English 1
kamalachhetri13
articleintechnology.docxDespite the literature supporting technology use in schools as beneficial for students, and despite the wide use of social technology, schools continue to be slow to change its integration in the classroom (Livingstone, 2012). It is imperative that teachers increase their use of technology in the classroom in order to prepare our K-12 students referred to as "digital natives," for the 21st century. Though many schools have technology available for use (Alger & Kopcha, 2008), barriers exist in incorporating technology into lesson plans, namely teacher reluctance (Keengwe, Onchwari, & Wachira, 2008). Teachers' hesitation in using technology more frequently is due to a number of factors, such as lack of time to learn new technology and incorporate it into lesson plans, beliefs around using technology in instruction, availability of working technology and technical support, comprehensive professional development, and a culture that promotes using new technology, self-efficacy, and teaching methods (Alger & Kopcha, 2008).
Literature Review
Self-Efficacy toward Technology
According to Bandura (1986) individuals possess a self-system that determines how much effort people will expend on any activity. Bandura also asserts that self-efficacy beliefs may be a strong predictor of related performance. Studies have shown a positive correlation between self-efficacy in technology and technology ability (Anderson & Maninger, 2007; Anderson, Grouulx, & Maninger, 2011). According to the technology acceptance model introduced by Davis (1989), there is a correlation between users' perceived ease of use and predicted adoption of technology. In his study investigating Moodles, Yeou (2016) found self-efficacy to be a critical factor in undergraduates' use of the technology tool. In a similar study investigating pre-service teachers, Albion (2001) found that self-efficacy was the most significant factor in predicting technology use. Pre-service and in-service teachers who possess high self-efficacy in regard to technology are more apt to use technology in the classroom because they are more confident in their ability. In their study investigating teachers' use of technology, Holden and Rada (2011) found that self-efficacy directly influenced individuals' ease of use and usability of technology.
Need for Technology Integration
With the adoption of the National Education Technology Plan (NETP), providing access to technology is no longer sufficient; the NETP stresses that schools are expected to ensure "all students understand how to use technologies as a tool to engage in creative, productive, lifelong learning" (p. 16 Herold, 2016). A key element in the plan is the need to move from passive to active use of technology. Often referred to as the "digital use and divide," a gap exists between learners who are using technology in active, creative ways to support their learning and those who predominantly use technology for passive content consumption.
To develop engaged citizens and to continue to be globally competitive, schools must integrate 21st-century competencies throughout the curriculum including the development of critical thinking, complex problem-solving, collaboration, and multimedia communication (U.S. Department of Education, 2015). One promising resolution is to integrate technology in our pre-service education classes. Through this practice, pre-service teachers can gain knowledge and skills in their classes as well as learn to integrate technology in their lesson plans and teaching.
Integration of Technology in Pre-Service Education Classes
According to the U.S. Department of Education (2016), teacher preparation programs have failed to prepare teachers to use technology in effective ways warranting the need for reevaluation of current curriculum for pre-service teachers. In fact, a key recommendation from the NETP is to transition from a single technology course to thoughtful use of technology throughout teacher education programs. "America's pre-service teachers must have opportunities to actively use technology to support learning and teaching through creation, collaboration, and problem solving" (U.S. Department of Education, 2016).
According to Chisholm and Wetzel (2001), an effective method for preparing pre-service teachers to integrate technology into their lessons would be to design teacher preparation courses that provide opportunities for students to utilize technology and gain hands-on experience. Zehr (1997) further supports this by writing that the best method for equipping pre-service teachers to incorporate technology into their future lessons is through teacher modeling during students' methods courses. This is in contrast to the previously used stand-alone technology courses (Wetzel, Buss, Foulger & Lindsey 2014), which seemed to be less effective (Bielefeldt, 2001). By integrating technology throughout these courses, teachers are more closely adhering to research on adult learning, that is, that adults increase professional knowledge over time, through a continuous and reciprocal system (Rogers, 2002).
According to the U.S. Department of Education (2016), there are four guiding principles for the use of technology in pre-service teacher preparation programs: a) focus on the active use of technology to enable learning and teaching through creation, production, and problem-solving; b) build sustainable, program-wide systems of professional learning for higher education instructors to strengthen and continually refresh their capacity to use technological tools to enable transformative learning and teaching; c) ensure pre-service teachers' experiences with educational technology are program-deep and program-wide, rather than one-off courses separate from their methods courses; and d) align efforts with research-based standards, frameworks, and credentials recognized across the field.
In efforts to assess our current role as teacher educators in preparing pre-service teachers to use technology, we developed a survey to assess pre-service teachers' attitude toward technology, investigate pre-service teachers' exposure to technology both in the K-12 classroom and in higher education classrooms, and to assess their level of preparedness in using technology in the K-12 classroom.
Purpose
To ensure that students in the K-12 classroom are adequately prepared for a society heavily dependent on technology, it is vital that teacher preparation programs prepare pre-service teachers in effective ways to use technology in the classroom. The current study was designed to answer the following research questions:
* Is technology important to pre-service teachers?
* How much technology did pre-service teachers observe during their field experience observations in the K-12 classrooms?
* How prepared do pre-service teachers feel in utilizing technology in the K-12 classroom?
Research Method
Participants
Participants in this study were secondary education majors attending a four-year university in the southern part of the United States. The participants were classified as seniors and chosen because they were enrolled in an assessment course that corresponded to their student teaching.
Of the 30 participants, 12 were male and 18 were female students; 26 participants self-identified as Caucasian, two self-identified as African-American, and two self-identified as Hispanic. The teacher candidates ranged in age from 20 to 28 years old. All participants came from middle-class backgrounds and were from both rural and urban communities. Each participant completed an informed consent document and was provided a detailed description of the study. They were also asked to provide demographic information and to indicate whether or not they were willing to complete the online survey. An IRB was not required because it was considered a class activity.
All participants completed demographic questions prior to completing the online survey. Demographic questions included the following: age, academic level, race/ethnicity socioeconomic status, and gender. This demographic questionnaire was used to gather descriptive information about the participants.
Instrument
Participants were administered a survey via an online survey tool called SurveyGizmo (https://app.surveygizmo.com). The survey instrument was created by the researchers. To increase the validity of the survey, it was shared with two expert reviewers in the field of teacher education. Additionally, the survey was piloted with 10 pre-service teachers enrolled in the same school of education. The main goal of this pilot was to assess the appropriateness of the survey questions as well as the language of the survey items. A few minor revisions were made based on feedback from the pilot survey. The Cronbach's alpha reliability scale for this survey ranged from .70 to .87.
Additionally, collecting both quantitative and qualitative data provided valuable insight regarding the validity of the survey instrument. The survey responses included a 4- and 6-point Likert scale as well as 7 open-ended questions, that is, questions for which no response choices are provided, which allowed participants to respond in their own words. This type of question is especially beneficial when exploring a new topic and can afford the chance to learn unexpected information (Sue & Ritter, 2007).
Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data including the measure mean scores as well as percentages on the survey responses. The open-ended questions were coded to identify patterns and themes.
Procedure
The survey was sent via e-mail during the middle of the semester term. The e-mail provided introductory information about the survey as well as a link to the survey instrument. Students were informed that their participation was voluntary, responses were confidential, and participation would not affect their course grade. The participants were given two weeks to complete the survey. When necessary, the researchers sent a reminder e-mail to non-respondents to motivate them to respond to the survey. Of the 30 students in the class, 30 responded providing a 100-percent completion rate.
Data Analysis
Responses were recorded and analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data including the measure mean scores, standard deviations, and percentages on the survey responses. The open-ended questions were coded to identify themes and patterns and can be found in Table 4.
Findings
Quantitative Results
The survey focused on the following pre-service teachers' perspectives on the following aspects of technology: (a) importance of using technology; (b) technology observed in the K-12 classroom and higher education classrooms; and (c) levels of preparedness in using technology. Due to the complexity of the survey using different Likert scales, data have been categorized in three tables. Tables 1-3 list the results of the survey.
Importance of Using Technology
The survey questions for this section were scaled from 4 being the highest with "very important" and 1 being the lowest with "definitely not important." As shown in Table 1, the majority of participants indicated it was important for students to use technology in their own learning with a mean of 3.48 (SD = .60). In regard to the importance of K-12 teachers incorporating technology in their instruction, similar results were found with a mean of 3.61 (SD = 56).
Technology Observed in the K-12 classroom
As researchers, we were interested in the amount of technology being used during observations by our pre-service teachers. The survey questions for this section were scaled from 6 being the highest with "always" and 1 being the lowest with "never." As shown in Table 2, the amount observed was relatively lower than what we expected with a mean of 3.71 (SD = 1.49). Data analysis also indicted that very few participants observed K-12 students using technology in their own learning with a mean of 3.10 (SD = 1.42). In regard to the amount of technology utilized by the professors in the higher education classes, the participants had mixed reviews with a mean of 4.32 (SD = 1.11) warranting the need for reevaluating our incorporation of technology in instruction.
Preparedness in Using Technology in the Classroom
We thought it was also important to assess participants' preparedness in using technology in the classroom. The survey questions for this section were scaled from a 6 being the highest with "fully prepared" and a 1 being the lowest with "fully unprepared." As shown in Table 3, data analysis indicated room for improvement in regard to how prepared participants felt to incorporate technology in their instruction in the K-12 classroom with a mean of 4.16 (SD=1.10). Similar results in regard to how prepared they felt to provide opportunities for K-12 students to use technology in their own learning with a mean of 4.35 (SD=1.08).
Qualitative Results
Results from the open-ended questions in the qualitative portion of the survey were informative and provided a snapshot of pre-service teachers' perceptions of various aspects of technology. According to Sutton (2011), "Although (pre-service) teachers' perceptions do not always measure what (pre-service) teachers actually know and do, their experiences and perceptions are important" (p. 40).
Following our analysis of the survey responses, we were able to ascribe meaning and uncover three themes. To qualify as a theme, a minimum of five participants had to endorse a particular category. The three identified themes are as follows: (a) technology is important to pre-service teachers, (b) there was a limited use of technology observed by pre-service teachers in the K-12 and higher education classrooms, and (c) pre-service teachers had a relative level of preparedness in using technology in the classroom but lacked specific technology pedagogy knowledge. In the following sections, we will provide a description of each theme.
Technology Is Important to Pre-Service Teachers
A relatively high percentage of participants indicated technology was important for both teacher and student utilization in the K-12 classroom. In their responses to the open-ended questions, participants indicated they were passionate about providing opportunities for K-12 students to gain technology skills. One student shared, "Teachers need to adapt their teaching to help students adapt to their future." An additional student stated, "Our world is evolving to a more technology-based society. We need to prioritize technology in order to prepared students for their future and careers." Finally, another student responded, "Teachers fighting technology is pointless and consumes time that could be used to embrace technology. Technology also provides interesting and cool ways to help students understand concepts."
Several participants also shared that technology is an effective tool for engagement. One participant stated, "Technology can increase engagement because our students rely on this tool for both communication and entertainment, it is only natural for them to use technology in their own learning." Another student added, "Technology can be used to engage students with different learning styles. We can use it as a differentiation tool to meet all the needs of all students."
Limited Use of Technology Observed in the Classroom
Another theme that emerged was the limited amount of technology observed in K-12 classrooms and higher education classrooms. As part of our teacher preparation program, pre-service teachers are required to complete field experience where they observe K-12 classrooms. We were relatively surprised at the lack of technology observed by participants in the K-12 classrooms in both teacher instruction and student use. One student shared, "As a future teacher, it is really helpful to see technology use in action when observing classrooms. It bewilders me when teachers have access to technology but fail to use it in their teaching or allow students to use it in their learning. Kids love technology and it is important for them to use it effectively." Research cites that teachers are faced with a variety of barriers in regard to technology integration including inadequate training for teachers, low self-efficacy around technology, and a lack of technical support (Hsu, 2016; Hammonds, Matherson, Wilson, & Wright, 2013), which are possible causations for limited use of technology observed by our pre-service teachers.
In addition, though the use of technology observed in higher education classrooms was significantly higher than those observed in the K-12 classrooms, the variety was rather limited. When asked what types of technology professors utilized, 86 percent of participants indicated PowerPoint as their professors' primary tool for technology followed by YouTube. One student shared his perspective in the following statement: "There is very little variety with Professors' use of technology. And even some don't allow you to use technology whatsoever in their classrooms." Another student added, "Professors, specifically those preparing teachers, should model how to effectively use technology in the classroom to enhance instruction and learning."
Relative Level of Preparedness in Using Technology
Even with only 44 percent of respondents indicating they felt fully or very prepared in using technology in the K-12 classroom and only 37 percent in providing opportunities for K-12 students to use technology for their own learning, there is strong need for improvement. One student responded, "It would be beneficial to preservice teachers [for professors] to embed more technology in all education courses."
In analyzing the qualitative data from the participants' open-ended responses, our data are consistent with numerous other empirical studies (Kaufman, 2014; Lee, Smith & Bos, 2014; Eren, Avci, Kapucu, 2015); though our pre-service teachers possess technology skills, many lacked pedagogical knowledge about how to effectively integrate technology in specific content areas. One student wrote, "It would be beneficial to preservice teachers to embed more technology in all education courses." Another student added, "Though I learned how to use some technology, I would have liked to learn how to use it in specific content areas to increase students' performance."
Discussion
The purpose of the survey was to assess pre-service teachers' attitude toward technology, investigate pre-service teachers' observation of technology both in the K-12 classroom and in higher education classrooms, and to assess their level of preparedness in using technology in the K-12 classroom. After analyzing our data, we found the following: (a) technology is important to incorporate in the K-12 classroom; (b) need to increase effective instruction in technological pedagogical content knowledge in teacher education programs.
Technology Is Important to Incorporate in the K-12 Classroom
A relatively high percentage of participants indicated technology was important for both teacher and student utilization in the K-12 classroom. As previously mentioned, with the adoption of the NETP, K-12 schools are expected to have opportunities for students to be active agents of technology for purposes of increasing engagement, critical thinking, and preparing them for the 21st century, which are key components for their generation to compete globally (Herold, 2016).
Furthermore, research confirms students have positive attitudes toward using technology in their learning process (Izadpanah & Alvavi, 2016; Rashid & Asghar, 2016), increasing not only students' levels of engagement but self-direction toward learning (Izadpanah & Alvavi, 2016; Gunuc & Kuzu, 2015). We need to ensure that technological opportunities are available to K-12 students by making sure our pre-service teachers are adequately prepared to effectively integrate technology in the classroom. Additionally, we need to continue to foster and nurture our relationship with K-12 schools in an effort to increase technology use among teachers. One potential method we could use would be to collaborate with districts to create and offer workshops about technology that would benefit both our pre-service teachers and their in-service teachers. Another approach would be to have our pre-service teachers model effective technology use in the classroom during their student internships. Through modeling technology use, our pre-service teachers can help make technology use more accessible and less intimidating for each district's in-service teachers. Both approaches benefit our students as well as existing teachers in using technology in the classroom.
Need to Increase Effective Instruction in Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Teacher Education Programs
Teacher educators have the responsibility to prepare pre-service teachers to meet the needs of the 21st-century learner, and technology is at the forefront. Again, though our pre-service teachers utilize technology on a daily basis, researchers agree that their ability to integrate technology in instruction is limited (Tozkoparan & Kilic, 2015) as evident by our participants' responses. We found that although students' level of preparedness in utilizing technology was relatively high, their ability in utilizing technology in specific content areas was limited as indicated in the qualitative data. Koehler, Mishra, and Cain (2013) define the complex interaction among content, pedagogy, and technology as technological content knowledge (TPACK) and is essential in teachers effectively integrating technology into instruction. Not only must teachers have a deep understanding of the content they teach but also have the ability to decipher the best technology that would be most appropriate for integration (Koehler et al., 2013).
Teacher education classes provide the opportune environment to model these effective technology instructional practices (Liu, 2011). An additional benefit of incorporating technology into course curriculum is students are encouraged to be more engaged with their professors as well as with other students (Brzeski, 2015). According to Foulger, Buss, Wetzel, and Lindsey (2014), "teacher education programs that provide candidates with the most current technology practices with new technology innovations have greater potential to foster candidates' preparation for the use of technology" (p. 56).
Pre-service teachers also need varied opportunities to utilize technology in their teacher education classes in order to increase their technology skills and enhance their self-efficacy in using technology. Incorporating technology use into coursework allows professors to facilitate a balance between the students' needs and the curriculum (Brzeski, 2015).
Conclusion
This study investigated our pre-service teachers' feelings about technology's importance, its current use in K-12 classrooms they observed, and how prepared they feel about incorporating technology into their future classrooms. The survey results indicate that while pre-service teachers believe incorporating technology in their teaching is important, they did not see an acceptable level of use among in-service teachers' classrooms they observed. Additionally, while technology use was more frequent in their higher education classes, the type of technology pre-service teachers saw their professors use was often limited to PowerPoint and YouTube videos.
Now that we have this information, it can inform areas where teacher educators can take a more proactive role to reduce the identified barriers to incorporating technology. For example, perhaps professors can begin by incorporating a wider variety of technology into their classes. We could assist each other in this effort through sharing ideas for how to include different apps and websites into our courses and how to increase students' use of them with assignments. This would not only benefit our students but also in-service teachers. When our pre-service teachers go into school districts to observe, they may feel more confident in modeling technology for their mentor teachers. Doing so will expose the mentor teachers to ideas for integrating technology into their own classrooms. Continued efforts in this area are one avenue for increasing technology use within K-12 classrooms.
Limitations
The focus of this study was on students attending one university in the southern area of the United States. Pre-service teachers from other universities may have different experiences, thus yielding different perspectives than our population. In addition, this study was limited to secondary pre-service teachers. Those studying elementary or middle school education may have different experiences and perspectives.
Recommendations for Pre-Service Education Preparation Programs
Preparing pre-service teachers for 21st-century learners is a priority for teacher education preparation programs. The following are recommendations to increase pre-service teachers' knowledge of technology.
1. Embed technology throughout all education courses. Research has proven that pre-service teachers benefit from technology integration in multiple classes rather than in a stand-alone technology course (Wetzel et al., 2014). In addition, by using this approach, students have opportunities to gain technological skills in content areas, classroom management, assessment, and communication. Table 4 provides user-friendly applications that can be utilized in the higher education classroom and the K-12 classroom.
2. Provide opportunities for pre-service teachers to utilize technology. One method that has been successful for our students is to provide an opportunity for them to research technology applications and share with their classmates how to use them in the classroom with their classmates. In addition, pre-service teachers can incorporate technology in their lesson plans. By providing opportunities for pre-service teachers to utilize technology, not only does it increase their technology skills, it also increases their self-efficacy, better preparing them for the classroom.
3. Create a needs assessment for your pre-service teachers. With the expansion of new technologies, it is imperative to assess the needs of pre-service teachers in the area of technology throughout the program of study to both minimize gaps in learning and for making curriculum decisions.
4. Hold brown bag luncheons and seminars for your pre-service teachers and teacher educators. Brown bag luncheons and seminars are inexpensive options to focus on specific topics. Invite an expert in the technology field, specifically in teacher education, to educate and demonstrate for teachers and pre-service teachers how to effectively use technology in the classroom as well as share the latest technology applications.
References
Albion, P. R. (2001). Some factors in the development of self-efficacy beliefs for computer use among teacher education students. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 9(3), 321-347.
Alger, C., & Kopcha, T. (2009). eSupervision: A technology framework for the 21st century field experience in teacher education. Issues in Teacher Education, 18(2), 31-46.
Anderson, S.E., Groulx, J.G., & Maninger, R.E. (2011). Relationships among preservice teachers' technology-related abilities, beliefs, and intentions to use technology in their future classrooms. J. Educational Computing Research, 45(3), 321-38.
Anderson, S. E., & Maninger, R. M. (2007). Preservice teachers' abilities, beliefs, and intentions regarding technology integration. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 37(2), 151-72.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bielefledt, T. (2001). Information technology in teacher education: A closer look. Technology in Teacher Education, 17(4), 4-15.
Brzeski, T. A. (2015, August 17). Advances in technology pave the path to actual learning: Using blogging as a learning tool. Teachers College Record. Retrieved from http://www.tcrecord.org.
Chisholm, I. & Wetzel, K. (2001). Technology and multiculturalism in the classroom. Journal of Research and Computing in Education, 33(5), 1-33.
Davis, F., (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance of informational technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-40.
Eren, E., Avci, Z., & Kapucu, M. (2015). Pre-service teachers' competencies and perceptions of necessity about practical tools for content development. International Journal of Instruction, 8(1), 91-104.
Gunuc, S. & Kuzu, A. (2015). Student engagement scale: Development, reliability and validity. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 40(4), 587-610.
Hammonds, L., Matherson, L., Wilson, E., & Wright, V. (2013). Gateway tools: Five tools to allow teachers to overcome barriers to technology integration. The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 80(1), 36-40.
Herold, B. (2016). In pursuit of active tech use. Education Week, 35(35), 16-23.
Holden, H., & Rada, R. (2011). Understanding the influence of perceived usability and technology self-efficacy on teachers' technology acceptance. JRTE, 43(4), 343-67.
Hsu, P. (2016). Examining current beliefs and barriers about technology integration: A case study. TechTrends, 60(1), 30-40.
Izadpanah, S., & Alvari, M. (2016). Student-engaged viewpoint on technology in learning English in Zanjan public schools. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(4), 854-61.
Kaufman, K. (2014). Information Communication Technology: Challenges and some prospects from pre-service education to the classroom. Mid-Atlantic Education Review, 2(1), 1-11.
Keengwe, J., Onchwari, G., & Wachira, P., (2008). Computer technology integration and student learning: Barriers and Promise. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(6), 560-65.
Koehler, M., Mishra, P., & Cain, W. (2013). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Journal of Education, 193(13-19).
Lee, K., Smith, S., & Bos, B. (2014). Pre-service teachers' technological pedagogical knowledge: A continuum of views on effective technology integration. International Journal of E-Learning and Distance Learning, 29(2), 1-18.
Liu, S. (2011). A multivariate model of factors influencing technology use by preservice teachers during practice teaching. Educational Technology and Society, 15(4), 137-49.
Livingstone, S. (2012). Critical reflections on the benefits of ICT in education. Oxford Review of Education, 38(1), 9-24.
Rashid, T., & Asghar, H. (2016). Technology use, self-directed learning, student engagement, and academic performance: Examining the interrelations. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 604-12.
Rogers, P. L. (2002). Designing instruction for technology-enhanced learning. PA: IGI Global.
Sue, V. M., & Ritter, L. A. (2007). Conducting online surveys. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.
Sutton, S. (2011). The pre-service technology training experiences of novice teachers. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 28(1), 39-47.
Tozkoparan, S. & Kilic, M. (2015). The effect of instructional technology and material design course to teacher candidates' gaining of technological pedagogical content knowledge competencies. Participatory Educational Research, 2(1), 44-56.
U.S. Department of Education (2015). Future ready learning: Reimagining the role of technology in education. Washington, D.C. Author.
U.S. Department of Education (2016). Advancing educational technology in teacher preparation: Policy brief. Washington, D.C. Author.
Wetzel, K., Buss, R., Foulger, T. & Lindsey, L. (2014). Infusing educational technology in teaching methods courses: Success and Dilemmas. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 30(3), 89-103.
Yeou, M. (2016). An investigation of students' acceptance of Moodle in a blended learning setting using Technology Acceptance Model. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 44(3), 300-18.
Zehr, M. (1997). Teaching the teachers. Education Week, 17(11), 24-30.
Jaime Coyne is an assistant professor of education in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction at Sam Houston State University in Huntsville, Texas. She earned her PhD in curriculum and instruction from Texas A&M University. Dr. Coyne's research interests include teacher preparation, literacy, pre-teachers' self-efficacy, and curriculum development. Dr. Coyne is also the coordinator for the Post-Baccalaureate Program. She may be reached via e-mail at [email protected].
Mae Lane is an assistant professor of education in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction at Sam Houston State University in Huntsville, Texas. She earned her EdD in literacy from Sam Houston State University. Dr. Lane's research interests include adolescent literacy, literacy coaching, and secondary teacher preparation. She has published in national and state journals and presented at several international, national, and state conferences. Additionally, she has worked with secondary teachers and schools in matters of literacy coach evaluation, adolescent literacy, and secondary teacher preparation in the state of Texas. She may be reached via e-mail at [email protected].
Lautrice Nickson is an associate professor of education in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction at Sam Houston State University in Huntsville, Texas. She earned her PhD in educational leadership from Prairie View A&M University. Dr. Nickson's research interests include teacher candidate preparation and curriculum issues. She has presented at international, state, and local conferences and published several articles concerning these topics. She may be reached via e-mail at [email protected].
Tori Hollas is an assistant professor of education in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction at Sam Houston State University in Huntsville, Texas. She earned her PhD in curriculum and instruction from Texas A&M University. Dr. Hollas' research interests include teacher preparation and mathematics education. Dr. Hollas is also the coordinator for the Middle Grades Education Program at SHSU. She may be reached via e-mail at [email protected].
