Abstract

The Faculty of Education at the University of Prince Edward Island has recently made a commitment to explore and implement Web/resource-based learning in course offerings, where pedagogically appropriate. This decision has a number of wide-reaching implications which, as a group of instructors, we continue to explore. The focus of this paper is on how instructors have explored Web-based learning environments, conceptualized changes to programs and courses, and engaged in the learning process themselves.

The Faculty of Education at UPEI offers a post-degree Bachelor of Education program, as well as a thesis-based Master of Education program. The first program tends to attract recent graduates of Arts or Science programs, while the second is oriented toward teachers in the field who wish to further their education. We have found that the former group is arriving at our doors with many more technology skills than students of previous years. These students have strong expectations that information technology will be an integral part of their education as pre-service teachers. The teachers enrolled in the Master’s program are already working within a school system which has a strong commitment to information technology. These teachers have shown a growing expectation that information technology, and particularly Web-based learning, will be essential in their own learning.

Educational use of information technology on Prince Edward Island itself is in the throes of change, as new information technology documents and information literacy documents are being written which support the integration of technologies into the teaching and learning contexts of Island schools. School Web pages are proliferating daily; province-wide telecommunication projects have been implemented in a number of schools. Every school in the province is connected to the Internet, and also connected to each other via the Department of Education network. The use of technology in teaching is supported by the PEI Department of Education from grade 1 through grade 12.

This is the context within which the instructors at the Faculty of Education work, as they prepare pre-service and in-service teachers to utilize Web-based learning and other technologies in their teaching. The Faculty of Education mounted a pilot project to explore the use of a Web-based learning environment in education courses. The learning environment chosen for this initiative was WebCT. Even though there was faculty agreement in principle to the inclusion of Web-based learning where appropriate, there were many issues to be dealt with as we moved through the project. These included infrastructure issues (Who is the site administrator for WebCT courses? Who pays the licensing fee?); pedagogical issues ( What is an appropriate use of Web-based learning in education courses which are offered face-to-face?); human resource issues (How do individual professors learn to use and integrate the Web-based environment into their teaching?).

The focus of this paper is on sharing the answers that were developed to these issues. It explores the support mechanisms in place during this project, and shares strategies and insights that were gained about teaching and learning in Web/resource-based learning environments. This paper addresses the issues of instructors discerning how to implement Web-based learning in their teaching, without compromising their pedagogical principles.

Introduction

The Faculty of Education at the University of Prince Edward Island (UPEI) recently made a commitment to explore and implement Web-based learning in courses, where it is deemed to be pedagogically appropriate. This decision proved to present a number of issues that as a Faculty had to be resolved. In the interest of facilitating faculty members’ adoption of Web-based learning components in their courses, a research grant was applied for and received from the Webster Foundation Fund for Innovation at UPEI. This grant allowed a course release for one faculty member, as well as the short term hiring of a technology facilitator to support this effort. The intent was to expedite the implementation of Web-based components within education courses through the coordinated efforts of faculty members, the technology facilitator, and the project leader. The focus of this paper is on how instructors have explored Web-based learning environments, conceptualized changes to programs and courses, and engaged in the learning process themselves.

The Context

The Faculty of Education at UPEI offers a post-degree Bachelor of Education program, as well as a thesis-based Master of Education program. The first program tends to attract recent graduates of Arts or Science programs, while the second is oriented toward teachers in the field who wish to fur the r their education. We have found that the former group is arriving at our doors with many more technology skills than students of previous years. These students have strong expectations that information technology will be an integral part of their education as pre-service teachers. The teachers enrolled in the Master’s program are already working within a school system which has a strong commitment to information technology. Similarly, these teachers have shown a growing expectation that information technology, and particularly Web-based learning, will be an integral part of their graduate education.

The use of information technology in classrooms on Prince Edward Island is evolving. New information technology and information literacy documents have been recently developed by the PEI Department of Education. These have supported the integration of technologies into the teaching and learning contexts of Island schools. School Web pages are proliferating daily; province-wide telecommunication projects have been implemented in a number of schools. Every school in the province is connected to the Internet, and also connected to each other via the Department of Education network. The use of technology in teaching is supported by the PEI Department of Education from grade 1 through grade 12.

This is the context within which the instructors at the Faculty of Education work, as they prepare pre-service and in-service teachers to utilize Web-based learning and other technologies in their teaching. The Faculty of Education mounted a pilot project to explore the use of a Web-based learning environment in education courses. The learning environment chosen for this initiative was WebCT, which had been proposed by instructors at the Information Technology Education Center (ITEC) as the Web-based learning environment of choice at UPEI.

Even though there was faculty agreement in principle to the inclusion of Web-based learning within courses where appropriate, there were many issues to be dealt with as we moved through this project. These included infrastructure issues (Who is the site administrator for WebCT courses? Who pays the licensing fee?); pedagogical issues (What is an appropriate use of Web-based learning in education courses which are offered face-to-face?); human resource issues(How do individual professors learn to use and integrate the Web-based environment into their teaching?). Underlying all these issues was one major the me: the resolve of the Faculty of Education to engage with the issues of technological and pedagogical change.

Rationale

Michael Fullan (1999) suggests that there are a number of lessons to be learned in dealing with change. One lesson he proposes is that conflict and diversity are our friends (p. 22). When we explored the attitudes of the faculty toward utilizing Web-based resources in their teaching, we encountered a range of opinions. We did not encounter consensus. However, we did find that faculty who had supported the IT Strategic Plan earlier in the academic year were willing to entertain the idea of including Web-based resources in their courses. There were a number of faculty who voiced critical questions, and who did not accept the statements of workshop leaders at face value. We found these dissenting voices very important–they required us to rethink, restructure–to explicate the rationale for involving faculty in this venture into Web-based learning. We learned to value the diversity of beliefs about the role of Web-based learning in our pedagogical practice.

We also found that it was difficult to maintain an overall perspective on what was happening throughout the project to professors, courses, research assistant and administration. There were too many unknowns, for us to be able to chart the entire course out in advance. We found that we had to accept a certain degree of uncertainty, and begin to develop the ability to "operate on the edge of chaos" (p. 24). Fullan advises, "Do not try to micromanage change through lots of rules, rigid structures, and for mal channels of communication. Rather, setup a system of people-based learning, framed by a few key priorities and structures" (p. 24). We conceptualized the changes we were undergoing as fitting within this framework of (1) key priorities, (2) structures, and (3) people-based learning.

Key Priorities

The key priorities in our case were the goals to which faculty had agreed in our strategic Information Technology (IT) plan. These included a commitment to:

• integrate Information Technology into teaching, learning, research and outreach services.
• collaborate with internal and external partners on Information Technology initiatives.
• continue developing our own Information Technology expertise in order to provide leadership in this area.
• increase accessibility of our various program offerings by making use of information technology
• create and nurture an environment for continuing research on integrated uses of information technology .

Structures

The Faculty of Education had an IT committee in place which initially sponsored the adoption of the IT strategic plan. The committee was composed of four early adopters of technology, who were already utilizing the Web in their teaching. One instructor had already taught Web-based courses for diploma students, a second had developed a Web-based Master’s level course. The third member of the committee had taught advanced technology, including HTML coding, to pre-service teachers. The fourth committee member taught the core technology course for all students in the B. Ed. program. These early adopters did provide a model for other faculty members of how education courses might in fact, be offered using WebCT.

The first step in the development of faculty expertise was the provision of a number of workshops. Several were provided by ITEC to introduce interested WebCT to interested university and college faculty. Other workshops were provided for instructors in the Faculty of Education to familiarize our faculty with the new IT facilities in the building: the University had given a grant to the Faculty of Education for the development of a "smart classroom" as a faculty and university resource. The new hardware and software were demonstrated–professors had an opportunity to experiment with these tools in an informal workshop atmosphere. For example, one exercise was an online jigsaw activity, during which different instructors read one of several journal articles about Web-based learning, posted their comments about the article on the WebCT bulletin board, and then responded to each others’ messages–thus using the Web-based tool for authentic learning and dialogue. These articles read by the instructors, as well as some basic instructions on the use of the digital camera, the scanner, and other tools, were provided in hard copy in a binder for each participant in the workshops. This strategy ensured that each instructor had his or her own paper "tutorial" whenever needed.

At the Faculty of Education, we conceptualized a range of possibilities for the use of WebCT in our classes. We found that our conceptualization fit the typology developed by Eastmond (1998)quite well, although his typology was based on online instruction in distance courses and all of the courses in our Faculty to this point are face-to-face. Eastmond’s Type I course is a traditional class supplemented with Internet activities–which foster "experiential and activity learning (p. 35). Some of the Web-based activities which define a Type I course would be email exchanges with other students and with the instructor, online library research , electronic journals, and Web sites (p. 34). These activity components are included in many of the courses developed at the Faculty using WebCT: students have learned to access the online electronic journals through Ebscohost, to use the Bobcat online library search, to explore Web site hot lists and Web quests placed within the course structures.

Some instructors are actively pursuing the use of computer conferencing as an integral component of their courses. If and when conferencing becomes the main method for delivering these courses, we are edging toward delivery of a Type II course. A Type II course requires that the Web become the main vehicle of course delivery and student-instructor interactivity. In practice, we would see much more student interactivity via the Web through active participation in computer conferencing. The commitment has been made by faculty through our IT action plan to develop one Web-based elective per year at both the Master’s and the diploma level. The WebCT project is our first iteration of Web-based learning for our education students.

People-based Learning

Within the context of the Web-based learning project, we believed that the most effective way to facilitate change was by providing learning opportunities for our faculty. These opportunities occurred in the workshops, in the modeling of actual Web-based learning within courses, and in mentor relationships.

In our faculty, one instructor offered a Master’s course as a face-to-face class, but his entire course was available through WebCT. This situation supported the change process in a number of ways:

• Professors had an opportunity to see a course in action, and explore some of the options that they might utilize in their own courses.
• They heard the enthusiastic responses of our Master’s students, who were teachers and adult educators working on Prince Edward Island.
• There was a gentle push-pull effect for faculty. The Master’s students were so enthusiastic about WebCT and how it might be used, that there was pressure on other faculty members offering Master’s courses to implement Web-based components in their teaching.

Another powerful change strategy was the development of a strategy to provide just-in-time training to faculty (Driscoll, M. , 1998; MacArthur, Pilato, Kercher, Peterson, Malouf, &Jamison, 1995; Mincemoyer & Thomson, 1998; Padjen, 1997; Perna, Lerner, &Yura, 1995; Rogan, 1997). The hiring of a research assistant/technology facilitator was an integral part of the plan to implement Web-based resources in Faculty of Education courses. The facilitator we hired to work with the faculty was a recent graduate of our teacher education program who planned to work as an educational software developer. He was personally committed to developing expertise in assisting others to develop Web-based course resources. We conceptualized the facilitation component of the WebCT project as a team effort. The team was composed of the technology facilitator, the team leader, and individual professors: the actual composition of the team shifted as work on various courses was completed and new professors joined the team for work on their course(s).

The technology facilitator developed expertise in the vagaries of WebCT and was able to share this new knowledge with individual professors just-in-time, when they needed the information. As individual professors made requests for modifications in the way WebCT features were organized, our facilitator experimented with the Web environment, to see if we could arrange the structures to reflect the constructivist, holistic pedagogy/andragogy espoused by our faculty. We were able to make some modifications, but other solutions eluded us. for example, we wanted to allow students to submit online assignments, but many of these had to be organized under the heading "quiz" even though that was not what we intended. When students submitted an essay online, professors could make comments on various portions, but not within the body of the student’s writing. These were several challenges posed by professors who utilized WebCT in their courses.

As the project continued, the technology facilitator demonstrated to the members of our faculty how to choose WebCT tools for their courses, how to input a new list of students in the course for a new term, how to upload their own course materials to the WebCT server. Written directions were provided for these new skills as well as an opportunity for guided practice. Throughout the nine month project, the four early adopters of the WebCT became skilled at WebCT course development. This allowed the faculty to continue to have supportive instructors with more refined skills in the development of Web-based course components even after the project was completed, and our technology facilitator was no longer available to the faculty.

Insights into Teaching and Learning

Support by the administration of the faculty and university was critical for the success of this project. This support was visibly demonstrated by the provision of a financial grant from the Webster Foundation to expedite the process, and by the strong encouragement of the Faculty of Education administration throughout the development and implementation phases of the project.

The provision of a course release for a faculty member to engage in planning, team meetings, and research into the process was a essential component of this project. This faculty member facilitated the continuation of the change process within the faculty, ensured a collective understanding of the progress of the project, and provided leadership as the project evolved.

The hiring of a technology facilitator was necessary for the successful development of the project. The facilitator focused on the dissemination of information about the Web-based learning environment, development of Web-based learning course components for individual professors, and the solution of technical problems. It was critical for the facilitator to develop supportive relationships with the faculty as they began to implement changes in more traditional course delivery.

Faculty commitment to the project was necessary for any change whatsoever to occur, for instructors develop and deliver their courses in the manner they believe most appropriate. Faculty members were willing to consider and undertake the inclusion of Web-based components in their courses, because of their commitment to the use of appropriate educational strategies for their students.

The framework utilized in this project: key priorities, structures, and people-based learning: afforded an appropriate means of conceptualizing change within the Faculty of Education. This framework provided one means of facilitating and describing the process of change throughout the life of the nine month project and beyond.

Summary

In the Faculty of Education, University of Prince Edward Island, a commitment was made to integrate Web-based learning into courses where this mode of learning and communication would be appropriate. Utilizing the Web environment of WebCT, the faculty pursued this goal vigorously. Many of the infrastructure issues alluded to earlier such as naming the site administrator, and deciding how the site licence would be negotiated were resolved over time, with coordination among ITEC, the Faculty of Education, and the University. The human resource and the pedagogical issues involved in a transition from strictly traditional face-to-face teaching, to the inclusion of Web-based learning in our courses were a challenge. Addressing change by focusing on our key priorities, on the structures of the change, and on the people-based learning involved in the change, provided a comprehensive model for development and implementation of Web-based learning in education courses.

References

Fullan, M. (1999). Change forces: The sequel. Philadelphia, PA: Falmer Press.

MacArthur, C. A. , Pilato, V. , Hercher, M. , Peterson, D. , Malouf, D. & Jamison, P. (1995). Mentoring: An approach to technology education for teachers. Journal of research on Computing in Education, 28 (1), 46-63.

Mincemoyer, C. C. & Thomson, J. S. (1998). Establishing effective mentoring relationships for individual and organizational success. Extension Journal 36 (2). Available online at http://www. joe. org/joe/1998april/a2. html.

Padjen, E. (1997). Training employees for keeps. Architecture, 86, (9), 146-149.

Perna, F. M. , Lerner, B. M. & Yura, M. T. (1995). Mentoring and career development among university faculty. Journal of Education, 177 (2), 31-45.

Rogan, J. M. (1997). Online mentoring: Reflections and suggestions. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 13 (3), 5-13.

Author Information

Martha Gabriel is a professor at the Faculty of Education, University of Prince Edward Island. She teaches courses in the area of technology in the classroom and in communications, and is conducting her doctorate research in the area of computer conferencing.. She has recently overseen the development of a Smart Classroom facility in the Faculty of Education, which was essential for the practical adoption of technology integration strategies. She has also been the lead researcher/facilitator for the WebCT project described in this paper.

© Copyright 1999. The author, Martha Gabriel, assigns to the University of New Brunswick and other educational and non-profit institutions a non-exclusive license to use this document for personal use and in courses of instruction provided that the article is used in full and this copyright statement is reproduced. The author also grants a non-exclusive license to the University of New Brunswick to publish this document in full on the World Wide Web and on CD-ROM and in printed form with the conference papers, and for the document to be published on mirrors on the World Wide Web. Any other usage is prohibited without the express permission of the author.