Survey of Instructional Technology Courses for Preservice Teachers.

Most teacher preparation programs offer one course in which preservice teachers are to develop their basic technology skills. If innovative pedagogy is the goal (of technology use in the classroom), the single instructional technology course may not effectively prepare preservice teachers to meet this goal. Knowledge of the format, content, and emphasis of the formal technology instruction that preservice teachers receive is imperative for establishing technology expectations for future teachers. Furthermore, such knowledge will provide insight into the status of instructional technology within schools of education. The preparation of preservice teachers to effectively use instructional technology is contingent, in part, on the basic attitudes and skills that preservice teachers develop with regards to instructional technology. In this article, the results of a survey of instructional technology courses at 88 teacher preparation institutions are presented. Descriptive statistics of the course format, content, and instructional emphasis are reported. Data analysis indicated that, in the introductory instructional technology courses, significantly more emphasis was placed on integrating instructional technologies into the curriculum than on using technologies for teacher productivity or personal use.

The prescriptive and descriptive literature about instructional technology and teacher education depicts the transition occurring within U.S. schools of education. They increasingly acknowledge the need to prepare preservice teachers to use technology, and struggle with methods to provide that preparation effectively. One recurring theme is evident in this literature: integration (Abdel-Haqq, 1995; Gilmore, 1995; Office of Technology Assessment, 1995; Henry, 1993). University faculty, educational researchers, experienced K-12 teachers, and professional organizations call for the integration of technology into the educational curriculum of preservice teachers to foster the ability of future teachers to use technology to expand the learning of K-12 students. Such integration should be provided through improved syntonicity (i.e., more hands-on experiences for preservice teachers with realistic educational assignments) and increased modeling of technology by college faculty in both content and methods courses (P anel on Educational Technology, 1997; Office of Technology Assessment, 1995).

Clearly articulated in the prescriptive literature is the premise that preservice teachers' ability to integrate technology into the curriculum will be the result of two factors: their basic technology skills, and the effective modeling of technology integration by teacher educators (Panel on Educational Technology, 1997; Willis & Mehlinger, 1996; Office of Technology Assessment, 1995; Sudzina, 1993; Oke, 1992; Wiburg, 1991). From the descriptive literature, it is reasonable to surmise that most preservice teachers complete one course in instructional technology or media (Milken Exchange on Educational Technology, 1999; Novak & Berger, 1991). Furthermore, it is in this single course that preservice teachers are to develop the basic technology skills that will serve as the foundation for their ability to integrate technology into the K-12 curriculum.

If, at most teacher preparation institutions, preservice teachers' instructional technology skills are developed in a single course, then knowledge of the content and format of that course should:

* Provide a basis to further identify and investigate factors that contribute to the development of technology-using educators.

* Provide insight into the status of instructional technology within schools of education.

* Offer a clear depiction of the technology attitudes and skills of the next generation of teachers.

Given the dynamic nature of technology, teacher educators and instructional technologists need to know how colleges and universities are preparing preservice teachers to use technology in the classroom. The purpose of this article is to report the results of a survey of the introductory instructional technology courses for preservice teachers taught at Holmes Group member institutions. The research questions addressed in this study were:

1. Is the single instructional technology course offered?

2. What is the primary focus of the single course (if offered)?

3. What is the specific content of the course?

4. What is the level of emphasis given to personal use, teacher productivity, and curriculum integration of computer-related technologies (CRT)?

METHOD

Subjects

The population for this study was college and university teacher preparation programs. The sample consisted of 88 higher education institutions that belong to the Holmes Group. The Holmes Group is a national consortium of research universities committed to making programs of teacher preparation more rigorous and connected to liberal arts education, research on learning and teaching, and wise practice in schools (Olson, 1987).

Materials

The Institution General Information Survey was designed to gather demographic data about the college or school of education in which the basic technology course was taught. It was comprised of four items. Respondents indicated their university/college, number of students and faculty within college/school of education, degree programs offered, and availability of certification or minor program of study in instructional technology (IT).

The Survey of Instructional Technology Courses was comprised of 34 items divided into three sections: general course information, course details, and resources for IT courses. The general course information section contained 15 items, and was designed to gather data such as course content focus, course format, credit hours, and average enrollment.

The course details section was designed to gather information about the course content, the extent to which specific topics were taught, and the relative emphasis given to each topic within the course (Figure 1). Course content was divided into three categories: computer technology, educational media (e.g., transparencies, videotapes, instructional television, etc.), and instructional design (e.g., needs assessment, goals, objectives, etc.). Below each category, a list of specific technologies (that comprise the category) was provided. Using a scale where 0 = not covered, 1 = mentioned, 2 = demonstrated, and 3 = used, the respondents were to indicate the "extent" to which each instructional technology was taught in the course.

Using the same list of technologies, the respondents were asked to indicate the type and level of emphasis given to each topic. The three types of emphasis were personal use (preservice teacher use of technology for academic or personal work), teacher productivity (teacher use of technology for classroom management and production of instructional materials), and curriculum integration (student or teacher use of technology for learning). Using a scale where 0 = not applicable, 1 = little or no emphasis, 2 = moderate emphasis, 3 = great emphasis, the respondents were to indicate the level of emphasis given to each topic within each type of emphasis.

The final section of the survey (resources for IT course) was designed to gather information about the types of additional instructional technology courses and the computer facilities available to preservice teachers. It consisted of six open-ended items in which the respondents were asked to describe additional instructional technology courses and computer facilities at their institution.

To ensure the content validity of the survey, experts in the areas of teacher education and instructional technology reviewed the survey. Reliability of the course details section of the survey was estimated by calculating internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha. The course details section of the survey was reliable. They appear in Table 1.

Procedures

A survey packet (consisting of a cover letter to the dean, the Institution General Information Survey, the Survey of Instructional Technology Courses, and a cover letter explaining the latter survey) was sent to the dean of each Holmes Group member institution. In the letter to the dean, it was requested that the Institution General Information Survey be completed by the dean, and the Survey of Instructional Technology Courses and cover letter be given to the individual responsible for teaching the introductory instructional technology course. Both completed surveys were returned to the researchers. Of the 88 institutions that were mailed survey packets, 53 were returned, yielding a response rate of 60%.

RESULTS

Thirty-three schools offered graduate degrees (masters and/or doctoral) in instructional technology. None of the institutions that participated in the survey offered a bachelor's degree in instructional technology. However, one institution offered an integrated bachelor's and master's degree in IT, and another school offered a fifth-year certification or licensure program in IT. In addition, four schools (9.3%) offered an undergraduate minor, and 10 (23.3%) offered an undergraduate certification in instructional technology.

The majority of institutions that participated in the survey (67%) reported student enrollments in the college/school of education in excess of 1,000. Of these institutions, 11 reported an enrollment of more than 2,000 students.

Question # 1: Is The Single Instructional Technology Course Offered?

Thirty-nine of the 53 respondents (73%) reported that a specific introductory instructional technology course for preservice teachers was offered at their institution. Ten schools (19%) reported that their institution did not offer a specific instructional technology course for preservice teachers, and four schools (8%) indicated that the instructional technology course content was offered by another college or integrated into another course. (The subsequent analysis included the schools that offered instructional technology courses. Therefore, the sample size was 43.) At nearly 60% of the institutions, the introductory instructional technology course was three credit hours with three contact hours per week. At 36 of the institutions surveyed, the course was taught in a lecture and laboratory format and had no prerequisites. It is interesting to note that nearly two-thirds of the institutions (27 of 43) required the course for all preservice teachers, yet at only one-third of the schools (14 of 43) was the c ourse state-mandated for certification or licensure (Table 2).

Question #2: What is the primary focus of the single course?

The primary focus of the instructional technology course was Computer Technology (28 schools; 65.1%). Four institutions reported that the primary focus of the course was instructional media.

Question # 3: What is the specific content of the course?

Computer Technology

Hard ware. Data analysis of the extent to which computer technology topics were taught in the introductory instructional technology course indicated that CD-ROMs (n = 31; 72%) were the hardware topic most used in the course. In addition, the hardware most demonstrated (but not necessarily used by students) was laser disks (n = 10). Modems were the form of hardware most mentioned in the instructional technology courses (n = 18).

The type and level of emphasis given to computer technology topics in the introductory instructional technology course indicated that 28 institutions gave "great emphasis" to the curriculum integration of CD-ROM technology.

Computer-based instruction. Each item in the computer-based instruction section (drill and practice, tutorials, educational games, problem-solving, and simulations) was used in the instructional technology course by more than 50% of the institutions. Problem-solving applications (n = 32) and simulations (n = 33) were the computer-based instructional applications most used in the course. Nine institutions reported that problem-solving applications were demonstrated in class, and 10 schools reported that drill and practice applications were only mentioned in the course. Educational games were the computer-based instructional applications not covered by the greatest number of schools (n = 4).

The type and level of emphasis given to computer-based instructional applications indicated that "great emphasis" was given to the curriculum integration of computer-based instructional applications. Thirty-one institutions reported that "great emphasis" was given to the curriculum integration of simulations, in particular.

Tool software. Word processing was the form of tool software most used (n = 39), followed by graphics/drawing applications (n = 38). The tool software that received the least amount of use was computer-based video editing (n = 2). Desktop publishing was the tool software demonstrated by the greatest number of institutions (n = 14). Frequency counts indicated that computer-based video editing was the form of tool software most mentioned in the introductory instructional technology course (n = 15), as well as the form of tool software not covered by the greatest number of schools (n = 21).

The type and level of emphasis given to tool software showed that more than 60% of the schools gave "great emphasis" to the personal use, teacher productivity, and curriculum integration of word processing. In addition, curriculum integration of graphics/drawing (n = 28), hypermedia (n = 25), spreadsheet (n = 22), and database (n = 22) tool software was "greatly emphasized."

Telecommunications. Nearly 60% of the respondents indicated that e-mail (88%), Internet (86%), and LAN/WAN (58%) were used in the instructional technology course. Eight institutions indicated that LAN/WAN topics were mentioned in the course, and eight schools reported that LAN/WAN topics were not covered. The type and level of emphasis given to telecommunications indicated that more than 50% of the respondents gave "great emphasis" to the personal use, teacher productivity, and curriculum integration of e-mail and Internet applications.

Programming. More than 50% of the respondents (n = 22) indicated that LOGO was not covered in their course. Thirteen institutions mentioned LOGO in the course, and only five reported that LOGO was used in the introductory instructional technology course. The respondents did not include any other programming language in the introductory instructional technology course.

Educational Media

Visual media production. The extent to which educational media topics were taught in the introductory instructional technology course indicated that, in the area of visual media production, transparencies (n = 17) and video recording (n = 14) were the media most used. Slide/audio presentations (n = 7) was the visual media production topic demonstrated in the instructional technology course, followed by still pictures (n = 6). Video editing (n = 12) and television production (n = 11) were the topics mentioned in class by the greatest number of schools. The data indicated that, with the exception of transparencies and video recording, 50% or more of the schools did not cover visual media production topics. Moreover, photography developing/printing (n = 33), television production titling/SEG (n = 33), hook and loop (n = 31), and flannel board (n = 31) display materials were the topics not covered by the greatest number of institutions.

Audio and motion media. In the area of audio media, six institutions reported that audio recording was used, eight indicated that audio recording was demonstrated, 12 mentioned audio recording, and 19 reported that audio recording and audio editing/duplication were not covered in the course. Similar to audio media, most of the institutions reported that various forms of motion media (16 mm films, n = 28; filmstrips, n = 27; television, n = 22) were not covered in the course. The forms of motion media most used were videos (n = 8) and television (n = 7). Ten schools reported that videos were demonstrated, and eight schools demonstrated television in the introductory instructional technology course.

Distance education. In the area of distance education, four institutions reported that two-way audio/video was used in the course, and four schools reported that correspondence was used in the course. The majority of schools (n = 22) reported that two-way audio/one-way video was not covered in the course.

Because the extent to which educational media topics were included in the introductory instructional technology course was low, the emphasis data are not reported.

Instructional Design

The extent to which instructional design topics were taught in the introductory instructional technology course indicated that cooperative learning (n = 28), lesson planning (n = 25), student-centered learning, evaluation, and media selection (n = 24, respectively), and writing objectives and lesson production (n = 22, respectively) were the topics most used in the instructional technology courses. The topics demonstrated by the greatest number of institutions were media selection (n = 8), media planning (n = 8), and learning styles (n = 7). The topics most mentioned in the instructional technology course were learning styles (n = 12), domains of learning (n = 10), visual literacy (n = 10), and portfolio production (n = 9). Classroom design (n = 22), needs analysis (n = 20), audience analysis (n = 20), task analysis (n = 21), and situated cognition (n = 19) were the topics not covered by the greatest number of institutions.

Question #4: What is the level of emphasis given to CRT?

To examine if significant differences in the type and level of emphasis given to tool and telecommunications software existed, analyses of variance were calculated. The independent variable was the type of emphasis (personal use, teacher productivity, and curriculum integration), and the dependent variable was the level of emphasis (0 = not applicable, 1 = little or no emphasis, 2 = moderate emphasis, 3 = great emphasis).

In the area of tool software, the data analysis indicated that there was a significant difference in emphasis given to graphics/drawing: F(2, 72) = 4.6l, p = .01; data base, F(2, 74) = 5.90, p [less than].01; presentation software, F(2, 72) = 5.90, p [less than].01); and hypermedia, F(2, 74) = 14.16, p [less than].001. The results of the post-hoc analysis indicated that for graphics/drawing applications, the emphasis in curriculum integration was significantly higher than the emphasis in teacher productivity, Tukey q = 4.48. For video editing, the emphasis in curriculum integration was significantly higher than the emphasis in teacher productivity, Tukey q = 6.27, and the emphasis in personal use, Tukey q = 9.84. For data base, the emphasis in curriculum integration was significantly higher than the emphasis in personal use, Tukey q = 5.13. For presentation software, the emphasis in teacher productivity was significantly higher than the emphasis in personal use, Tukey q = 4.50. For hypermedia, the emphasis i n curriculum integration was significantly higher than the emphasis in personal use, Tukey q = 8.05. The Tukey q critical value was 4.28, respectively.

In the area of telecommunications, there was a significant difference in the emphasis given to the Internet, F(2,72) = 5.23, p = .007). The emphasis in curriculum integration was significantly higher than the emphasis in personal use, Tukey q = 4.45; the Tukey q critical value was 4.28.

DISCUSSION

The purpose of this study was to examine the nature and content of the instructional technology preparation for preservice teachers at a sub-set of research universities. Although not the only model, the single course appears to be the dominant model for technology preparation of preservice teachers. The data suggested that most preservice teachers enrolled in Holmes Group member institutions complete a single three-credit course in instructional technology, a portion of which is laboratory-based. The results of this study support the conclusion that a shift in the content and emphasis of instructional technology preparation for preservice teachers is occurring. Current focus of instructional technology preparation for preservice teachers is on computer technology and not educational media or instructional design topics. Moreover, the data presented in this study suggest a growing emphasis on curriculum integration of technology, in contrast to the use of technology for personal use or teacher productivity. This shift in content and emphasis is consistent with paradigm transitions that have occurred within-the field of instructional technology (Thompson, Simonson, & Hargrave, 1996).

Lack of confidence and skill in using technology, as well as a lack of knowledge of how to meaningfully incorporate technology into the teaching and learning process has stifled the technology use of many K-12 teachers (Willis & Mehlinger, 1996; Office of Technology Assessment, 1995; Schrum, 1994; Wiske, Zodhaites, Wilson, Gordon, Harvey, Krensky, & Lord, 1990). The development of basic technology skills and curriculum integration knowledge by preservice teachers suggest the emergence of a generation of educators who are poised to begin to use and explore the potential of computer-based technologies in the teaching and learning processes. Finally, the results of this study indicate the content emphasis given to instructional technology from the perspective of course instructors. It did not examine the learning that results from the instruction. Future studies are needed that examine the skills, attitudes, and knowledge that preservice teachers develop by completing the basic instructional technology course a nd factors the impact of their ability to incorporate technologies into the teaching and learning process.

References

Abdal-Haqq, I. (1995). Infusing Technology into preservice teacher education.

ERIC Digest. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 389 699).

Gilmore, A.M. (1995). Turning teachers on to computers: Evaluation of a teacher development program. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 27(30), 251-269.

Henry, M.J. (1993). Profile of a technology using teacher. Paper presented at the meeting of the Eastern Educational Research Association, Clearwater, FL.

Milken Exchange on Educational Technology. (1999). Will new teachers be prepared to teach in a digital age? Milken Family Foundation.

Novak, D., & Berger, C.F. (1991). Integrating technology into preservice education: Michigan's response. Computers in the Schools, 8(1/2/3), 89-101.

Office of Technology Assessment. (1995). Teachers and technology: Making the connection. (Report no. OTA-EHR-616). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Oke, L. (1992). The need for technology instruction in teacher education. Exit Project, Indiana University at South Bend.

Olson, L. (1987). An overview of the Holmes Group. Phi Delta Kappan, 68(8), 619-621.

Panel on Educational Technology (1997). Report to the President on the use of technology to strengthen K-12 education in the United States. Washington, DC.

Schrum, L. (1994). First steps into the information age: Technology infusion in a teacher education program. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 10(4), 12-14.

Sudzina, M.R. (1993). Technology, teachers, educational reform: Implications for teacher preparation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association of Teacher Educators, Los Angeles.

Thompson, A.D., Simonson, M.R., & Hargrave, C.P. (1996). Educational Technology: A review of the research. (2nd ed.) Washington, DC: Association of Educational Communications and Technology.

Waggener, J. et al., (1992). Media and Technology for Teaching: Course manual for EDM/EDT 343/443/543, Miami University of Ohio (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 345681)

Wiburg, K.M. (1991). Teaching teachers about technology. Computers in the Schools, 8(1/2/3), 115-129.

Wiske, M., Zodhiates, P., Wilson, B., Gordon, M., Harvey, W., Krensky, L., & Lord, B. (1990). How technology affects teaching. (Technical Report No. TR87-10). Boston: Harvard Graduate School of Education, Educational Technology Center.

Willis, J.W., & Mehlinger, H.D. (1996). Information technology and teacher education. In J. Sikula, T.J. Buttery, & E. Guyton, (Eds.) Handbook of research on teacher education (2nd ed.). New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan, pp. 978-1029.

                Reliability coefficients for course details
                           section of survey of
                   instructional technology courses for
                            preservice teachers
Topic Area           Extent            Emphasis
                            Personal   Teacher    Curriculum
                              Use    Productivity Integration
Computer technology   .90     .95        .93          .90
Educational Media     .94     .95        .94          .94
Instructional Design  .94      NA         NA           NA
              Characteristics of the Instructional Technology
                Courses at Holmes Group Member Institutions
Item                       Response   N  Percent
credits                    3 hours    26 60.4%
Contact hours              3 hours    25 58.1%
Prerequisites              No         36 83.7%
Required for preservice
teachers                   Yes        27 62.8%
Required for certification No         25 58.1%
Primary focus              Computer
                           technology 28 65.1%