Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
lead to the greatest long-term usage of the IA and skills we teach, our webmetrics
analyses have shown us that our predictions are often wrong. We will continue to
focus on specific target audiences with the understanding that the person who ends
up utilizing the skills long term may not be the person we would have predicted.
Our plans for future research include exploring if there are substantive changes in
the ways teachers engage in teaching and learning as a result of the workshop, and
if changes do exist, what happens to student learning as a result of these changing
teaching practices. Included in that is understanding how persistent the changes in
teaching practices are.
We will also continue to learn more about our user base through the use of web-
metrics and will be exploring why some users continue to come back and use the
IA and why other users do not. We have IA users who have not had exposure to
our workshop continue their use. We will persist, through the use of webmetrics and
other methods, to learn about these users and then apply what we learn to our f2f
workshops.
Lastly, one area of our research not mentioned within this chapter has been in
understanding the types of knowledge that teachers use when developing lessons
using online resources. We will continue this exploration and hope to create a
measurement of this knowledge.
Suggestions for other future research include continued exploration of the use of
PBL as a method for delivery of teacher technology PD workshops; further devel-
opment of different models of how to incorporate both technological skills and
different pedagogical skills, like PBL, into a PD workshop for long-term impact,
and replication of our workshop model with the IA with different audiences around
the world.
Acknowledgments
This material is based on work supported by the National Science Foundation
under Grants No. 0333818, 554440, & 0434892, and Utah State University. Any opinions, findings,
and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do
not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. We thank the teachers and
student teachers who participated in our studies.
References
Barneveld, A. V., & Strobel, J. (2009). Is PBL effective? A meta-synthesis of meta-analyses com-
paring problem-based learning to conventional classroom learning.
Interdisciplinary Journal of
Problem Based Learning
,
3
(1), 44-58.
Barrows, H. S. (1986). A taxonomy of problem-based learning methods.
Medical Education
,
20
(6),
481-486.
Barrows, H. S. (1996). Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview.
New
Directions for Teaching and Learning
,
68
, 3-12.
Cohen, J. (1988).
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
(2nd ed). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
Computing Research Association (2005).
Cyberinfrastructure for education and learning for the
future: A vision and research agenda
. Washington, DC: Computing Research Association.
Derry, S. J., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Nagarajan, A., Chernobilsky, E., & Beitzel, B. D. (2006).
Cognitive Transfer Revisited: Can we Exploit new Media to Solve Old Problems on a Large
Scale?
Journal of Educational Computing Research
,
35
(2), 145-162.
