learning - Academic Conferences Limited
learning - Academic Conferences Limited learning - Academic Conferences Limited
Jonathan Barkand The teacher demonstrates frequent and effective strategies that enable both teacher and students to complete self-assessments and pre-assessments. NACOL Additional Standards: The teacher collaborates with colleagues. The teacher arranges media and content to help students and teachers transfer knowledge most effectively in the online environment. (Optional) 3. NCATE categorization The NCATE Professional Standards for the Accreditation of Teacher Preparation Institutions was used to categorize the online teacher standards collected. NCATE is officially recognized by the U.S. Department of Education as an accrediting body for institutions that prepare teachers and other professional persons for work in preschool, elementary, and secondary schools (NCATE, 2008). NCATE Standard 1 related to Candidate Knowledge, Skills, and Professional Dispositions was specifically used for categorization. The optional NACOL additional standard was related more to instruction design rather than teacher characteristics and was not used. The SREB/NACOL standards have had a naming structure applied for alignment purposes for the survey. 1. Content and Pedagogical Knowledge for Teacher Candidates: 1.1. The teacher meets the professional teaching standards established by a state licensing agency or the teacher has academic credentials in the field in which he or she is teaching. 1.2. The teacher has the prerequisite technology skills to teach online. 2. Pedagogical and Professional Skills for Teacher Candidates: 2.1. The teacher plans, designs and incorporates strategies to encourage active learning, interaction, participation, and collaboration in the online environment. 2.2. The teacher provides online leadership in a manner that promotes student success through regular feedback, prompt response, and clear expectations. 2.3. The teacher has experienced online learning from the perspective of a student. 2.4. The teacher understands and is responsive to students with special needs in the online classroom. 2.5. The teacher demonstrates competencies in creating and implementing assessments in online learning environments in ways that assure validity and reliability of instruments and procedures. 2.6. The teacher develops and delivers assessments, projects, and assignments that meet standardsbased learning goals and assesses learning progress by measuring student achievement of learning goals. 2.7. The teacher demonstrates competencies in using data and findings from assessments and other data sources to modify instructional methods and content and to guide student learning. 2.8. The teacher demonstrates frequent and effective strategies that enable both teacher and students to complete self-assessments and pre-assessments. 3. Professional Dispositions for Teacher Candidates: 3.1. The teacher models, guides and encourages legal, ethical, safe, and healthy behavior related to technology use. 3.2. The teacher collaborates with colleagues. 36
4. Indicators and survey questions Jonathan Barkand The following Indicators were part of NACOL Standards for Quality Online teaching. Not all indicators were used to create the assessments. An indicator for each standard was chosen based on the ability to accurately measure the self-assessment. Some questions cover more than one indicator. Some standards contained multiple methods of assessment and required more than one question to accurately cover the scope of the standard. The actual question was created by the researcher and the question type is added to show the form of measurement. Indicator 1.1: Meets the state’s professional teaching standards or academic credentials in the field. Question 1.1: Are you a state certified teacher in your content area? Type: Dichotomous (Yes or No) Indicator 1.2: Demonstrates the ability to effectively use word-processing, spreadsheet, and presentation software. Question 1.2: How would you rate your technology skills in Microsoft Office and Internet systems (browsing, emailing)? Type: Five-Point Likert Scale Indicator 1.2: Utilizes synchronous and asynchronous tools (e.g., discussion boards, chat tools, electronic whiteboards) effectively. Question 1.2: How would you rate your technology skills with teaching synchronous and asynchronous tools (discussion boards, chat/tutor tools, electronic whiteboard)? Type: Five-Point Likert Scale Indicator 2.1: Facilitates and monitors appropriate interaction among students. Indicator 2.1: Promotes learning through group interaction. Question 2.1: How many hours per week are spent on discussion boards and facilitating group interaction? Type: Nominal with ranges (Less than an hour, 1-2 hours, 2-4 hours, 4-8 hours, 8+ hours) Indicator 2.2: Models effective communication skills and maintains records of applicable communications with students. Question 2.2: What is your average response time on student communications (emails/discussions/phone)? Type: Nominal (less than an hour, 1-3 hours, 3-6 hours, within 24 hours, 24+ hours) Indicator 2.2: Encourages interaction and cooperation among students, encourages active learning, provides prompt feedback, communicates high expectations, and respects diverse talents and learning styles. Indicator 2.2: Provides timely, constructive feedback to students about assignments and questions. Question 2.2: How would you rate the quality of your timely, personalized, and constructive feedback for assignments/questions? Type: Five-Point Likert Scale 37
- Page 11 and 12: Malaysia); Tuomo Kakkonen (Universi
- Page 13 and 14: Preface These Proceedings represent
- Page 15 and 16: Mini Track Chairs Dr Antonios Andre
- Page 17 and 18: Cornélia Castro is a PhD student i
- Page 19 and 20: Manuel Frutos-Perez is the Leader o
- Page 21 and 22: David Mathew works at the Centre fo
- Page 23 and 24: Research interests include the inve
- Page 25: Novita Yulianti is a PhD student at
- Page 28 and 29: Samuel Adu Gyamfi et al. the develo
- Page 30 and 31: Samuel Adu Gyamfi et al. completion
- Page 32 and 33: Samuel Adu Gyamfi et al. interactio
- Page 34 and 35: Survey of Teachers’ use of Comput
- Page 36 and 37: Babatunde Alabi Alege and Stephen O
- Page 38 and 39: Babatunde Alabi Alege and Stephen O
- Page 40 and 41: Babatunde Alabi Alege and Stephen O
- Page 42 and 43: Issues and Challenges in Implementi
- Page 44 and 45: Hussein Al-Yaseen et al. 2000/2001
- Page 46 and 47: Hussein Al-Yaseen et al. phase invo
- Page 48 and 49: Hussein Al-Yaseen et al. Berthold,
- Page 50 and 51: Antonios Andreatos Figure 1: Estima
- Page 52 and 53: Antonios Andreatos exchange applied
- Page 54 and 55: Antonios Andreatos knowledge space,
- Page 56 and 57: Figure 5: Video metadata from YouTu
- Page 58 and 59: Antonios Andreatos The organisatio
- Page 60 and 61: Constructing a Survey Instrument fo
- Page 64 and 65: Jonathan Barkand Indicator 2.3: Has
- Page 66 and 67: References Jonathan Barkand Allen,
- Page 68 and 69: 2. Pedagogical agents Orlando Belo
- Page 70 and 71: Orlando Belo Type (Tp), the refere
- Page 72 and 73: 3.3 The agent’s architecture Orla
- Page 74 and 75: Some Reflections on the Evaluation
- Page 76 and 77: Nabil Ben Abdallah and Françoise P
- Page 78 and 79: Nabil Ben Abdallah and Françoise P
- Page 80 and 81: Nabil Ben Abdallah and Françoise P
- Page 82 and 83: Designing A New Curriculum: Finding
- Page 84 and 85: Andrea Benn For this new course, it
- Page 86 and 87: Andrea Benn Technology is already i
- Page 88 and 89: Andrea Benn To bring about the co-o
- Page 90 and 91: Latefa Bin Fryan and Lampros Stergi
- Page 92 and 93: Latefa Bin Fryan and Lampros Stergi
- Page 94 and 95: Faculty development Online course
- Page 96 and 97: Latefa Bin Fryan and Lampros Stergi
- Page 98 and 99: Latefa Bin Fryan and Lampros Stergi
- Page 100 and 101: Alice Bird being reviewed under the
- Page 102 and 103: Alice Bird Developing the process m
- Page 104 and 105: Alice Bird Reflecting on the feasib
- Page 106 and 107: 3.3 Early stage implementation Alic
- Page 108 and 109: Enhancement of e-Testing Possibilit
- Page 110 and 111: Martin Cápay et al. of Likert scal
4. Indicators and survey questions<br />
Jonathan Barkand<br />
The following Indicators were part of NACOL Standards for Quality Online teaching. Not all indicators<br />
were used to create the assessments. An indicator for each standard was chosen based on the ability<br />
to accurately measure the self-assessment. Some questions cover more than one indicator. Some<br />
standards contained multiple methods of assessment and required more than one question to<br />
accurately cover the scope of the standard. The actual question was created by the researcher and<br />
the question type is added to show the form of measurement.<br />
Indicator 1.1: Meets the state’s professional teaching standards or academic credentials in the field.<br />
Question 1.1: Are you a state certified teacher in your content area?<br />
Type: Dichotomous (Yes or No)<br />
Indicator 1.2: Demonstrates the ability to effectively use word-processing, spreadsheet, and<br />
presentation software.<br />
Question 1.2: How would you rate your technology skills in Microsoft Office and Internet systems<br />
(browsing, emailing)?<br />
Type: Five-Point Likert Scale<br />
Indicator 1.2: Utilizes synchronous and asynchronous tools (e.g., discussion boards, chat tools,<br />
electronic whiteboards) effectively.<br />
Question 1.2: How would you rate your technology skills with teaching synchronous and<br />
asynchronous tools (discussion boards, chat/tutor tools, electronic whiteboard)?<br />
Type: Five-Point Likert Scale<br />
Indicator 2.1: Facilitates and monitors appropriate interaction among students.<br />
Indicator 2.1: Promotes <strong>learning</strong> through group interaction.<br />
Question 2.1: How many hours per week are spent on discussion boards and facilitating group<br />
interaction?<br />
Type: Nominal with ranges (Less than an hour, 1-2 hours, 2-4 hours, 4-8 hours, 8+ hours)<br />
Indicator 2.2: Models effective communication skills and maintains records of applicable<br />
communications with students.<br />
Question 2.2: What is your average response time on student communications<br />
(emails/discussions/phone)?<br />
Type: Nominal (less than an hour, 1-3 hours, 3-6 hours, within 24 hours, 24+ hours)<br />
Indicator 2.2: Encourages interaction and cooperation among students, encourages active <strong>learning</strong>,<br />
provides prompt feedback, communicates high expectations, and respects diverse talents and<br />
<strong>learning</strong> styles.<br />
Indicator 2.2: Provides timely, constructive feedback to students about assignments and questions.<br />
Question 2.2: How would you rate the quality of your timely, personalized, and constructive<br />
feedback for assignments/questions?<br />
Type: Five-Point Likert Scale<br />
37
Change language