Institutional Change and Resistance: Teacher Preparatory Faculty and Technology Integration

Abstract

This piece discusses issues of vision, skills and knowledge, and departmental culture as barriers to the integration of technology into teacher education courses. After a review of literature in these three areas, themes found from interviews with innovators at Western Michigan University are presented and discussed. Also included are recommendations for institutions seeking to integrate technology into their teacher preparatory curriculums. is nothing more difficult to plan, more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to manage than the creation of a new order or things ... Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince This article describes a qualitative case study regarding potential barriers to the integration of technology into teacher-preparatory courses, as perceived by teacher-educators at one university. It includes major themes gleaned from interviews with change agents, framed by their visions for appropriate technology usage, their skills and knowledge, and their perceptions of departmental culture. Also included is a brief review of literature in each of these areas, as well as conclusions and recommendations made regarding institutional change and the integration of technology. Preparing Tomorrow's Teachers To Use Technology (PT3) is a U.S. Department of Education grant awarded to over 400 universities. Western Michigan University accepted a grant in 1999. The primary focus of PT3 at WMU is to enable all WMU preservice graduates to proficiently use technology in order to engage students in 21st century collaborative, learner-centered environments (PT3 Grant Objectives, 2000). Thus teacher-preparatory faculty are being asked to model collaborative and learner-centered uses of technology for students, who will then integrate these ideas into their future classrooms. Identified in the first year of the grant was an implementation strategy. In essence, the implementation of the grant is about institutional change. While multi-faceted, one key component of WMU's institutional change strategy will be described in this article; the diffusion of grant objectives and integration of technology standards by faculty instructing teacher-preparatory courses. Specifically, perceptions of barriers to technology integration are addressed. Technology standards that have guided and will continue to guide grant goals and objectives are provided by the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). There are six broad areas identified by ISTE as critical to using technology in education: (a) Technology Operations and Concepts; (b) Planning and Designing Learning Environments; (c) Teaching, Learning and the Curriculum; (d) Assessment and Evaluation; (e) Productivity and Professional Practice; and (f) Social, Ethical, Legal, and Human Issues. One diffusion approach has been to encourage College of Education and Arts and Sciences faculty, through discussion, marketing, technological assistance, and professional development opportunities, to address the ISTE standards in their teacher-preparatory courses. These would then reinforce what elementary students learn in a specialized technology course, as well as reach those students seeking to become secondary educators or educators in other specialty areas, such as physical education, music, and art. As this approach to the integration of technology in teaching is central to the institutional change the grant is intended to effect, it was important that grant evaluators understand the perceptions of the major players. One way to assess whether the grant initiatives to date are working, specifically, whether teacher-preparatory faculty are indeed changing, is to assess the roadblocks or barriers, as perceived by the participants themselves, in regards to the integration of technology into their classes or courses. Research methods used to do so are described next. Research Methods Collection of data on faculty perceptions came from many sources. …

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 85 citations exist upstream.