This article presents a planning framework for instructors to reflect upon in their decision making and implementation process of technology use. Detailed components include consideration of factors relating to: (a) context, (b) student, (c) instructor, (d) technology, (e) access, (f) knowledge and content, and (g) the important skill and craft of connecting theory to practice. Developing innovative use of technologies may assist in meeting the demand for highly qualified teachers in the area of low-incidence disabilities. Teacher educators must utilize a deliberative, thoughtful process before engaging in the actual development of online courses and this article offers a strategy that will help promote this process.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Association for Employment in Education. (2003). Educator supply and demand in the United States: 2003 Research report.Columbus, OH: Author.
Bausch,M.E., & Hasselbring,T. S. (2004). Assistive technology: Are the necessary skills and knowledge being developed at the preservice and inservice levels?Teacher Education and Special Education, 27(2), 97-104.
5.
Billingsley,B.S. (2002). SPeNSE summary sheet.Beginning special educators: Characteristics, qualifications, and experiences. Retrieved May 20, 2007 from http://ferdig.coe.ufl.edu/spense/
6.
Boe,E, Bobbitt,S., Cook,L., Barkanic,G., & Maislin,G. (1999). Teacher turnover in eight cognate areas: National trends and predictors. (Report No 1998-DAR 3). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Graduate School of Education, Center for Research and Evaluation in Social Policy.
7.
Chester,A. & Gwynne,G. (1998). Online teaching: encouraging collaboration through anonymity.Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 4(2). Retrieved May 20, 2007 from www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol4/issue2/chester.html.
8.
Clark,R.E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media.Review of Educational Research, 53, 445-459.
9.
Collins,B.C. (1997). Training rural educators in Kentucky: A model with follow-up data.Rural Special Education Quarterly, 20(3), 234-248.
10.
Connelly,V.J. (2003, November). An analysis of alternatively prepared teachers using the school and staffing survey. Paper presented at the meeting of the Teacher Education Division, Biloxi, MS.
11.
Darling-Hammond,L. (2000). Solving the dilemmas of teacher supply, demand, and standards: How can we ensure a competent, caring, and qualified teacher for every child.New York: National Commission on Teaching and America's Future.
12.
Darling-Hammond,L., & Sclan,E. (1996). Who teaches and why. In SikulaJ., ButteryT.J., & GuytonE. (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Teacher Education (2nd ed., pp. 67-101). New York: Macmillan.
13.
Diaz,D.P. (2000). Comparison of student characteristics, and evaluation of student success, in an online health education course. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Nova Southeastern University, Fort Lauderdale, FL.
14.
Fink,L.D. (2003). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
15.
Harris,T.R., Bransford,J. D., & Brophy,S. P. (2002). Roles for learning sciences and learning technologies in biomedical engineering education: A review of recent advances.Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering, 4, 29-48.
16.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 2004, 20 U.S.C. §1400 et seq.
17.
Jackson,V.L. (2003) Technology and special education: Bridging the most recent digital divide. Auburn University, Georgia. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED479685))
18.
Johnson,L. (2004). Research-based online course development for special education teacher preparation.Teacher Education and Special Education, 27(3), 207-223.
19.
Jung,L.A., Galyon-Keramidas,C., Collin,B., & Ludlow,B. (2006). Distance education strategies to support practica in rural settings.Rural Special Education Quarterly, 25(2), 18-24.
20.
Knowles,M.S., Holton,E., Swanson,R. A. (1998). The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development.Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing Co.
Leflore,D. (2000). Theory supported design guidelines for web-based instruction, (102-117). In AbbeyB. (Ed.), Instructional and cognitive impacts of web-based education.Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
23.
Ludlow,B.L., Conner,D., & Schechter,J. (2005). Low incidence disabilities and personnel preparation for rural areas: Current status and future trends.Rural Special Education Quarterly, 24(3), 15-24.
24.
Ludlow,B.L., & Duff,M. C. (2002). Live broadcasting online: Interactive training for rural special educators.Rural Special Education Quarterly, 21(4), 26-30.
25.
McLesky,J., Tyler,N. C., & Flippin,S. (2004). The supply of and demand for special education teachers: A review of research regarding the chronic shortage of special education teachers.The Journal of Special Education, 38(1), 5-21.
26.
Meyen,E.L., Aust,R., Gauch,J. M., Hinton,S. H., Isaacson,R. E., Smith,S. J., et al. (2002). e-Learning: A programmatic research construct for the future.Journal of Special Education Technology, 17(3), 37-46.
27.
Meyen,E.L., Lian,C. H. T., & Tangen,P. (1997). Developing online instruction: One model.Focus on Autism and other Developmental Disabilities, 12(3), 159-165.
28.
Miller,S.M., & Miller,K. L. (2000). Theoretical and practical considerations in the design of web-based instruction (156-177). In AbbeyB. (Ed.), Instructional and cognitive impacts of web-based education.Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
29.
Murphy,P.J., & Angelski,K. (1996/1997). Rural teacher mobility: A report from British Columbia.Rural Educator, 18(2), 5-11.
30.
Murray,F. B. (Ed.), (1996). The teacher educator's handbook: Building a knowledge base for the preparation of teachers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
National Center for Academic Transformation. (2003). Program in course redesign. Retrieved May 11, 2007 from http://www.center.rpi.edu/PCR.htm
33.
National Education Association. (2000). Confronting the future of distance learning—Placing quality in reach. Retrieved May 20, 2007 from http://www.nea.org/nr/nr000614.html
34.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002).
35.
Piaget,J. (1969). The Mechanisms of Perception.London: Rutledge & Kegan Paul.
36.
Reeves,T.C., & Reeves,P. M. (1997). Effective dimensions of interactive learning on the World Wide Web. In KhanB. H. (Ed.), Web-based instruction. (pp.59-66). Englewood Cliff, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
37.
Rosenberg,M.S., Boyer,K. L., Sindelar,P. T., & Misra,S. K. (2007). Alternative route programs for certification in special education: Program infrastructure, instructional delivery, and participant characteristics.Exceptional Children, 73(2), 224-241.
38.
Rosenberg,M.S., & Sindelar,P. T. (2001). The proliferation of alternative routes to certification in special education: A critical review of the literature.Arlington, VA: Council for Exceptional Children, National Clearinghouse for Professions in Special Education.
39.
Rude,H., Jackson,L., Correa,S., Luckner,J., Muir,S., & Ferrell,K. (2005). Perceived needs of students with low-incidence disabilities in rural areas.Rural Special Education Quarterly, 24(3), 3-14.
40.
Rule,S., Salzberg,C., Higbee,T., Menlove,R., & Smith,J., (2006). Technology-mediated consultation to assist rural students: A case study.Rural Special Education Quarterly, 25(2), 3-7.
41.
Russell,T. (2001). The no significant difference phenomenon.Raleigh: North Carolina State University.
42.
Schlosser,C.A., & Anderson,M. L. (1994). Distance education: review of the literature. Ames Research Institute for Studies in Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED382159).
43.
Sebastian,J., & McDonnell,J. (1995). Rural students' with low incidence disabilities: Recommended practices for the future.Rural Special Education Quarterly, 14(2), 31-36.
44.
Skylar,A.A., Higgins,K., Boone,R., Jones,P., Pierce,T., & Gelfer,J. (2005). Distance education: An exploration of alternative methods and types of instructional media in teacher education.Journal of Special Education Technology, 20, 25-33.
45.
Smeaton,A.F., & Keogh,G. (1999). An analysis of the use of virtual delivery of undergraduate lectures.Computers & Education, 32, 83-94.
46.
Smith,S. (2001). The positive and challenging aspects of learning online and in traditional face-to-face classrooms: A student perspective.Journal of Special Education Technology, 16(1), 52-59.
47.
Spooner,F. (1996). Personnel preparation: Where have we been and where we may be going in severe disabilities.Teacher Education and Special Education, 19(3), 213-215.
48.
Spooner,F., Agran,M., Spooner,M., & Kiefer-O'Donnell,R. (2000). Preparing personnel with expertise in severe disabilities in the electronic age: Innovative programs and technologies.Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 25(2), 92-103.
49.
Spooner,F., Jordan,L., Algozzine,B., & Spooner,M. (1999). Student ratings of instruction in distance learning and on-campus classes.Journal of Educational Research, 92, 132-141.
50.
Todis,B. (1996). Assistive technology in educational settings.Journal of Special Education Technology, 13(2), 49-61.
51.
Todis,B., & Walker,H. M. (1993). User perspectives on assistive technology in educational settings.Focus on Exceptional Children, 26(3), 1-16.
52.
Van Dusen,G. C. (2000). Digital dilemma: Issues of access, cost, and quality in media enhanced distance education.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
53.
Walker,S., & Fraser,B. J. (2005). Development and validation of an instrument for assessing distance education learning environments in higher education: The distance education learning environments survey (DELES).Learning Environments Research, 8, 289-308.
54.
Wilson,S.M., & Floden,R. E. (2003). Creating effective teachers: Concise answers for hard questions. An addendum to the report, “Teacher preparation research: Current knowledge, gaps and recommendations.”Washington, DC: AACTE Publications. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED476366)
55.
Zeichner,K.M., & Schulte,A. K. (2001). What we know and don't know from peer reviewed research about alternative certification programs.Teacher Education, 52, 266-282.
