Using technology to increase collaboration between career tech and core subject teachers.

Using technology to increase collaboration between career tech and core subject teachers. [ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] MANY TEACHERS HAVE WITNESSED THIS SCENE FAR TOO OFTEN: Studentscome to our career and technical education (CTE) classrooms and theteacher presents them with a problem that requires them using a (:oresubject skill such as determining the volume of a piston cylinder usinggeometry. Some students pull out a pencil and paper and begin solvingthe problem, while at the same time other students begin to stare at thewalls, knowing there is a mathematical way of determining the volume,but they can't quite remember how to use the numbers they have beengiven to find an answer. Or maybe the situation is not math in a mechanics class, it'schemistry in a family and consumer science course and the studentsdon't understand how baking powder causes biscuits to rise (hint:it's sodium bicarbonate (NaHC[O.sub.3]) and potassium bitartrate([KC.sub.4][H.sub.5][O.sub.6]) reacting to form carbon dioxide(C[O.sub.2])). Or, to turn the tables, maybe a core subject area teacheris explaining a concept, perhaps a math instructor teaching thePythagorean Theorem, when she notices that some students are strugglingwith the concept. The instructor provides an example using a righttriangle, but students still stare with a confused look, asking,"Why should I learn this if I will never use it?" Soundfamiliar? As CTE instructors we realize there are core subject conceptsincluded in our lessons, but sometimes we fail to point out theseembedded concepts to our students. Similarly, many core subject teachers know their subject mattervery well, but fail to point out how their subjects--science, math orEnglish--are used daily in many (all?) career fields. Often, we teachour subjects in a vacuum, without illustrating to the students how thesesubjects apply to everyday life. And for some reason we expect thestudents to make these connections on their own; but yet theydon't. Instead of understanding the subject matter and how it fitsinto the larger schemata of life, they try to memorize the informationwe provide them hoping that some day they will see the practicalimportance of these concepts. What would happen if CTE instructors could reinforce core subjectcontent in the lessons they teach? Similarly, how would students benefitif, for each core subject, we had practical applications for theconcepts so our students could see how these skills apply to theirlives? Would our students be better prepared for a successful career?Would they perform better on assessments? Perhaps both of these arepossible. At the very least, students would have a context in which theycould apply core subject concepts. Whether you teach a core subject oran applied subject, you can accomplish this. All it takes is somecollaboration between CTE and core subject (CS) instructors. In the nextfew paragraphs, we will illustrate some advantages of CS instructorspartnering with CTE instructors and then share how some simple tools canbe used to facilitate this relationship. What Happens in the Absence of Collaboration? In the earlier examples we saw two illustrations in which studentsin CTE courses struggled. The students who have less aptitude for thecore subject do not readily see the connections, may have forgotten manyof the GS skills learned previously, and may struggle to understand theconcepts they probably know are lurking in their CTE courses. Thestudents who have a strong grasp of the CS concepts may have difficultyseeing the connection to contextual examples as well. They remembercompleting similar assignments in their CS courses, but cannot fullyremember (or perhaps they were never shown?) how to apply these conceptsto the current problem presented in the CTE course, which may lead tofrustration and questions. What Happens When Collaboration Occurs? Students' CS knowledge increases: In a 2006 study, Brian Parr,Craig Edwards, and Jim Leising published an experiment that evaluatedmath competencies of two groups of high school students; one groupparticipated in an experimental treatment in which Oklahoma math andagricultural science teachers collaborated to develop agricultural powerand technology lessons (i.e., mechanics) with enhanced attention to theembedded mathematical concepts within the lessons. A total of 37agricultural science teachers and 447 students participated in thisstudy. Instructors were randomly split into two groups one group of 18that taught the math-enhanced curriculum (experimental group), and onegroup of 17 that would teach using traditional methods (control group),making no changes in their curriculum or lesson presentations. [FIGURE 1 OMITTED] The 18 teachers using a math-enhanced curriculum, along with theirmath teacher partners, participated in a five-day in-service where theyengaged in team building activities, evaluated existing power andtechnology curriculum, and developed 17 lessons that accentuated theembedded math concepts. These lessons were then evaluated by theircolleagues and returned to them with suggestions for improvement. The instructors were also trained in a specific seven-stepinstructional approach to deliver the lessons. Over the course of thenext semester both groups of CTE instructors taught their agriculturalpower and technology lessons. As the CTE instructors using themath-enhanced lessons moved through the semester, they periodically metwith their collaborating math instructors to debrief after eachmath-enhanced lesson presentation, reflect on best practices, anddiscuss how future lessons could be improved. At the end of the semester students were evaluated using theACCUPLACER math exam. Students who received the math-enhanced lessonsscored significantly higher on the exam than did the students in theclasses in which no lesson changes had been made. Indeed, when the testscores were evaluated statistically the results were significantlyhigher at the p< 0.05 level (Parr, Edwards, and Leising, 2006). The results of this study are important, especially in light of thestandardized testing that is prevalent in schools today. When studentswere taught mathematical concepts in a specific context, they performedbetter on a standardized test. To re-emphasize, CTE instructors did notmake large, extensive changes to their curriculum; they just accentuatedthe math concepts that already existed in the curriculum through thecollaborative assistance of their local math instructor. In addition tothe quantitative findings of the study, some anecdotal observations weremade as well. First, math teachers were excited to work with agricultural scienceteachers. In fact, when the math instructors discovered a contextualapplication for the concepts they had been teaching, they wereenergized. It seems that many math teachers love math, and have a deepunderstanding of the logic behind it, but struggle to find examples ofhow these concepts apply to specific career fields. CTE teachers have agreat understanding of how CS concepts are applied, but may find thatthey are a bit shaky with the academic content embedded in theirlessons. Next, the agricultural science teachers who participated wereempowered and felt valued by the math teachers. By providing a contextfor the math teachers, they helped improve the teaching in the mathclassrooms. Finally, an atmosphere of trust and respect emerged. One ofthe initial struggles within the study was creating a safe environmentin which both teachers felt sufficiently comfortable to ask forassistance. The CTE teachers had to admit that they were not asknowledgeable as they wanted to be in certain areas of math, andsimilarly the CS teachers had to reveal that their personal experiencesdid not lend itself well to the application of some of the concepts theywere teaching. Best Practices What is the best way to integrate CS concepts into CTE courses?Based on the study discussed above, the following practices provedsuccessful. Pre-lesson Establish a relationship. Begin with a face-to-face meeting. In thestudy above CS and CTE instructors met and developed a level of trustbetween one another before they began working on academic issues. Toaccomplish this, they used team-building activities. You may want toshare a cup of coffee or go bowling to begin this process. Worktogether. The instructors then made time to review the CTE curriculum todetermine where core academic concepts were embedded within the CTElessons. Teach the Lesson Teach the lesson using the model from the National Research Centerfor Career and Technical Education (NRCCTE, see Figure 1 on page 49): 1. Introduce the CTE lesson 2. Assess students' CS awareness as it relates to CTE 3. Work through the CS examples embedded in the CTE lesson 4. Work through related, contextual CS-in-CTE examples 5. Work through traditional CS examples 6. Students demonstrate their understanding 7. Administer a formal assessment (Anderson, 2008; Stone, Alfeld,Pearson, Lewis, and Jensen, 2005) Post-Lesson CS and CTE instructors continue to meet and collaborate on lessonsand teaching methods. Debriefing and reflection are needed after eachlesson to allow for continuous improvement of lessons and thoroughunderstanding of CS concepts by CTE instructors (Parr et al., 2006). Using Technology After face-to-face meetings with your collaborating instructor, useWeb-based resources to post information, create lessons, garnerfeedback, and continue the dialog. Here are some suggested freeresources: Wikis A wiki is a Web site that allows people to easily post and editinformation. Think of it as an online document that invited colleaguescan write, edit and share. With a personal wiki you can limit the numberof people who have access to view the wiki and who are able to edit thewiki. You have complete control of it! Each time the wiki is edited, ane-mail is sent notifying you of the edits (Rhoades, Friedel, and Morgan,2009). Two of these resources are PBworks (http://pbworks.com) andwetpaint (www.wetpaint.com). Blogs A blog, short for Web log, is more like an online journal thatothers can view. Users post items that people will view and can commenton, such as written material, videos and links to other Web sites. Youmay have read blogs online (Imperatore, 2009). Both Blogger(www.blogger. com) and Edublogs (http://edublogs. org) offer freeresources. Document Sharing Google documents (http://docs.google.com) is a Web-basedapplication that stores your documents online and allows only thosepeople yon invite to read and edit them, which provides a significantamount of privacy (Hayes, 2008). Invitations arc specific to eachdocument, so when you invite someone to collaborate they have access toonly the document to which you invite them. In addition to a textdocuments, Google docs also provides online spreadsheets andpresentation tools. Collaborating is a Winning Strategy Collaborating with core subject instructors is a win-win situation.First and foremost the student wins--they gain a better understanding ofconcepts by learning them within a relevant context. Second, the CTEinstructors win by gaining a deeper understanding of core subjectsalready embedded in their courses. Finally, core instructors win bylearning about the context in which their concepts are utilized. UsingWeb-based resources makes the collaborating easy and available to a wideaudience. References Anderson, S. (2008). "Math Infusion in Agricultural Educationand Career and Technical Education in Rural Schools." RuralEducator, 30, 1-4. Hayes, B. (2008). "Cloud Computing." Communications ofthe ACM, 51(7), 9-11. Imperatore, C. (2009). "What You Need to Know About Web2.0." Techniques, 84(1), 20-23. Parr, B. A., Edwards, M. C., and Leising, J. G. (2006)."Effects of a Math-enhanced Curriculum and Instructional Approachon the Mathematics Achievement of Agricultural Power and TechnologyStudents: An Experimental Study." Journal of AgriculturalEducation, 47(3), 81-93. Rhoades, E. B., Friedel, C. R., and Morgan, A. C. (2009). "CanWeb 2.0 Improve Our Collaboration?" Techniques, 84(1), 24-27. Stone, J. R., Alfeld, C., Pearson, D., Lewis, M. V., and Jensen, S.(2005). Building Academic Skills in Context: Testing the Value ofEnhanced Math Learning in CTE: Pilot study. St. Paul, MN: NationalResearch Center for Career and Technical Education. Chris Morgan, Ph.D., is an assistant professor at the University ofGeorgia in the Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education andCommunication. He can be contacted at acm@ugo.edu. Brian Parr, Ph.D, is an assistant professor at Auburn University inthe Department of Curriculum and Teaching. He can be contacted atbap007@aaburn.edu.