Professional Development Article Review
Lisa Weaver
University of West Georgia
Issues in Instructional Technology – MEDT 8463
Dr. Leslie Moller
June 26, 2011
Professional
Development Article Review
Sugar, W. (2005, October) Instructional technologist
as a coach: Impact of a situated professional development program on teachers'
technology use. Journal of Technology and
Teacher Education 13 (4), 547 – 571. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com
Technology is an
integral part of today’s society. It is
utilized in both professional and personal life. With technology around every turn, why is
education not keeping pace with the world?
Are the students not ready? Absolutely they are. Students today were born into the technology
age. Are the teachers not ready or are
they not sure of how to implement it? In
his article, Sugar (2005) discusses one possible way to assist teachers “who do
not feel confident in using computers and other technology tools in their
instruction” (p. 549). Technology
coaches are used to aid teachers in the use of technology in their
classrooms. Sugar investigated the
impact these coaches have on technology use. He also looked at the way the
professional development was presented.
Most professional development situations are presenters speaking and
teachers listening. In this study a more
hands-on, collaborative approach was taken.
Sugar began his research
in 2000 with one technology coach and five high school teachers. After six weeks he increased his study to a
total of five schools; nine teachers with access to one technology coach. The teachers were selected after completing a
preassessment survey.
Sugar chose teachers based on three factors: content area, experience with specific
technologies, and gender (Sugar, 2005, p. 551).
The technology coach facilitated professional learning meetings on a
weekly basis with the participating teachers.
The coach would answer questions from the teachers and help them with
activities they could use in the classroom.
The professional development was personalized to each teacher’s goals
and what they wanted to get out of the experience. The study lasted for four months with a
follow-up seven months later.
The teachers that
participated reported back with very positive results. Sugar (2005) notes, “All of the respondents
believed the technology coach program should continue and be implemented in the
future” (p. 555). The teachers had
become more comfortable and knowledgeable of the technology available to
them. The teachers also reported back
that the delivery of the information was more successful. Sugar writes, “Compared to a typical inservice
technology workshop, this program obviously made impact on teachers’ perceptions
of this technology coach program.” (p. 556).
Sugar concludes that “Individualistic inservice technology training and
situated professional development for teachers are essential factors for
successful technology integration.” (p. 567).
Sugar set out to find a
way to help teachers integrate technology in their classrooms through the use
of a technology coach. Through the
personalization of instruction and hands-on activities, Sugar was able to
accomplish his objective. He found that
teachers in today’s technology driven world are hesitant to use the tools due
to lack of training. With the use of a
technology coach, teachers are able to build their confidence as well as their
skill level. It would be interesting to
know if the delivery method used by the technology coach truly made a
difference in the outcome of the study.
In this study, the coach personalized the instruction for each teacher
he worked with rather than using the holistic delivery method. Meaning he did
not set an agenda of his own and make all teachers do the same thing. Would the teachers of a holistic delivery
feel the same way as the teachers in this study, or does this delivery method
of individualizing professional development need to be implemented in teacher
education more often?