In 1998, as the Internet was bursting into the mainstream of instruction, I asked the question of how we might use technology to support and potentially augment the new teacher mentoring process.  Through a small grant from the Oracle foundation, I began working with a group of teacher mentors near Belmont, CA. They were provided with laptop computers, dial-up Internet access, and email accounts along with a variety of technology tools,  Our goal was to support these local BTSA partners in their work of mentoring and guiding new teachers. 

We explored the use of web-cams for virtual observations and conferencing, built an online community using the FirstClass product,  constructed a website of resources and links for new teachers, and set up email communication.   As the project evolved, we discovered two desires that the new teachers repeatedly expressed:  1) opportunity to observe other teachers teaching and 2) ability to observe their mentor teach their own students and then co-reflect on this instruction.

The findings from this project challenged my basic notions about the content, context, and delivery of both new teacher and mentor training and I began to envision where and how technology could be used to reach more teachers in need without sacrificing quality.   Ertmer (1999) suggests that a strong vision for how technology can be used to augment the new teacher support programs is the first step in overcoming barriers to technology use.  Modeling, reflection, collaboration and envisioning are required for second order, intrinsic change to occur. 

In 2001, I received a Preparing Tomorrow’s Teachers to Use Technology grant from the U.S. Department of Education to develop subject-matter content and pedagogy materials to support under-prepared teachers in the classroom.   At that time, California had approximately 54,000 teachers-of-record who were either uncredentialed or were teaching out of field.  A survey of the “pre-intern” and intern programs supporting them revealed that there was a dearth of support available for math and science teachers.   I embarked upon the development of 9 video cases:  6 in science that have a secondary focus on English Learner strategies; 3 in Math with a secondary focus on special needs student strategies.

The result of this work can be found at http://teachinginterchange.org/vcs.html

Pertinent to our upcoming discussion on Mulimedia Representations of Teaching, there were many critical decisions I had to make while designing these video cases.  The primary dilemma presented in each of them was how did each teacher address the learning needs of their student population while teaching math and science content to middle and high school students. A major barrier we also had to address was the fact that most members of the intended audience would not have the luxury of a mentor/support provider/advisor to guide them. Without a mentor, who would help them to deconstruct the teaching practices or point out key pedagogical issues and choices?  It is well-known among teacher educators, that new teachers and teacher candidates often are unable to find key “teaching moments” during classroom observations; they cannot deconstruct the classroom activities and interactions without support.

This led to decisions about:

•Presentation of Key Perspectives

•Ancillary Materials

•Video Characteristics

•Case Discussion Facilitation

•Tools for Online Discussion

Ancillary Materials: What Should be Included? (Perry 2000, Talley 2001)

•Relevant contextual information

•Text transcripts

•Professional literature

•Questions for reflection

•Lesson Plans

•Web Links

•Goals & Outcomes

•Student Work Examples

•Online Portfolios

•Storyline/Scenario

•State and national standards

Key Perspectives: Who is it important to include?

•Teacher

•,Students

•Experts/scholars

•Parents

•Analysis/Interpretation

•Administrators

Video Characteristics

•Student/Teacher interaction and dialog

•Authentic footage – continuous, chunked or edited?

•Problem/dilemmas

•Complexity

•Multiple teacher behaviors including ineffective practice

•Models of exemplary teaching

•Prompts / stopping points for reflection

•Student behavior and misconduct

This left us with many decisions:

•Authentic footage or edited footage

•Show problems and dilemmas or exemplary practice

•Shoot the video with best possible sound and lighting or through the lens of the classroom observer; i.e. “guerilla” style

•What is the sequence of presenting the “case”

•How does one deconstruct the teaching practice yet retain the integrity of the “observation:

•How do we present the material in a way that allows professionals to feel that they are not back in the University classroom?

•How do you check for understanding and potential transfer to the learner’s own teaching practice?

I look forward to our meeting and hearing how others have dealt with these dilemmas of video case production.

References:

Ertmer, P. (1999). Addressing first- and second-order barriers to change:  Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47-61.

PERRY, G. (2000). Video case studies and teacher education: a new tool for preservice education? Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Pepperdine University, Los Angeles.

PERRY, G. and TALLEY, S. (2001). Online video case studies and teacher education: A new tool for preservice education. Journal of computing in teacher education, 17(4).