Teacher Planning Grant

Final Report

University of Mount Union
















Table of Contents
Background Information ........................................................................................ 3
Executive Summary .............................................................................................. 3
Program ................................................................................................................ 5
Pre-Service Teachers ........................................................................................ 5
1. Pre-service teacher (PST) development, in particular the innovative
use of ICT for students to enhance teaching and learning for the
purpose of this grant ............................................................................. 5
2. Plans for increasing K-12 students use of ICT ..................................... 5
3. Pre-Service teacher curricula ............................................................... 6
4. Preparation in meeting challenges of teaching in 21
st
century
classroom .............................................................................................. 6
Practicing Teachers ........................................................................................... 7
1. Student competency measures in the appropriate use of ICT .............. 7
2. Practicing teacher and administrator involvement ................................ 7
3. Professional development .................................................................... 8
4. Developing new strategies in the use of ICT ........................................ 9
5. Provide students with adequate means to learn with technology ......... 9
College or University ....................................................................................... 10
1. Evaluation ........................................................................................... 10
2. Communication between public LEAs and college or university ........ 10
3. Communities of practice ..................................................................... 10
4. Results ............................................................................................... 11
Recommendations .............................................................................................. 12
Background Information
Grant Recipient Organization:

Individual(s) Preparing Report: Dr. Melissa Askren Edgehouse (UMU), Dr. Mandy
Capel (UMU), Linda Bigham (UMU), Jan Horning (AELS), Amanda Hennon
(AELS), Andrea Wendt (LES), and Amy Eddins (WBMS)

LEA Partners (please list): Alliance Early Learning School (AELS), Louisville
Elementary School (LES), and West Branch Middle School (WBMS)

Other Partners (please list):

Executive Summary
Please provide an executive summary of the work completed and overall
progress towards reaching goal(s). Use no more than 1 page.




"#$ %&'( )*+,* -+./$01 2$3,0/ 45$67/+8$ 9711:0;
A Collaboiative Pioject Involving the Alliance Eaily Leaining School (Kinueigaiten), Louisville Elementaiy School
(S
th
uiaue), West Bianch Niuule School (8
th
uiaue), & The 0niveisity of Nount 0nion (Pieseivice Teacheis)
!"#$% '()')!$#*+,
1. Integiate auuitional technology into CS 218Q:
a. A0Ps anu cybei-bullying
b. 0tility of iPaus anu Web 2.u tools anu cieate lesson plansunits
c. ePoitfolio
u. Fielu expeiience
2. Collaboiate with the 0N0's IT
S. Appoint 7 Tech Ambassauois (TA's) to seive as on-site assistants to
inseivice teacheis anu peei coaches to CS 218Q stuuents
4. Pioviue K-12 inseivice teacheis high quality piofessional uevelopment
S. Integiate cutting-euge technologies into K-12 anu univeisity classiooms
6. Inciease pieseivice anu K-12 stuuents' knowleuge anu use of ICT in the
classioom
7. Cieate a collaboiative community of piactice among all giant paiticipants
(inseivice anu pieseivice teacheis, auministiatois, etc.)
8. Bevelop an ongoing system of collecting anu evaluating uata
-,.( /(,0%12""34*5 (" (6, 78(89,
While the funuing foi The IPAB 0nion has ceaseu, the
paiticipants fiom this past yeai woulu like to
continue collaboiating. Plans aie in place to allow CS
218Q pieseivice teacheis to woik with inseivice
teacheis. Nost impoitantly, the inseivice teacheis
woulu like to continue meeting aftei school on a
iegulai basis. Whethei it be to simply tioubleshoot
oi shaie iueas oi attenu a piofessional uevelopment
session, the they believeu these sessions weie
valuable anu woithwhile to continueeven though
theie woulun't be a stipenu foi theii attenuance.
0veiall, it was a successful pioject!
:#;"9 '++"<0$4%6<,*(% "= >6, ?@'A B*4"*

Puichaseu 8u iPau 2 anu 6 iPau S uevices (along with coveis, eaibuus, chaigingsyncing caits,
apps, etc.)
Appointeu 7 Tech Ambassauois to seive as on-site assistants to inseivice teacheis anu peei
coaches to CS 218Q stuuents
Beliveieu 841 houis of piofessional uevelopment, incluuing:
o 0ne all-uay iPau launch inseivice
o 0ne two-uay inseivice conuucteu by Apple Consultants
o Nonthly aftei school woikshops
o eTech Confeience
Cieateu a community of piactice foi giant paiticipates to collaboiate thiough uoogle+
Integiateu new content into CS 218Q, Euucational Neuiaa couise foi all euucation majois,
typically taken uuiing theii sophomoie yeaiincluuing Acceptable 0se Policy ieseaich,
cybeibullying, iPau integiation, anu cleaiei alignment with ISTE's NETS-T stanuaius
Collecteu anu evaluateu giant-ielateu uata, incluuing:
o Qualitative Focus uioup Inteiviews ielateu to technology use, challenges,
expeiiences, haiuwaie, etc., with inseivice teacheis anu auministiatois, conuucteu
by TA's
o Quantitative Pie- anu Post-Questionnaiies ielateu to ICT use to:
! Inseivice Teacheis
! Pieseivice Teacheis
! K-12 Stuuents
! Technology Ambassauois
! K-12 Auministiatois
Attenueu eTech's Confeience
o Submitteu five pioposals to piesent technology-ielateu sessions at the eTech
Confeience, anu all five pioposals weie accepteu
o 21 inseivice teacheis, piincipals, pieseivice teacheis, anu highei euucation faculty
attenueu the full confeience

Program
Please provide a summary for each of the following areas. Be certain to include
any necessary data that will support the activity summary and the progress. Use
as much space as needed to provide an overall understanding and picture of
accomplishments for each area.
Pre-Service Teachers
1. Pre-service teacher (PST) development, in particular the
innovative use of ICT for students to enhance teaching and
learning for the purpose of this grant
Include a description of the activities conducted and the innovative practices that were
implemented.

The following outlines the major curriculum additions/changes to CS 218Q, Educational
Media:
Acceptable/Responsible Use Policy Research and Analysis: Preservice
teachers researched a variety of local districts AUPs (including LEA partners),
revised existing policies, evaluated Bring Your Own Tech/Device clauses,
provided recommendations, and presented research findings to their peers.
Utility of iPads and Web 2.0 Tools: Preservice teachers were introduced a
variety of Web 2.0 Tools (Weebly, Prezi, Glogster, Poll Everywhere, Zamzar,
Screenr, Vocaroo, Wifitti, etc.) and utilized such tools in lessons they taught to
their peers. Additionally, the preservice teachers researched various apps
relevant to the K-12 students as requested by inservice teachers.
ePortfolios: Preservice teachers created ePortfolios to showcase their work (i.e.,
screencasts, lesson plans) and strengthen a professional, digital identity.
Field Experience: Because we had too many preservice teachers to provide
field placements for each of them, we created different tracks within CS 218Q.
These self-selected tracks allowed for the preservice teachers to complete varied
assignments and then share their work with their peers during class sessions.
For instance, some worked with K-12 students and inservice teachers, while
others created screencast tutorials of iPad apps, researched AUPs, or created
mini units with iPads or other technology and taught the lessons to K-12
students.

While each of the above curriculum additions have been helpful, probably the most
useful have been the development of tracks within the course and the collaboration with
the inservice teachers. Each of the preservice teachers agreed that the tracks allow for
flexibility and choice and assignment completion based on skill sets and interests.

2. Plans for increasing K-12 students use of ICT
Explain the ways the grant activities enhanced the preparedness of PSTs for the use of
ICT in the classrooms and with students, citing evidence in data from the local evaluation.
The preservice teachers in both the fall and spring semesters this past year cited large
improvements with their own, K-12 students, and inservice teachers use of ICT. The
professional development that was made possible through this grant (the Apple
workshop, after school meetings/inservices, the eTech conference, etc.) really helped the
professors of CS 218Q learn more and therefore teach the preservice teachers better.
When comparing the pre-questionnaire data with the post-questionnaire from each
semester, vast increases were identified as noted:
20% increase with those who strongly agree that they like to use technology
19% increase with those who strongly agree that they know how to use
technology pretty well
35% increase with those who strongly agree that they use technology everyday
at school with students
23% increase with those who strongly agree that they can easily learn new
technologies
33% increase with those who strongly agree that their students are comfortable
using technology
21% increase with those who strongly agree that their students can easily learn
new technologies
Overall increases with the frequency of usage of nearly all technologies listed on
the survey (SMART Boards, Word Processors, Games, Tablets, etc.)
These favorable results indicate that inservice teacher and administrator involvement with
the grant clearly impacted their technology use of ICT.
3. Pre-Service teacher curricula
Include changes made to the required coursework in educational technology and
competency demonstrations, and how coursework aligns with standards or goals (i.e.,
ISTE NETS-T, NCATE goals, eTech Ohios 5-Year state ed tech and strategic plans).

While some past CS 218Q course assessments were aligned with ISTEs NETS-T
standards, some were not. The changes in this course have further hewed these
standards to all assignments in the course. For instance, preservice teachers conducted
research regarding AUPs and cyberbullying, which is nicely aligned with NETS-T
standard 4, Promote and Model Digital Citizenship and Responsibility, and the field
experience component for some preservice teachers is well aligned with standard 5,
Engage in Professional Growth and Leadership. While many of the NETS-T standards
were addressed prior to the grant, each of the standards are now aligned with one or
more of the courses assessments.
4. Preparation in meeting challenges of teaching in 21
st
century
classroom
Include an explanation of what occurred to help prepare pre-service teachers in meeting
these challenges in K-12 classrooms.

Throughout the course, professors of CS 218Q discussed the many challenges that face
inservice teachers, administrators, and K-12 students with regards to technology.
Upgrades, funding, time to plan and learn new gadgets, monitoring student use of
technologies, IT support and troubleshooting, etc., were all challenges identified by the
preservice teachers in the pre-questionnaire. While these challenges seemed to
outweigh the benefits of technology use to a few preservice teachers, they were able,
through class discussions and through field experiences with inservice teachers, to
combat these challenges. We discussed grant opportunities to overcome funding issues
(one teacher at AELS was awarded two iPads at no charge through DonorsChoose.org),
collaboration with area universities (much like our grant work) to overcome lack of timely
IT support (as these individuals are often overworked or non-existent in districts) or
professional development needs (especially when universities provide PD a low or no
cost to districts). These types of discussions have occurred as a direct result of the
grant. Previously, preservice teachers were not exposed to these types of real-world
challenges. Now, as evidenced in the preservice teachers post-questionnaire, many of
them feel as though they should embrace technologyregardless of the challenges they
may face in their future districts.

Practicing Teachers
1. Student competency measures in the appropriate use of ICT
Include a discussion (and data from the local evaluation, if available) of how students of
participating teachers have realized an increase in (a) their use of ICT, (b) their
engagement, and (c) their content area achievement.

Data from the various questionnaires, interviews, etc., revealed improved ICT use by
students (and even teachers). The following bullets help illustrate how their students
have increased ICT use, have been more engaged with technology, and have had higher
achievement in a variety of content areas:
My students LOVE using the iPads! We recently started using Zapd with our higher
achieving students. The kids have been thrilled to see their sites projected on the
SMART board, and they love reading their material to us! My students have produced
writing that is great, and their typing skills have really improved. While I assist them with
spelling when necessary, their ideas and photo choices are all their own.
We blog at least one time each week so parents can follow student progress. This has
caused students to really think about what they are learning and relay that information to
those who care for them.
In September, I thought I was just going to use the iPads for intervention and enrichment
through the use of apps. But after attending our collaborative grant meetings, I have
gained many more ideas on how to implement and adapt lessons at the kindergarten
level.
Our students have been studying for tests/quizzes using Flashcardlet, have conducted
basic research through Safari, enjoy working with the Science 360, NASA, and Study
Island Mobile apps, take AR tests, use Solar System HD to reinforce state standards, and
they use apps like ShowMe and Zapd for project based activities.
Our students use Doodle Buddy as a dry erase board in class pretty regularly. Doodle
Buddy works really well for games like Jeopardy!
Several teachers have tried using TeacherPal for classroom organization.
5th graders have been linked to the ODE website to practice for the Science and Reading
OAA test. This works great for posting extended responses using Apple TV.
We have really noticed higher scores on vocabulary tests when using the Flashcardlet
app. Its helping a lot!
We also use Popplet to help with short story features and story organization.
Our students seem more excited and less apathetic about learning when using iPads for
specific group activities instead of just Internet based activities. We love them!
2. Practicing teacher and administrator involvement
Include an explanation of the teacher and administrator involvement in the grant activities
and the impact this made on implementation.

Inservice teachers and administrators attended and participated in the activities listed in
the next question. Additionally, district technology coordinators, while not initially part of
the grant, were instrumental in assisting teachers with on-site troubleshooting, Bretford
Syncing/Charging cart set-up and use, etc.much appreciated involvement.
Furthermore, the three LEAs each had quite strict policies for teachers being out of the
classrooms and attending conferences. We were concerned that few teachers would be
able to attend the eTech Conference as a result. Fortunately, the administrators at each
LEA made arrangements with their superintendents to have five representatives from
each building attend the conference, fully supported through grant funds (including
substitute teacher pay). Though we didnt intend to pay 100% of the cost of the
conference for each participant, we reduced the number of attendees to accommodate
the districts needs/requests.

This involvement yielded great results when comparing the inservice teachers and
administrators pre- and post-questionnaires (and these statements are the same as
those listed for the preservice teachers, for comparison purposes):
13% increase with those who strongly agree that they like to use technology
29% increase with those who strongly agree that they know how to use
technology pretty well
19% increase with those who strongly agree that they use technology everyday
at school with students
43% increase with those who strongly agree that they can easily learn new
technologies
14% increase with those who strongly agree that their students are comfortable
using technology
37% increase with those who strongly agree that their students can easily learn
new technologies
Overall increases with the frequency of usage of nearly all technologies listed on
the survey (SMART Boards, Word Processors, Games, Tablets, etc.)

These favorable results indicate that inservice teacher and administrator involvement with
the grant clearly impacted their technology use of ICT.

3. Professional development
Describe the professional development for practicing teachers, and the way in which your
grant developed a systematic way of providing ongoing support and PD to practicing
teachers.

Many grant participants participated in following professional development offerings,
totaling 841 hours:
All-Day Launch Workshop in August
Two-Day Apple Professional Development Workshop in September
Monthly After School Workshops September through May
Presented at and Attended the eTech Conference in February

In all, were quite pleased that we helped to deliver a total of 841 hours of professional
development for inservice teachers and administrators. However, the some of the PD
was structured a bit differently than we initially intended. The after school workshops
were originally scheduled as sessions focusing on a particular topic, like Web 2.0 tools,
Google Docs, iPad Apps for Literacy, etc.; but, when the teachers from each district were
in the same room, they didnt want to learn about specific technologies. They really
wanted unstructured time to informally share iPad tips and tricks, successful apps, lesson
plan ideas, and more. Many of the meetings lasted longer than the 60-minute allotment,
as teachers were anxious to gain new ideas from one another. While not planned, all
participants have embraced this unintended consequence. We occasionally integrated
structured PD, but rather than 60 minute sessions on Web 2.0 tools, the participants
learned about the topic for 20 or so minutes and spent the remaining time sharing.
These sessions were so beneficial that we plan to continue meeting next year, even
though the teachers wont be earning a stipend for their attendance. This ongoing
collaboration and support will be valuable to all involved parties.
4. Developing new strategies in the use of ICT
Include a description of the strategies that were employed to increase the use of ICT of
practicing teachers and the use of these strategies with K-12 students.

Much like the first question in this section, data from questionnaires revealed the
following to help illustrate how they and their students have increased use of ICT in their
classrooms:
As I became more familiar with the iPad, I was more willing to take risks in trying out
other technologies with students. I use technology everyday now with my students!
We listened to stories on the iPad and used them for retellings. In the past, students
listened to me read a story and shared orally. When using the iPads independently,
students were then able to respond on paper using pictures and words as appropriate.
My kindergartners blogged and created their own websites on the iPads. My students
writing abilities improved, and parents communicated with their child through comments
on the students blogs. This engaging collaboration was a very positive experience!
The iPad was great for quickly taking a child in the hallway and recording him/her reading
a book then instantly uploading to YouTube with a link on the childs website. They were
so excited to go home and have their parents see them read the story.
I saw teachers using technology in many ways with the addition of the iPads. It
reinforced the use of one or two devices with many students by using them at centers,
and this didnt happen prior to the grant. iPads, SMART Boards, and classroom
computers were always in use by the end of the year.
In the past, technology was used mainly for Microsoft and PowerPoint projects and
research. Now we all use it in so many other ways.
5. Provide students with adequate means to learn with technology
Include a description of what was done through the grant activities to ensure K-12
students have the technology to accomplish the goals of the grant.

Prior to meeting with the inservice teachers at our grant kick-off meeting in August, we
purchased all hardware for the grant, including 80 iPads and covers, VGAs, earbuds,
charging/syncing carts, Mac Minis, etc. Purchasing these devices in July was a wise
move as it has allowed ample time for all grant participants to learn the technology. The
inservice teachers have had their iPads since August, UMU plans to keep five of the 80
iPads, and all other technologies have been in the districts since October. In May, UMU
purchased an additional 6 iPads with the remaining funds, and these will remain with
UMU so that inservice teachers no longer need to check-put devices for preservice
student use. Finally, hundreds of paid apps were purchased through the Volume
Voucher program for K-12 student use.

College or University
1. Evaluation
Include a description of your local evaluation plan and the measures used to assess
impact, as well as a summary of the progress on the described measures.

The grant administration team created several questionnaires to help measure the impact
of the grant. Focus group interviews, questionnaires, video testimonials, Google+
conversations, and meeting notes have been collected by UMU, and all parties involved
submitted pre- and post-questionnaires. The combination of qualitative and quantitative
data proved to be quite beneficial.

The grant administrators worked together to compile and analyze each measure,
disaggregate by participant type, etc., and results are identified later in this report.

2. Communication between public LEAs and college or university
Include an explanation of the collaboration between the grantee and the partnering public
LEAs and the collaboration and cooperation between PSTs and practicing teachers
during placement.

Our grant participants collaborated in a variety of ways:
Inservice teachers, TAs, preservice teachers, and UMU faculty shared their work
with one another at our monthly after school meetings
UMU faculty and inservice teachers emailed one another on a fairly regular basis
(to check on their work, provide codes for purchased apps to install, etc.)
Some grant participants communicated regularly on their own, which fostered
close relationships with participants form different buildings and grade levels
Some grant participants communicated regularly via Google+
3. Communities of practice
Include a discussion about the establishment of communities of practice within your
project and how they (a) were formed, (b) contributed to the success of the project, and
(c) may be sustained.

We used Google+ as our community of practice platform. While most participants agreed
that Google+ is fairly user-friendly, our inservice teachers didnt embrace it as we had
hoped. Many of them preferred to share ideas via email or teachers lounge
conversations. The preservice teachers regularly made posts, shared ideas, etc., but the
inservice teachers just didnt utilize the site as often as we had intended. However, one
example that follows shows how two inservice teachers from different districts
collaborated to solve problems.




4. Results
Include a brief summary of the results of the data collected within the internal evaluation.

This report includes various results throughout, and the bullets below include a brief
synopsis of the findings. In all, the results were incredibly positive.
Qualitative focus group session questions revealed that the inservice teachers
participating in the grant like technology, but they do not often have the time or
professional development to utilize devices appropriately.
IT departments are often too busy to assist teachers with troubleshooting, so when
problems arise, teachers often forgo the technology and find another way to deliver the
instruction. These early data findings helped make it clear that we needed to provide
time and professional development, along with resources (i.e., iPads) in order to make
the integration successful.
Inservice and preservice teachers showed numerous increases from the pre- to the post-
questionnaire with regards to personal technology use, comfort levels, student use, and
they overall reported that they like to use technology much more in May than they did in
August.
K-12 students cited in the pre-questionnaire that they can learn new technologies easily
(60% strongly agree), and this increased to 65% (strongly agree) on the post-
questionnaire.
49% of K-12 students cited in the pre-questionnaire that know how to use technologies
pretty well, and this increased to 55% on the post-questionnaire.
Interestingly, 68% of K-12 students are comfortable using technology early in the grant,
but only 58% were comfortable at the end. The grant administrators wondered if perhaps
the iPad proved to be challenging to some students, thus the decrease for this prompt.
Relatedly, a decrease of 20% was identified in the prompt about assignments being more
fun if they use technology. This could also be related to challenging apps, poor
management, lengthy troubleshooting, etc., though we cant be sure.
K-12 students wished their teachers used technology more frequently (63% strongly
agree), whereas only 53% wished this in the post-questionnaire, potentially indicating that
their teachers were now using technology more than they had earlier in the year.
32% of K-12 students reported that they strongly disagreed with the statement, I use
technology more in school than I do at home in the pre-questionnaire, whereas only 4%
reported this on the post.
Overall, participants use of ICT increased over the year.

Recommendations
Include any recommendations for other colleges, universities, K-12 LEAs, and state-level
policymakers regarding supporting and preparing pre-service teachers to effectively use ICT in
the classroom.

Our recommendation to other universities and K-12 LEAs is quite simple: Collaborate,
collaborate, collaborate! This grant allowed us to learn the value of talking about technology,
integrating a field experience component to an educational technology course, and more. Rather
than hiring pricey consultants, IT professionals, etc., K-12 LEAs could further benefit from the
knowledge of preservice teachers and their professors. This process saves districts money, and
the collaboration is invaluable to all involved parties. While it took time to get started, identify
stakeholders, plan professional development, select common meeting dates, etc., it proved to be
well worth it. If we only had monies to purchase devices, we suspect that some iPads might be
used a fancy paperweights; professional development is imperative. With tight budgets in K-12
districts, money to purchase devices and secure high-quality professional development might not
be feasible. Instead, purchase the equipment and seek the PD through an area university. The
networking could benefit all, as it did for us.