Program Survival Can Depend on Partnerships: Technology Education in Nova Scotia, 2(14)
Gregg MacKinnon
Guest editors from Nipissing University
for partnership theme articles:
Douglas R.
Franks
Mary Ross Hookey
Helen G.
Langford
Abstract
As a result of the government closure of the Nova Scotia Teachers College in July of 1997, the province of Nova Scotia was without a Technology Education teacher-preparation program. After considerable deliberation over a period of two years, the government awarded the right to offer a new program to Acadia University in the spring of 1998. The proposal, which as finally accepted, demonstrates a unique partnership between Acadia University and Horton District High School. Practical aspects of technology education will be taught on-site at the newly constructed technology-rich high school with the balance of the program to be offered at Acadia University, home of the recent laptop initiative coined the "Acadia Advantage." The partnership represents the culmination of several years of leadership challenges spanning the university, public school and government settings.
Introduction
Impetus for Change
Reviews of Teacher Education
Teacher education in Nova Scotia has been profoundly restructured as a result of the following studies published in 1994: the Shapiro report, "Teacher Education in Nova Scotia: An Honourable Past, An Alternative Future" (January 1994); the Nova Scotia Council on Higher Education (NSCHE) report, "Reshaping Teacher Education in Nova Scotia" (March 1994); and the draft report of the Nova Scotia Department of Education Teacher Certification Review Committee, "Teacher Certification in Nova Scotia" (March 199 4).Initial Responses
In June 1994, the Council of Nova Scotia University Presidents (CONSUP) created the Academic Transition Committee (ATC) and charged it with the task of reviewing recommendations for restructuring teacher education within Nova Scotia. Having accepted and amended the ATC report, CONSUP presented to the funding body, NSCHE, its "Report on Academic Transition for Teacher Education." The constructive intent of this report was the promotion of a "high quality comprehensive and accountable teacher education system in the province." This pivotal document, which contained 42 recommendations, advanced two central directives: first, that there be a limited number of teacher education programs, structured as a system, with each having individual provincial responsibility for leadership in selected study areas; and second, that a common core-curriculum be implemented with designated requirements such as a minimum of 16 weeks of supervised practicum.The direct and lasting impact of these deliberations was the closure of several teacher education programs in the province: the Nova Scotia Teachers College (NSTC), and schools of education at Dalhousie University, and St. Mary's University. NSCHE mandated a two-year post-degree standardized teacher-education program for all surviving institutions. An ill-considered consequence of NSTC's closure was the loss of Nova Scotia's only Technology Education Teacher Education program. Though the NSCHE indicated that Acadia University, a surviving School of Education, might develop a Technology Education program, the chair of NSCHE rescinded this stance (October, 1995) favouring instead a reconsideration of the models best suited to the delivery of technology education to teachers.
Searching for Direction
After nearly a year had passed with no direction from the Department of Education, an independent group of stakeholders, The Maritime Provinces Technology Teacher Training Group (MPTTTG), met for a series of meetings beginning September 1996. This committee was struck by concerned NSTC technology education faculty and included representatives from Acadia University, University College of Cape Breton, University of New Brunswick, University of Moncton, and the Nova Scotia Agricultural College. The Department of Education was invited to participate in these meetings thereby prompting the government formally to act on the unfinished task of delivering technology education for teachers.These preliminary meetings culminated in the formation of a government-initiated committee of stakeholders, the Working Group on Technology Education, chaired by Dr. D. Kaufman. This committee included NSTC, UCCB and Acadia representation (from the MPTTTG) as well as Saint Francis Xavier and Mount Saint Vincent University representatives. The president of the provincial Technology Education Teachers Association rounded out the working group. After discussions on a variety of models, in May, 1997, the working group produced a final report containing ten recommendations. A partnership between Acadia University and University College of Cape Breton (UCCB) was advanced on the assumption that such a collaboration could be undertaken with modest cost. Similar cooperative ventures have been explored with some success at UBC (partnered with British Columbia Institute of Technology) and the University of Manitoba (partnered with Red River Community College). The Kaufman Report, appended with a budget from the individual partners, was recommended to the NSCHE for approval.The NSCHE rejected the proposal as they deemed the cost to be more than modest. They thereby opened the process to alternate proposals. Acadia University submitted a cost-efficient proposal to the NSCHE, one which built upon the strengths of the Kaufman Report and an earlier proposal tabled during the Working Group deliberations. This new co-operative proposal was accepted by the NSCHE in May 1998; its detailed description follows.
A Fresh Direction
A Community Partnership
Based on the Kaufman Report and extensive observation (by the author) of working models in both Canada and the United States, a unique partnership model (see table 1) for offering teacher education in Technology Education was created. In the fall of 1998, a new technology-enriched high school will be completed in Greenwich, Nova Scotia. This school replaces an older school (to be closed) in the district that goes by the same name Horton District High School. This new facility is being built close to Acadia University via a consortia partnership. The timing of this new school construction has dovetailed nicely with the current technology initiatives presently taking place at Acadia University.Acadia recently embarked on an IBM-sponsored laptop project. All students entering bachelor programs at Acadia are leased an IBM ThinkPad computer which they use within a completely "wired" campus. Innovative strategies have been developed (Hemming & MacKinnon, 1998; Symons, 1997) to incorporate the use of the technology in pedagogically sound ways.
Since the onset of the so-called "Acadia Advantage" (September, 1997) the experiences gained by faculty have positioned Acadia to give technological and pedagogical guidance to the Horton District High School (HDHS) faculty. This has been accomplished via an on-going professional development program offered by the Acadia Continuing Education Department.
The nature of the collaboration has gone beyond instructional technology experiences. Early in the school-design process, a committee comprised of faculty members from HDHS and Acadia School of Education decided that the new school would: 1) promote educational research, and 2) facilitate the offering of a teacher education program in Technology Education.
Research potential has been built into the planning of specific rooms in the school. An observation room adjacent to a classroom allows for student and teacher monitoring through one-way glass. This provides an opportunity for faculty and students of Acadia to study principles and practises of classroom instruction. The school administration has pledged support for rotating instructors through this classroom so that a variety of subjects and modes of instruction can be observed. Because HDHS is well-equipped with instructional technologies it is an ideal setting to study the impacts of technology on education. Acadia University has a vested interest in this regard considering their recent laptop initiative.
Within the technology education department teacher education students
will have access to dedicated and shared space. This space can be utilized
for lesson preparation as well as individual design and prototype exercises.
These students will have access to all of the instructional technologies
as they provide technical and pedagogical support to their cooperating
teachers.
Table 1. A Multi-faceted Co-operative Model
| Shared responsibility in: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Technology Education at Horton District High School: Human and Physical Resources
As the administration of the high school came to consider faculty teaching-load requirements at the new high school, it became obvious that additional teachers would be required. Technology Education (TE) was one such area of consideration. The partnership model proposed by Acadia was reliant not only on usage of the new facilities (an authentic learning setting for B.Ed. students) at HDHS but also on the concept of employing an adjunct faculty member with significant school-based experience. Just as Acadia School of Education was involved in HDHS design recommendations, by invitation a faculty member (the author) participated in the hiring of the technology educator for HDHS. This was done in anticipation of promoting a partnership model in which a faculty member would teach half time in each capacity as a high school teacher and as TE professor.Another feature the partnership considered carefully was the equipment required to co-offer both the public school TE courses and the teacher-education program. Again, a joint committee was struck and the program breadth considered. In the aftermath of the NSCHE decision to move forward with the Acadia-Horton proposal the opportunity arose to access the equipment from the previous Nova Scotia Teachers College program in TE. This equipment, in addition to that purchased for the new school, will provide a well-equipped setting for offering both the high school and B.Ed. programs (see Table 1).
Curriculum Partnerships
The curriculum development for the TE program is in progress. It is built upon successful instructional design models (Heath, 1997) incorporating principles of constructivism and situated learning (Posner, Strike, Hewson & Gertzog, 1982; Fosnot, 1989; Brooks & Brooks, 1993; Carr, Jonassen, Litzinger & Marra, 1998) that value students' multidimensional capacities (Sternberg, 1989; Gardner, 1993; Armstrong, 1994). Input from the Nova Scotia Technology Education Association and the local technology education teachers was both requested and received. While recommendations for curriculum and practicum structure, as well as suggestions for industrial placement experiences, were the primary focus for these meetings, a new role for Acadia to serve the teacher community also emerged. This role is one of disseminating to the schools and their faculties a progressive model of technology education, a decided paradigm shift away from industrial arts or vocational training models.The Kaufman Report provided an analysis of the many models of TE in the public school system. From this study and a series of site visits, it became evident that there has been a significant paradigm shift (Raizen, Sellwood, Todd & Vickers, 1995) from industrial arts, or vocational training, to a more broad-based technology approach (ITEA, 1996) which incorporates as key concepts, design as a problem solving activity, and impacts of technology on society and individuals (Yager, 1993). This change in emphasis better serves all students who, in adulthood, will move into a technology-rich society. To better prepare students, this new paradigm must be communicated to the practising teachers through visionary leadership provided by quality teacher-education programs.
The curriculum under development for the TE speciality of the B.Ed. program is in parallel with the Public School Program of Nova Scotia. In general, TE in the public schools is divided into three component technology strands: 1) energy, power, and transportation, 2) communications, and 3) production. Few university programs offer students at the bachelor's level a broad base in technology content. Acadia will, therefore, offer a summer program in these content areas of technology. The TE applicant's content-strengths and experience will be individually assessed when accepting students for the new program. Initially it is anticipated that engineering and science students will offer the best match for our program-- but this will change. NSCHE has strongly encouraged a partnership between the University College of Cape Breton (UCCB) and Acadia University. UCCB has technology program offerings at the bachelor's level. These could be readily adapted to offer a new broad-based technology degree. The result could be candidates ideally suited for entry into a career as TE teachers. Though this was not the preferred mode of partnering initially recommended by the Kaufman Report, it nonetheless recognizes the government's desire to promote a fiscally responsible program that draws on the strengths of academic resources accessible within Nova Scotia.
Benefits and Challenges Accompanying Partnerships
Financial Considerations
In light of the increasing impact that technology is having on education, this is clearly an exciting and challenging educational venture. The time frame that accompanied the closure of the NSTC program and the subsequent Acadia offering described here, makes it evident that change does not come without significant effort. In times of government fiscal restraint partnerships are not only increasingly valuable, they are increasingly necessary. The new HDHS facility benefits financially from the rental of classroom space and the additional equipment to be used simultaneously in teacher education and public school education. Acadia University benefits by having a location to offer a new program as well as the space to house necessary equipment.Research Potential
HDHS offers a living laboratory for research on the impacts of technology on education. In addition, teacher interns will have an opportunity to become involved in an on-going classroom setting with significant expertise on-site. The students of HDHS will benefit from additional classroom supervision and instruction by teacher interns. Having espoused the benefits of this particular relationship with HDHS it is worth noting that Acadia University School of Education has endeavoured to maintain special relationships with all schools in the district. Research potential remains an exciting prospect at HDHS recognizing that individual research projects rely heavily on dedicated individual partners in the university and public school setting.Partnership Development
The greatest dilemma that accompanied the moulding of this particular partnership occurred at the onset of discussions. The lack of leadership by the government in addressing the growing concern over technology education initially prevented interest groups from acting on the problem. Only after the Maritime Provinces Technology Teacher Training Group had met did the government recognize that technology education in Nova Scotia was in jeopardy and that there was a considerable national need (Press, 1997) for technology education teachers. The public school board and university administration immediately saw value in an on-going partnership between technology-rich sites, one in which collaboration could occur at multiple levels spanning finance and research. The HDHS building consortia saw this partnership as a means of maximizing facilty use and putting money back into the project; they were particularly receptive to the venture.Program Design
Program design provided a challenge in that the predominant model for technology education teacher training in North America was an integrated program of 4-5 years in length. Because the Shapiro Report designated two year after degree programs in Nova Scotia, Acadia was faced with attracting the most "technology literate" bachelor degree students and designing for them a personalized intensive broad-base technology experience. This has meant considerable integration of technologies related to communications, energy, power, and transportation as well as production. The success of this needs assessment approach remains to be evaluated. This is, however, a significant trend in higher education. What do students need and how can we build authentic programs based on the principles of situated learning?Human Resources
Choosing an appropriate adjunct faculty presents a difficult task. Universities and public schools work on different timetables and their administrations have varied expectations of faculty. It goes without saying that their organizational agendas are very different. An adjunct faculty member must be able to co-ordinate their time and responsibilities. They must provide leadership and direction not only at individual sites but also in the realm of nurturing the cooperative venture.An interesting technicality that requires careful consideration is the nature of the faculty position held at two sites. Acadia, by invitation, participated on the hiring committee for the technology education teacher at HDHS. The committee was particularly concerned that the successful candidate could fulfil the needs of both institutions in light of a possible partnership on the horizon. To this end an experienced teacher educator and former public school teacher was hired to fill the position. The complication that still requires consideration is the remuneration model for this person. In the event that a candidate does not possess Ph.D., the likelihood of taking on a tenure track position at a university is low. This may necessitate a model where the adjunct instructor is paid by the school board which is then reimbursed by the university. Alternatively, the adjunct instructor may be considered as a term appointment. Is there flexibility in respective institutional unions to create unique guidelines and new positional identities for such adjunct instructors? These details highlight the complexity of a joint appointment.
Project Leadership
The author has held the primary responsibility in terms of designing the proposal, undertaking the political ground work to ensure partner satisfaction and maintaining a progressive pedagogical framework (ITEA, 1996) deemed crucial to success. While the author has some expertise in curriculum development in the technology education, this responsibility, in the focussed sense, has been taken on by the adjunct faculty member. The leadership challenge has been multidimensional.An early hurdle was to consider provincial resources. How could members of Acadia design a TE program that capitalized on their own expertise in teacher education while recognizing that the equipment infrastructure and space to house it was neither in place nor financially accessible? This led to the question of a "suitable "partner to provide such an infrastructure.
There is inherent difficulty in discussing the greater goals of a university from a faculty rather than an administrative perspective. The author found it particularly challenging to exercise any latitude in the discussions without pursuing input from university administration at each significant juncture. Though largely unavoidable, this additional bureaucratic layer clearly has precluded facile negotiation and ultimate agreement.
In the Acadia-HDHS proposal the task of addressing all concerns at the public school site was a complex one. The school board and principal had to be approached re: the concept of an adjunct faculty, the school usage for teacher preparation, and the temporary storage of transferred TE inventory from NSTC to the old HDHS school site. In conjunction with transfer of TE inventory from NSTC to Acadia-HDHS, the author coordinated delivery of equipment through the government Department of Transport. The sorting, selection and discarding of obsolete equipment was undertaken by the author and adjunct faculty. This immense task was an organizational challenge. The building consortia required consultation re: remuneration for Acadia usage of the facility. The accepted proposal had an attached budget that was prepared by the author and has been administered in the areas such as curriculum development, program advertisement, equipment transport, teacher collaboration and industrial practicum placement.
The breadth of responsibility has required a certain leadership mode
that Maxcy (1991) referred to as "initiating structure."
The new program has not been led or forwarded by a committee but rather
by a single person (the author). This has meant structuring a feasible,
logical approach from the conception of the partnership project through
to the delivery of the program. While much of the leadership has been transactional
(Northouse, 1997) the inherent enormity of the project
has necessitated a measure of transformational effort. As the vision of
a new technology education for all children is promoted the leadership
base will broaden significantly.
Implications for Other Settings
Value Added Shared Resources
To spawn a successful partnership the university or college community must recognize the value of local schools for research and shared facility. The schools must, in turn, tap into the physical and academic resources available on university and college campuses. This can be both humbling and intimidating for parties concerned but it is nonetheless necessary. Broadening the academic and physical resource base saves money thus ensuring government support of visionary programs.Mutual Understanding
Each partner must understand what the other gains or is looking for in the collaborative effort. From a broader perspective such partnerships enlighten stakeholders as to the greater educational goals of respective institutions. In systems such as the one described above, this understanding allows the public schools to better prepare students for post secondary institutions. Conversely, this open line of communication ensures that institutions of higher education are cognisant of the social and academic qualities of incoming students. Institutions can then provide a comfortable study environment and design programs that build upon the identified prior knowledge of students.Accepting Compromise
With any partnership comes compromise. Administrators and unions must be flexible to the organizational complexities that arise. Respective faculties must be receptive to shared physical and academic resources. They must understand the inherent responsibilities of an adjunct instructor. In the aforementioned model Acadia had to voice "reasonable" expectations with respect to the new HDHS TE facilities. At the same time the school's own administration had financial constraints associated with building construction and these limitations had to be respected. Partnerships can not happen without dedicated committees striving for the positive outcomes of collaboration despite the individual institutional barriers. In this particular model finding a qualified individual to bridge institutions was not a trivial task. In another system it is strongly recommend that the roles and responsibilities of an adjunct instructor be clearly delineated. Where possible, a well-defined remuneration package should be agreed upon from the onset.Shared Goals: A New Technology Education Community
The Acadia-HDHS partnership has created a new community. The cooperation of HDHS has allowed Acadia to offer a very relevant, progressive and much-needed teacher preparation program in technology education. In the current economic climate this program could not have evolved without a partnership in light of the prohibitive start-up costs. This fact alone justifies the partnership. The prevalence of technology at both institutions as a result of different circumstances, fortuitously enhances the value of the partnership to both parties. The Acadia-HDHS technology education program continues to be crafted after more than three years of diligent, directed concern for the future of technology education in Nova Scotia. The process has been a complex leadership task due to the large number of stakeholders, the political environment, the practical aspects of accessing inventory, the funding management and finally the urgency to meet a documented need for technology education teachers in Canada. The Acadia-HDHS partnership to offer technology education is far too young to comment on measurable program successes. The desire to provide a quality program is in place and with thoughtful reflection in the semesters to come the partners will have an opportunity to seek out more effective ways to maximize benefit for students and respective institutions.In a venture such as this our ultimate responsibility is to the student. Are we providing better opportunities to learn? Are the stakeholders focussed on the educational outcomes of their programs? Building a community of shared resources should serve to provide better education for all students. The best partnerships require good will, flexibility, and a spirit of compromise which will, most importantly, ensure the continuation of visionary programs.
References
Armstrong, T. (1994). Multiple intelligences in the classroom. Alexandria,VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Brooks, J.G., & Brooks, M.G. (1993). The case for constructivist
classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Carr, A.A., Jonassen, D.H., Litzinger, M.E., & Marra, R.M. (1998)
Good ideas to foment educational revolution: The role of systemic change
in advancing situated learning, constructivism and feminist pedagogy. Educational
Technology, 5-15.
Fosnot, C.T. (1989). Enquiring teachers and enquiring learners: A
constructivist approach for teaching. New York, NY: Teachers College
Press.
Gardner, H. (1993). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences.
New York, NY: Basic.
Heath, M. (1997). Instructional design models for emerging technology.
Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference of the Society of
Information Technology and Teacher Education, Orlando, FL, 459-462.
Hemming, H., & MacKinnon, G. (1998). The Acadia Advantage: Using
computer technology in teacher education. Proceedings of the Ninth International
Conference of the Society of Information Technology and Teacher Education,
Washington , DC, 911-915.
International Technology Education Association (ITEA). (1996). Technology
for all Americans. Reston, VA: ITEA.
Maxcy, S.J. (1991). Educational leadership: A critical pragmatic
perspective. Toronto:OISE Press.
Northouse, P.G. (1997). Leadership:Theory and practice. London:Sage
Publishing.
Posner, G.J., Strike, K.A., Hewson, P.W., & Gertzog, W.A. (1982).
Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual
change. Science Education, 66(2), 221-227.
Press, H. (1997). Teacher demand in Canada. Toronto:Robinson
& Blackmore Printing & Publishing
Raizen, S.A., Sellwood, P., Todd, R.D., & Vickers, M. (1995). Technology
education in the classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Sternberg, R.J. (1989). The triarchic mind: A new theory of human
intelligence. New York, NY: Penguin Books.
Symons, S. (1997, June). Introductory Psychology and the "Wired Campus."
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Canadian Society for the Study
of Education, St. John's, NF.
Yager, R. E. (1993).Science-technology-society as reform. School Science and Mathematics, 93(3), 145-151.
Author Notes
Dr. Gregory MacKinnon
School of Education
Acadia University
Wolfville, NS B0P 1X0
gregory.mackinnon@acadiau.ca
IEJLL - Educational Partnerships Theme Series
External Reviewers
(In addition to the usual members of the IEJLL Editorial Team)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|