Report on Monterey Visit Regarding Defense Language Institute (DLI) and the MAE with Emphasis in Instructional Technology

December 6th and 7th, 2007 Carla Piper, Rick Berger, Care Terkelson MAE with Emphasis in Instructional Technology Background Information History of the Program The original program was designed by the School of Education around 1999-2000. I was part of the original committee who met to collaborate on course content and review original syllabi for EDUC551, 552, 553, 554. Centers who wanted to offer the program locally were required to submit a detailed proposal including a rationale for the program, numbers and names of prospective students, and resumes of qualified faculty. The only center to submit a program proposal was Moreno Valley. No other campus has submitted a program proposal. The feasibility of having a large enough student cohort and qualified instructors made it impossible for most centers to offer such a specialized program. With the advent of distance learning, I felt we could move the program to the eCollege platform and offer it system-wide. In 2002, I submitted a program proposal for an online MAE in Tech with all four courses offered through eCollege. I presented resumes for prospective instructors with terminal degrees and revised all the syllabi in collaboration with several prospective instructors. The program was approved for online instruction. In 2003, the program was revised upon the recommendation of the chair of the education division, Dr. Mike Stuckhardt. He suggested that because the new SB2042 credential program placed EDUU551 as a prerequisite, it should no longer be considered a graduate level course. I recommended that students take their local onsite EDUU604, the MAT Action Research Course, as their final course. However, it was felt that the MAE in Tech program should have its own capstone. EDUU565, Action Research in Educational Technology, was added as the 4th course in the program. Any technology-focused program must be constantly updated to reflect the rapidly changing technologies that are being currently utilized in educational settings. As the associate division chair of the educational technology program and as a full-time faculty instructor, I have continued to update EDUU451/551 and EDUU552 on a regular basis. However, EDUU563 and EDUU564 have not been re-written since the beginning of the program. At this point, both courses need to be revised to reflect the changes in educational technology. I have communicated my concerns over the future of the MAE in Tech program to the Dr. Rodriguez, the education chair. In my last three annual student learning outcomes assessment reports, I have included some of the critical comments students have made in the student learning outcomes surveys.

Problems with Current Program Student Interest in College Instructional Technology I received feedback from some students regarding the fact that they were interested in the masters degree program in instructional technology, but they planned to work at the college level rather than in K-12 school districts. One of our earliest students was a Chapman program manager who planned to use her masters degree for advancement in our university. I began thinking about ways to make the program more meaningful for educators in more diverse settings. I knew that the courses needed revisions because the focus was outdated, even for K-12 teachers. I also felt that the program could meet the needs of teachers who were interested in using instructional technology in university classroom settings. Since the available instructional technologies, including online course delivery systems, had expanded tremendously, and student interest was focused on new tools and strategies for using technology in a greater variety of classroom settings, I began to re-think the program syllabi. EDUU563 I had planned to re-write EDUU563 before the next online offering in Spring Session II, 2008. The course had been written by another instructor, a previous core faculty member in Moreno Valley. He had originally been willing to serve as a course custodian. However, at this point, he is longer core faculty and does not want to teach online. The content of the course was originally focused on K-12 California curriculum planning from the California Learning Resource Network (CLRN) and the California Technology Planning Guide for K-12 school districts. At this point, the CLRN material is used more appropriately in the level one/two technology courses for K-12 teachers - EDUU551/552. The California Technology Planning Guide is no longer published by the state. At this point, all school districts have already filed technology plans with the state. This course needs a complete overhaul with a focus on new technology tools and strategies for curriculum and instruction. This provides an opportunity to update this course for students who want to teach, advise, or facilitate technology use at institutions of higher learning. EDUU564 and 565 When the MAE with an emphasis in Instructional Technology was first approved, the courses included EDUC551, 552, 553, and 554. The capstone project in EDUC554 was a literature review on digital equity and an electronic web portfolio. However, with the SB2042 credential using EDUU451/551 as a prerequisite course, it was decided that EDUU551 should no longer be a part of an MAE program, but a prerequisite requirement. The distance education department asked another core faculty member from Santa Maria to design a new capstone EDUU565 Action Research in Educational Technology. I had written EDUU564 with the idea that it was the final capstone and we did not have a chance to re-write EDUU564 to prepare the students to use their literature review as a preparation for their action research project. The instructor and I made some adjustments and encouraged students to focus their literature review on a topic they would use for action research. In addition, the textbook used in that course was published in 2002. At this point, the textbook is outdated. I need to make some revisions

to that course and use a new text. An additional problem exists in that the instructor/course custodian for EDUU565 no longer teaches for Chapman. EDUU563, 564, and 565 need to be revised and updated to facilitate the process of conducting action research within the educational setting. Efforts need to be made to coordinate these three courses to better prepare students for action research. EDUU563 should provide opportunities to examine more current technological tools and strategies that are applicable not only for K-12 students, but also for students preparing to teach at the university level. I propose that the EDUU563 needs substantive changes and may require re-approval by the CAC. EDUU564 needs to be revised to prepare students for their action research project. However, I do not believe those changes for 564 are substantive. We need to update the textbook, change the expectations of the literature review to reflect the need for action research, and expand the course expectations for teaching in more diverse educational settings. Instructor Problems Originally, the program was designed based on the assumption Chapman would have a qualified instructor with a doctorate and expertise in educational technology serve as course custodian for each class. My idea was that these instructors would constantly update their courses in eCollege in order to meet the needs of students who are working in the rapidly changing field of technology. Emerging technologies require instructors who follow the latest developments in technology but also teach in educational environments where new tools and strategies are being used to promote learning. I had a qualified course custodian assigned to each class, but at this point, none of the four original instructors are teaching in the Chapman online department. As each course is copied for a new term, the hope is that the instructor make sure web resource links are current, technology tools and strategies are timely, and make revisions and additions where needed. When we added EDUU565, I determined that the same instructor could teach EDUU564 and 565 to better facilitate students in the action research process. Students should not have to have the same instructor for more than two classes in the program. Since the course custodian for EDUU565 no longer teaches for Chapman, I will need to serve as course custodian for all of the technology courses. Hopefully, we can find a group of instructors who are willing to take over the course custodian role and work collaboratively on building a more cohesive program for our students. Scheduling Problems Another issue that has been discussed by a number of faculty, program managers, and students is that the MAE in Tech courses need to be offered more than once a year. I have received a number of emails stating that students need to completed these three courses locally as R & C because they can not finish their degrees in a timely fashion. I have also heard from students who changed to C & I because they could finish that MAE emphasis faster. I feel that these classes should be able to run as LC1s in order to accommodate students in the program. The challenge is to find qualified instructors who are willing to teach LC1s.

New Prospective Students from DLI Interest in the program has been slow to develop, partially due to lack of focus on educational technology at the national level with No Child Left Behind and the lack of job opportunities in school districts. Online enrollments have been growing but it has been difficult to justify offering the technology classes more than once a year. A number of students interested in the MAE in Tech decide to enroll in the Curriculum & Instruction masters because they can finish the program quicker and use their credential units for their emphasis, leaving only six core MAE classes. On the other hand, if the courses were offered more frequently, program managers and faculty would find the MAE in Tech easier to promote. The possibility of bringing more students into the program gives new hope to the future of the program. However, some challenges exist. I have been communicating with both Rick Berger and Care Terkelson at Monterey regarding the possible influx of students from DLI. I knew that Rick had strong connections with DLI and had been actively and successfully recruiting students into both the MAE in C & I and Instructional Technology. Rick sent me several extensive emails with updates on the numbers of students and the expectations these students had for the Instructional Technology program as they served as college language teachers at DLI. Reasons for Monterey Chapman/DLI Visit In Fall Session I, 2007, I had my first DLI student in EDUU451/551 online. It was immediately clear to me that some assignments in the course were unclear and possibly inappropriate for this DLI student. The course was designed for K-12 public school teachers who were entering the credential program and required to meet the California level one/two technology standards. Both EDUU551 and 552 are focused on integrating technology into teaching and meeting state content subject matter content standards by grade level (K-12). I began my facilitation by sending this student an attachment with the national foreign language standards and the California foreign language frameworks. With those standards to work from, he was able to complete assignments with a focus on meeting curriculum standards. With many emails, phone conversations, and assignment critiques, this student successfully completed the course with an A. I realized at that point that I needed more hands-on information on the needs of these DLI students. The time I had spent communicating with my first DLI student caused concern. I had already received emails from Rick regarding the large number of students interested in entering the program. I talked to Care about the revisions she was making with EDUU510 and the problems with student writing. We all decided it was time to take a trip to Monterey and evaluate the situation realistically. Rick set up meetings with the DLI students, a DLI administrator, and the educational technology instructors from Monterey. Rick gave me a tour of the DLI campus and I met with both Rick and Care about ways to meet student needs without compromising the program for K-12 educators. Primary Questions for the Monterey Visit 1. Is the MAE with an Emphasis in Instructional Technology a good match for these students?

2. What are the academic needs and technology expectations of the DLI students? What do the DLI students expect to learn in our program? 3. How can we adapt and accommodate the DLI students in our courses and still continue to meet the needs of the K-12 teachers and school district technology leaders? 4. What does the course content in DLI consist of? What are their curriculum standards and frameworks? 5. What technology software and hardware do DLI teachers currently use and how? 6. How much flexibility to DLI instructors have in their teaching and instructional design? 7. Will DLI students be able to effectively complete an action research project in their own classroom settings? How can this process be facilitated? 8. Will DLI students be able to effectively write their action research project in English? What kinds of support will they need? 9. What are Chapmans current limitations to this process? 10. What changes can realistically be made that would help this program succeed, both at the local campus level and with the online delivery through eCollege? 11. Should Monterey Chapman complete a program proposal to provide the entire MAE with an Emphasis in Instructional Technology degree coursework locally with cohorts of students? If so, does Monterey Chapman have a sufficient number of educational technology instructors with appropriate terminal degrees? Timeline of Meeting in Monterey: December 6-7, 2007 Thursday, December 6: Meeting with Rick Berger and Carla Piper o Rick provided information on the following: Background on DLI DLI student numbers and DLI registration/tuition policies DLI Chapman MAE program interests and student numbers (See Ricks email copy at the end of the report). o Curriculum and Instruction more students choosing C & I o Instructional Technology DLI student needs, goals, purposes for pursuing MAE in Tech Chapman Technology Accommodations o Limitations of the computer lab 13 computers o Requires two sections of each course to accommodate numbers of students o Lab classroom setup not conducive for discussion, collaboration, and community all computers face the wall. o Lack some of the hardware/software that DLI students need and use in their own instructional settings Online Issues o Scheduling Limitations Currently EDUU563, 564, and 565 are only offered once a year.

o Many students opt for the Curriculum and Instruction MAE since they will finish the program earlier. o Students state a general preference for face-to-face instruction and interaction with teachers o Some students fear the online courses, but some need online classes due to international travel and attendance issues. Shared two prospective faculty resumes o Both had doctorates in education o Both had degrees in educational technology o Both had extensive experience with online teaching and learning o Both had expressed interest in teaching for Monterey locally and teaching online. Further Discussion o Current syllabi emphasize K-12 vs. College Teaching o Discussed use of the National Foreign Language Standards and California Foreign Language Frameworks for curriculum focus.

Meeting with Care Terkelson and Carla Piper Discussed current education program requirements, strengths, and limitations for DLI students. Expressed concerns with lack of skill in academic writing in English. o DLI students need detailed, specific clarification and guidance on assignment and course expectations. o DLI students will require additional tutoring and mentoring in the action research process, as well as in the MAE core coursework Brainstormed ways of adapting and accommodating DLI students in the MAE core classes, as well as in the C & I coursework aimed at K-12 education. How do we provide alternatives to the California K-12 curriculum content standards and CCTC teacher expectations - not always appropriate for DLI educational purposes? How do we maintain rigor and integrity in the program and provide support for DLI student success? How can we make changes in the MAE in Tech and still meet K-12 educational technology leadership goals? What impact does the presence of DLI students in our K-12 education courses have on our instructors and credential students?

Meeting with Chapman Monterey Technology Instructors Four instructors attended along with Rick, Care, and Carla o Two are current 551/552 instructors: David Slavin and Tony Caldwell Both have masters degrees and extensive experience in K-12 education Both have worked with the DLI students successfully

Instructors shared their approaches to how they have been meeting the needs of DLI students. Both were very enthusiastic and positive about their ability to successfully adapt and accommodate DLI student needs. o Two are prospective instructors with doctorates: Bettye Saxon, Ed.D. & Ann Igoe, Ph.D. Both highly qualified and experienced in online learning Both expressed enthusiasm and strong interest in teaching for Chapman either onsite or online. Both are familiar with the needs of K-12 educators, as well as DLI. Discussed the need to teach EDUU551 and EDUU552 onsite o Can provide scaffolding with focus on meeting curriculum standards that are appropriate for DLI students o Need to provide a foundation for using online delivery tools through Blackboard that can easily translate to eCollege for the final three MAE in Tech courses o Determined that the course objectives of EDUU551 and 552 can easily be met with the DLI language curriculum. o Rick provided information on how he is scheduling these courses on two different nights and registering students in appropriate cohorts one for K-12 and one for DLI. o Brainstormed other ways to make current assignments more meaningful for DLI students. Curriculum Standards o National Foreign Language Standards o California Foreign Language Frameworks Currently plan to have students take EDUU563, 564, and 565 online Monterey may need to complete a proposal for an onsite MAE with an emphasis in instructional technology program. o Current online schedule is insufficient with courses offered only once a year. Many students are opting for the C & I emphasis since it is quicker to complete. o Many students prefer face-to-face instruction o May be beneficial to run program locally Need greater control over scheduling cohorts of students. Have two local qualified instructors with doctorates. o Will need additional personnel - program manager and/or senior lecturer in educational technology to help manage the program and advise students.

Meeting with MAE in Tech Students Met with 6 students, Rick, and Care. After introductions all around, gathered information on student expectations and concerns about the MAE in Tech program Questions asked:

o What are your goals for entering this program? What are your general goals for the future? Teaching in this country or returning to your own country? Higher education? o What activities are currently a part of your classroom instruction at DLI? o Explain your curriculum? Standards? Competencies? Objectives? o How much emphasis do you put on historical/cultural aspects of language? o What technologies do you presently use in your classrooms with DLI students? o How do you see technology enhancing your teaching and student learning? o What types of projects do you hope to create with technology? o How much flexibility do you have in your teaching and instructional design? What technology interventions, tools, or strategies do you feel you might add to your teaching? o How are you using: Websites and online resources? Smartboards? Powerpoint and presentation programs? Ipods, podcasts, and audio production? Blackboard and online course delivery systems? Digital video? Student expressed concerns o Online classes most prefer onsite, face-to-face interaction with instructor o Academic writing in English no writing center at Chapman o Chapman technology to match DLI technology expectations Limited lab size and equipment Want training in: Smartboards Ipods and podcasts Ulead video production Table PC and Microsoft OneNote Collaboration and shared sessions Powerpoint Need to design courses in Blackboard Interactive classroom assessment Personal Response Systems (PRS) Blackboard clickers Students reported on curriculum, technology tools, and instructional strategies currently used in DLI classes o Curriculum Competencies Listening Reading Speaking Transcription o Brainstorming techniques with students o Access authentic material/primary sources on the web o Use Smartboards and multimedia presentations

o Use Personal Response Systems (PRS) for assessment o Include historical/cultural research and activities. o Focus on cultural classroom/community activities and opportunities to use language in authentic settings Each student explained his/her own unique classroom setting and job description within DLI. I was impressed with their dedication to learning and their obvious desire to be creative and improve their teaching practice. They are very anxious to be effective teachers and they clearly want to be on the cutting edge of technology. Students stated that they felt their experience with EDUU551 was highly successful and very valuable for their learning. Most took the course locally, but one took the course online with me and expressed his appreciation for my help along the way. Two students are currently taking 552 online. One likes the online format and feels successful. The second student feels he is not engaged in the online class as much as he would be in a face-to-face class. One student is taking EDUU600 online and expressed concern that he is not doing well. As a TA in the class, I was able to look at his gradebook and he appears to be making it through the class just fine. Students expressed their appreciation for being able to participate in this discussion and have their voices heard in this collaborative process. Students expressed great enthusiasm for Chapman University and were particularly pleased with Ricks efforts in working with them individually through the application, advising, and registration process. They appeared to be generally pleased with their coursework to date, although some are just beginning the program in Spring Session I.

Debriefing with Care and Carla o Talked over challenges of meeting student needs o Summarized recommendations that needed to be made to make the MAE in both C & I and Instructional Technology useful for the DLI students. o Reviewed adjustments to EDUU510 and the content, text, and instructional changes for the DLI cohort 510 class. o Discussed the current EDUU551 local class successes with DLI students. o Talked about whether Monterey should propose to hold the full program onsite. o Decided that, at this point, holding EDUU551 and 552 locally in cohorts should provide students with sufficient scaffolding so that they can succeed in the last 3 courses in eCollege. o Discussed the feasibility of conducting action research. After the discussion with DLI students, I feel they can successfully design and carry out their action research within their DLI instructional site. o Determined that the redesign of EDUU563 should meet the following goals: o Examine and learn new technologies that can be successfully implemented with the DLI classroom setting

Blogs, podcasts, wikis, digital video, webcasts, PRS devices, Blackboard, html web design Online asynchronous and synchronous communication and collaboration tools o Prepare students in the process of instructional design o Discussed the student writing concerns and the possibility of offering an undergraduate English course that could act as a writing tutorial. Discussed the problems financial issues because the course would not be a requirement for the MAE program and DLI might not pay for it. Friday, December 7th - Meeting with Rick Berger and Carla Piper Meeting at DLI: Rick, Carla, and Tracy Gates DLI Faculty Development Specialist Tracy Gates of DLI o Shared more information about DLI o 4000 Students learning ? languages o Students earning AA degrees o Discussed the various instructor roles in different departments o Discussed the academic needs of the students