Technology Integration Article

Carey, R., Kleiman, G., Russell, M., Venable, J.D., Louie, J. ( 2008). Online courses for
math teachers: Comparing self-paced and facilitated cohort approaches. The
Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 7(3). Retrieved September 3,
2009 from the ERIC database.

The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of online professional development (OPD) on teacher content knowledge, beliefs, and practices. It is speculated that there would be a greater impact on the Facilitated Cohort Group as opposed to the Self-paced group in these areas.
The participants of this study were middle school teachers who taught at least one Algebra course. Of the 91 participants, 52 finished the program. One reason for the high drop out rate was due to family health situations and time constraints. The other reason was the level of math content. Those that were comfortable with the advanced content level stayed in the program, where as those who were challenged by the concepts felt the need to not continue.
This 10 week study examined the effects of a course taught two ways. Both ways required the participants to read the same material, complete the same assignments, and assign the same activities to their classroom. The two courses had the same two facilitators teaching one section of each to insure the validity. The only difference is that in the Facilitated Cohort group the significance to work collaboratively with the other group members and to interact with the teacher was emphasized. The participants, as a group, completed one session per week with daily open discussions and were required to post comments and questions two times a week. The Self-Paced group was given 10 weeks to complete all assignments at a pace that was comfortable to them. They did not interact with one another or with the teacher.
Data was collected using six different instruments. First, participants filled out a closed-response background survey on teaching experiences and use of technology. The second instrument was a closed-ended survey on the pedagogical beliefs. The third instrument was a math assessment covering the mathematical concepts covered in the study. The assessment was administered during the first and last weeks. The fourth instrument was a log that the participants filled out containing the number of times they implemented a strategy from the study into their classroom. The fifth instrument was a student survey that asked the students to record the frequency of specific learning strategies and activities that went on in the classroom. The last instrument was a course evaluation that listed the positive and negative aspects of the study as well as rating the course work as to its relevance to their classroom routine.
A t-test was conducted and proved that OPD did have an impact on teacher content knowledge, beliefs, and practices. However there was no significant difference between the Facilitated Cohort group and the Self-Paced group. Several reasons were given to explain why the outcome did not support the hypothesis. First, the study put too much emphasis on one course that was taught by one grade level. Next time, it is suggested that they include other subject areas. Second, the drop out rate was very high; they did not have a good representative sample to conduct the experiment. Third, the length of the study was too long. Fourth, the materials were too organized and thorough. This was an advantage for the Self-Paced group. They did not need to have online discussions to understand the strategies. The strategies were fully explained in the provided materials. Finally, all participants were volunteers; therefore, they were intrinsically motivated and interested in finding new ways to teach their curriculum.
Future studies might yield a different outcome if the above reasons were taken into consideration. Although the study did not have the results that it was looking for, it does show that OPD is successful.