SOBRE LOS COMPONENTES TRANSHISTÓRICOS PARA EL ANÁLISIS DE LA CIUDAD EN EL SISTEMA MUNDIAL

As previously discussed, the TPP does not currently include a course specifically devoted to learning about educational technologies. A majority of the interviewees (eight out of the eleven) commented about this, often wishing for a more deliberate—or perhaps a more obvious—opportunity for them to learn about the technologies that they will use in the classroom. I did not specifically ask them about a course related to educational technologies, but I did ask a somewhat broader question: “What do you think would be the best way for a pre-service teacher to learn about technology integration?” In response, eight of the eleven interviewees specifically brought up the idea that a course to help them learn about various classroom technologies would be a benefit, making comments such as, “I don't think it'd be a bad idea to have a whole course devoted to tech

integration…A class that teaches about current technology and, maybe, how teachers are using it now, and how technology is changing,” (Drew) and “I think it would be more beneficial to have a class that is solely focused on technology. Then you can take that technology class and actually apply it to your methods courses.” (Gary)

Several participants noted that there are some formal opportunities to learn about educational technologies, but they also suggested that this learning is fragmented. For example, Bruce made the comment, “it surprises me that it isn't some course specifically called education technology…I think we have ‘technology in education’ as a little subsection of six different courses.” Two other pre-service teachers corroborated this view that technology learning was divided into a variety of courses:

It's not something that is spent in depth on necessarily, but it's something that we definitely hit on in each methods course. We've talked about it in psych courses and such like that too. It's something we talk about all the time. (Henry)

I know in multiple classes, I couldn't even name them necessarily, but we've just had a unit or a class that's been about technology, or we've been given a list of apps that are helpful, or just I feel like that's been at least brought up in most of my classes at some point. … I don't know that there's been whole lot of

application. (Elsa)

Interestingly, most who thought a technology course was a good idea recognized that a one-size-fits-all course would actually be a poor-fit for pre-service teachers, due to the different age groups and content areas they would be teaching. This idea fits quite well with the TPACK framework: contextualizing technology use with different pedagogies and in different content areas. For example, in illustration of her technological content knowledge, one pre-service teacher suggested

I think that for each subject area, tech integration is going to look a little

differently, just because of the nature of the content. For science, I know there's online dissection type things, but of course a history class isn't going to have that type of thing. (Fiona)

Along similar lines but with regard to technological pedagogical knowledge, another participant recognized that teachers at different grade levels may use vastly different technologies with their students. In his thinking about how to best prepare for technology integration, one interviewee stated

I think it will be cool to have a class, because each [pre-service teacher] in our class…we're going to teach very different things. [My friend] wants to teach high school history, there's no way I could ever teach high school history. If there would be a class for different majors or even high school, middle school, and elementary and just maybe modeling programs that we would use in a classroom and then letting us figure it out and try it for ourselves. (Kevin)

Thus, perhaps a better model for a technology course would be one differentiated for the different needs of a variety of pre-service teachers. Several participants had suggestions for how to make such an arrangement feasible, getting creative with the scheduling and thinking flexibly about the credit options, included the following:

Maybe have a…one credit, or half semester class where you just dive into the different technologies that can be used in your content area, because I don't think it would necessarily need to be a three credit course, but a course that allows you to explore and have someone who's knowledgeable about the technology in your content area to be able to talk you through it. (Fiona)

I don't know if it would be a once a week senior seminar type thing where it's Friday at eight a.m. (Gary)

I think that would be the easiest way, [would be to] just spend a whole semester [learning about technology]…I suppose you could do three separate [segments] for the elementary, the middle, and the high school. Even if you broke it up into three terms or something, like you focused on elementary, if it was a one credit course or something like that even. You focus on elementary for four weeks and then middle for four weeks and high school for four weeks. If you want to go to

all three, great. If you don't…it just depends what your credit level will allow you. (Henry)

These suggestions indicate their beliefs that learning about technology integration is important, and they are willing to be flexible to develop the knowledge and skills they believe they need.

Some of the participants however, had other ideas of ways to support pre-service teachers’ learning about technology integration. One of Andie’s comments is a telling contrast to those who recommended a technology course. She suggested, “I think prior to this year, I thought the best way would be to have a tech class, but I think I'm learning as I go that you naturally are just going to learn once you are in it” (Andie). It is important to note that being “in it,” as she says, is referring to her experience as a PDS intern. She has the opportunity to practice technology integration under the supervision of and in collaboration with her mentor teacher on a day-to-day basis. She also suggested that it might be more helpful to just have a list of great technology tools for teaching different content areas, stating,

I think one of the most beneficial things to improve would be to have a list. For math, if you want to learn geometry, here's my list. If you want to learn algebra, here's my list. Just to have a resource, like here's some awesome apps. I don't know if that's even possible for all of the different subject areas, but for science, if you're trying to learn about density, here's an app for that. (Andie)

Four other participants also recommended a resource list. Their suggestions included the following:

I think it would be helpful just to maybe walk away with…five tools, five

websites, five programs or five apps or whatever that you can be like, ‘You know what? I'm going to use this.’ (Gary)

I would [just appreciate] some idea of what resources are out there to assist in integrating that technology into that subject matter. (Ivory)

I can think of times that we've talked [in classes] about, ‘What are some good ways to communicate with parents? Here's a list of communication apps that you can use.’ That was so helpful. (Elsa)

Today we had some [guest speakers] come into…Educational Psychology, and they're like, ‘Oh, Classroom Dojo, blah, blah, blah’ and they just keep going, and I'm like, ‘Oh! Jot that down!’ Throw that on my list of things. I've got apps, I've got websites, I've got, you know, just different technology resources, so I think that that's a really cool thing to compile. (Julie)

Both Gary and Ivory suggested that the combination of a course as well as a list of excellent resources could be helpful, and that the resource list would be a benefit because of its practicality. Other pre-service teachers also emphasized this need for practicality when it comes to technology integration, so if a technology course were to be offered, it would have to be “a practical course” (Henry), a course that emphasizes “first hand experience” (Ivory), a course that provides “some guideline…as to how we need to determine whether or not this [particular technology] is useful.” (Bruce). Elsa offered an insightful comment that sums up much of the participants’ ideas about a technology course, stating, “it's really important for teachers to be aware of what's going on

most exciting thing, but the newest, most effective thing.” These pre-service teachers are looking for wisdom in how to teach with technology.

Chapter Summary

Trustworthiness and credibility are always concerns in case study research (Creswell, 2012). By triangulating from both quantitative data and qualitative data (Yin, 2014) and among various perspectives within the qualitative data, (Creswell, 2013; Stake, 2005) a trustworthy, credible accounting of the case can be advanced. This chapter

presented the results of the survey of pre-service teachers’ beliefs about their knowledge and self-efficacy for technology integration, as well as interviews of a maximum

variation sample of survey completers. After a thick description of the research context, the participants, and the data analysis procedures, the findings were presented. There were six major findings related to pre-service teachers’ perceptions of their abilities to integrate technology into the classroom, and their perceptions of what contributed to the development of these abilities. These findings provide evidence answer the research questions for this study:

1) Pre-service teachers generally feel confident in their abilities to teach with technology, regardless of their gender, year in college, or major/endorsement area.

2) Pre-service teachers feel a sense of pressure or expectation to be able to integrate technology into their teaching practices.

3) Modeling effective technology integration is an important part of pre-service teachers developing the self-efficacy to integrate technology into their own teaching practices.

4) Both formal and informal learning opportunities positively impact pre-service teachers’ confidence for working with technology.

5) Technological knowledge is an important component for self-efficacy in technology integration, but pedagogical knowledge and content knowledge are also necessary.

6) Pre-service teachers believe that a practical course in educational technology would help to prepare them to integrate technology in the classroom.

These findings suggest several important considerations for teacher educators intent on preparing pre-service teachers to integrate technology into their future classrooms. In the next chapter, implications of these results will be explored, and the limitations as well as what can be learned from the context-dependent knowledge (Flyvbjerg, 2006) that can be discerned from this case.