Technology Integration

What meaning does technology integration hold for you as an educator of

adults? Does it imply that you are integrating technology in development of
curriculum, or is it as facilitator of learning in either a face to face, hybrid, or
distance learning environment? There are vast amounts of technological
tools to be utilized in adult education, the task is to determine what and how
to use them. Therein lies the caveat-so many technologies, so little training.
I will focus on two articles that bring to light both the technology and the
implementation challenges.
As a new educator, I have a unique perspective on technology and how to
implement it. Most of this information was new to me until a few years ago
when I decided to pursue an advanced degree and move from clinical
practice to teaching. Not only can it be overwhelming to teach but also
trying to include technology that supports content is a bit daunting. So I was
pleasantly surprised to read The Student Centered Classroom of the 21st
Century: Integrating Web 2.0 Applications and Other Technology to Actively
Engage Students. This case report was performed in a physical therapy
school and describes various methods of tech use with surveys completed in
the categories of: portable devices, active use of the web, effects of
educational technology, preferences for the amount of technology,
usefulness, comfort levels, barriers, and digital distractions. These
technologies were utilized in a hybrid environment and included Moodle
Learning System, which is a free learning management system, Raptivity
($1,125), Camtasia ($179), Jing (free), and Triptico (free).
Most of us are familiar with LMS such as Moodle, most of them are not open
sourced though or free. One aspect that I liked was the idea of having
students complete a quiz prior to class as a way of preparing them for a
flipped classroom.
Raptivity is an expensive version of SoftChalk, it provides many of the same
applications, matching, click and drag activities. Camtasia Studio allows
instructors to develop videos, edit, closed caption for accessibility, but it can
be time consuming, especially when having to edit material. It does allow
instructors to videotape lectures, webcasts involving capture of computer
screens. PowerPoint audio can be adjusted much easier, without having to
re-record audio files. Jing is a smaller, limited, free version of Camtasia
produced by the same company. It allows less than five minutes of recording
time, but you can capture images/screen shots and send effortlessly. Triptico
is another free program that offers many different tools that can be utilized
in the classroom, such as random partner selection for group activities,
timers, image selection, and text analysis tools. After reviewing this list, I did
try to access them, Jing was the easiest, and most of the others did offer free
30-day tryout subscriptions.

So what were the results of the study? Faculty and students were surveyed
on multiple points by a research team from University of Minnesota. Some of
the best information:
99% of students reported that they never created or contributed to
podcasts, 97% wikis, 93% tweets, or blogs 83% (This is interesting
considering the fact that I just read a current article on integrating
podcasts).
31% never uploaded or shared photos, 66% never uploading videos
Most favorable response was to Moodle, 92% or respondents gave it
favorable ratings
Online self-tests also had a favorable rating, 73%
YouTube and Jing tutorial links within Moodle 72%, PowerPoint
downloads, 97%
Only 34% favorable rating for Raptivity, Triptico and Live binders.
52% responded to being digitally distracted by the use of technology
by others not related to course work (WOW).
59% agreed that policies should be in place to limit these distractions
and finally 47% felt that the instructor was responsible for keeping
class interesting enough to prevent the temptation to digital
distractions.
Conclusions drawn from the study were that students may be more
comfortable with using technology but that doesnt mean that they know
how to use it. Students like the use of technology, but if they didnt use it
enough they were unable to make a meaningful connection to their learning.
Students understand the limitations of technology, as do instructors,
implying that there is good use to be made, but what happens if there is
something wrong with the computer?
We have discussed the what portion, now we need to talk a little bit about
how; how do we find the time, the information, and the training to implement
these tools?
A model has been presented by Sara Dysart and Carl Weckerle that
addresses professional development for integrating technology in higher
education (this is a good thing, I can recall trying to upload an exam through
Respondus into D2L, IT walking me through it; I remember hinting that it
would be helpful to develop it into a professional development course). The
authors describe the conversion of Technological, Pedagogical, and Content
Knowledge (TPACK) framework from K-12 to higher learning. The premise
behind this is that it can be used as an approach to build instructors ability
to integrate technology with the pedagogical strategies that best serve the
content they are teaching (Dysart & Weckerle, 2015). The framework
consists of three interlocking circles each representing knowledge
(technological, content, and pedagogical), in K-12 teachers learn how to
apply this during in-service/formal training which most post-secondary
teachers are not exposed to. The model:

Alecia K. Thiele, A.K., Mai, J., & Post, S. (2014). The student-centered classroom of the 21 st century: Integrating web 2.0 applications and other
technology to actively engage students. Journal of Physical Therapy Education, 28(1), 80-93.

The theory behind the model is that PD doesnt normally take into account
the specific content adult educators are applying, so part of the three rings is
missing and without it technology is integration isnt effective. This model
expands PD to include not only PD training, but incorporates peer coaching,
and communities of practice. This leads to sustained, purposeful learning
among faculty, building a sense of community, which leads to more effective
technology integration. I cant wait to see this model implemented here!
Dysart, S., & Weckerle, C. (2015). Professional development in higher
education: A model for meaningful technology integration. Journal of
Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 14, 255-265
Retrieved from http://www.jite.org/documents/Vol14/JITEv14IIPp255265Dysart2106.pdf
Alecia K. Thiele, A.K., Mai, J., & Post, S. (2014). The student-centered
classroom of the 21st century: Integrating web 2.0 applications and other
technology to actively engage students. Journal of Physical Therapy
Education, 28(1), 80-93.