual technologies are ways to produce or deliver materials by using mechanical devices or electronic machines to present auditory and visual messages” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 38). Audiovisual technologies are generally linear in nature, represent real and abstract ideas, and allow for learner interactivity dependent on teacher application.

The concept visual from EdTech 506, Instructional Message Design, was designed following the 6 guidelines in chapter 12 of Graphics for Learning by Clark and Lyons (pp. 249-263). On each image I displayed more than two representational images and text, one for natural and one for

The Journey to My M.E.T. 8

not a natural resource. The placement of a counter example, of the not a natural resource, will assist the learner in building an accurate mental model of natural resources. Placing the text next to each photo allows the learner to visualize other natural and not natural resources they will encounter throughout their life. Displaying a natural resource and not a natural resource together applies the contiguity principle allowing the learner to clearly see the differences. I organized the visuals with the natural resource above the not a natural resource to stress the importance of knowing a nature resource. I engaged the learners by using a page curl with a hot spot that makes the learner click to move to the next visual. On the last page of the visual there is an activity for the learners to further their understanding of the concept of natural resources. As a teacher, creating this visual reinforced the importance of showing comparisons to the learner in order to understand the concept being illustrated.

2.3 Computer-Based Technologies“Computer-based technologies are ways to produce or deliver materials using microprocessor-based resources” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 39). Computer-based technologies represent electronically stored information in the form of digital data. Examples include computer-based instruction (CBI), computer-assisted instruction (CAI), computer-managed instruction (CMI), telecommunications, electronic communications, and global resource/reference access.

In EdTech 503, Instructional Design, I built the Internet Search Engine WebQuest around several videos I created to support the learning of how Internet searches work and the different kinds of searches the learner can initiate. The idea behind the WebQuest is to have the students create a word processing document to record their data. This will allow them to see differences in the number of web site hits when using different Boolean search strategies. The videos I produced explain the different search engines that people can use, show the learner how to do a search, and explain how I wanted the learner to record the results in the word processor. The biggest learning experience I had was creating the videos. This was the first time I used Windows Movie Maker so production took longer than I had anticipated. I housed the WebQuest on my school district’s web server and quickly realized that the video format was not working. To correct this problem I found the software Prism Video Convertor and converted the videos from .wmv format to .mov format. As for the students actually doing the WebQuest, I realized that computer-assisted instruction was going to be a major stepping stone for them. You can read the raw data from the students and realize they struggled with me being the facilitator. To address this issue I will be stepping into the teacher-role more offend instead of facilitator-role. I will introduce each phase of the lesson regardless of the progression of the student groups. However, after the introduction, I will continue to reinforce the projects intent to encourage students to use the materials provided to assist them in completing the lesson.

The Journey to My M.E.T. 9

2.4 Integrated Technologies“Integrated technologies are ways to produce and deliver materials which encompass several forms of media under the control of a computer” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 40). Integrated technologies are typically hypermedia environments which allow for: (a) various levels of learner control, (b) high levels of interactivity, and (c) the creation of integrated audio, video, and graphic environments. Examples include hypermedia authoring and telecommunications tools such as electronic mail and the World Wide Web.

The creation of the Jigsaw activity, Searching the Internet Effectively, in EdTech 502 Internet for Educators, is a highly interactive lesson for the learner. The learners begin in their home group by watching the first video An Internet Search Begins with You. The home groups will answer the questions indicated by the activity and engage in a discussion but the video content and their answers to the questions. Each group member will select a topic to master (expert member) from the list provided in the project. The groups will split into their expert group and complete the next set of objectives. This Jigsaw activity incorporates videos and the use of the Internet to assist the learner in understanding how to effectively search for information on the World Wide Web. This project took my HTML coding to a new level because I learned how to insert tables and embed videos housed on a different site. I attribute the success of this project to the Jigsaw activity because I saw the students exchanging ideas and reasoning the results throughout the lesson (Aronson, 2010).

Standard 3: UtilizationCandidates demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to use processes and resources for learning by applying principles and theories of media utilization, diffusion, implementation, and policy-making.

3.1 Media Utilization“Media utilization is the systematic use of resources for learning” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 46). Utilization is the decision-making process of implementation based on instructional design specifications.

The total process for developing the Internet Search Engine WebQuest for EdTech 503, Instructional Design, uses a systematic approach to design. The main objective was to develop a lesson to fit the learner’s needs. Using the instructional design model presented in the book the, Systematic Design of Instruction “incorporates the major components common to all models including analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation” (Dick, Carey, and Carey, 2005, p. 3). Housed on my Wetpaint Wiki are the main components outlined by Dick, Carey and Carey, showing the systematic process used to create the final product. The three media types I selected for this project are the Internet, online surveys, and videos. The learner

The Journey to My M.E.T. 10

characteristics analysis that I completed prior to developing the project shows that the students are motivated when using the Internet; have experience with text boxes hence the use of online surveys; and videos created to provide learners with continuous support/review option throughout the project. The videos are to assist the learner in bridging their gap from a teacher directed lesson to a self regulated learning environment. When I taught this lesson, I discovered that the students were not ready for a more self-directed learning experience, and they didn’t like the higher order thinking questions at the end of the lesson. The raw data collected from the students has been attached to ‘Revisions and Rationale’ page of the wiki.

3.2 Diffusion of Innovations“Diffusion of innovations is the process of communicating through planned strategies for the purpose of gaining adoption” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 46). With an ultimate goal of bringing about change, the process includes stages such as awareness, interest, trial, and adoption.

During EdTech 501, Introduction to Educational Technology, the class participated in a blog using Word Press. One of the conversations we engaged in was to list what we felt were the cardinal rules for an effective technology use plan. This conversation focused on what needs to be done to bring about change within our school districts in order to infuse innovations of the 21st Century, such as Web 2.0 tools or use of mobile devices. I chose the cardinal rules discussion because it brought about awareness in me. This awareness was the exponential growth of technology not just with computers but the Internet and mobile devices. I incorporated this awareness into my teaching by helping my students see that technology is not just computers, but the ever increasing innovations that touch our lives on a daily bases like cell phones and green energy.

I also included my personal learning log from EdTech 504, Theoretical Foundations of Educational Technology because it increased my interest and awareness of learning theories as applied to educational technology and 21st Century skills. The personal learning log illustrates my adapting to technology restriction within my teaching district in order to enrich my students lives. The log allowed me to reflect on my current teaching and find ways around district level technology restrictions in order to bring about change using 21st Century technology tools.

The CARET Research from EdTech 541, Integrating Technology into Classroom Curriculum, provides a glimpse into how technology is bringing about change in teaching math skills. I conducted my research using the information found on the web site Center for Applied Research in Educational Technology (CARET). The articles from this research showed that when software designers and educators work together they can develop software that motivates students, creates a technology rich curriculum, and promotes a constructivist learning environment. I feel the most important aspect of this research was the emphases placed on

The Journey to My M.E.T. 11

teacher training to incorporate technology into the curriculum. I was able to locate interactive math sites on the Internet that motivates students to learn basic math concepts. When used in combination with classroom instruction student achievement did increase.

I selected these projects for this standard to highlight the integration of 21st Century technologies where I teach. For example, a middle school teacher has begun to integrate the use of iPods. Another teacher asked for my assistance in creating a wiki and I documented that collaboration in Ed Tech 523. More teachers are asking for my expertise in using 21st century technologies; from math sites to be used when teaching a skill or what software to use to showcase learning. The district is doing its part by purchasing SMART Boards and providing training. My district is taking steps to support 21st Century Technologies as an important part of today’s education.

3.3 Implementation and Institutionalization“Implementation is using instructional materials or strategies in real (not simulated) settings. Institutionalization is the continuing, routine use of the instructional innovation in the structure and culture of an organization” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 47). The purpose of implementation is to facilitate appropriate use of the innovation by individuals in the organization. The goal of institutionalization is to integrate the innovation within the structure and behavior of the organization.

During EdTech 504, Theoretical Foundations of Educational Technology, I reworked a lesson that was done using traditional instructional methods. Not that there is anything wrong with tradition, but in today’s world students are motivated by using technology. This was a third grade lesson plan on North American animals and their habitats which is part of the curriculum in the State of Illinois. I was surprised at how excited and motivated the students were when I taught them how to search the Internet for information on the animal. I indicated that they were going to use Power Point to present their findings to enhance and reflect their learning; I have included student examples of the work. You can see from their work that most students wanted to include everything they wrote down about their animal and apply as many effects that would enhance their data. I will continue to use this lesson because the students loved it.

3.4 Policies and Regulations“Policies and regulations are the rules and actions of society (or its surrogates) that affect the diffusion and use of Instructional Technology” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 47). This includes such areas as web-based instruction, instructional and community television, copyright law, standards for equipment and programs, use policies, and the creation of a system which supports the effective and ethical utilization of instructional technology products and processes.

The Journey to My M.E.T. 12

The Internet copyright scavenger hunt created in EdTech 502, Internet for Educators, is a web-based lesson that centers learning on the importance of copyright laws. As I developed this scavenger hunt, I knew I wanted the students to learn about the basics of copyright and plagiarism. I also wanted them to learn about Creative Commons because it was new to me too. I felt it is important that the students learn about Creative Commons because we live in a world of open source and greater access to information via the Internet. I learned about Creative Commons as a result I am better able to direct my students how to use information obtained from the Internet. This supports the “effective and ethical utilization of instructional technology products and processes,” within this standard. The most important change in my teaching is to impart to my students the importance of giving credit where credit is due.

Standard 4: ManagementCandidates demonstrate knowledge, skills, and dispositions to plan, organize, coordinate, and supervise instructional technology by applying principles of project, resource, delivery system, and information management.

4.1 Project Management“Project management involves planning, monitoring, and controlling instructional design and development projects” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 50). Project managers negotiate, budget, install information monitoring systems, and evaluate progress.

During EdTech 505, Evaluation for Educational Technologists, I developed an evaluation report for the beginning teacher and induction program being implemented by a fictitious school district. The report is an example of project management because it explains how offering a workshop on Kagan’s Cooperative Strategies meets the Illinois State Teaching Standards for continued funding of the program. This experience increased my understanding for the need to evaluate a major project. According to Boulmetis and Dutwin (2005) the most common reasons to evaluate are, “…to fund, maintain, or end an existing program or select a different program” (p. 30). In this case, the evaluation was to determine if grant funding would continue. The program highlighted in the evaluation is real both at the state and school district level even though the school district in the report is fictitious.

4.2 Resource Management“Resource management involves planning, monitoring, and controlling resource support systems and services” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 51). This includes documentation of cost effectiveness and justification of effectiveness or efficiency for learning as well as the resources of personnel, budget, supplies, time, facilities, and instructional resources.

The proposal project developed during EdTech 505, Evaluation for Educational Technologists, was based on a set of guidelines set forth by the Determining Instructional Purpose, presented

The Journey to My M.E.T. 13

by the instructor. This proposal outlines the process that will be taken to determine if the school administrator training materials should continue to be developed. The proposal contains all the information necessary for the fictitious organization to determine if they will hire the company to perform the evaluation of the training materials. Some of the contents of the proposal: 1) are a budget, 2) outline of how the evaluation will be conducted, 3) personnel duties and 4) a timeline for each phase of the project. Using the processes outlined in the book the ABCs of Evaluation enabled me to bring together the many steps needed when evaluating a given product or program (Boulmetis & Dutwin, 2005). This proposal project impacted my understanding of the complexity of how major learning materials are evaluated.

4.3 Delivery System Management“Delivery system management involves planning, monitoring and controlling ‘the method by which distribution of instructional materials is organized’ . . . [It is] a combination of medium and method of usage that is employed to present instructional information to a learner” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 51). This includes attention to hardware and software requirements, technical support for the users and developers, and process issues such as guidelines for designers, instructors, and SMETS support personnel.

The defining visual context tables from EdTech 506, Instructional Message Design, comes from Clark and Lyons’ (2004) book Graphics for Learning chapter 16 (p. 331-350). These tables outline the learner characteristics, learning environment, delivery media, e-learning platform, and file formats for the overall graphic visual designed during the class. Completing these tables allowed me to focus on the overall environment in which the visual will be used. I learned that defining the visual context should be done prior to designing the visual. The information within the tables can be instrumental in designing multimedia for learning. It is important for the designer to remember that you will not have control over the environment that your design maybe used in. Therefore; by outlining this information before designing the visual, the designer can indicate the best environment for this learning material to be used. Developing the defining visual context tables helped me understand the importance of creating a visual that will benefit many types of learners and environments.

4.4 Information Management“Information management involves planning, monitoring, and controlling the storage, transfer, or processing of information in order to provide resources for learning” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 51). Information is available in many formats and candidates must be able to access and utilize a variety of information sources for their professional benefit and the benefit of their future learners.

The Journey to My M.E.T. 14

The process of developing a lesson using the project-base learning instructional strategy encompasses all aspects of the information management standard. Using steps found on the web site Project Based Learning Online I developed a math stories lesson during EdTech 542, Technology-Supported Project-Based Learning. This web site gave me the opportunity to discover the process of building a project-based learning lesson using five design principals. Each principal contains four sections that assisted me in creating the math stories lesson. Learning to develop a project-based learning lesson benefited me professionally because it gave me the tools I need to “develop an engaging standard focused project” (PBL, 2005). Developing this lesson using the PBL strategy I learned that providing students with self assessments allows the teacher to manage the learning process better. Along with self assessment opportunities there are several areas for formal assessment by the teacher. These assessments determine if re-teaching a topic is necessary or if the students are ready to move forward. The Project Based Learning Online web site illustrates information management involving the planning of the lesson using the resources on the web site and assessments within the lesson to monitor the student learning and transfer of knowledge from teacher to learner.

Standard 5: EvaluationCandidates demonstrate knowledge, skills, and dispositions to evaluate the adequacy of instruction and learning by applying principles of problem analysis, criterion-referenced measurement, formative and summative evaluation, and long-range planning.

5.1 Problem Analysis“Problem analysis involves determining the nature and parameters of the problem by using information-gathering and decision-making strategies” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 56). SMETS candidates exhibit technology competencies defined in the knowledge base. Candidates collect, analyze, and interpret data to modify and improve instruction and SMETS projects.

During EdTech 504, Theoretical Foundations of Educational Technology, the class created a Wiki Book which analyzed learning theories and how they connect to technology rich instruction for the 21st Century. My co-author and I collected and analyzed data to show that in order for teachers to facilitate a technology rich constructivist learning environment, colleges and school districts need to support training of pre-service and in-service teachers. Our research also showed that without changing the pedagogy of teachers they will not fit technology into instruction. This means that technology will be an add-on to their lesson not the center that will assist in increasing student knowledge (Matzen & Edmunds, 2007). This project made me realize that teachers need to be taught how to integrate technology as much as students need to be taught to use the technology.

The Journey to My M.E.T. 15

5.2 Criterion-Referenced Measurement“Criterion-referenced measurement involves techniques for determining learner mastery of pre-specified content” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 56). SMETS candidates utilize criterion-referenced performance indicators in the assessment of instruction and SMETS projects.

Throughout Edtech 541, Integrating Technology into the Classroom Curriculum, I completed a series of q uizzes which are a criterion-referenced measurement. Each quiz was a review of a chapter in the book Integrating Educational Technology into Teaching (Roblyer & Doering, 2010). Completing and passing the quizzes showed that I mastered the performance indicators set by the instructor of the class. In addition, I learned about the beginnings of modern technology integration from the use the programming language LOGO to modern day software bundles of word-processing programs, spreadsheet programs, desktop publishing programs, and database programs. Finally, the quizzes, from a teacher perspective, increased my awareness that building prior knowledge can be accomplished by this traditional method of assessment. I believe it is an essential part of learning. William R. Klemm said it best, “The more one knows (remembers), the more intellectual competencies one has to draw upon for thinking, and even creativity (p 61).” I will continue to test and quiz my students on basic knowledge so they can become a more intuitive thinker.

5.3 Formative and Summative Evaluation“Formative evaluation involves gathering information on adequacy and using this information as a basis for further development. Summative evaluation involves gathering information on adequacy and using this information to make decisions about utilization” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 57). SMETS candidates integrate formative and summative evaluation strategies and analyses into the development and modification of instruction, SMETS projects, and SMETS programs.

I selected the FWL Evaluation Proposal from EdTech 505, Evaluation for Educational Technologists to highlight my mastery of summative evaluation. Boulmetis and Dutwin’s (2005) definition of a “summative evaluation is an assessment of overall program effectiveness” (p. 49). The program sited in the proposal is a training package for school administrators. The company wanted to know if they should continue or discontinue the distribution of the product. My company, Blue Skies LLC, will conduct phone surveys to gather information from products owners to determine if the existing product is meeting the program objectives. Even though all information in the proposal is fictitious it clearly shows my understanding of a summative evaluation. I am gathering data to determine if the program is meeting the training objectives and if the company should continue development by interviewing the current product owners. Creating this proposal gave me the insight I need to use summative evaluations on lessons that I currently use, and determine if I should continue to using them or find different ones.

To highlight my mastery of formative evaluation, I selected two parts from EdTech 503, Instructional Design. Part one, is the formative assessment used to outline the learning at each stage of the performance objectives developed at the beginning of the instructional design.

The Journey to My M.E.T. 16

According to Dick, Carey and Carey (2005) (DCC), this is a one-to-one formative evaluation because it is at the start of the design phase (p. 279). Part two is the raw data collected from a class (small-group evaluation) that completed the instructional material as it was designed. DCC (2005) call this the second phase of evaluation because the group consisted of twenty individuals from the target population (p. 279). The third stage outlined by DCC (2005) is the field trail. “The emphasis in the field trail is on the testing of the procedures required for the installation of the instruction in a situation as close to the “real-world” as possible” (p. 279). It was determined after conducting the field trail that the only change to the original design would be to have the teacher or facilitator spend more time introducing each phase of the lesson. The knowledge I gained about the formative assessment stages outline by Dick, Carey and Carey, will aid me in creating lessons that target the intended learners and ensure that learning occurs.

5.4 Long-Range PlanningLong-range planning that focuses on the organization as a whole is strategic planning....Long-range is usually defined as a future period of about three to five years or longer. During strategic planning, managers are trying to decide in the present what must be done to ensure organizational success in the future.” (Certo et al., 1990, p. 168). SMETS candidates demonstrate formal efforts to address the future of this highly dynamic field including the systematic review and implementation of current SMET developments and innovations.

The Technology Use Plan (TUP) analysis completed in EdTech 501, Introduction to Educational Technology, takes a long range plan and proposes improvements to be considered during the development of next technology use plan. The evaluation of the current TUP began by completing the benchmark survey to determine the current level of technology maturity in five major categories; innovation, curricular, conductivity, support, and administrative. After the survey was completed a detail summary was developed that explained the results. Then, an analysis rubric was completed and followed up by a detailed summary of the rubric. The knowledge from the summaries was used to complete the proposed improvement to the future TUP. This TUP increased my understanding of the process necessary for a school district to move forward in technology use and expectations of teaching staff. The most important thing I learned, as a teacher, is that I need to be more understanding with the administration because they may be writing the technology use plan just to receive federal funds to purchase as much technology as they can.

Conclusion Here I am at the end of my journey to my Master of Educational Technology Degree.

This program has made me a better teacher and 18 months ago I thought I was teaching my

The Journey to My M.E.T. 17

students 21st Century skills, only to find out I was still in the 20th Century. This program and my instructors have brought me into the 21st Century. As you reviewed my selected projects and my rationale for meeting each AECT standards, you can see I have integrated 21st Century technologies using educational theories of the past. I wrote in my entrance essay:

“…I will become a better teacher providing my students with the skills necessary to become technology productive adults. Additionally, I will be able to increase my fellow teachers’ knowledge in integrating technology to enhance their lessons, which will benefit the students’ learning process. With my love of technology and my goal to make a difference in children’s lives…”

I have become a better teacher and feel I am making my students life-long learners using 21st Century technologies. I am helping my fellow teachers integrate these new technologies into their curriculum. Everything I have learned from writing HTML to designing lessons using the many different instructional strategies will make a difference in the lives of the students I teach.

The Journey to My M.E.T. 18

References

Aronson, E. (2010). Jigsaw classroom: Overview of the technique. Retrieved from http://www.jigsaw.org/overview.htm.

Boulmetis, J. and Dutwin, P. (2005). The ABCs of evaluation: Timeless techniques for program and project managers. Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass.

Center for Applied Research in Educational Technology. (2005). http://caret.iste.org/

Clark, R. C. and Lyons, C. (2004). Graphics for learning. San Francisco, California: Pfeiffer.

Cummins, J., Flood, J., Foots, B. K., Goldston, M. J., Key, S. G., Lapp, D. et. la. (2008). Scott Forseman science grade 2. (Diamond edition, pp. 137-168). Glenview, Illinois: Pearson Education, Inc.

Dick, W., Carey, L. & Carey, J. O. (2005). The systematic design of instruction (6th ed.). Boston,Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.

Dodge, B. (2007). What is a webquest? Retrieved from http://webquest.org/index.php.

Klemm, W. R. (2007). What good is learning if you don’t remember it? The Journal of Effective Teaching, 7(1), 61-73.

Matzen, N. J., & Edmunds, J. S. (2007, Summer). Technology as a catalyst for change: The role of professional development. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39(4), 417-430.

Project based learning (PBL). (2005). Design your project. Department of Educational Technology, Boise State University. Retrieved from http://pbl-online.org/.

Roblyer, M. D. and Doering, A. H. (2010). Integrating educational technology into teaching (5th ed.). Boston, Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.

Seels, B., & Richey, R. (1994). Instructional technology: The definition and domains of the field. Washington, DC: Association for Educational Communications and Technology.

Sincero, P. (2005). Inquiry learn. What is inquiry-based learning? Retrieved from http://www.inquirylearn.com/Inquirydef.htm.

The Journey to My M.E.T. 19

Starr, L. (1999). Scavenger hunts: Searching for treasure on the Internet. Retrieved April 9, 2010, from http://www.educationworld.com/a_curr/curr113.shtml