A PROCESS FOR CHANGING TEACHER EDUCATION
Abstract
If legitimate Technology Education is going to be achieved in our nation's schools then many changes must take place in our traditional Industrial Arts teacher prepatory programs. One of the most important areas for change consideration is in the curriculum of many current programs.
Recognizing this need, Oklahoma State University (OSU) launched a revision process to alter its Industrial Arts curriculum. The process used in the curriculum development/revision plan at OSU was DACUM (Developing a Curriculum). DACUM is an approach to curriculum development that has been found to be a method of quickly determining, at relatively low cost, the duties and tasks of persons employed in an occupation (Norton, 1987). The DACUM procedure operates on three premises: (1) expert workers (teachers) are better able to describe/define their jobs than anyone else, (2) any job can be effectively described in terms of the tasks that successful workers (teachers) in that occupation perform, and (3) workers (teachers) need certain specific attitudes and knowledge in order to perform each task correctly (Norton, 1987, p. 15).
The results of the DACUM process at OSU were a clear and distinct set of duty and task statements for the secondary Technology Educator. With this information the Industrial Arts proRram at Oklahoma State University has revised its traditional
A PROCESS FOR CHANGING TEACHER EDUCATION
undergraduate and graduate curricula in order to prepare its students with the most appropriate instruction and training needed to become great technology education instructors.
A PROCESS FOR CHANGING TEACHER EDUCATION
A Process for Changing Teacher Education
Programs in Technology Education
The scope and extent of the efforts necessary to move Industrial Arts programs into a position to provide the quality of instruction necessary to achieve legitimate Technology Education varies from location to location. However, it is generally agreed that, outside of a relatively few locales around the country, the Industrial Arts programs are in need of major curriculum content changes. In order for these changes to occur at the local school level, the teacher must be creative and open minded, as well as acutely attentive to the literature and also to the direction of his/her state and national professional associations. In service training, possibly in a variety of forms, would become essential as the local teacher revises his/her program.
Appropriate and up-to-date in service training becomes an even greater need in light of the fact that we live in a modern, fast paced society. In a relatively short period of time our society has been forced to change not only in the methods of manufacturing products, but also in the levels of knowledge and skills necessary to understand and operate advanced technological equipment. Moreover, the rapid changes in technologies are having significant cultural impacts (e.g., nuclear energy - safety, application, and waster disposal).
A PROCESS FOR CHANGING TEACHER EDUCATION
Adapting to Technological Change
In order for our society to successfully adapt to the technological changes as well as to the economic effects brought on by the advances in technology, it is imperative that our educational institutions provide curricula that integrate the knowledge of and skills required to operate modern technologies with the needs of society as a whole (Johnson, 1985). It is at this point that Technology Education can and must make a concentrated effort to contribute to the general education process taking place in our schools. Maley (1985, p. 3) expressed this need succinctly:
The sand in the hourglass of time is playing out and a
sense of urgency must prevail if technology education is
society driven and
to assume its rightful place in dominated by, as well as dependent on, technological accomplishments for survival, and a quality of life its population desires. Change and the University Curriculum
This urgency has been felt at the university level where a more revolutionary approach for change may be necessary if the concepts and activities of Technology Education are to be implemented for preparation of Technology Education teachers. Recognizing this need, Oklahoma State University (OSU) launched a change process to alter its Industrial Arts curriculum.
A PROCESS FOR CHANGING TEACHER EDUCATION
The Industrial Arts program at OSU began in 1915 with the advent of manual training. The program evolved into a standard Industrial Arts program in 1929 and serviced the state of Oklahoma with the traditional curriculum in woods, metals, and drafting. Realizing the need to update and change the curriculum and facilities, the faculty and staff of the School of Occupational and Adult Education as well as the College of Education at OSU have begun a major revision process within the Industrial Arts program. There are a number of phases to be incorporated into the revision plan. However, the curriculum development phase for Technology Education is the area that will be addressed in this report. The DACUM Process
The process used in the curriculum development/revision plan at OSU was DACUM (Developing A Curriculum). DACUM is an approach to curriculum development that has been found to be a method of quickly determining, at relatively low cost, the duties and tasks of persons employed in an occupation (Norton, 1987). The DACUM procedure operates on three premises: (1) expert workers (teachers) are better able to describe/define their jobs than anyone else, (2) any job can be effectively described in terms of the tasks that successful workers (teachers) in that occupation perform, and (3) workers (teachers) need certain specific attitudes and knowledge in order to perform each task correctly
A PROCESS FOR CHANGING TEACHER EDUCATION
(Norton, 1987, p. 15).
The DACUM process began by carefully identifying 6-12 experts from the occupational area being reviewed. The OSU project accomplished this by conducting a national survey to identify the leaders in the field of Technology Education. The seven experts identified were as follows:
1. Mr. Michael Daugherty, Technology Teacher Technology Education Carrier Junior High School North Enid, OK
2. Dr. William E. Dugger, Jr. Professor and Program Area Leader Technology Education Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Blacksburg, VA
3. Dr. Donald Lauda, Dean School of Applied Arts and Sciences California State University-Long Beach Long Beach, CA
4. Mr. Michael Neden, Technology Teacher Explorations in Technology Pittsburg Middle School Pittsburg, KS
A PROCESS FOR CHANGING TEACHER EDUCATION
5. Dr. Roger Stacy, Oklahoma State Supervisor Industrial ArtstTechnology Education Oklahoma State Department of Vocational and Technical Education Stillwater, OK
6. Dr. Leonard F. Sterry Director of Technology Education University of Wisconsin-Stout Menomonie, WI
7. Dr. Thomas Wright, Professor Department of Industry and Technology Ball State University Muncie, IN
Following the identification of the panel members, arrangements were made to procure the services of a trained DACUM facilitator who would provide guidance for the process. Dr. James Hamilton, Senior Research and Development Specialist--Emeritus from the National Center for Research in Vocational Education served as facilitator during the OSU curriculum project. With the guidance of the facilitator the DACUM committee began by identifying the general duties of the exemplary teacher of Technology Education at the secondary level. Three examples of such duties were selecting instructional content, structuring an educational environment, and selection of teaching strategies.
A PROCESS FOR CHANGING TEACHER EDUCATION
Upon a consensus of what the duties were, the committee then addressed the specific tasks that must be performed by the teacher in order to accomplish the duties. The DACUM committee was encouraged to use a variety of small group meeting techniques (i.e. - discussion, dialogue, and interaction) to arrive at a consensus of what each task should be within each duty (see Table 1). After all duties and tasks had been identified, the concluding responsibility of the DACUM committee was to sequence the order of the tasks within each duty statement and to prioritize the duty statements based on their importance in the developmental process of a Technology Education program.
Insert Table 1 here
Results
The results of the DACUM process at OSU were a clear and distinct set of duty and task statements for the secondary Technology Educator (see Table 1). With this information the Industrial Arts program at Oklahoma State University can now revise its traditional undergraduate and graduate curricula in order to prepare its students with the most appropriate instruction and training needed to become exemplary technology education instructors.
A PROCESS FOR CHANGING TEACHER EDUCATION
Conclusions and Recommendations Technological literacy via Technology Education cannot be achieved by simply providing advanced technological equipment to existing teachers and programs. It will be necessary to incorporate a sound program of appropriate course work which is not only explanatory in nature but also provides the prospective teachers with the most complete way of learning and teaching Technology Education. Furthermore, preparatory programs are needed that will equip new teachers with a uniquely different approach to the profession that incorporates such things as technical skills in advanced technologies, problem solving abilities, understanding of the social and cultural impacts of technology and provision of accurate information in order to make clear career choices. Specifically, a major goal of the Technology Education discipline is to aid the students of our world to become technologically literate. The DACUM process is an effective, low-cost, and expedient way to support the revision of traditional Industrial Arts curricula into the Technology Education curricula of today and tomorrow. As Maley (1987, p. 6) stated: The transition of Industrial Arts to Technology Education depends above all other factors on a new influx of thousands of bright, capable, creative, and dedicated young and old people into the teaching profession for technology education.
A PROCESS FOR CHANGING TEACHER EDUCATION
This transition will be significantly aided when our curricula is appropriate for the job we have before us.
A PROCESS FOR CHANGING TEACHER EDUCATION
References
Johnson, J. (1985). The nature of our technological society. A Perspective _ Implementation: International Technology Education Association, pp. 11-13.
Maley, D. (1985). Issues and trends in Keynote Address: Technology Education ; California University of PA, California, PA, pp. 3-14
Maley, D. (1987). Technology education challenges and opportunities. The Technology Teacher, (7), 3-6.
Norton, R. (1987). A tool for developing curricula. Vocational Education Journal, 62 (3), p. 15.
DACUM on Technology Education Teacher Oklahoma State University Sti1lwater, OK
A. DEVELOP A STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THE TECHNOLOGY EDUCUATION PROGRAM;
1. Establish a program philosophv based on standards national standards regarding technology education.
2. Develop a mission statement for the program.
3. Develop a rationale for change.
4. Identify long term goals and objectives.
5. Develop an action plan (who, what, and when, cost)
6. Evaluate/update plan periodically.
B. SELECT INSTRUCTIONAL CONTENT
1. Develop program goals and objectives based on program philosophy.
2. Identify the technological systems to be used as content organizers.
3. Analyze the body of knowledge within each of the content organizers.
4. Analyze the social cultural impacts within each of the content organizers.
5. Assess the interface of the content with other disciplines.
6. Identify and articulate the scope and sequence of courses for each content organizer.
7. Identify goals and objectives for each course.
S. Develop/select course content.
C. STRUCTURE AN EDUCATIONAL ENVIRONMENT
1. Analyze the physical facilities based on course content.
2. Assess education environment with other disciplines and external agencies.
3. Identify the changes to be made with alternative solutions.
4. Identify changes to be made to accommodate special needs students.
5. Identi h support agencies, other discipl'nes, and people.
6. Prepare/submit proposals for change.
7. Politic to assure funding. &. Assess/modify- plans
9. Implement the change.
10. Assess/evaluate/modify the changes based on effectiveness and new technological developments.
D. SELECT TEACHING STRATEGIES
1. Identify a balance of individual and group activities for levels of instruction.
2. Assess the activities in terms of the student needs, physical facilities, budget, teacher competence, etc.
3. Select the most appropriate activity for each unit of instruction.
4. Locate/design/produce instructional materials for each activity.
E. PROVIDE LABORATORY MANAGEMENT
1. Develop safety rules and safety tests.
2. Develop/maintain inventory of equipment and supplies.
3. Maintain student records.
4. maintain a filing system for records &materials.
5. Identify resource needs and submit requisitions.
6. Procure free materials.
7. Schedule use of laboratorv.
8. Maintain equipment.
9. Develop a supply control system.
10. Develop a tool control system.
11. Develop student personnel system.
12. Maintain proper laboratory atmosphere.
13. Develop a student clean-up system.
14. Develop, justify-, and manage the budget.
F. Deliver Content
l. Schedule the content and activities of the course.
2. Interface with other disciplines (coordinate curriculum with other disciplines whenever possible.)
3. Develop daily lesson plans.
4. Organize materials for each daily lesson.
5. Introduce and manage psychomotor activities.
6. Present cognitive information.
7. Facilitate affective development.
G. MOTIVATE STUDENTS
l. Improve teacher characteristics, traits, and attitudes.
2. Structure an appropriate educational environment.
3. Select appropriate content and teaching strategies.
4. Administer the student behavioral polics consistently.
5. Operate an effective student association.
H. MAINTAIN STUDENT DISCIPLINE
l. Establish student behavior expectations.
2. Develop a written behavior policy.
3. Obtain approval of behavior policy from administrator
4. Communicate behavior policy to students parents.
5. Implement behavior policy.
6. Evaluate the effectiveness of the behavior policy.
I. EVALUATE STUDENT's COGNITIVE, AFFECTIVE, & PSYCHOMOTOR
PERFORMANCE.
l. Develop evaluation system.
2. Develop/acquire/administer pre-tests.
3. Adjust content and instructional strategies according to pre-test.
4. Monitor student success.
5. Develop/acquire/administer post-test.
J. ADVISE STUDENT ASSOCIATION'
1. Determine type of student organization to be formed.
2. Contact the national and state organization to aid the formation of the student organization.
3. Establish local student organization chapter.
4. Assist officers in developing program of work.
5. Assist in carrying out the program of work.
6. Evaluate the effectiveness of the program of work.
K. PROMOTE/ARTICULATE TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION
1. Determine internal and external publics.
2. Assess what motivates internal and external publics.
3. Develop a public relations plan.
4. Develop promotional media and materials.
5. Implement the public relations plan.
6. Evaluate the effectiveness of the public relation program.
L. Develop Advisory Committee
1. Establish the role of the committee.
2. Identify the constituency to be represented on the committee.
3. Organize the committee.
4. Schedule and conduct committee meetings.
5. Utilize committee recommendations.
M. CONTINUE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICE
1. Develop a professional development plan.
2. Seek release time and funding for inservice activities.
3. Participate in in service training.
4. Utilize professional and related materials.
5. Participate in professional associations.
6. Initiate change in the profession.
7. Provide professional service to others.
8. Participate in organizations outside the profession.
9. Project a professional image.
N. ASSESS PROGRAM EFFECTIVENESS
1. Identify standards reflecting the mission and goals of the program.
2. Establish a process for using the standards.
3. Conduct the assessment using the standards.
4. Analyze findings with faculty and advisory board.
5. Develop plan to maximize strengths and correct deficiencies.
6. Report findings to appropriate personnel.
7. Implement plan to maximize strengths and correct deficiencies.
8. Reassess program periodically.