letter to chair / matrix / artifacts /additional projects / interesting links
|
Action Research Artifact Report |
|
Technology in the Arts in District 12---- (see artifact) In the spring of 2001, I conducted an Action Research project into the ways that art teachers in my district integrate computer technology into their visual arts curriculum. I was curious because I am an art teacher who teaches digital imaging classes, and through my activities on the Visual Arts Standing Committee, I had a notion that there were not many other art teachers using computers with students the way I do. I wanted to verify what was actually going on, and get to the source of inequities if they did indeed exist. I feel strongly about the relevance of using computers, peripherals, and software as artistic tools; as a leader in my district this passion I can and want to share. Analysis I work in a large school district. We serve a diverse variety of students from a wide range of ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds. Our district explicitly supports the integration of technology in the learning environment, and there are district standards with regard to computer and technological literacy for students. Every school has at least one computer lab, and all but two of the district schools had art teachers during the spring of 2001. At the time of my research project, there were forty-two art teachers in the district. Of those forty-two, twenty-seven agreed to participate in my study, that represents 64%. I felt that this majority would fairly represent what was going on with the visual arts and computer technology throughout the district. Ultimately the goal of my research project was to provide me with hard data that I could use to effectively advocate for the integration of computer technology in the art class. I teach digital imaging professional development classes to teachers for another school district, and thought that I might find additional opportunities within my own district if the results of my research demonstrated a need and desire on the part of my colleagues. Rationale I chose to conduct a written survey of the study participants. This method of data collection seemed the most time effective for my colleagues and myself, given the obligations and responsibilities of a teacher in the spring of a school year. (We prepare for the district art show at this time of year, and time is precious.) I devised a very thorough and specific survey, yet it was not overwhelmingly long or time consuming. I wanted to determine the degrees and contexts of computer technology use, reasons for limited or non-existent use, levels and sources of training and as yet unmet needs of district art teachers. Therefore I fashioned the questions to enlighten me on those areas. Results The results of the survey were indeed enlightening. I discovered that most of the art teachers surveyed felt comfortable with computer technology, and used it at home. On the job, most used computers for administrative tasks such as grading, attendance, and email. Additionally, a high number of study participants, 71%, use computer technologies in their teaching, but a minority are actually teaching digital arts curriculum. The most prevalent use of computers by students was for enrichment; a term I defined as non-structured use after class work was completed. The second most prevalent use was that students use computers to conduct Internet based research. The top response regarding what kind of software art students use was an Internet browser. Of the 29% of art teachers that do not use computer technology with their students, the number one reason was due to lack of training, not lack of interest. Fifty-two percent of the participants and their students have access to a digital camera and scanner, 22% have one or the other, and 26% have neither tool available. This data shows an unacceptable inequity if all students are to have access to what are increasingly considered to be essential tools in the professional as well as creative world. As Ohler (1996, para, 8) convincingly states, "The rapidly growing domain of employment, in which presentation, media, entertainment, and education converge, now embraces the Arts out of necessity." Ninety-two percent of the participants want more technology training; digital imaging and graphic design are the two most popular training interests. Evidence of Value The Action Research project has proven to be very valuable. First, there are 42 of my colleagues that know I am a technology person as well as an arts person, and that I have a strong interest in supporting the integration of computer technology and the visual arts. Twenty-nine of my colleagues have shown me that they are invested enough in educational technology that they would participate in a study, they wanted their voices heard. Secondly, I have concrete data that I can use to advocate for more technological equity between schools in the district. This data provides me with a map for what avenues I might take to better serve my colleagues. Finally, I have discovered that art teachers want more technology training, and I may be one who provides that training. In fact, I am scheduled to conduct a short workshop on PowerPoint for art teachers in February of 2002. Also negotiations are currently underway for me to teach a ten-hour Adobe Photoshop workshop to teachers at one of the large district high schools. There is as yet untapped value to the research; it has established a baseline from which to measure the growth and development of digital arts curriculum for district students. Reflection As stated above, I have discovered a challenging and worthwhile cause that will exercise the technological leadership skills I have acquired over the past two years. I have acted on the results of my Action Research, and will continue to do so in the future. ILT Responsibility Areas #1 Continued improvement of professional practice that requires critical inquiry, professional development, and reflective practice.
#4 Understands how to capitalize on the capacities and abilities of each learner.
|
