The purpose of the Summary Report is to provide feedback about unique practices as well as suggestions to the Host project based on your site visit experience. In addition, the Summary Report is a vehicle for identifying trends or lessons that can facilitate continuous learning among grantees.
Focus Areas
Please describe the primary focus areas and activities of the Host project
as you learned about it through this site visit.
KSU primarily focused on increasing the technology fluency of faculty members
and cooperating teachers within the College of Education, Arts and Sciences,
Community Colleges, and in K-12 districts providing cooperating student teacher
supervisors. This was provided through intensive summer training academies and
continuing instructional technology support throughout the year. Additionally,
the project was able to use additional funds to host an unprecedented Digital
Convergence Conference bringing high-level K-16 policymakers together. This
not only encouraged visionary thinking, but also focused on practical steps
that can be taken to share resources and collaborate in the future.
Outcomes
During implementation, grantees commonly revisit and modify initial objectives.
These mid-course adjustments offer valuable insight into innovative strategies
as well as the impact of contextual factors on project implementation. In this
section, please describe briefly both the intended and actual outcomes of the
Host project objectives.
The intended and actual outcomes of the KSU project seem to be in alignment.
One of the primary reasons for this correlation was the collaborative relationship
between the grant evaluator and the grant administrators. They did an excellent
job of taking participant evaluations and suggestions during the sessions to
adjust and adapt subsequent sessions. One example of this was after year 1,
they invited technology support personnel from the districts and institutions
outside of KSU to participate in initial training. This better prepared them
for the new equipment which their organization was obtaining as a result of
the PT3 funds, and would be expected to technically support.
The Digital Convergence Conference was added because of additional funds, but
kept with the original program goals. It expanded the audience and focused on
raising awareness on the part of policymakers.
Spotlights
Please describe up to three spotlights or unique practices that have emerged
from the Host project that can be shared with the larger PT3 community. The
collaboration of not only College of Ed faculty, Community College partners,
and K-12 district personnel, but ALSO other College faculty from Arts and Sciences
is a commendable effort. To encourage the faculty and mentors that pre-service
teachers are taught by to effectively use technology, the focus needs to expand
beyond the College of Education in this way.
The COE at KSU has carts of wireless laptops that faculty can check out and
us in their classes, to effectively not only model instructor presentation skills
with technology, but also effective STUDENT use of technology within instruction.
KSU is effectively using some of their PT3 participants who were initially reticent,
reluctant technology users as their evangelists for technology use both within
and outside the college.
KSU has hosted the first high-level conference for K-16 educators to talk about
the future of digital education in Kansas. This effort to bring the “heavy
hitters” together was unprecendented. The KanRan bill passed last week
to build a digital backbone across the state, which was attributable to this
conference. A second follow-on conference in Salina next December is now in
the works, and the collaboration snowball is gaining strength. This effort to
bring the policymakers from across the state together which is essential for
the educational reform / technology integration process to move forward.
KSU has developed their own online courseware called “K-State Online”
that is fully integrated with the KSU student information system. They are continuing
to use this home-grown version instead of using Blackboard or WebCT because
they want the ability to customize as they need to, and not be beholden to the
supported features decisions of commercial entities. There is some concern if
K-State Online will be able to adopt a workable business model. At some point
they may either have to make it commercial or ditch it. For now it is a flexible
system that many faculty members appreciate, although many others use Blackboard
and other alternatives. There is an IMPORTANT need to have diversity in online
courseware offerings: it would be best if Microsoft / Blackboard does not rule
this universe like they do so many others. If OpenSource alternatives that can
be customized to meet institutional needs can be available, WITHOUT restrictive/costly
licensing fees, institutions, students and faculty will be better served.
Trends
Based on the Host project and your site visit experience, please identify
emerging trends in the field that warrant further discussion. The Tegrity learning
system demonstrated during our visit represents a viable technology for ‘stand
and deliver’ faculty members who want to use PowerPoint and deliver their
content on the web and/or on CD.
There is an all-important need for instructional technology support. Not just
TECHNICAL support, where computers are hooked up and configured, but INSTRUCTIONAL
help. As one of the instructional tech facilitators at KSU said, he is a “technology
fear therapist.” The skill set and people skills that these staff must
demonstrate are in many ways very different from those of strict tech support
staff. We need to have staff who don’t ‘teach technology,’ but
‘help people learn about technology.’ This is not just a semantic
difference: it is a difference in philosophy, and organizations need to be more
intentional about providing this instructional technology support.
As expected proficiencies with technology increases, there will be an INCREASED
need for “just in time training” for faculty and staff. Large class
workshops are insufficient as a means to usher in new technologies and help
people get comfortable with new tools. We need MORE emphasis on person-to-person
training and technology support.
The cohort model used at KU which was shared during our site visit is a great
model for bringing the innovation and work time to K-12 and higher ed collaborations.
Suggestions
Please share your suggestions with the Host project about possibilities for
project improvement, dissemination, and potential partners.
Relationships between iTAC and the College of Education need to be further enhanced.
You don’t want duplication of efforts, but at the same time the instructional
technology support which can be provided in-house is likely to be
more readily utilized by faculty. Every college within the University needs
people who can serve a ‘bridges’ to bring together faculty focused
on teaching and leaning and technology resources/strategies that
can enhance those educational opportunities.
The primacy of personal relationships in encouraging faculty as well as K-12
educators to step outside their comfort zones and learn new instructional methods
that include appropriate technology use should not be underestimated. We can’t
just buy new hardware and software: we need people with the “fear therapist
skills” to work with them.
Relationships between iTAC and the College of Education need to be further enhanced.
You don’t want duplication of efforts, but at the same time the instructional
technology support which can be provided in-house is likely to be
more readily utilized by faculty. Every college within the University needs
people who can serve a ‘bridges’ to bring together faculty focused
on teaching and leaning and technology resources/strategies that
can enhance those educational opportunities.