Candidate Statement
Introduction:
My overall professional goal is to equip future and current teachers with the necessary skills and knowledge to effectively design instruction and integrate technology within K-12 environments, with a particular focus on design-related domains. This interest in the field of Instructional Systems Technology began in 2005 when I observed faculty training aimed at improving instruction at the secondary level through the integration of iPod technology. A high school design teacher at the time and graphic designer by profession, I found my desire to become a researcher of design education and technology integration within K-12 environments spurred by that experience.
My scholarly agenda within the field of IST primarily falls into two main areas. My first area of focus is technology integration, in particular how pre-service and in-service teachers successfully integrate technology in teaching and student learning. I define technology integration as teacher and/or student use of digital technologies for increased efficiency, effectiveness, and/or engagement (Merrill, 2007). My second area of focus is design education. I define design education as subject areas that utilize design principles, concepts, practices, and/or procedures to develop solutions to given tasks or problems (Alexander, 1964; Norman, 1988; Simon, 1996). More specifically, I seek to identify best practices for preparing educators at the secondary level to teach in design-related domains, such as engineering, computer science, and graphic design (Mitchell, 1993; Schön, 1983). These two areas come together in my professional goal, which is to inform pre-service teacher education programs and in-service teacher practice in the areas of instructional design and technology integration within K-12 environments and design-related domains.
Within this candidate statement, I detail how my previous research, my teaching, and my service activities align with my scholarly goals and desired future position as a faculty member at a Carnegie status research-intensive university. In the sections that follow, I describe the progress I have made in each respective area of my scholarly agenda.
Section 1 – Goals for Scholarship, Teaching, and Service
Goals for Scholarship
When I came to the Instructional Systems Technology department at Indiana University as a doctoral student, I brought with me a particular skill set and knowledge in the areas of graphic design and K-12 education. However, in order to conduct the research that I wished to pursue, I knew that I needed to develop my inquiry skills and to immerse myself in scholarly research within my areas of interest. As a result, I chose to minor in Inquiry Methodology and have progressed steadily towards meeting my professional goals.
At a fundamental level, I have sought to master the craft of research. During the coursework years of my doctoral program, I developed essential research skills through my involvement as a research assistant on the “Leveraging Technology to Keep America Competitive” contract (funded by the U.S. Department of Education) and through my work as a team member of the TeachTech research group. The overall aim of the national study was to examine the gap between the technology skills and experiences that pre-service teachers acquire as part of their teacher education programs and the technology skills and experiences that in-service teachers find meaningful and useful in the classroom. During my time as a research assistant, I gained insight into the nature of contractual government research studies and developed a website to inform constituents about the status of the LevTech project. I piloted and provided feedback on multiple research instruments, ranging from the original survey design to the development of subject-specific teacher phone interview protocols. In order to engage myself more fully in the field of design, I actively participated in a research group led by Professor Elizabeth Boling from the fall of 2007 to the fall of 2012. As a result of my involvement with both research groups, I conducted several interviews, carried out transcriptions, and coded both qualitative and quantitative data, the results of which can be seen in the papers and publications that are detailed below.
In order to nurture my scholarship in the area of design education, I have worked independently to create several research endeavors. In the fall of 2008, I explored the concepts and principles of design within my first formal literature review: Defining Design for Instructional Designers: Concepts and Principles. In the spring of 2009, I carried out a pilot study that investigated the process of when and in what ways instructors of design address the qualities of the designer and how design students perceive of the process of their development as designers. In the spring of 2010, I drafted a research proposal that sought to examine higher education design faculty’s perceptions of the purpose and outcomes of secondary design education, how those perceptions inform the design of their curriculum for the introductory design courses that they teach, and how they perceive secondary design courses are fulfilling the purpose/outcome described. Although I went so far as to develop an IRB form for the proposed study, I did not carry out the research proposal due to published results of a national study conducted by the AIGA that informed my overarching research agenda. In 2012, I formed a design education research group with two colleagues from the University of Notre Dame and we meet online weekly to discuss our research efforts in design education. Our collaborative efforts have resulted in a panel session titled Intersections [of Design Education] in K-12 at the AIGA Design Educators Conference in the fall of 2014. Finally, my dissertation proposal is the culmination of my independent research efforts in this area of scholarship.
As my research skills progressed, I have actively engaged in independent research projects and conference presentations. Each year since 2009, I have presented research papers at national conferences. In the coming year, I will serve as panel moderator and present a research paper at the AIGA Design Educators Conference in Portland, OR on the topic of the Intersections [of Design Education] in K-12 in September 2014. In November, I will present a paper titled The "other" core standards movements: Implications for educators of media, technology, and design at AECT in Jacksonville, FL. I also submitted a paper proposal to the AERA 2015 conference titled: Meanings of Design within a Core Standards Movement: A Technical Use Analysis.
In order to extend scholarly research in the area of IST, I have integrated stronger theoretical frameworks into my research. For example, as part of my coursework for the Introduction to the Learning Sciences, I created a research proposal grounded in design-based research or formative research (Reigeluth & Frick, 1999). The intent of my proposal was to improve both case-based learning theory and pre-service teacher education practice in a quasi-experimental mixed-methods study. The study, which includes an extensive literature review on case-based learning theory, describes an intervention of virtual communities of practice (Lave & Wenger, 1991) in case-based instruction in a pre-service technology integration program. The research presents an opportunity to extend recent previous research on case-based learning in pre-service educational technology courses (Kim & Hannafin, 2009; Gomez, Sherin, Griesdorn, & Finn, 2008) by integrating authentic practice and feedback (Schön, 1983) from in-service teachers with the aid of online video conferencing software.
An ongoing goal that I have as a scholar is to develop a successful publication record in peer-reviewed journals. My publication journey as a first author began in 2010 with a paper presentation at AERA, "How Elementary and Secondary Teachers Use Technology Differently: A National Study of Accomplished Technology-Using Teachers," which focused on my research of elementary and secondary accomplished technology-using teachers. I have been a collaborator on other papers and presentations due to my involvement in research groups. The fall 2010 issue of ISTE’s Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education (JDLTE) featured the article "Equipping the Next Generation of Teachers: Technology Preparation and Practice," of which I was contributing author. Other collaborative publications include "ADDIE: Perspectives in Transition," published in the Sept./Oct. 2011 issue Educational Technology, and "Preparation versus practice: How do teacher education programs and practicing teachers align in their use of technology to support teaching and learning?" published in Computers in Education in 2012. In the spring of 2014, I had a first authored publication, "The Art of Online Critique" in the ISTE publication Learning and Leading with Technology.
The focus of my dissertation proposal reflects my professional goal to advance theory and practice in the area of instructional design in design-related domains within K-12 environments.
In order to carry out my future research, I intend to secure more funding opportunities through the form of grants and fellowships. As a School of Education fellowship recipient, I had the privilege of financial support during my four years at Indiana University, which enabled me to become active in two research groups during my first year of study. During the 2009/2010 school year, I applied for and received the Larson Award, which helped defer the cost of travel to the 2009 SITE conference and the 2010 AERA conference. I was the recipient of the GPSO travel award ($500) in the spring of 2012, which funded a portion of my travel to Vancouver to present my research at the AERA conference. I received the internal IST Kemp Award for my research in 2011 ($4300) and in 2014 ($3000). The Kemp Award will fund my dissertation field work activities in the fall of 2014. I intend to seeking both internal and external funding opportunities in the fall of 2014 for the spring writing stage of my dissertation to more fully commit myself to this endeavor.
Goals for Teaching
My research agenda is informed by my K-12 teaching background, which reflects a sustained interest in design education and technology integration. During my two years as a fifth-grade teacher, I integrated technology through the student use of electronic resources, maintained an electronic gradebook, and presented information visually through the use of my laptop. Though I had restricted access to the technology resources within the school, at that time, I was unaware of how to overcome technology barriers. When I transitioned to a secondary school teaching art and design, I capitalized on the resources available and administrative support to integrate technology into my everyday practice. A graphic designer by profession, I desired to teach design on a more concrete level. Students at the school were already required to take two years of technology and I viewed my course as a way for students to fulfill part of their technology requirements. I received permission from my principal and department chair to develop a course in graphic design. I created all aspects of the course, as no curriculum in graphic design existed in Texas at the secondary level when I started teaching the class in 2005. The course outline, the units, the lessons, and the assessments* integrate reflective practice, design thinking, and technology integration in accordance with my teaching philosophy. Given my inability to find precedent of high school graphic design courses, I modeled the course after an introductory design class that I had while attending the University of Notre Dame. I modified the curriculum to reflect the students' access to technology outside of the classroom and was able to scaffold the assignments in increasing difficulty to build upon the previous experiences of the students. I also gathered hand-written student feedback to inform my teaching practice. Sample A and Sample B show a representation of student course evaluations and were selected based on the completeness of forms and are intended represent range of feedback that is both positive and negative.
Reflective practice plays an integral role in my philosophy of teaching, both in and outside of the classroom. I define reflective practice as working with ill-defined problems, during which time one questions and acts on his own activities, known as reflection-in-action and reflection-on-action (Schön, 1983). Reflective practice is a common habit among designers and is often integrated into instruction in design-related domains. Within reflective practice, one should experience a practicum, that is, the ability to fail in safe semi-real setting. For example, pre-service teachers undergo a practicum by engaging in field experience prior to their student teaching placements. Throughout a practicum, an individual begins to build a repertoire and develops design judgment, which means that an individual can see patterns and seeks to transfer ideas from previous situations to new experiences (Schön). In the case of educators, the more experienced a teacher is, the more likely he or she is able to develop adaptive expertise. Furthermore, as an individual develops material, such as sketches, drafts, or models, the material figuratively "speaks back" to the creator (Schön). This reflective practice encourages the learner to develop the ability to frame the situation, which goes beyond simply solving a problem (Schön). Education is not about creating the perfect instructional design, rather, an educator is charged with framing a novel design space and must be responsive, adaptable, and capable of a holistic appreciation of patterns and relevance (Boling, 2008). When I work with design students or pre-service teachers within a classroom setting, I try to model reflective practice as it is easy for student to miss inquiry in action if they do not see reflection-in-action.
One way that I practice reflection-in-action in the classroom is through peer and instructor critique sessions, both formal and informal. As a teacher educator, I offer formative and summative feedback through a variety of media, including written statements, oral review, online rubrics, traditional rubrics, multimedia screen captures and hybrid spreadsheets (a combination of a student checklist and a teacher rubric). I utilize an array of electronic resources during feedback sessions in order to introduce students to technologies that can be integrated into their own practice as well as engage their future students through a variety of efficient and effective media. In addition to modeling reflective practice to my students, I encourage the pre-service teachers to engage in reflective practice with each other. Students utilized blogs, Google Spreadsheets, and Google Sites for self-critique and would employ Google Forms, online forums, and online polls to offer feedback to each other and debate topics related to their own practices. As part of a goal that I set out at my second dossier review, in March/April 2014, my article, "The Art of Online Critique," was published in Learning and Leading with Technology in order to share my experiences using online peer critique as an instructional tool in the virtual classroom.
As a professional, I value both self-critique and external review, due to my background as a graphic designer, an educator, and an instructional designer. I have sought evaluations from mentors, principals, and department chairs at both the elementary level* and secondary level. I used the constructive comments within the evaluations to improve my core teaching practices, as I received my training through an alternative certification program and therefore lacked the experience of a four-year teacher education preparation program. The desire to improve my teaching practice at the K-12 level was also shaped by the high school students that I taught. At the end of each semester, I asked my secondary students to offer anonymous feedback on my teaching practices and the course design. I created reactionnaires that included Likert-scale responses and open-ended questions, which allowed me to gauge students’ perceptions. I conducted the student evaluations of my own volition and used the results to modify my course design and teaching practices. For example, I often found that during the first year I taught at the secondary level, my students strongly disagreed with the statement, "I found the coursework challenging but not overwhelming." As a result, I tweaked my assignments until students felt challenged, but not overwhelmed. At the university level, I also encourage student critique in both informal (e.g. an anonymous online poll) and formal ways (e.g. course evaluations). Given the quantity and diversity of courses that I have taught at Indiana University Bloomington and at Indiana University Purdue University Columbus, I have compiled a comprehensive summary of objective items from the W200, W301, and W204 courses I instructed. As you will notice in my evaluation summary, my scores as an instructor have remained consistently high and have shown improvement overall. Though my scores dip slightly during the spring of 2010, I recognize that I was still learning how to balance an increasing research load while teaching six-credit hours, which was a first for me.
As a scholar, I believe that students learn best when they have the ability to engage authentic practice and receive feedback within a context that integrates a community of practice. Bichelmeyer (personal communication, October 15, 2008) advocates that students of design should be provided with the opportunity to have practice and feedback in authentic settings, but recognizes the constraints of working within a traditional university setting hinder this process. As a teacher educator, my ability to provide authentic experiences to pre-service teachers, who often are not yet able to conduct field experiences, depends primarily on how I choose to integrate technology into the classroom. One way that I have overcome the barrier of a traditional classroom setting is by inviting subject-matter experts to speak to my classes from a distance. For example, during the spring of 2010, Susie Gronseth, shared her expertise on assistive technologies with my W200 students via Skype and during the summer of 2010, Jesse Strycker, described his experience as a district technology coordinator with my W204 students using Adobe Connect. Another way I have incorporated more authentic practices into my instruction is through slight modifications of traditional assignments. In previous iterations of W301 [Technology Integration in Teaching - Part I], students researched emerging educational technologies, such the iPad or SMART Boards, and made traditional presentations to the class using PowerPoint. In order to make the experience more authentic for the pre-service teachers, I had the students observe a lesson during their field placement experience and determine what emerging technologies would be most appropriate to integrate into the observed lesson, given the technology resources available at the school, the needs of the learners, the objective of the instruction, and the context of the learning environment. Rather than making a PowerPoint presentation, students utilized screen-capture software to create a video that described the situation they observed, which they then presented to the class.
As an educator, I feel compelled to challenge myself by teaching a greater range of students in more varied learning environments and content areas. Overall, my teaching experience at the university level has centered on undergraduate educational technology courses including W200 - Computers in Education, W301- Technology Integration in Teaching (Part 1), W204 - Programming for Microcomputers in Education and W205 - Microcomputer Graphics for Teachers. I have progressed steadily in my teaching from a lab Assistant Instructor (W200 Spring of 2009), to an Assistant Instructor (W301/W200), to an Adjunct Faculty in a blended learning environment (W204), to an Adjunct Faculty in an online learning environment (W205). As more colleges and K-12 institutions integrate online education into course offerings, the ability to provide quality online instruction is essential to the needs of 21st century learners. One goal that I have as a teacher and researcher of technology integration is to provide both instructional designers and preservice teachers with the confidence to teach online. Some examples of online instruction that I have created include a series of online tutorials, developed a classroom blog, and designed a course website for the blended course that I taught during the summer of 2010. I have also conducted online classes at a distance through Adobe Connect. In an effort to obtain the goal I set out at my second dossier review, I have successfully taught two online courses thus far, one during the summer of 2012 and the other during the summer of 2013. Upon completion of my dissertation, I would like to teach a course at the graduate level in the area of educational or instructional technology.
Goals for Service
I view scholarly service within academia as using one's time and talents to serve one's department, the School of Education, the University, national organizations, and the community at large. Though I have practice service to community throughout the course of my life, now as a scholar, I have the ability to utilize the skills that I have learned as a doctoral student to give back to the research community at large.
Service to the Instructional Systems Technology department. Since entering into the IST doctoral program, I have served the department primarily through my involvement in the annual Instructional Systems Technology conference. In my first year, I was the lead graphic designer for the conference, during which time I designed the poster for the 2008 IST conference and the conference brochure. Nichole Harlin, who was in charge of the conference that particular year, was kind enough to recognize my efforts in her thank you letter within the conference brochure. In my second year, I served as the co-chair of the IST conference. My duties included meeting with Rod Myers, the conference chair, once a week during the fall and spring semesters to coordinate planning activities. I directed an undergraduate graphic designer in the production of print materials. I also coordinated the basket raffle to help raise funds for the following year. Rod Myers graciously described and acknowledged my contributions to IST Conference in a thank you letter in February of 2009. In 2010, I served as the Instructional Systems Technology conference chair. I could not have completed the task without the help of 18 IST graduate student managers and over 30 undergraduate volunteers. The peer-reviewed conference submissions resulted in 27 presentations were attended by over 100 conference attendees. The key note presentation, which featured IU scholars from IST, Learning Sciences, Business, and Informatics, was well-attended, as was the job fair and evening reception. Overall, I felt the conference was a success and look forward to the 2011 conference where I will serve a consulting role as chair emeritus.
Service to the School of Education. My primary service to IU School of Education has been through my involvement as an active member of a subcommittee that examined how teaching is evaluated within the School of Education at Indiana University. My participation in the subcommittee was inspired by my interests in analysis and evaluation and by my teaching philosophy, which encourages reflective practice within education. My work on the sub-committee not only allowed me to analyze how other universities evaluate teaching for promotion and tenure, it prepared me well to serve on other subcommittees in the future. I also am more fully aware of the faculty expectations for promotion and tenure at comparable research institutions. While serving on the subcommittee, I had the opportunity to investigate how teaching is evaluated at other comparable universities with the United States. I compiled a matrix highlighting the differences between institutions and presented the findings to the subcommittee. I also collected and analyzed data from departmental focus group meetings within the School of Education. I identified the themes as more or less prominent and compared my findings with another colleague for reliability. Our collective findings were integrated into the final report, which was submitted to the Agenda Committee of Policy Council March 11, 2009 and reviewed by the council on April 1, 2009.
Service to Indiana University. In terms of service at the university level, I had the opportunity to serve as a scribe for the Design Thinking Forum, which though brief, encouraged me in my endeavors to research design education. The Design Thinking Forum suspended meetings while waiting for approval from various deans to establish the Center for Design Thinking. If the Center for Design Thinking is established in the future, I will resume my position as scribe if time permits.
Service to National Organizations. My participation to service at the national level is has evolved as my career as a scholar has developed. In my formative years within my doctoral program, I served as a student volunteer at the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) annual conference in the fall of 2008. As I completed my inquiry coursework, I pursued opportunities to serve as a reviewer for conferences and publications within the IST field. I have reviewed conference proposals for AERA and AECT, and I currently serve as a reviewer for the journal Computers in Education. Additionally, I am the
Service to the Community. Though my service to the community has been limited due to my increased focus on research, I was previously very active in provide service to various K-12 teaching communities. In the 2006, I was part of a team that established the Dallas Alliance for Catholic Education Fellowship, which was also known as Dallas Educators Partnering To Help (DEPTH). Dallas DEPTH was a group dedicated to serving and strengthening Catholic schools in Dallas. Together, with three other team members, we designed and developed a diocesan-wide mentoring program that paired experienced teachers with induction teachers from twenty-two different schools. During the summer of 2007, before I started my doctoral coursework, I wrote and received a grant of $3000 from the University of Notre Dame to establish a regional chapter of the ACE Fellowship in Indianapolis. In my first year, the service initiative centered around four professional development days, which served the needs of teachers at one particular school. I worked under the direction of Katherine Steinlage, who kindly wrote a testament to the work I completed during my first year as the Indianapolis ACE Fellowship Chair. I compiled a portfolio* of my work, including my revised grant application, service documents that integrated instructional design strategies, and an agenda for the 2008/2009 academic year. Once a solid network of volunteers was established in the Indianapolis ACE Fellowship, I stepped down as chair in 2008 and became the communication coordinator, just as the service program expanded to serving six schools. Although I enjoyed working with the Indianapolis ACE Fellowship, I realized that my doctoral program did not permit me enough time to serve the group in a leadership capacity. As a result, I stepped down from the leadership team altogether in June of 2009 so that I could focus on my independent research in preparation for my dissertation.
Section 2 – Progress in Focus Area Competencies
With an overall focus on pre-service teacher education programs and in-service teacher practice in the areas of instructional design and technology integration within K-12 environments and design-related domains, there are competencies in research, teaching, and service that I strive to acquire as part of my work within the doctoral program.
The following are the necessary competencies that I have identified as a researcher and my progress toward meeting each one:
Ability to review and synthesize literature
Status: Acquired. I have engaged in scholarly writing through the creation of literature reviews and critiques, many of which I created specifically for research proposals. I also subscribe to several journals in the field, including American Educational Research Journal, TechTrends, and Educational Researcher.
Knowledge of quantitative and qualitative research methods
Status: Acquired. As an inquiry minor, I have taken a variety of research courses in both qualitative and quantitative methods, including: Application of Research Methods to Instructional Systems Technology (R690), Intermediate Inferential Statistics (Y502), Methodological Approaches to Educational Inquiry (Y521), Survey Research Methodology (Y521), Qualitative Inquiry in Education (Y611), Applied Multivariate Statistics (Y604), Narrative Theory and Inquiry (Y630), Content Analysis for the World Wide Web (S642), and Discourse Theory and Analysis (Y631).
Knowledge of theories related to IST
Status: Acquired. Given that one's theoretical framework should inform and guide one's research in IST, I have completed coursework to expand my knowledge of theories that relate to IST. In addition to Readings in Instructional Technology (711), I have completed coursework in Human Computer Interaction Design Theory (I604), Design Theory and Philosophy (I690) and Introduction to the Learning Sciences (P572).
Experience in designing research studies
Status: Acquired. As part of Y611 (Qualitative Inquiry in Education), P572 (Theory and Method in Learning Science), and my independent work as part of my research groups, I have constructed research study proposals that relate to my scholarly interests in design education and technology integration. My dissertation proposal is evidence of the largest independent study I have designed to date.
Ability to design data collection strategies and instruments
Status: Acquired. Through my experience working on the Leveraging Technology to Keep America Competitive project, I designed a variety of data collection instruments. Additionally, as part of my coursework, I created semi-structured interview questions for a pilot study in Y611 (Qualitative Inquiry in Education) and Y630 (Narrative Inquiry). In Y525 (Survey Research Methodology), I developed a survey instrument that involved both multiple iterations, pilot testing, and subject-matter expert review. The survey instrument later was revised and received IRB approval in 2013. In S642, I conducted a feature analysis of elementary teacher websites. In Y630 (Narrative Theory and Inquiry) and Y631 (Discourse Theory and Analysis), I applied multiple narrative and discourse techniques to collected data.
Ability to collect and analyze quantitative and qualitative data
Status: Acquired. In addition to my coursework, as part of my involvement on the TeachTech research project and Prof. Boling's research group, I have participated in many aspects of data collection and analysis. Examples of my ability to collect and analyze data include screening of initial respondents to surveys, analyzing quantitative responses from surveys, coding of open-ended questions, conducting multiple phone interviews, transcribing interviews, coding interview data, and conducting document analysis. Due to the sensitive nature of the documents, some documents have been posted to a secure server and require an IU network ID and a password to access.
Experience in sharing research at conferences and through publications
Status: Achieved. Since I started in the IST program in 2007, I have steadily increased the number of research conference submissions I have made. At this point in time, I present yearly at AECT and approximately every other year at AERA. In addition to my conference presentations and papers, I am an author on three published articles in three different journals, including the Journal of Digital Learning and Teacher Education, Computers in Education, and Educational Technology. In the fall of 2014, I will be presenting papers at conferences for AECT and AIGA. I submitted a proposal to present at AERA in the spring of 2015. I have a paper currently under review in Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education.
Ability to apply for and receive research funding
Status: Achieved and In-Progress. During my first year at Indiana University, I applied for and received a grant through the University of Notre Dame to support Catholic education within the city of Indianapolis. I also had the ability to work as a research assistant on the Leveraging Technology to Keep America Competitive contract with the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Educational Technology. I also worked on a grant to establish an Educational Technology Center (ETC) within the Center for Evaluation and Educational Policy (CEEP). I received the internal IST Kemp Award for my research in 2011 ($4300) and in 2014 ($3000). Looking ahead, I intend to submit grants in the fall of 2014 to fund the writing of the last two chapters of my dissertation.
The following are the necessary competencies that I have identified as a teacher and my progress toward meeting each one:
Content Knowledge
Status: Achieved. I have completed all required coursework in Instructional Systems Technology and Inquiry methodology. Prior to my Ph.D. studies at Indiana University, I completed coursework at the University of Notre Dame where I received a B.F.A in Design and a Master of Education degree.
Experience in course design and development
Status: Achieved. As an associate instructor at Indiana University and an adjunct instructor at Indiana University Purdue University Columbus (IUPUC), I have gained experience in course design and development. I assisted in the course development of W200 in the Spring of 2009 and 2010. I also redesigned and developed course materials for W301 and W204 during the Fall of 2009 and the Summer of 2010. I developed and taught a three-credit online course, Microcomputer Graphics for Teachers (W205) for IUPUC in the summers of 2012 and 2013. In addition to my work at the university level, I have created and instructed design courses at the secondary level, including Graphic Design I and II.
Teaching experience in K-12 and undergraduate traditional and blended courses
Status: Achieved. Prior to beginning my doctoral studies, I worked as a fifth-grade elementary teacher for two years at St. Mary of Carmel and as an art and design teacher at Bishop Dunne High School for three years. I have taught undergraduate courses in educational technology at Indiana University and IUPUC in both traditional, blended, and online learning environments. In the future, I seek to expand my experience to include graduate instruction.
Ability to communicate effectively with students
Status: Achieved. At the elementary, secondary, and university level, I have learned to how to communicate not only the content of the instruction, but my policies, procedures, and course expectations as well. Overall, my course evaluations at the secondary and university level have been positive.
Desire to improve teaching pedagogy
Status: Achieved. In addition to formal student evaluations, I encouraged students to provide me with informal feedback and made changes in my pedagogy as needed. I also have sought feedback from administrators, principal, and colleagues throughout the course of my teaching career in order to improve my teaching effectiveness within the classroom.
Ability to model reflective practice
Status: Achieved. I model reflective practice by offering frequent peer and instructor formative and summative feedback. I also encourage students to engage in reflective practice. As I model reflective practice, I utilize a range of technologies in order to model the various ways technology can be incorporated into feedback and assessment in teaching.
Experience in collaboration with K-12 schools and community organizations
Status: Achieved. As part of my work as the chair of the Indianapolis ACE Fellowship, I had the opportunity to collaborate with inner-city schools*, as well as principals, teachers, and administrators within the Diocese of Indianapolis. The aim of the Indianapolis ACE Fellowship was to strengthen and sustain Catholic education within the city of Indianapolis.
Leadership in domain
Status: Achieved. I have presented at several national conferences on the topic of design education and technology integration with K-12 environments. As I continue to develop as a scholar, I look forward to sharing my work with other pre-service teacher educators and the K-12 teaching community through additional conference presentations and teaching publications.
Ability to share knowledge and experiences with fellow educators
Status: Achieved. I have attended and presented at conferences sponsored by the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) and the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education. As part of a goal that I set out at my second dossier review, I published an article, The Art of Online Critique, in the March/April 2014 edition of the practitioner-focused journal Learning & Leading Through Technology.
The following are the necessary competencies that I have identified in service and my progress toward meeting each one:
Ability to assist in departmental IST conferences
Status: Achieved. In 2008, I served as a graphic designer for all print materials associated with the IST conference. In 2009, I collaborated with Rod Myers as the assistant chair to the conference, during which time I participated in weekly strategic meetings, directed the graphic designer and coordinated fundraising activities. Additionally, during each IST conference that I have attended, I have served as moderator of presentations and assisted online conference attendees in Adobe Connect sessions. I also have volunteered as a proposal reviewer for the IST conference.
Provide leadership in departmental activities
Status: Achieved. I served at the Chair of the IST conference, which included overseeing 18 volunteer managers, 30 student volunteers, 27 presentations, 100 conference attendees, a job fair, an evening reception, and a Key Panel discussion. I credit the success of the event to the energy of the volunteers who prepared months in advance for the day-long conference.
Contribute to committees within the university
Status: Achieved. During the 2008-2009 academic school year, I participated in a sub-committee that examined how teaching is evaluated within the School of Education. I examined practices at other comparable institutions and collected data from departmental meetings, which I analyzed in collaboration with a peer on the sub-committee team. I have also served as a proposal reviewer for the GPSO travel grant.
Establish rapport and serve interdepartmental groups
Status: Achieved. As design is a domain not limited to the IST department, I engaged with other departments through my activities as a scribe for the Design Thinking Forum. The Design Thinking Forum served as a framework for the various design resources on IU's Bloomington campus to interact.
National/International Service
Participate as a member of professional organizations
Status: Achieved. As a member of the American Educational Research Organization (AERA) and the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT), I regularly attend and participate in national conferences.
Volunteer in relevant professional organizations and for peer-reviewed journals
Status: Achieved. In order to develop my skills as a researcher, I have served as a proposal reviewer for the 2011 AERA conference for the special interest group in Instructional Technology (SIG IT). Since 2012, I have regularly volunteered as a conference proposal reviewer for the Teacher Education Division of AECT. Currently, I am the Teacher Education Division (TED) Graduate Student Association (GSA) representative for AECT, a position I will hold until November 2015. I am also a reviewer for the journal Computers in Education.
Contribute to the K-12 teaching community
Status: Achieved. As a former inner-city school teacher, I have a strong connection to in-service teachers serving in parochial schools with minority populations. As a result, I have served in the Dallas ACE Fellowship as a committee member from 2005 to 2007, during which time we developed a mentorship program between diocesan induction and in-service teachers. In 2007, I founded the Indianapolis ACE Fellowship, which served K-12 teachers and inner city schools through service days and professional development sessions.
Section 3 – Breadth and Integration
In an effort to achieve my professional goal of becoming a scholar at a Carnegie status research-intensive university, my minor is Inquiry Methodology in order to fully prepare myself for an academic career. I designed my program of studies such that I completed the majority of my inquiry courses during my first two years in the doctoral program. As a result, I have been able to develop my theoretical knowledge of technology integration in education and instructional systems technology through my inquiry coursework. For example, when I was developing expertise in the area of survey methodology, I examined the technology integration experiences of pre-service teachers during their field experiences and student teaching placements through the creation of a survey. As a result, I was able to design a comprehensive survey portfolio, which describes the creation of the survey instrument, includes multiple iterations the survey, and incorporates pilot testing with potential participants. In 2013, I revised the survey instrument, submitted the study for IRB approval, and distributed the survey to preservice teachers at a large teaching institution in the Midwest. The results of the study were presented at AECT in 2013.
Based on my positive experience with the survey portfolio, when I enrolled in a course on multivariate statistics, I decided to examine the survey utilized in the TeachTech study. I collaborated with Serdar Abaci, a fellow doctoral student at IU, to conduct a regression analysis that sought to predict teacher technology use based on the independent variables of grade level taught, technology preparedness, and technology requirements within a certification program. Our regression model failed to predict technology use with the three variables included in the regression, due in part to our data set, which violated normality and homoscedasticity of residuals. Not deterred by the experience, Serdar and I partnered to conduct an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) on an instrument that attempted to measure pre-service teachers’ technology skills, perceived technology beliefs, and perceived technology barriers. The results of our EFA indicated that perceived technology barriers can be defined according to three factors: future barriers, current barriers, and time. Though our conclusions were limited, as a three factor solution is problematic for a ten-item set, the exploratory factor analysis allowed me to deepen my knowledge of factors that influence technology integration in the classroom. As a result, I decided to conduct a written critique of an article by Franklin (2007) as part of my survey methodology coursework, given that she examined the factors that influence elementary teachers to use computers. In the fall of 2010, in order to further both my scholarship in the area of technology integration and develop my inquiry skills, I used discourse analysis to examine how pre-service teachers perceive a teacher's identity online and conducted a web content feature analysis of elementary teacher websites. Each respective project resulted in conference presentations at the national level.
Conclusion
I present this dossier as evidence that my research, teaching, and service activities are aligned to reflect my professional goal of equipping future and current teachers with the necessary skills and knowledge to effectively design instruction and integrate technology within K-12 environments and design-related domains. My publication and presentation record reflect a sustained commitment to my research agenda. My former and future teaching experiences in the areas of design and technology integration in pre-service education inform my research, which in turn, improve my teaching practices. I have used the skills and knowledge I acquired as an educator and researcher to serve the IST department, the School of Education, Indiana University, national organizations and the community. Although there will always be goals I will need to achieve as I progress in my academic career, each year I grow as a scholar, a teacher, an individual, and as a mentor. As a doctoral candidate, I look forward to my dissertation research, presenting at national conferences, and continued publication in peer-reviewed journals. Throughout this upcoming year, I will seek out grants for dissertation writing, as well as independent and collaborative research projects. In order to develop myself as a teacher, I embrace opportunities to teach at the graduate level and continue to publish articles within the teaching community. I look forward to serving in a leadership capacity as the GSA Teacher Education Representative through November of 2015. In sum, I look forward to this upcoming year and I thank you for your time in reading this candidate statement.
* = Due to file size and portfolio arrangement, please download document and view in Adobe Acrobat
References
Alexander, C. (1964). Notes on the synthesis of form. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Boling, E. (2008). The designer as human instrument. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT), Orlando, FL.
Franklin, C. (2007). Factors that influence elementary teachers use of computers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 15(2), 267-293.
Gomez, L. M., Sherin, M. G., Griesdorn, J., & Finn, L.E. (2008). Creating social relationships: The role of technology in preservice teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 59(2), 117-131.
Kim, H., & Hannafin, M. (2009). Web-enhanced case-based activity in teacher education: a case study. Instructional Science, 37(2), 151-170.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation: Cambridge University Press.
Merrill, M.D. (2007). Levels of instructional strategy. Educational Technology, 46(4), 5-10.
Mitchell, C. T. (1993). Redefining designing: From form to experience. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Norman, D. A. (1988). The psychology of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.
Reigeluth, C., & Frick, T. (1999). Formative research: A methodology for improving design theories. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theories (Vol. II, pp. 633-651). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence-Erlbaum Associates.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial (3rd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.