NATIONAL-LOUIS UNIVERSITY

MASTER COURSE OUTLINE

 

 

 

Course/Workshop Prefix and Number TIE 536     sem hours 3 sh (2+1)           Fixed  X      

Course/Workshop Title: Integrating Technology Across the Curriculum

System Title: _Integrating Tech Across Curriculm____________________________ (limited to 30 characters including spaces and punctuation.

College NCE               Unit/Program/Department Technology in Education

 

 


Course description (maximum @ 100 words):

This course will focus on strategies for integration of technology into classroom practice. Students will explore a variety of teaching strategies and pedagogical approaches for implementing technology use across the curriculum. The student will design and implement lessons demonstrating appropriate ways to use technology to meet existing curricular objectives and to expand curricular options. Students will design and implement professional development plans for helping other teachers develop these skills. Students are expected to complete a minimum of 15 hours of field experiences as part of this course. These hours are a part of the program benchmark assignment completed in this course.

 

Prerequisite(s):

TIE 5xx, TIE 544, and TIE 542 or their equivalent.  Non-TIE majors who wish to register for this course must have prior permission of instructor.

 

Relationship to specific NLU program(s):

A required course in the TIE program meeting both Illinois (Technology Specialist) and ISTE (Technology Facilitator) Standards for Technology in Education Advanced programs.

 

NCE outcomes addressed:

€ Assess, reflect on and critique their knowledge and practice.

€Integrate theory and practice

€ Understand contextual nature of knowledge

 

Course goals and expected student learning outcomes:

As a part of this course students will:

 

  1. Examine a variety of pedagogical approaches that support the integration of technology into the curriculum and are designed to meet the needs of all learners. (TS 1G, TS-1H, TF- III B )
  2. Explore a range of instructional frameworks for using technology in the classroom. (TS- 5A, TS-5C, TF-II.E. 1)
  3. Designs and implements lessons, which integrate computer use and other technologies into the curriculum to improve instructional effectiveness. ( TS-7A, TS-7B, TS-12D ,TF-II.A 3., TF-II.C)
  4. Demonstrate how technology tools can be used to provide for individual differences among students of varying ability levels.  (TS-3F, TS-7G, TF-II.A., TF-VI.B. 1,2)  
  5. Link designed lessons to state learning standards and the NETS standards. (TS-4.A.,D., TS- 8A, TF-II.C. 1,2) 
  6. Explore a variety of strategies that assess learning involving the use of technology. (TS-1N, TF-IV.A. 1,2)
  7. Design appropriate assessment materials for learning experiences that consider content and technology competencies.  ( TS ­ 1N, TF-IV.A. 1)
  8. Understand the importance of legal, ethical and responsible use of technology resources. (TS ­1O, TF-VI.A. )
  9. Uses research to support the use of a variety of pedagogical approaches and the ways in which they link to the use of technology as a curricular tool. ( TF- III E )
  10. Design a professional development component to introduce the unit and lesson created in benchmark project and support teacher¹s use of unit/lessons developed. (TS-1M, TS­ 9; TS-12A, TS-12B, TF ­ II.B, TF-IIE1., TF-IV.A. 2.)
  11. Understand the importance of communicating with stakeholders (classroom teachers and administrators) groups in order to improve student learning.  (TS-12A,E, TF-V.D.)
  12. Identify resources for a professional library that will support technology facilitators and specialists in their own professional growth as well as in the work to support others. (This is part of an ongoing portfolio (TIE 592) requirement across courses) (TF ­VIIC)

 

( ISBE: Technology Specialist (TS)    ISTE: Technology Facilitator Standards (TF))

 

Major Topics:

.

A.  Linking technology integrated lessons to the curriculum across content areas.

              1.  Using technology to assist in meeting existing curricular objectives.

              2.  Using technology to extend the learning environment, e.g.,

                         a.  Simulations of situations not usually examined in the classroom

                         b.  Problem solving with a data base and spreadsheets

c.      Accessing information beyond the walls of the school via  

the Internet

              3.  Use of technology-based experiences to provide collaborative learning

                    environments.

4.     Matching lesson elements to the Illinois Learning Standards and the
NETS Standards.

B. Compare and contrast a range of instructional approaches for using technology in the classroom.

1.     Engaged Learning

2.     Problem-based Learning

3.     Anchored Instruction

4.     Social Constructivism

5.     Collaborative groups

6.     Full group instruction

7.     Peer tutors

8.     Meeting the Needs of All Learners (eg, including those with differences in cultural, languages and learning styles)

9.     Currently identified Best Practice

 

C. Examine Models for designing integrated learning experiences

1.     Understanding by Design

2.     Apple Unit of Practice

3.     ASSURE Model

 

D.  Analysis and re-examination of the current status in a student¹s own classroom.

  1.  How is technology used?

2.     Is the use of the technology linked to the curriculum?

3.     Is the use of technology linked to state standards

4.     Is the integration of technology linked to assessment?

              5.   What instructional strategies are employed?

              6.   How are lesson objectives assessed?

 

E.  Planning for Technology Integration

              2.  Plan a unit with specific objectives.

                         a.  Provide for individual differences.

                         b.  Consider technology-related classroom management strategies.

 c. Address state learning standards and state and national technology     standards

 d. Describe lessons (performance tasks) for the unit

3.     Implement fully developed lesson.

a.      Use of one of the models for design of lesson

b.     Integrate appropriate technology experience in the lesson

c.      Develop and use tool for assessment of student learning

d.     Include personal reflection on the implementation experience

4.     Evaluate lesson.

 

F.  Impact of introducing new technologies into school context (the process of change).

              1.  on curricular goals and objectives

              2.  on the role of the teacher and teachers¹ concerns

              3.  on the possibility of new instructional strategies.

              3.  on changes in grouping patterns and scheduling

4.     on changes in methods of assessing student learning.

 

Field Component/Experiences

 

1.     Implementing a technology-based lesson in a school setting, assessing the success of the lesson, revising for future use.

2.     Implementing a professional development experience based upon the fully implemented lesson in I.

 

The field experienced will be assessed through a rubric to be used for all elements of this course, as these two experiences constitute one of the required benchmark assignments for the ISTE Technology Facilitator Program Approval.

 

 

Professional Development Experience Rubric will include assessment of:

1.     understanding of adult learning theory

2.     teacher materials designed for use with the lesson

3.     selection of, modeling of and explanation for use of specific pedagogical approach

4.     examine assessment strategies of student learning as part of the professional development experience.

5.     develop instructional goals, performance objectives for and assessment of the professional development experience provided.

6.     Implementation of and reflection upon professional development activity

 

There will also include a personal reflection on the implementation of the professional development experience

 

 

Suggested methods for evaluating student performance:

 

Class Participation in face-to-face classroom and online synchronous and asynchronous class discussions and reflections

Completion of Unit Plan and implementation of expanded lesson

Implementation of and reflection upon fully developed lesson

Critical Friend activities during project development process

Completion of benchmark assignment
Representative text(s) and /or supporting resources:

 

Anderson, C.L. & Anderson, K.M. (2001).  Examples of activities using KidPix Studio Deluxe correlated with academic standards.  Special Education Technology Practice. 3(1), pp. 24-33.

Anderson, C.L. & Anderson, K. (2002).  Using Sheila Rae the Brave to develop an inclusive technology-integrated thematic unit.  Special Education Technology

Practice, 4(5), pp. 17-24.

Appert, C. (2002). Meeting standards: Preparing school-based professionals with technology competencies. 2002 CSUN Conference Proceedings. Retrieved January 8, 2002 from http://www.csun.edu/cod/conf/2002/proceedings/168.htm

Bazil, M. & Heintz, J. (1997). Technology across the curriculum: Activities and ideas.  Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited, Inc.

Behrmann, M. (1988). Integrating computers into the curriculum: A handbook for special educators. San Diego, CA: College-Hill Press.

Blackmore, J. (1996). Learning styles: Adult learning styles.[Online] Retrieved on January 18, 2003 from Learning Styles Web page. http://granite.cyg.net/~jblackmo/diglib/styl-a.html

Bransford, J. (Editor) (2000). How people learn: brain, mind,experience, and school. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. [online] Retreived January 18, 2003  at http://books.nap.edu/html/howpeople1/]

Brooks, J. & Brooks, M. (1993). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms.  Alexandria, VA:  Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. http://www.ascd.org/framebooks.html

Brown, John Seely, A. Collins, and P. Duguid.  Situated cognition and the culture of learning, Educational Researcher, 1989, 18, pp. 32-42. http://www.ilt.columbia.edu/ilt/papers/JohnBrown.html

Chan, B. (1993).  Kid pix around the world: a multicultural computer activity book.  Reading, MA:  Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Costa, A. (1991).  The school as a home for the mind.  Palatine, IL:  Skylight Publishing.

Cuban, L. (1986).  Teachers and Machines: The Classroom Use of Technology Since 1920.  New York:  Teachers College Press.

Danielson, C. (1996).  Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching.  Alexandria, VA:  Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. http://www.ascd.org/framebooks.html

Dede, C. (1998).  ASCD Year Book: 1998 learning with technology. Alexandria, VA:  Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. http://www.ascd.org/framebooks.html

Ditson, L., Kessler, R., Anderson-Inman, L. & Mafit, D. (1998).  Concept mapping meaning.  Eugene, Oregon:  International Society for Technology in Education.

Harris, J. ( 1998).  Virtual architecture: Designing and directing curriculum-based telecomputing.  Eugene, Oregon:  International Society for Technology in Education. [Online]  Retrieved on January 18, 2003 from Virtual Architeture¹s Web Home web page at http://virtual-architecture.wm.edu/. 

Holcomb, E. (1996). Asking the right questions: Tools and techniques for teamwork.  Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.

Illinois Learning Standards (2002). [Online] Accessed December 28, 2002. http://www.isbe.state.il.us/ils/standards.html

Susan Loucks-Horsley (1998). Ideas that work: Effective professional development for teachers of science. Columbus, OH: Eisenhower National Clearinghouse. [Online] http://www.enc.org/text/professional/learn/ideas/science/document.shtm?input=ACQ-142559-2559_2

Hyerle, D. (1996).  Visual tools for constructing knowledge.  Alexandria, VA:  Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. http://www.ascd.org/framebooks.html

 

ISTE ( 1998). National Educational Teaching Standards for Students (NETS-S) [Online] Accessed December 28, 2002.  http://cnets.iste.org/students/

ISTE (2001). National Educational Teaching Standards for Teachers (NETS-T) [Online] Accessed December 28, 2002. http://cnets.iste.org/teachers/

Johassen, D. (1996).  Computers in the classroom: Mindtools for critical thinking.  Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey:  Merrill.

Jones, B. F., Valdez, G., Nowakowski, J., & Rasmussen, C. (1995). Plugging in. Oakbrook, IL: NCREL. [Online] Accessed Dec. 28, 2002 . http://www.ncrtec.org/capacity/plug/plug.htm

Kahn, J. (1998).  Ideas and strategies for the one-computer classroom.   Eugene, Oregon:  International Society for Technology in Education.

Lamb, A. (1997).  The magic carpet ride: Integrating technology into the k-12 classroom.  Emporia, Kansas:  Vision to Action.

Lindsey, J. D. (Ed.) (1999). Technology and exceptional individuals (3rd. ed.). Austin, TX: Pro Ed

Male, M. 2003).  Technology for inclusion: Meeting the special needs of all students (3rd ed.).  Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Martorella, P. (1997).  Interactive technologies and the social studies: Emerging issues and applications.  Albania, NY:  State University of New York Press.

Marzano, R., Pickering, D. & McTighe. ( 1993).  Assessing student outcomes: Performance assessment using the dimensions of learning model.  Alexandria, VA:  Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. http://www.ascd.org/framebooks.html 

Marzano, R. (1992).  A different kind of classroom: Teaching with dimensions of learning.   Alexandria, VA:  Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. http://www.ascd.org/framebooks.html

Marzano, R., Brandt, R., Hughes, C., Jones, B., Presseisen, B., Rankin, S. & Suhor, C. (1988).  Dimensions of thinking: A framework for curriculum and instruction.  Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. [Online] Excerpt retrieved on January 18, 2003 at http://www.ascd.org/framebooks.html

McGrath, P. & Axelson, J. (1993).  Accessing awareness and developing knowledge: Foundations for skill in a multicultural society.  Pacific Grove, CA:  Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.

McKenzie, Jamie (1997). A questioning toolkit. FromNowOn: The Educational Technology Journal, 7(3).  http://www.fno.org/nov97/toolkit.html

McKenzie, Walter 92002). Multiple intelligence and instructional technology ­ A manual for every mind. .  Eugene, Oregon:  International Society for Technology in Education.

McTighe, J., & Wiggins, G. (1998).  The understanding by design handbook.. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Moursund, D. (2002).  Project-Based learning using information technology.  Eugene, Oregon:  International Society for Technology in Education.

Norton, P. & Wiburg, K. (1998).  Teaching with technology: Designing opportunities to learn (2nd Ed.).  Belmont.CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning..

North Carolina Professional Teaching Standards Commission(2001). Professional Development Standards/ [Online] http:www.ncptsc.org/cinit/Standards/Develop_Stds.pdf

Roberts, S.(2000). Addressing the needs of diverse learners ID No. 4906.[online] Retrieve January 3, 2003 from TrackStar Web site: http://trackstar.hprtec.org/

Roblyer, M., Edwards, J. & Havriluk, M. (1997).  Integrating educational technology into teaching.  Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.

Sanholtz, J., Ringstaff, C. & Dwyer, D. (1997).  Teaching with technology: Creating student centered classrooms.  New York: Teachers College Press.

Schiler, M. (nd). Teaching and Technology Transfer.  [Online]. http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~marcs/teach.html#Teaching

Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners, Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J. (1998).  Understanding by design.  Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Woodwark, J., & Cuban, L. (2000). Technology, curriculum, and professional development:  adapting school to meet the needs of students with disabilities. Thousand Oaks, CA :Corwin Press.

                       

 

Delivery systems (check all that apply):

X    Traditional Classroom Delivery

q      Field Model

q      On-line

q      Other system (describe)

 

                                                                                                                                                                                   

Submitted by Marianne Handler                                              Date January, 2003

Revised by ( if applicable) ____________________________Date __________

                                    ______________________________    Date __________

  

Approved by:

            Program/Department/Unit ________________________                  Date __________

            College Curriculum Council/Unit  __________________                  Date __________

            College Dean ___________________________________               Date __________

            Senate Curriculum Committee* _____________________                Date __________

 

When all signatures are obtained, forward to the Provost Office            

            Provost ____________________________________                                   Date __________

 

The Provost Office forwards to Registrar                                                  Date __________

 

* New Courses ONLY