GUIDELINES FOR TECHNOLOGY IN
THE COMMONWEALTH'S STATE-APPROVED
TEACHER-EDUCATION PROGRAMS

TO THE GOVERNOR AND
THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF VIRGINIA



HOUSE BILL 1848

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA RICHMOND 1997


Communications
(804)225-2600
communications@schev.edu
  

PREFACE

House Bill 1848, sponsored by Delegate J. Paul Councill, Jr., during the 1997 session of the General Assembly, mandates that the State Council of Higher Education for Virginia, in consultation with the Virginia Department of Education and the accredited teacher-education programs of the Commonwealth's institutions of higher education, develop guidelines "to seek to ensure that all students matriculating in teacher-training programs meet the standards embodied in Virginia's Technology Standards for Instructional Personnel and have the requisite skills for the implementation of the Board of Education's Six-Year Educational Technology Plan for Virginia." Another section of HB 1848 mandates that the governing bodies of the public institutions of higher education "establish programs to seek to ensure that all graduates have the technology skills necessary to compete in the 21st Century, and particularly, that all students matriculating in teacher-training programs receive instruction in the effective use of educational technology."

The State Council of Higher Education (SCHEV), in consultation with staff of the Department of Education and the leadership of the Virginia Association of Colleges of Teacher Education and other related groups, appointed a representative task force to develop the guidelines required by House Bill 1848 (see the list of members in an Appendix to this report). The Task Force on Technology in Teacher Education (the Task Force) worked through the summer of 1997 in order to complete its assignment by the fall of 1997. The stated goal of the Task Force was to provide guidance to all the approved teacher-education programs in the Commonwealth concerning what is reasonably necessary in order for graduates of their programs to meet the standards specified by the General Assembly. These guidelines are advisory only and have no regulatory effect in their current form.

In recognition of the potential fiscal impact that implementation of the guidelines would have on teacher-education programs, the Council has placed high priority on the technology initiatives for higher education institutions contained in its 1998-2000 budget recommendations. These recommendations include a request for additional funding for institutes which would provide technology training for the 30,000 secondary school teachers in the Commonwealth.

These guidelines were reviewed by SCHEV's Instructional Programs Advisory Committee (the chief academic officers of the public institutions of higher education) and were approved by the Council of Higher Education. The Task Force has recommended that the guidelines also be reviewed by the Advisory Board on Teacher Education and Licensure (ABTEL). ABTEL was established by Section 22.1-305.2 of the Code of Virginia to advise the Virginia Board of Education on policies and procedures applicable to teacher education and the licensure of school personnel.

The proposed Technology Standards for Instructional Personnel to which House Bill 1848 refers were approved by the Board of Education in June of 1996 for submission to the process required by the Administrative Process Act (APA). Public hearings were held on the proposed standards on September 17, 1997, and the period for public comment closed on October 31, 1997. ABTEL has completed review of the public comments and has submitted the proposed standards to the Board of Education, which is expected to take final action on them in early 1998. A copy of the proposed technology standards is reproduced in the appendices of this report.


TABLE OF CONTENTS



PREFACE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION

Chapter 2: GUIDELINES

  1. INFRASTRUCTURE
  2. HARDWARE
  3. SOFTWARE
  4. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
  5. FACULTY
  6. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
  7. CURRICULUM
  8. LABORATORIES / MEDIA RESOURCE CENTERS
  9. ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT PROFICIENCY

REFERENCES

APPENDICES

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

House Bill 1848, passed by the 1997 session of the General Assembly, contains several provisions related to training in educational technology. One of those provisions requires that the State Council of Higher Education (SCHEV), in consultation with the Virginia Department of Education and the accredited teacher-education programs of the Commonwealth's institutions of higher education, develop guidelines to seek to ensure that all students matriculating in teacher-training programs meet the standards embodied in Virginia's Technology Standards for Instructional Personnel and have the requisite skills for the implementation of the Board of Education's Six-Year Educational Technology Plan for Virginia.

In the spring of 1997, SCHEV appointed a task force that was broadly representative of the teacher education community and charged it with developing a set of guidelines that would be advisory in nature, to aid teacher-education programs in their efforts to ensure the technological competence of their graduates. The Task Force on Technology in Teacher Education developed a set of 31 guidelines which indicate "best practices" in each of nine areas that encompass virtually all aspects of technological preparedness for teacher-education programs: infrastructure, hardware, software, technical assistance, faculty, professional development, curriculum, laboratories/media resource centers, and assessment of student proficiency. The guidelines in many instances are accompanied by "comment," or observations by the task force that give context to the guidelines or provide rationales for the approach taken.

Among the practices that the Task Force found most effective were the following: that classrooms used by a teacher-education program be equipped with network-ready, multi-media computers or built-in networking capability, to provide access to the Internet for instructional purposes; that full-time faculty members in teacher-education programs be provided network-ready, multi-media computers for their offices at institutional expense; that students enrolled in teacher-education programs have access to network-ready, multi-media computers in a variety of platforms, to reflect the diversity that exists in the public schools in choice of platform; that teacher-education programs develop software libraries that will include software commonly used for instructional purposes in the public schools of Virginia; that the professional studies curriculum of teacher-education programs include a stand-alone credit-bearing course on teaching and technology, as well as content-area pedagogy courses that include subject-specific uses of technology; that technology also be integrated into practica and field experiences within the teacher-education programs; and that a technology advisory committee be established within the school or department of education to plan a strategy for infusing technology into the teacher-education program and for coordinating departmental and institutional efforts regarding technology.

The Task Force believes that, if a teacher-education program consistently adheres to all of the guidelines set forth in this report, it will have made a good faith effort to ensure that its graduates meet the standards embodied in Virginia's proposed Technology Standards for Instructional Personnel and have the requisite skills for the implementation of the Board of Education's Six-Year Educational Technology Plan for Virginia.


Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION

In recent months considerable publicity has been given to the national education goal that, by the year 2000, every classroom in America's public school will be equipped to give students and teachers access to the Internet for instructional use. Clearly, in order for Virginia to keep up with national expectations for public education, prospective teachers who are in the pipeline to begin their teaching careers in the new millennium must have appropriate training in the uses of educational technology in order to make effective use of the resources now being infused into Virginia's public schools. House Bill 1848 reflects the finding of the General Assembly that there is an urgent need for students in teacher-education programs to be prepared to meet the new standards to which all instructional personnel in Virginia's public schools will soon be held.

The Task Force undertook its assignment with awareness that, just as there is a wide variety in the extent of technology usage among public school systems, there is also a wide spectrum in the degree of technological preparedness among the 37 state-approved teacher-education programs. These programs are offered by public and independent institutions that vary from large, doctoral-granting universities to small liberal arts colleges. Generalizations that will be applicable to all 37 programs are sometimes difficult and often require qualification. Yet the guidelines are expected to be equally applicable to public and independent institutions of all types.

Another obstacle to the task at hand was the dearth of reliable data concerning the current status of technology in the teacher-education programs. No systematic survey or inventory had been undertaken in recent years, and much of the information available was anecdotal. Therefore, in spite of the project's tight timetable, a survey was conducted in an attempt to inform the Task Force's deliberations with hard data. The survey was designed to correspond as closely as possible to the Virginia State Technology Survey for K-12 schools, which was developed by Quality Educational Data and administered in two parts, to individual schools and to each school division's central offices.

With adaptation to the higher education environment, the survey was administered in two parts to the heads of the teacher-education programs and the institution's central administration. This approach was intended to enable a direct comparison between the status of technology in the public schools and in the teacher-education programs. The survey results, while confirming that there is a wide variety in the degree of technological preparedness among the programs, showed that the teacher-education programs are making strides to keep up with the technology infusion in the public schools. The Task Force notes that progress has been uneven, in part because, unlike the centralized planning for K-12 schools through the six-year technology plans, the state's planning for technology in teacher-education programs has been decentralized and ad hoc.

Throughout its deliberations the Task Force remained cognizant of the connection between professional studies in the field of education and academic studies in the arts and sciences in the preparation of future teachers. Because Virginia requires that teachers have majors in an arts and sciences discipline rather than in education, students preparing to become teachers have a substantial part of their preparation in coursework offered outside the teacher-education program. Also, future teachers must be equipped to prepare their students to meet the Virginia Standards of Learning in the core academic areas of mathematics, science, history, and English. Thus the General Assembly's directives relating to the technological preparedness of teachers should appropriately be a concern of the institutions of higher education as a whole and not just of the teacher preparation programs. In fact, House Bill 1848 includes a mandate that the governing bodies of the public institutions of higher education "establish programs to seek to ensure that all graduates have the technology skills necessary to compete in the 21st Century and, particularly, that all students matriculating in teacher-training programs receive instruction in the effective use of educational technology."

The Task Force was acutely aware that technological preparedness is not a plateau which can be reached, resulting in a cessation of exceptional effort. Given the rapid pace of technological progress, the specter of obsolescence is omnipresent. The only effective defense against out-datedness is continual planning, conducted with realization that investments for technology will be a continuing budget outlay. Most institutions of higher education now have in place institution-wide planning and budgeting efforts for technology. The Task Force strongly recommends that these efforts be supplemented by a technology advisory committee within the school or department of education, which might bring to bear special expertise in formulating strategies for the selection and use of instructional technologies appropriate for future teachers (see especially Guidelines 1 and 9). Obviously, coordination with the institution-wide structure would be essential.

Readers of these guidelines should bear in mind that the guidelines are advisory only and, in their current form, have no regulatory effect. Use of such words as "must" and "require"has routinely been avoided, and no significant difference is intended in the force and effect of the words "should," "recommend," and "suggest." All of these words were intended to have their ordinary meanings in common parlance, with only small shades of nuance distinguishing them. This usage should not be confused with the technical meanings of these same terms in the accreditation vocabulary of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education, or other bodies. (For definitions of these as well as other words and phrases used in this report, a Glossary is included as an Appendix to this report.)

Finally, the Task Force observes that the overarching goal of these efforts is to enhance student learning, and that technology use is a tool to achieve that end, as well as to increase efficiency with classroom management tasks. Continuing research is needed as a basis for identifying the best practices in regard to technology use for improved student learning in the K-12 schools.



Chapter 2: GUIDELINES

I. INFRASTRUCTURE

Comment: Institution-wide goals related to infrastructure that are particularly relevant to teacher-education programs include the following:

  1. Developing an infrastructure that affords full access to current technology for both faculty and students;
  2. Creating a structure that can be used to manage information for both instructional and administrative purposes;
  3. Providing a medium that can be used to develop and practice the technology-related teaching methodologies that are needed to enhance the learning process; and
  4. Providing the capability to communicate and share information with members of the academic community and outside world.

These goals can be met only by providing access to state-of-the-art computers, other instructional technology, and software which connect through a facility-wide, high-speed, communications network with multi-media capabilities. This infrastructure should be capable of connecting faculty members and students through multi-media computers and other instructional technology with two-way audio, data and video transmission capabilities. Facility with the use of technology for teaching and learning will require wide availability and opportunity for continuous use of these media. Capability to connect computers and other technology to the infrastructure as a path to the world-wide web, Internet, wide-area and local networks, satellite networks and e-mail systems should be provided for faculty members in offices and classrooms; for students in a variety of locations, such as classrooms, laboratories, library/media centers, and dormitories; and for both through off-campus dial-in connections. This access and capability is rapidly becoming available to teachers and students in K-12 schools as a result of the Six-Year Educational Technology Plan for Virginia and several funded initiatives. It also should be made available to college faculty and the students who will soon be working in K-12 schools.

In order to accomplish these goals, teacher-education programs should conform to the following guidelines in the areas of infrastructure planning and management, network capabilities, and administration and control:

Guideline 1:   A departmental technology advisory committee should be formed and charged with overseeing infrastructure planning and management within the school or department of education, in close coordination with institution-wide efforts (one or more overlapping members are recommended). Its duties should include:

  • assessing the current state of the institution-wide and education- program infrastructure;

  • determining the present and future instructional and technological needs of faculty and students within the school or department;

  • developing long-range plans for the infrastructure that tie it to the educational mission, strategic plans and objectives of the institution and department;

  • determining the appropriate infrastructure configuration, the technical capabilities needed, the electrical and telephone connections, the cabling type, the system hardware and software needs, and the requirements for support and maintenance;

  • developing long-term and short-term tactical plans related to specific infrastructure goals, recommendations, projects and activities, personnel assignments, timetables for completion, and associated costs; and

  • establishing a process for the periodic review, evaluation and revision of infrastructure based upon the availability of new technology, instructional advances, and project completion cycles.


Guideline 2: The infrastructure should be designed and installed to provide the greatest possible flexibility for connection and to maximize use of the diverse hardware existing on most campuses. The following network considerations should be addressed:

  • client/server model technology should be adapted and include work station connection to file servers, print servers, mail servers and gateway servers;

  • the network topology should be consistent with the institution-wide backbone and be planned with consideration of future growth, nodes available, and size and date requirements;

  • network media should be capable of high-speed transmission, with either Category 5 or fiber-optic cable recommended;

  • infrastructure hardware determinations concerning hubs, routers, interfaces, repeaters and switches should be made to maximize the capability and flexibility of the system;

  • potential problems concerning device incompatibility, logical link and protocol differences should be determined and network solutions identified;

  • vendor-specific software solutions for networks should be chosen with consideration of user needs and network capabilities; and

  • maintenance, repair, hardware and software troubleshooting personnel are needed to operate the system and should be included as essential to the infrastructure plan.

Guideline 3: In order to be effective and safe for all users, plans for an operational infrastructure network should address important management and control issues, including the following:

  • a systems administrator should be assigned to control and monitor access and modifications to the infrastructure;

  • acceptable use policies should be established, monitored and enforced;

  • as appropriate, filters should be installed to limit access and intrusion of unwanted and objectionable materials;

  • Internet/Intranet firewalls should be established to protect access to the system and information stored in servers;

  • security systems should be established that include log-in assignments and periodic changes in passwords.


II. HARDWARE

Guideline 4: Faculty classroom use: Every faculty member teaching a course offered by a teacher-education program (including adjuncts and teaching assistants) should have access to a network-ready multi-media computer for classroom use. A network-ready computer would connect the classroom to the Internet. Hardware for multi-media capability would include speakers (or headphones), a sound card, a CD-ROM drive, a microphone, a projection device, and a camera for desktop video-conferencing. The overall configuration of the computer should be sufficient for modeling and demonstration of current software. The hardware may be mobile.

Comment: A national goal for K-12 schools is that, by the year 2000, every classroom in America will be connected to the Internet. It seems reasonable to expect teacher-education programs to adhere to the same timetable and to have every classroom equipped with either a network-ready, multi-media computer or built-in networking capability by the new millennium.


Guideline 5: Faculty office use: Every full-time faculty member in a teacher-education program should be assigned a network-ready, multi-media computer for his/her office at institutional expense. In addition, adjuncts and teaching assistants should have access to the same computer resources at an on-campus location. The configuration of the computer should be sufficient to operate on the Internet and to demonstrate current software. Because versatility across specific computer environments is preferred, faculty should have access to a variety of platforms.

Comment: Currently, there is approximately a 50/50 split among public schools between Apple computers and IBM-compatible PC's . Because students from each teacher-education program will be taking teaching positions in schools in which one or the other environment predominates, in the short term it will remain necessary for teacher-education programs to have both platforms available, although both need not be supported equally.


Guideline 6: Student access: Every student enrolled in a teacher-education program should have access to a network-ready, multi-media computer that meets the specifications needed to operate current software in the typical K-12 school. Student ownership of computers should be encouraged. It is, therefore, incumbent upon the institution (or school/department) to supply low-cost or no-cost options for students who have demonstrated need of assistance in acquiring the necessary computer resources, such as Internet access. In addition, because versatility across specific computer environments is preferred, students should have access to a variety of platforms.


Guideline 7: Peripheral equipment: Every faculty member teaching a course offered by a teacher-education program (including adjuncts and teaching assistants) should have access to the peripheral equipment listed in the Technology Standards for Instructional Personnel (e.g., scanner/digitizers, projection devices, CD-ROM's, graphing calculators, etc.). Students should have access to the peripherals necessary to practice and demonstrate related computer skills consistent with the current demands of the typical K-12 school.



III. SOFTWARE

Guideline 8: In order to support both pre-service teacher education and in-service professional development programs, faculty and students should have access to specific software, including the following:

  • an integrated software package with word processing, spreadsheet, database, and graphics components;

  • communications software, including a web browser, an HTML (Hypertext Markup Language) editor, an FTP (File Transfer Protocol) program, and Telnet software;

  • a software library appropriate to the range of programs offered.


Guideline 9: A formal process should be established within the teacher-education program for selecting appropriate software for instructional purposes. Faculty and students should have access to a software library containing a variety of software for each content area specific to the grade levels served, including software related to the Standards of Learning and electronic textbooks. Pre-service teacher-education programs that prepare candidates for K-12 licensure should build a software library for all areas of content and all grade levels, as well as the software used by the public schools for administrative purposes.

Comment: The departmental technology advisory committee (see Guideline 1 above) might be instrumental in establishing the formal process for software selection.


Guideline 10: In order to develop proficiency in subject-specific software, teacher- education students should have ready access to software for both in-classroom and out-of-classroom use throughout their teacher-education program. Software libraries should include software commonly used by teachers in Virginia public schools as well as emerging categories of software that are likely to be used in the first year of teaching.

Comment: In mathematics, for example, teacher education students should become knowledgeable in several types of software. These include software programs that allow students to explore and construct connections between numerical, algebraic and graphical aspects of mathematical topics, as well as software that allows for the acquisition and mathematical and statistical analysis of real-world data. Some specific categories of such software include computational, symbolic-and manipulation, and graphing-visualization programs; geometry exploration programs; topic-specific programs; and collections of software programs for graphing calculators that address the Standards of Learning.




IV. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

Comment: Technical assistance is often an afterthought in technology efforts. However, without a well-designed technical assistance system efforts to infuse technology into teacher-education programs will surely fail. The effects of original investments in equipment and staff development will be severely tempered if an on-going system of "just in time" help is not provided. The technical support system must be thought of as a core element of a technology plan. It is an investment that must be considered as the overall system or approach is developed. Without good technical assistance users will become discouraged and will not take necessary risks to adopt technology into their teaching repertories.

How much technical assistance an institution has and how it is provided will vary greatly. Yet the premise that institutions have a responsibility to provide adequate amounts of high quality technical assistance to faculty and students should be a given.


Guideline 11: Each teacher-education program should have a strategic plan or mission statement of technical assistance that is up-dated periodically and revised based on identified needs. Technical assistance should be founded on clearly stated purposes (e.g., making the use of technology user-friendly by solving operating problems and helping faculty integrate technology into courses) and should be supported by specific budgetary allocations on an on-going basis.

Comment: Technical assistance needs to have a clear direction and expectations need to be spelled out so users know what kind of service they can request. In addition, the service deliverers will know what their customers expect from them. Often in technical systems the user is at the mercy of the service deliverer. This cannot be the case in teacher-education programs if change is to occur. Budgetary commitments are a concrete demonstration that the institution recognizes the importance of technical assistance and is approaching it in a purposeful way.


Guideline 12: The functions of the technical assistance system should include attending to hardware and network problems, resolving common software problems, and providing support to faculty in the application of technology to instructional endeavors.

Comment: An assistance hotline and process to dispense help quickly will keep users happy and is basic to any support system. Helping faculty with "just in time" instructional development problems should be an integral part of technical assistance. Faculty cannot be expected to solve sophisticated instructional design problems involving technology without adequate help. This latter feature of the system will become the most important one as technology efforts mature. More and more users will be literate enough to take care of their own lower-level problems and will then raise the level of their request to new applications of technology to instructional endeavors.


Guideline 13: A technical support system should be dynamic and modular. It should be responsive to users' needs and provide appropriate backup.

Comment: A technical assistance system should be one that grows with the progress of the overall effort in technology. It must meet the changing requirements of the users and the technology. In addition, its modularity should allow for segments to be easily replaced or revised when they no longer meet rapidly-changing needs. Help for hardware and software problems must be responsive, e.g., requests for help met within a reasonable time period with a high probability of user satisfaction. Backups to any system are essential, and back-up equipment should be readily available to replace on-line equipment with problems and to keep the system up and running.


Guideline 14: The system should be overseen by a liaison person or team responsible for providing technical assistance on a permanent basis and for keeping the system on the leading edge.

Comment: Such persons do not need to be technicians. They should be attached to the administration and the technical assistance operation in such a way that they can provide guidance and direction to the system. A robust system will need to constantly change, and if a decision-maker is not connected to it, the probability goes up considerably that the system will atrophy and quickly become inadequate.


Guideline 15: On-going training should be available for technicians to keep abreast of technological changes.

Comment: If the skills of the technician remain static and do not develop, then users will become frustrated, and development of the technical assistance system will be retarded. In such a situation, the assistance can even become a serious impediment to development of the overall technology plan.




V. FACULTY

Guideline 16: All faculty in teacher-education programs should be knowledgeable about current practice related to the use of computers and technology and integrate them into their teaching and scholarship. Faculty should have training in and access to education-related electronic information, video resources, computer hardware, software, related technologies, and other similar resources.


Guideline 17: Course syllabi, student work, portfolios, classroom observations and interviews with students and cooperating teachers should provide evidence of a faculty member's attainment of applicable standards and of his or her mastery of fundamental concepts and skills for applying information technology in educational settings. In addition, faculty members should be expected to integrate technology into their classes.

Comment: This approach recognizes that faculty in schools, colleges and departments of education collaborate with colleagues throughout an institution in preparing students in teacher-education programs to meet the Technology Standards for Instructional Personnel. The burden is upon the higher education institution to describe and document how it accomplishes this through its approved programs.


Guideline 18: Faculty should be knowledgeable about legal and ethical issues related to the use of educational technology and should incorporate these issues in the program's curriculum.

Comment: Local school divisions all have "acceptable use" policies, and many colleges and universities, as well as the American Association of University Professors, are developing them. Given this pervasive concern, it seems appropriate for faculty in teacher-education programs to be knowledgeable about developments in this area.





VI. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Guideline 19: Teacher-education programs should adopt and regularly revise a professional development plan that enables all members of their faculty (including adjuncts and teaching assistants) and staff to stay abreast of the latest advances in instructional technologies.


Guideline 20: Teacher-education programs should ensure that all members of their faculty (including adjuncts and teaching assistants) have access to systematic and comprehensive activities to enhance their technological competence and intellectual vitality with respect to the use of instructional technologies.


Guideline 21: Opportunities should be made available for all full-time faculty in teacher-education programs to participate on a regular basis in professional meetings, conferences, symposia, etc. that are designed to acquaint them with the latest technological developments.





VII. CURRICULUM

Comment: Current practice is to provide instruction primarily in generic technology courses that include teachers from all grade levels and content areas. This strategy alone has proven ineffective. The ways in which teachers use educational technologies differ by grade level and content area. The needs of a first-grade teacher, a middle-school social-studies teacher, and a high-school geometry teacher are different. The high school teacher should be familiar with tools such as Geometers Sketch Pad and graphing calculators which are not relevant for the first-grade teacher. A more effective way to ensure that teachers will integrate appropriate uses of educational technologies into their teaching is to incorporate these uses into three areas:


Guideline 22: Students should enter their professional studies courses with a foundational level of technological competency. This could be accomplished, for example, (a) by a separate, credit-bearing course; (b) by a sequence of modules; or (c) through performance assessments. In the cases of a stand-alone course or a sequence of modules, examples, illustrations, and case studies incorporated into the coursework should be drawn from K-12 teaching practice. (Stand-alone educational technology courses are not a substitute for integration into subject area pedagogy courses.)

Comment: In the past, standards recommending a "computer course" have been written in such a way that a course in FORTRAN programming, for example, would satisfy the requirements. Since the ultimate goal of these requirements should be improved instruction for K-12 students, it is important that standards explicitly refer to courses in educational technology and K-12 teaching practice.


Guideline 23: Faculty in the teacher-education program should integrate current uses and best practices of educational technology into professional studies courses. A substantial amount of technology instruction should be embedded in regular courses in the professional studies curriculum.

Comment: A comprehensive national assessment by the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment concluded,"...overall, teacher-education programs do not prepare graduates to use technology as a teaching tool." This report noted that generic training will not suffice: "The kind of training, not just availability, is important. Much of today's educational technology training tends to focus on the mechanics of operating new machinery, with little about integrating technology into specific subjects." Until now, use of technology in most schools has been marked by an emphasis on computer skills rather than discipline-based learning. A transition from isolated skills practice to integration of technologies throughout disciplines is needed.


Guideline 24: Faculty from other disciplines should incorporate current uses and best practices of educational technology into content courses. Since much of the course work prospective teachers take is in the arts and sciences, it is particularly important that students preparing to be teachers see effective teaching with the use of technology in other parts of the college or university.

Comment: It is noteworthy that House Bill 1848 contains a provision that addresses the need for technology training for all college graduates, not just those who will become teachers. Section C states, "In order to improve the quality of the Commonwealth's work force and educational programs, the governing bodies of the public institutions of higher education shall establish programs to seek to ensure that all graduates have the technology skills necessary to compete in the 21st Century..."


Guideline 25: Faculty in the teacher-education program also should integrate current uses and best practices of educational technology into practica and field experiences in K-12 schools. Placement with cooperating teachers who effectively use technology in their classes should be encouraged.

Comment: In addition to the institution of higher education's integration of technology into the on-campus experiences of its students, prospective teachers need the opportunity to practice these technologies in actual field experiences. Teacher-education programs and school divisions have a vested interest in forming alliances to support effective use of technology in local schools. The higher education and school-based environments must reinforce one another by modeling effective technology use, and by supporting both teachers and teacher education students who wish to incorporate appropriate use of technology into classroom practice.



VIII. LABORATORIES / MEDIA RESOURCE CENTERS

Guideline 26: To support its teacher-education curriculum with regard to educational technology, each institution should provide a variety of facilities and instructional support services. While these services are traditionally accessed through computer centers and laboratories, through library media resource centers, or through resource centers dedicated to teacher-education programs, each institution should demonstrate that it provides access to appropriate technology resources for faculty and students, independent of how these resources are organized.


Guideline 27: Instructional technology support services should be able to provide for both individual and group instruction in the use of various educational technologies. These technologies should include microcomputers; local and global networking capability; word processing, spreadsheet, authoring and presentation, and desktop publishing software; multimedia presentation capability; reception of satellite and other telecommunications programming; and facilities for video and graphics production.


Guideline 28: Instructional technology support services should meet the following minimum standards:

  • Hardware and software resources should be available in sufficient quantities to meet the needs of faculty and students in the teacher-education program.

  • Hours of operation and availability of staff should be sufficient to accommodate the diverse schedules of teacher-education students.

  • Sufficient and qualified professional and /or support staff should be available to implement the services for which they are responsible.

  • Professional staff members should have appropriate degrees and should be qualified in the technology resources available to faculty and students in the teacher-education program.

  • The budget for informational technologies should be ample to provide acquisitions of new technology resources on a regular and sustained basis.



IX. ASSESSMENT TO DEMONSTRATE STUDENT PROFICIENCY

Comment: Both the proposed Technology Standards for Instructional Personnel and the existing Six-Year Educational Technology Plan for Virginia require that students in teacher-education programs demonstrate competence in basic technology skills and the ability to integrate technology into instruction. Guidelines to accomplish these goals include a foundation of technology competence which is necessary concurrently with or prior to methods courses and field experiences. This can be achieved through a general literacy course or demonstration where the platform and software are not as important as skill acquisition. Successful completion of such coursework might constitute one component of an overall assessment plan.

Also critical to technology proficiency is the requirement of technology use in core subject classes. Utilizing graphing calculators to learn in mathematics courses and scientific sensors and probes for lab work in science courses results in the highest level of technology competence with those tools. The same is true for projects, reports, and presentations that employ technology for any class. Professors who model uses of educational technology in their own teaching and require their students to use it for assignments greatly further student proficiency with technology. Monitoring of student performance on such assignments is another source of information that can be used in an overall assessment plan.

In addition to a strong foundation of technology competence, students in teacher preparation programs must be able to apply technology in the classroom. They must recognize that technology is a tool and a methodology for teachers and students to use in the processes of teaching and learning. Professional studies and methods courses provide the most direct way to accomplish this. Again professors who model uses of educational technology in their own teaching and require their students to use it for assignments encourage prospective teachers to experience the power of technology in the learning process. Numerous examples of technology applications must be included as an integral part of learning how to teach the various disciplines, and successful integration of technology into the contents should be included in the course evaluations, which can be an important source of information for assessment purposes.

Internships and field experiences make students in teacher preparation programs aware of technology initiatives in Virginia's K-12 public schools. Placement with cooperating teachers who effectively integrate technology into their teaching should be encouraged. Students should be encouraged to use technology for record-keeping and reporting on the pre-student teaching experience, as well as in lesson planning. Teacher-education programs should plan for and require the use of technology during the student teaching experience. Assessment of technology integration related to the Standards of Learning for Virginia Public Schools should be a major part of the total student teaching evaluation by both the cooperating teacher and the college supervisor.

Finally, surveying of student teachers upon completion of their internships and of recent graduates of the teacher-education program can provide very useful information about individuals' own assessment of their preparation for entering the technological environment of K-12 schools.

The results of these various assessment techniques should be used to make changes in efforts to integrate technology into the teacher-education program, in an on-going cycle of continuous revision and improvement.

Guideline 29: Teacher-education programs should develop and regularly revise a written plan setting forth strategies to measure student achievement in meeting state-mandated technology standards and having requisite technology skills.


Guideline 30: Teacher-education programs should use a variety of assessment techniques in monitoring their students' achievements in technology, for instance satisfactory completion of coursework, testing, surveying, portfolios, observation and critique of student teaching performance, etc.


Guideline 31: Each student's proficiency in meeting the Virginia Technology Standards for Instructional Personnel should be documented by the "College Verification Form" in its present form. A signature on that document assures the Virginia Department of Education that all requirements have been met. Technology requirements should be treated the same as instruction in reading methodology, grade point average, etc.






REFERENCES

Albemarle County (Virginia) Public Schools. "Albemarle County Media, Technology and Research Curriculum Glossary." Charlottesville, Virginia, 1997.

Educational Testing Service. Computers and Classrooms: The Status of Technology in U.S. Classrooms. Princeton, New Jersey, 1997.

Howe, Denis, et al. The Free On-Line Dictionary of Computing. <www.dictionary.com>, 1997.

International Society for Technology in Education. NCATE-Approved Curriculum Guidelines for Educational Computing and Technology. Eugene, Oregon, 1995.

National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education. Standards, Procedures and Policies for the Accreditation of Professional Education Units. Washington, D.C., 1993.

Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. Criteria for Accreditation: Commission on Colleges. Decatur, Georgia, 1996.

U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. Teachers & Technology: Making the Connection (OTA-EHR-616). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1995.

Virginia Department of Education. Six-Year Educational Technology Plan for Virginia. Richmond, Virginia, 1996.

Virginia Department of Education. Standards of Learning for Virginia Public Schools. Richmond, Virginia, 1995.

Virginia Department of Education. Technology Standards for Instructional Personnel. Richmond, Virginia, 1996.

Virginia Department of Education. Virginia State Technology Survey Report (prepared by Quality Education Data, Denver, Colorado). Richmond, Virginia, 1996.



APPENDICES



Glossary

House Bill 1848

Members of the Task Force on Technology in Teacher Education

Proposed Technology Standards for Instructional Personnel
(not available on server - click here to request hard copy)









Glossary *

Administrative

access: Faculty and students have access when technological resources are available them on a reasonably convenient basis, which might include signing up for use, waiting a reasonable amount of time, and/or going to a reasonably proximate off-campus site for use. (cf. "Ready access.")

ready access: Faculty and students have ready access to technological resources when those resources are available on-campus, without advance notice, and with only minimal waiting time. (cf. "Access.")

recommendations: Courses of action that members of the Task Force have found effective.

"should" statements: Statements that indicate the best practices for teacher-education programs seeking to ensure the technological competence of their graduates.

suggestions: Courses of action that members of the Task Force believe might be effective.

Technical

application: A computer software program you use.

backup: To make a copy of data and store it separately from the original.

browser: A program that allows a person to read hypertext; the browser gives some means of viewing the comments of nodes (or "pages") and of navigating from one node to another.

card: In hypermedia programs, an electronic card that is used to store some type of data; cards have different components used for information storage.

Category 5 cable: A shielded twisted pair cable capable of 100 megabytes per second; the highest rated wiring material, it is the industry standard for desktop and office computing purposes.

CD-ROM: Compact Disk Read Only Memory. A Compact Disk can hold over 600 MB of information stored optically.

CD-ROM drive: A disk drive which allows data, including audio, to be accessed.

computer: An electronic machine that can perform calculations and can process a large amount of information accurately and much more rapidly than the human brain.

database: A collection of data organized for search and retrieval.

desktop: Main workspace of a windows-based operating system.

desktop publishing: A computerized layout that integrates graphics and text to produce a professional looking document.

digitizer: A device that changes analog information into digital information that the computer can use to produce certain effects.

e-mail: Messages, called electronic mail, that are sent and received over a computer network from one person to an intended individual or group.

fiber optic cable: Cable connecting a communications system that uses dozens of hair-thin strands of glass to move information at the speed of light.

file server: Hardware and software that together provide file-handling and storage functions for multiple users on a local area network.

FTP: File Transfer Protocol. A client-server protocol that allows a user on one computer to transfer files to and from another computer over a network.

FORTRAN: FORmula TRANslator. The first and still the most widely used programming language for numerical and scientific applications.

gateway server: A router or other kind of internetworking device.

graphing: A feature in a software program that allows numerical data to be interpreted as a graph or chart.

hardware: The physical equipment of a computer, such as the screen/monitor, the keyboard, the Central Processing Unit, and the storage devices.

HTML: Hypertext Markup Language. A programming language used to develop Internet pages.

hypertext: "Active text" where one word is linked to another into a computer program; a type of indexing system.

interface: Connection between two items (components) so they can work together.

Internet: A global network of thousands of other computer networks that offers e-mail and information retrieval services to millions of people.

LAN: Local Area Network. A network that exists at one site.

log in: The act of connecting with a computer system and entering your user identification and password.

mail server: Hardware and software that together provide the E-mail function for multiple users on a local area network.

multi-media: A computer program or presentation that involves multiple forms of media (still images, moving video, sound, animation, art, text, etc.).

network-ready: A computer is network-ready when it has built-in capacity to be connected to a communication or connection system that lets it communicate with another computer, printer, disk, or other device.

node: An addressable device attached to a computer network. More often called a "host."

on-line: Communicating with other computers through a modem.

peripherals: Any part of a computer other than the central processing unit (CPU) or working memory, such as disks, keyboards, monitors, mice, printers, scanners, tape drives, microphones, speakers, cameras, etc.

platform: A specific combination of hardware and operating system and/or compiler.

print server: Hardware and software that together provide the printing function for multiple users on a local area network.

processing: The manipulation of data by a computer in accordance with its instructions, or programming.

professional studies: Academic work in the field of education, usually offered by or through a school or department of education.

program: A set of steps or a list of instructions that tells a computer to do something.

programming A computer language, such as FORTRAN, used to write programs that language: run on computers.

scanner: A peripheral device that converts text or pictures into bit-mapped data that is put into a computer; the digitized images can then be edited.

server: A program that provides some service for other (client) programs; also a computer that provides some service for other computers connected to it via a network.

software: Program material for computers; instructions to the central processing unit to tell it what to do with the data it receives.

sound card: A plug-in optional circuit card for an IBM-compatible PC. It provides high-quality stereo sound output under program control.

spreadsheet: An applications program, typically used in number-related information processing, that can quickly handle calculations and perform evaluation.

telecommunications: Sending information electronically across a distance using a computer and modem.

Telnet: The Internet standard protocol for remote log-in.

topology A network topology shows the hosts and the links between them. A network layer must stay abreast of the current network topology to be able to route packets to their final destinations.

video-conferencing: A discussion between two or more groups of people who are in different places but can see and hear each other using electonic communications.

WAN: Wide Area Network. A network that exists over multiple sites.

word processing: A process using a computer to input and edit text; a computer application that resembles typewriting but allows instant correction of errors, moving text to different locations, and other editing functions.

world-wide web: An Internet client-server hypertext-distributed information retrieval system which originated from the CERN High-Energy Physics laboratories in Geneva, Switzerland

* Some definitions in this glossary were taken from The Free On-Line Dictionary of Computing by Denis Howe et al. and the "Albemarle County Media, Technology and Research Curriculum Glossary."



House Bill 1848

CHAPTER 827

An Act to amend and reenact §§ 22.1-253.13:5, 23-9.2:3, 23-9.8, and 23-9.13:1 of the Code of Virginia, relating to training in educational technology.

[H 1848]

Approved April 2, 1997


Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Virginia:

1. That §§22.1-253.13:5, 23-9.2:3, 23-9.8, and 23-9.13:1 of the Code of Virginia are amended and reenacted as follows:

§22.1-253.13:5. Standard 5. Training and professional development.

A. The General Assembly and the Board of Education find that effective educational leadership and personnel and appropriate programs of professional development and training are essential for the advancement of public education in the Commonwealth.

B. Each member of the Board of Education shall participate in in-service programs on personnel, curriculum and current issues in education as part of his service on the Board.

C. The Board of Education shall sponsor, conduct or provide advice on (i) training and professional development of teachers, principals, supervisors, division superintendents and other school staff and (ii) in-service programs for school board members on personnel, curriculum and current issues in education. The Board shall provide technical assistance on professional development to local school boards designed to seek to ensure that all instructional personnel are proficient in the use of educational technology consistent with its Six-Year Educational Technology Plan for Virginia.

D. Each local school board shall require (i) its members to participate annually in in-service programs on personnel, curriculum and current issues in education as part of their service on the local board and (ii) require the division superintendent to participate annually in professional development activities at the local, state or national levels.

E. Each local school board shall provide (i) a program of professional development, as part of the license renewal process, to assist teachers and principals in acquiring the skills needed to work with gifted students and handicapped students and to increase student achievement, and (ii) a program of professional development in educational technology for all instructional personnel, and (iii) a program of professional development for administrative personnel designed to increase proficiency in instructional leadership and management.

§23-9.2:3. Power of governing body of educational institution to establish rules and regulations; offenses occurring on property of institution; state direct student financial assistance.

A. In addition to the powers now enjoyed by it, the board of visitors or other governing body of every educational institution shall have the power:

1. To establish rules and regulations for the acceptance of students except that individuals who have been convicted of violating the federal requirement to register for the selective service shall not be eligible to receive any state direct student assistance; to establish rules and regulations for the conduct of students while attending such institution; and to establish rules and regulations for the dismissal of students who fail or refuse to abide by such rules and regulations.

2. To establish rules and regulations for the employment of professors, teachers, instructors and all other employees and provide for their dismissal for failure to abide by such rules and regulations.

3. To provide parking and traffic rules and regulations on property owned by such institution.

4. To establish guidelines for the initiation or induction into any social fraternity or sorority in accordance with §18.2-56.

B. Upon receipt of an appropriate resolution of the board of visitors or other governing body of an educational institution, the governing body of a political subdivision which is contiguous to the institution shall enforce state statutes and local ordinances with respect to offenses occurring on the property of the institution.

The governing bodies of the public institutions of higher education shall assist the State Council of Higher Education and the Virginia Student Assistance Authorities in enforcing the provisions related to eligibility for financial aid.

C. In order to improve the quality of the Commonwealth's work force and educational programs, the governing bodies of the public institutions of higher education shall establish programs to seek to ensure that all graduates have the technology skills necessary to compete in the 21st Century and, particularly, that all students matriculating in teacher-training programs receive instruction in the effective use of educational technology.

§23-9.8. Cooperation with State Board of Education.

The Council shall cooperate with the State Board of Education in matters of interest to both the public school and the state-supported institutions of higher education, particularly in connection with coordination of the college admission requirements and teacher training programs with the public school program. In accomplishing this responsibility, the Council shall consult with the Board on its Six-Year Educational Technology Plan for Virginia and shall encourage the public institutions of higher education to design programs which include the skills necessary for the successful implementation of the Plan.

§23-9.13:1. Institutes for training teachers, administrators and librarians; guidelines to be developed by the State Council of Higher Education.

A. From such funds as may be appropriated for this purpose and from such gifts, donations, grants, bequests, and other funds as may be received on its behalf, the Council shall establish institutes providing technology training for teachers, administrators and librarians in the elementary and secondary schools of the Commonwealth.

B. The institutes shall be established at no more than three sites, which may include two-year and four-year public institutions of higher education.

C. The State Council of Higher Education shall, in consultation with the Virginia Department of Education and the accredited teacher-education programs of the Commonwealth's institutions of higher education, develop guidelines to seek to ensure that all students matriculating in teacher-training programs meet the standards embodied in Virginia's Technology Standards for Instructional Personnel and have the requisite skills for the implementation of the Board of Education's Six-Year Educational Technology Plan for Virginia.





Members of the Task Force on Technology in Teacher Education

Members of the Task Force included staff from the Compliance and Technology divisions of the Virginia Department of Education; heads of a representative sampling of teacher-education programs (public and private, large and small, NCATE-accredited and non-NCATE-accredited) from across the Commonwealth, representing the Virginia Association of Colleges of Teacher Education; a faculty member from a school of education, representing the Association of Teacher Educators of Virginia; two public school teachers, including the 1996 Virginia Teacher of the Year; the chief academic officer of a private college, representing the Council of Independent Colleges of Virginia; and a school board member, representing the Advisory Board on Teacher Education and Licensure.

communications@schev.edu
Dean Alan A. Arroyo
School of Education
Regent University
1000 Regent University Drive
Virginia Beach, VA 23464
PHONE: (757) 579-4260
FAX: (757) 579-4318
E-MAIL: alanarr@regent.edu
Prof. Glen L. Bull (Association of Teacher Educators - VA)
Curry School of Education
University of Virginia
405 Emmett Street
Charlottesville, VA 22903
PHONE: (804) 924-7471
FAX: (804) 924-0747
E-MAIL: gbull@virginia.edu
Ms. Mychele B. Brickner
(Fairfax County School Board and the
Advisory Board on Teacher Education and Licensure)
9732 South Park Circle
Fairfax Stations, VA 22039
PHONE: (703) 569-0944
FAX: (703) 440-6736
E-MAIL: mbrickner@burkholder.fcps.k12.va.us
Provost Jerome Garris
(Council of Independent Colleges of Virginia)
Provost and Dean of the College
Randolph-Macon College
P. O. Box 5005
Ashland, VA 23005
PHONE: (804) 752-7268
FAX: (804) 752-7231
E-MAIL: jgarris@rmc.edu
Ms. Barbara L. Huneycutt (teacher
   at Walker Upper Elementary School
   and Virginia's 1996 Teacher of the Year)
1564 Dairy Road
Charlottesville, VA 22903
PHONE: H: (804) 296-2301
       W: (804) 296-9151
FAX: (804) 977-7034
E-MAIL: bhuneycu@pen.k12.va.us
Ms. Byrd G. Latham
Teacher Education Specialist
Division of Compliance
Virginia Department of Education
101 North 14th Street
Richmond, VA 23219
PHONE: (804) 225-2104
FAX: (804) 225-2831
E-MAIL: blatham@pen.k12.va.us
Dr. Linda L. Logan
Department of Education
Virginia Wesleyan College
Wesleyan Drive
Norfolk, VA 23502
PHONE: (757) 474-9492
FAX: (757) 461-5044
E-MAIL: lllogan@vwc.edu
Ms. Rhonda M. Miller (teacher
   at Linkhorne Middle School)
1440 Northwood Circle
Lynchburg, VA 24503
PHONE: H: (804) 384-9492
       W: (804) 384-5150
FAX: (804) 384-2810
E-MAIL: rmmiller@pen.k12.va.us
Dr. Lan W. Neugent
Director of Instructional Media
   and Training
Virginia Department of Education
101 North 14th Street
Richmond, VA 23219
PHONE: (804) 786-2260
FAX: (804) 371-2455
E-MAIL: lneugent@pen.k12.va.us
Dr. Jerry Niles
College of Human Resources
   & Education
Virginia Tech
Blacksburg, VA 24061-0317
PHONE: (540) 231-6426
FAX: (540) 231-7157
E-MAIL: niles@vt.edu
Dean John S. Oehler
School of Education
Virginia Commonwealth University
P. O. Box 842020
Richmond, VA 23284
PHONE: (804) 828-3382
FAX: (804) 828-1323
E-MAIL: jsoehler@vcu.edu
Members ex officio:
Associate Director for Technology
State Council of Higher Education
101 North 14th Street
Richmond, VA 23219
PHONE: (804) 225-2600
FAX: (804) 225-2604
E-MAIL: communications@schev.edu
Dr. Thomas A. Elliott
Assistant Superintendent for Compliance
Virginia Department of Education
101 North 14th Street
Richmond, VA 23219
PHONE: (804) 371-2522
FAX: (804) 225-2831
E-MAIL: telliott@pen.k12.va.us
Dr. Ida J. Hill (retired 8/31/97)
Assistant Superintendent for Technology
Virginia Department of Education
101 North 14th Street
Richmond, VA 23219
PHONE: (804) 225-2757
FAX: (804) 371-2099
E-Mail: ihill@mail.vak12ed.edu