Training Teachers to Integrate Technology into the Classroom Curriculum: Online versus Face-to-Face Course Delivery

Affordances of online (OL) and face-to-face (F2F) teacher technology training environments provide different learning experiences for teachers, which have an impact on both the critical outcomes of the technology training and the teachers' abilities to transfer their learning and integrate technology into their classrooms. Instruction must be situated in an authentic context that resembles that of the classroom teacher to enrich their learning process by providing realistic experiences that more easily transfer. This study compared the critical outcomes of a teacher technology training course taught through OL and F2F delivery modes. The results of this study provide insight into the use of affordances inherent in both OL learning environments and traditional F2F to create effective teacher technology training programs. ********** THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK In response to the challenge for preparing teachers to integrate technology into the curriculum, campus technology teams, colleges, and universities are focusing on inservice teacher technology training programs. Typically teachers have been required to attend courses at training facilities or college campuses to receive face-to-face (F2F) technology instruction. Off school campus course delivery creates three problems: (a) it can separate the experiences with technology applications from teachers' classroom settings thus hindering transfer, (b) it disrupts teachers' demanding schedules, and (c) It requires travel to colleges or excludes those who live at a distance from colleges (Sharp, 2002). Field basing instruction in the schools is addressing these problems. Distance delivery of instruction that incorporates field-based experiences offers alternatives for inservice teacher training that addresses the last two problems. Therefore, many colleges and universities use web-based instruction (WBI) to reach teachers who need technology training. WBI brings courses to individuals and groups of teachers who might not otherwise have access to them (Flowers, 2001; Khan, 1997; Reeves & Reeves, 1997; Relan & Gillani, 1997; Zirkle, 2003). The effectiveness of training received in a classroom setting versus training delivered through distance learning is under constant debate. Educators have concerns regarding the capacity of WBI to adequately provide authentic and interactive experiences that support learning (Johnson, Aragon, Shaik, & Palma-Rivas, 2000; Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2003). As with all media, the contexts of online (OL) or face-to-face (F2F) learning environments constrain the experiences of teachers by filtering reality. OL and F2F learning environments are "complex entities with multiple sets of affordances that are predicated on the perceptions of users and the context in which they are used" (Jonassen, Cambell, & Davidson, 1994, p. 38). Transfer occurs when similar relationships and experiences in the learning environment hold across situations and the environment where learning is to be applied (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989; Greeno & Middle School Mathematics through Applications Project Group, 1998; Halpern & Hakel, 2003; Jonassen, Campbell, & Davidson, 1994). The affordances of OL and F2F environments provide for different learning experiences, which impact the outcomes of instruction (Jonassen et al., 1994; Sullivan & Czigler, 2002). When teacher technology training is delivered OL, the learner is removed, virtually if not physically from the school classroom context. Virtual interaction can take place by synchronous (two-way, real time, interactive technologies) such as audio teleconferencing, audio graphics conferencing, chats, and videoconferencing making it possible to link geographically separate learners and instructors for real time interaction. In addition, asynchronous computer conferencing allows learners and instructors to participate in course discussions on individualized time schedules. …