Scholarly Use of Technology in Instruction: Learning from 3 Case Studies

Issues in Using the Internet in Instruction

For My Students | Admin/Research | PSY | FaCET | WKU

The Scholarly Use of Technology in Instruction:

Learning from 3 Case Studies

Sally Kuhlenschmidt
Western Kentucky University
Bowling Green, KY 42101

Overview

Linked below are 3 parts of a case study concerning the scholarly use of technology in instruction.

The incidents described are based on personal experiences but the individuals are fictional. In the cases I describe the experiences of

Charlie (a young instructor at a higher education institution who knows a little about technology),
Lucy (a well-established faculty member relatively uninterested in technology and instruction) and
Eldon (expert in working with technology, less so in working with the consequences of technology).

These three struggle with how to behave in a scholarly fashion toward various technological tools and present some pitfalls and triumphs of instruction with technology.

I have chosen a case studies approach because successful generalization of scholarly behavior into daily on-line life requires diagnostic and integration skills, best conveyed through deep reflection. Case studies support that kind of long term thought.

The conceptual organization of the cases derives from:

Boyer, E. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. New Jersey: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Glassick, C., Huber, M., & Maeroff, G. (1997). Scholarship assessed: Evaluation of the professoriate. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Pub.

Each section of the case was constructed primarily to illustrate two of the 6 standards proposed by Glassick, Huber, & Maeroff (1997).

Criteria	Key Questions	Example
1. Clear goals	Are they clear, realistic, achievable and important?	"Students will be able to critically evaluate Web sites after completing this course."
2. Adequate preparation	Does the scholar understand the existing scholarship, have the necessary skills, pull together the necessary resources?	The instructor has reviewed material on critical evaluation of Web sites, has attended workshops to learn to effectively use search engines and has prepared in advance resource materials for students
3. Appropriate methods	Do they fit the goals, are they applied effectively and modified when circumstances change?	The instructor has students compare and contrast two web sites on the same topic, a peer reviewed Electronic journal and a popular media journal.
4. Significant results	Are the goals achieved and is it a consequential addition, opening up further areas for exploration?	The instructor evaluates the assignment by using the Muddiest Question task and ratings in a MOO (students are anonymous).
5. Effective presentation	Are style and organization suitable and forums for communication appropriate? Is the message clear and possessing of integrity?	The actual assignment pages are well presented, easy to access and are not changed once the term begins. (Addenda are highlighted at the top of the page). The instructor also prepares an article for the campus teaching newsletter.
6. Reflective critique	Does the scholar critically evaluate the work using appropriate breadth and is the evaluation used to improve future work?	The instructor solicits independent review of the Muddiest Question task and uses this plus student responses to modify the assignment and the newsletter article.

For more information about the Scholarship of Teaching visit:

The Carnegie Academy for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. (no date). The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. [On-line]. Available: http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/scholarship-teaching-learning.

Cases

Use the following links to read the cases I have written. They can be read as one continuous story or treated as 3 separate stories although there is a progression through time from the first to the last. Please, do not distribute without asking my permission so that I may keep my personal accountability records up to date. Thank you.

Part 1: Clear Goals and Adequate Preparation.
Part 2: Appropriate Methods and Significant Results
Part 3: Effective Presentation and Reflective Critique
My Synopsis. My reflections on the incidents in the 3 cases are available here. If you are attending a workshop with me, I'd prefer you not read this until after the workshop so you bring your fresh perceptions of the cases.
Workshop Participant Summary. Comments from participants at my workshop, The Scholarly Use of Technology in Instruction, at the 25th conference of the Professional and Development Network in Higher Education, November 11, 2000, Vancouver, British Columbia.

For more information on using cases in teaching

Hutchings, P. (1993). Using cases to improve college teaching: A guide to more reflective practice. American Association for Higher Education.
Wilkerson, L. & Boehrer, J. (1992). Using cases about teaching for faculty development. To Improve the Academy, 253-262.
Herreid, C., Schiller, N, & Hollander, S. (2000). National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science. [On-line]. Available: http://ublib.buffalo.edu/libraries/projects/cases/case.html.

Issues in Using the Internet in Instruction

For My Students | Admin/Research | PSY | FaCET | WKU

Contact the author with comments or questions about this site by following the directions at this page (which will open in a new window.)

Printing a single copy for use at a workshop led by the author is permitted without contacting her. Otherwise, please contact her so she can fix an updated copy and keep track of uses. Thank you.

Website created: June 1996. Page Created: March 16, 2000. Last Modified: March 4, 2013.