Classroom Technology at Defense Language Institute English ... · Classroom technology at defense language institute 4 Current Conditions and Desired Conditions Current condition

Running head: CLASSROOM TECHNOLOGY AT DEFENSE LANGUAGE INSTITUTE1

Classroom Technology at Defense Language Institute English Language Center (DLIELC)

Charles Rich

Student ID: 000539797

Assessment Code: JNT2—Task 1 (Needs Analysis)

Course Mentor: Dr. Michele Costanza

Student Mentor: Samantha Spears

April 17, 2016

Classroom technology at defense language institute2

Table of Contents

Problem Statement.......................................................................................................................................3

Discussion of Instructional Problem............................................................................................................3

Current Conditions and Desired Conditions............................................................................................4

Data Collection Process...............................................................................................................................4

Discussion of Data Collection Instruments Used.....................................................................................4

Discussion of Sources of Data.................................................................................................................5

Data Gathered Through Other Sources....................................................................................................6

Results of Data Analysis..............................................................................................................................7

Data Analysis Techniques Used..............................................................................................................7

Results of Analysis..................................................................................................................................7

Table 1.................................................................................................................................................7

Table 2...............................................................................................................................................10

Table 3...............................................................................................................................................15

Table 4...............................................................................................................................................16

Table 5...............................................................................................................................................19

Table 5.1............................................................................................................................................20

Table 6...............................................................................................................................................21

Table 7...............................................................................................................................................22

Table 8...............................................................................................................................................25

Table 9...............................................................................................................................................27

Findings of Needs Analysis.......................................................................................................................29

Need for Instruction...............................................................................................................................29

Goal of Instruction.....................................................................................................................................30

Appendix A: Data Collection Instrument 1 - Section Chief Interviews.....................................................31

Appendix B: Data Collection Instrument 2 - Supervisor Interviews..........................................................31

Appendix C: Data Collection Instrument 3 - Teacher Surveys.................................................................32


Problem Statement

The teachers at the Defense Language Institute (DLI) are expected to "use technology

effectively in the classroom" as a part of the core document (job description). Teachers' ability

to use technology ranges from those who can't or won't use it to those who are technical

gurus, with most falling somewhere in between.

Discussion of Instructional Problem

Our job requirements are based on a US Air Force Core Document that outlines job

responsibilities and performance criteria. That document states that an effective teacher

“Integrates use of the latest audio, video, and computer software, utilizing the latest educational

technology delivery systems.” This document also states that teachers develops and evaluates

training materials as needed.

It has been established that not all of our staff uses technology effectively, for various

reasons. A couple of the reasons cited is a lack of technologies provided to us through the Air

Force systems and a lack of teacher training and experience in technology. So far, we have

addressed these issues by creating an Educational Technology Working Group to analyze the

problem at an organizational level (of which I am a member), I have created an Educational

Technology Response Team, which uses tech savvy teachers to assist those who are less

proficient, and we are in the process of developing in-service-training(IST) modules and

seminars to further address technology training for our teachers. It is this last item that my design

will likely address.


Current Conditions and Desired Conditions

Current condition. Teachers at DLI exhibit varying degrees of technical ability in the

classroom and training for this is not always relevant or effective.

Desired condition. Teachers will be able to access and effectively use educational

technology in the classroom.

Data Collection Process

Discussion of Data Collection Instruments Used

For this analysis I have selected three collection instruments, Interviews with the section chiefs

and the Unit supervisors, and an online survey for the teachers in the section.

In the first interview I discussed the technology needs of the organization with three section

chiefs. The questions in these interviews were crafted to obtain a better understanding of management

expectations for effective use of technology in our classrooms. I covered three basic areas of Effective use

of technology, training need, and new technologies the chief's felt we should adopt. See Appendix A for a

list of the questions asked.

I conducted a similar interview among four of our six section supervisors. The questions were

essentially the same as for the chiefs with a few additional questions to try to better understand their

observations of teachers' use of technology and what kinds of training teachers were seeking out on their

own or through our in-service training. See appendix B for the questions used in these interviews.

Due to the number of teachers in the organization an online survey was used to poll them on their

use of technology. My questions for the teachers were more specific and asked which technologies

teachers already used or knew something about. They were also asked for their input on the effectiveness

of currently available technologies and for their ideas for new technologies. The questions for this

survey are in appendix C.


The purpose of these instruments was to establish a baseline expectation from the chiefs

and supervisors and a current state of use from the supervisors and teachers so that an idea of the

gap in between could be established. This gap between expectation and reality is our training

need.

Discussion of Sources of Data

I chose to narrow my research to one section of our organization due to differences in the

student population and the style of delivery in these sections. This analysis covers only the

Specialized English section which is concerned primarily with English for Specific Purposes

(ESP) style training that concentrates on vocabulary and skills needed for advanced military

training, versus the focus on grammar and mechanics skills taught in the other two sections. The

difference in focus would likely result in very different answers from these unique groups.

Due to recent changes in our organization and the timing of this analysis I ended up

interviewing The outgoing section chief and the incoming one. Because of this I obtained two

different perspectives where I initially expected one. The Interim Chief professed to having

limited knowledge on the topic, though in speaking with her about the interview she expressed

some of her opinions on the topic and gave me a pretty good idea of her stance.

I was only able to interview four out of six supervisors in the section, though the answers

I received were very informative.

The teacher survey was announced to the section through emails from supervisors to

about sixty teachers, of which seventeen responded. I extended the survey open period for an

extra week due to an initial response of eleven teachers. While seventeen responses out of sixty

may not seem like many, It's actually just short of a third of the staff and doesn't take into

account teachers who may have been on vacation, those who may not have been able to access


the survey online due to technical difficulties, or those who may not have been notified. Overall,

this is an acceptable response rate and the answers received yielded useful data.

Data Gathered Through Other Sources

Our curriculum department has analyzed this problem in the past and will be addressing

the issue in the future. They agreed to share what they had gathered so far and look forward to

receiving this analysis for their use. I had not received copies of their results prior to compiling

this analysis, but have briefly discussed some of their findings and ideas with them.

I have also discussed some of our technology issues in quarterly meetings with other

members of the Educational Technology Working Group, of which I am a member, and have an

idea of the direction our organization wants to go with classroom technology. In the past couple

of years these meetings have given me some perspective of the management view of technology

use and their expectations of teachers.


Results of Data Analysis

Data Analysis Techniques Used

The results were carefully reviewed and analyzed, then organized in the tables that

follow. The interviews with the section chiefs and unit supervisors consisted of qualitative

questions and I charted the collected data in tables in the following section where I broke it down

by category and themes and provided supporting excerpts from the participants. This data was

then used to formulate a summary presented at the end of each of these sections.

The teacher survey contained both quantitative and qualitative questions and each

question is broken down in its own table with analysis following it (with the exception of the

first yes/no question, which was simply averaged and reported on). An average was calculated

for each quantitative question to establish only if respondents reported average or above usage or

understanding. The qualitative questions were broken down by themes and supporting excerpts

were provided. This data was then used to formulate a summary presented at the end of the

section, much like for the previous two sections.

Results of Analysis

I interviewed the section chiefs, both the outgoing and the incoming. Their comments are

excerpted in the table below and the themes that formed during the interviews outlined.

Table 1

Interviews with section chiefs

Category Themes Excerpts from interview


respondents

Effective use of technology Effective technology integration.

Objectives need to be met,

whether or not technology is

used.

Technology should “enhance”

student learning.

Respondent 1: Teachers need to

find ways to integrate the

technology into their lesson plans

in a way that capitalizes on their

individual teaching styles. This

does not mean technology needs

to be integrated into every lesson.

Respondent 1: Effective use

would facilitate or augment the

criteria that supervisors use when

conducting instructor evaluations.

Respondent 2: Should meet the

objective of the lesson.

Ineffective use of technology Avoid technology use for

technology's sake. If we already

have a book exercise that covers

the material adequately then

technology may not be necessary.

Admin programs should be used

effectively and in a timely

manner. Training on these may

be necessary.

Respondent 1: There is not a

specific technology being used

ineffectively, but across the board

teachers could benefit from

additional training on how to

integrate technology into their

lesson plans.

Respondent 2: Some teachers

aren't using the admin programs

effectively.


Movies should be used to

compliment the course or lesson

objectives and exercises should

be designed to ensure students are

really getting what they are

supposed to from it.

Respondent 2: Tech for tech's

sake. Sometimes teachers jump

straight to technology before

covering the material in the book.

Respondent 2: There are too

many movies shown on the Smart

Boards, just to show a movie.

Training need Training and refresher training is

needed on pretty much all

technology and applications that

we use currently.

Respondent 1: The skill levels of

the instructional staff vary so

widely that across the board

training needs to be made

available.

Respondent 2: CAD, CAR,

ATAAPS refresher training.

New technologies SharePoint needs to be more

effective and effectively used.

We need to look at what we can

do to expand our use of

technology to “keep up” with

current educational trends and

usage.

Respondent 1: DLI should look

into digital textbooks and

incorporating laptops or

notebooks for students.

Respondent 2: Our SharePoint

should be state-of-the-art for an

organization of this size.

These interviews were enlightening. My intent was to establish a baseline of the Chiefs'

expectations for technology usage and training, but what I found is that their thoughts on this are


in the vein that we could all use training and it should be sought out and provided. Both

respondents pointed out that our salaries were renegotiated with the Air Force Personnel Office

and pay adjusted based on the level of professionalism expected from our teaching staff and our

core documents were re-written to reflect a higher level of professional responsibility. One of our

responsibilities is to seek out and attend professional training where needed, to include the use of

existing technology. Both felt that we could be doing more to meet this requirement.

There is also the prevailing thought that not all teachers are “comfortable” with

technology, but that it's fine as long as they use the technology they can use effectively. This

might mean seeking out training on the “basics”.

According to both chiefs technology should meet curriculum objectives and should be

used in ways that would reflect well on their instructor evaluations.

I prepared a second set of interview questions similar to those I asked of the chiefs for the

unit supervisors. The results of this interview are excerpted in the table below, followed by a

brief discussion.

Table 2

Interviews with unit supervisors

Category Themes Excerpts from interview

respondents

Effective use of technology Perception that we are lacking in

training opportunities, especially

on the basics.

Need to use technology more

effectively

Respondent 1: Everybody needs

to be trained. It's always ongoing.

Respondent 1: Technology

should make your job easier

Respondent 2: Teachers should


Effective teachers seek out the

curriculum and teacher created

materials for use in their classes.

be able to use the curriculum

created materials effectively.

Respondent 3: The use of

technology should be easy to

understand, clear, it must help

students, and must be applicable.

Respondent 3; If social media is

used it should be wisely used.

Respondent 3: The book

resources on DVD have been

very helpful.

Respondent 4: We need to be able

to use what we have effectively.

Respondent 4: To be better able

to teach with technology teachers

need to know what is available on

our network. They need to be

curious enough to go looking for

it.

Ineffective/improper use of

technology

Teachers should use Smart boards

and technology more effectively.

Interactive use of technology

Respondent 1: Many teachers are

using the smart board just to

display textbooks and that's not

using it effectively.


Teacher developed materials

Teachers don't tend to create and

share materials.

Respondent 1: When it becomes

more interactive it is effective.

Respondent 2: Document

cameras

Respondent 3: I've not observed

any misuse or ineffective use of

technology. What they do use is

used effectively.

Respondent 4: The Attendance

program has a lot of information

we don't access.

Respondent 4: Teachers don't

develop a lot of material for the

Smart board or other classroom

activities. They should develop

more of their own materials and

shouldn't be afraid to share it.

Training need Training or jobs aids are needed

for Microsoft Office.

Basic trouble shooting skills

Smart board training needs to be

refreshed.

More training needed on the in-

Respondent 1: Smart Boards

Respondent 1: Microsoft Office

training needed - Outlook,

PowerPoint, Excel.


be able to do basic trouble


house administrative programs. shooting before calling IT.

Respondent 2: Administrative

tasks


be a little bit more effective with

Excel. It tends to be unused.

Respondent 4: Teachers don't

make effective use of office

programs and need some basic

training in it.

New technologies Cellphone-based activities

Teachers need to be comfortable

with current technologies before

adopting new ones.

Be willing to try something new

and to experiment with what we

have. Be curious.

Respondent 1: Cell phones with

curriculum created materials or

applications

Respondent 1: Cell phones as a

teaching tool.


feel comfortable with the existing

technology before we add more.

Respondent 3: We need to perfect

what we have and make sure it

works. If we have training on

Word, Excel, PowerPoint, etc is a

giant step forward.


Respondent 3: Often IT failures

stop us from doing what we need

to do.


be willing to try something new.

Respondent 4: There are

applications available out there

for smart phones, tablets, and

such that could be very effective.

Teacher requests for training None reported teachers asking for

technology, but did mention that

teachers should seek training out.

Respondent 1: None really.

Respondent 2: None.

Respondent 3: Excel

Respondent 4: None.

The supervisor interviews highlighted four main areas for improvement; Training in the

basics like Microsoft Office, more self-reliance and computer savvy among teachers, more

teacher created and interactive materials and activities, and more effective use of the other

technologies we already have, such as curriculum created materials and Smart board activities.

Several respondents noted that the Educational Technology Response Team has been

very effective in assisting and training teachers to better use resources. The teachers who have

sought out the team members and worked with them have been quite effective. Those who feel

they can't use the technology, or who are afraid to should seek out this type of help.


There are also a number of activities that we are not required to do that often and one

supervisor recommended that we have a notebook of job aids that remind people of the steps to

perform these less frequent tasks.

Surprisingly, there were not a lot of responses around the idea of new technologies. Most

of the respondents seemed to agree that we need to get a handle on what we already have and

that there is a definite training need there.

The teacher survey was completed by seventeen specialized English teachers and was

comprised of eight questions.

The first question asked participants if they knew who their Educational Technology

Response Team member was. Response team members are tech savvy teachers who help others

with their classroom technology and each is assigned to help others in their unit. Knowing who

these people are can save teachers a lot of aggravation. Eighty-two percent of participants said

that they know who the team members are.

The second question asked participants to rate their ability to use common technology

and applications already in use in the classroom. The scale for this was from one to five, with

one meaning no skill and five being expert.

Table 3

Teacher proficiency with existing technology

Technology Weighted Average

Not at all Somewhat Average Fairly well Expert

Email 0 0 0 9 7 4.44

Smart Board 0 2 4 8 2 3.63


PowerPoint 1 2 1 7 5 3.61

Excel 2 3 3 6 2 3.19

SharePoint 3 10 0 3 0 2.19

Lync 6 2 4 2 2 2.5

Document Camera 2 4 1 5 4 3.31

The Online Learning Center

1 1 1 4 9 4.19

Individualized MediaInstruction

0 2 4 5 5 3.81

Curriculum-ProvidedMaterials

0 1 1 7 7 4.25

CAD, CAR, PE Input 1 0 0 5 10 4.44

An average understanding of these concepts should be above a weighted average of three

and ideally it would be good to see teachers become proficient in many of these skills and rate

their abilities four or above. Regardless of which level of proficiency used the data seems to

indicate a definite need for training in SharePoint and our desktop communications platform

Lync. All but email and our in-house generated programs could use some refresher training.

Question three asked participants to rate their knowledge of tools or concepts that have

been identified as technology we will be likely using in the near future, or that are already in

progress or on the way.

Table 4

Knowledge of tools or concepts

Tool Weighted


Average

Not at all Have heard of

Somewhat familiar

Have used Very familiar

Learning ManagementSystems (LMS)

4 8 3 1 0 2.06

Globalnet 5 5 2 4 0 2.31

Ilias 15 0 0 1 0 1.19

milSuite 9 3 0 4 0 1.94

Blended Learning 6 4 3 2 1 2.25

Document Encryption 1 4 4 6 1 3.13

Secure file sharing 2 6 1 4 1 2.63

Wiki 1 6 1 6 2 3.13

Blogs 0 4 6 4 2 3.25

Social Media 0 1 2 7 6 4.13

Simulators 4 2 5 4 1 2.75

Cloud computing and storage

0 3 2 7 4 3.75

This was a loaded question in that some of these technologies are already available and

under-utilized or are on the way and very few have heard of them. The first two, Learning

Management Systems and Globalnet go together as Globalnet is an LMS that the Air Force is

working on with a contractor to provide us with a workable system in the near future. We have

already gone through a couple of trials of it with a small number of our staff and the final

product is on the way. More people had heard of Globalnet than I expected, but training will be

necessary once it has been implemented.


Ilias was a piece that dovetailed with Globalnet in its fist iteration that allowed teachers

to create their own learning spaces and classroom within the LMS. Earlier versions of Globalnet

were more of a content management system, where the newer version is more of a learning

management system, so Ilias may not be needed. If we do see it in the next run then training will

need to be provided.

MilSuite is a collection of applications provided by the Air Force on our network that

provide social networking applications for like blogging and discussions in a secure

environment. My impression both from this survey and from observation is that most of our staff

is unaware of this program and those who are aware of it don't tend to use it. Training can

address the awareness issue, but if people don't see a need they may not apply that training.

Our curriculum is beginning to develop more blended learning materials and classes. A

few of the respondents haven't heard of it at all, and most have not been involved with

development of these types of lessons. Most likely a seminar or training on blended learning

would be all that would be necessary to inform our teachers on this topic.

Most of our staff knows that emails can be encrypted, but fewer realize that files can be

too or that they have the tools available to transfer these files securely. Due to the sensitivity of

our records and some of the files we share it is important that people know how to do so

properly. As short training or perhaps a job aid might be necessary in this case.

Use of social media in a military environment is often a topic of contention though it isn't

strictly forbidden. Operational Security, or OPSEC, is always on our minds and we are very

aware that our students' privacy and security are paramount. This doesn't mean that we can't use

social media to communicate with our students, just that we should not make their photos and


information public. Given the complicated nature of this issue it is a good idea to discuss the use

of social media in seminar or small group training.

Simulators are becoming more and more a part of what we do. It's one thing to tell a

student about preparing for military training at another site, it's another to be able to show them.

We use simulators with pilots to practice their radio calls in English and similar programs allow

technicians to work in a simulated environment in English. This survey seems to show a pretty

even spread of understanding, though it's hard to say whether the ones who do need training in

them have received it. I know from experience that those who use the flight simulator don't

always know how and training for all of the aviation English teachers is advised.

The final issue of cloud computing and storage will become more important as the Air

Force upgrades our computers to Windows 10 in the near future. Our current network storage

model causes a lot of angst when servers and drives go down. If the Air Force chooses to use

cloud storage as much as most Windows 10 installations do then we will need training in this

emphasizing the differences and techniques of this new storage model.

The fourth question asked what technology in the classroom respondents felt

uncomfortable using in the classroom and gave four common choices and an “other” category

that allow for an open response.

Table 5

Technology teachers aren’t comfortable with

Choices Responses

The Smart Board 3

Social Media 5

IMI or other computer based tools 0


The Internet 0

Other 6

Table 5.1

Other

Response Answer

1 doc camera

2 system drives because they may or may not be accessible

3 the document camera

4 I feel comfortable using technology, but not confident that it will function.

5 I don't feel uncomfortable using any of this.

The question whether teachers are comfortable using the technologies listed was a bit

surprising. Every classroom has a Smart Board but some of our teachers do not know how to use

it properly. We certainly don't want them to be nervous or uncomfortable using it. In speaking

with several teachers and supervisors about the boards the general impression I got is the

expectation is that they are so easy to use that no one should have a problem with them. It has

been my observation that most of us are using it primarily as a display, rather than as an

interactive device. Perhaps the truth of the matter is that we all need to learn how to better utilize

this resource.

Teachers are understandably nervous about the use of social media, given increased

scrutiny and advice from the Air Force to be careful not to jeopardize students privacy and

security. School districts have similar privacy concerns, although for different reasons, and social


media can be an effective way to share information given due diligence and caution. As

discussed in the previous question its not really a matter of learning how to use it, but more a

matter of learning when or if to use it.

Training on the use of document cameras is probably a bit overdue. Most of the cameras I

have seen in the classrooms are covered in dust or shoved in the closet. It is sometimes easier to

find an example of something you want to use in class on the Internet or in a curriculum

provided PDF than to set up the camera and project from a book. This could be showing a need

for training, or conversely it could be showing no need for the cameras.

The fifth question asked if participants felt that appropriate tools had been made available

to address their technology needs.

Table 6

Have appropriate tools been provided?

Choices Responses

Yes 4

I don't know 1

Not really 11

This question was intended more or less to gauge satisfaction with our current technology

use among the respondents. A majority answered just as I thought they would and simply

affirmed the need for this analysis.

The sixth question asked what kinds of classroom technology respondents would like to

see adopted at DLI.


Table 7

Technology you would like adopted at DLI

Response Answer Trends

1 I would like to see tablets and Alexa (Amazon) or other

technology assistants incorporated. I would also like to

have a mil SME as a robot come to classes. I would

love to have google classroom email set up like they do

in public schools. Send briefings etc

More liberal cellphone policies

More curriculum provided

materials

Cell phone based applications like

Cahoots, Quizlet, Alexa,

vocabulary/ note cards, interactive

activities

eTexts and eBooks

Student laptops, notebooks, or pad

computers.

Better network infrastructure for

higher speeds and capacity

Improved database

Newer Smart Boards or

Promethean Boards

Speech recognition

2 We need to make use of the apps coming out that utilize

the ubiquitous cell phones. Kahoot, Quizlet, others.

3 Lots more online stuff. All the texts should be available

electronically.

4 Broader bandwidth for internet simulators, You-tube,

Ted Talks

5 I'm willing to use Kahoots! and other cellphone-based

tools that use phones in a sensible way. I also want

some form of electronic vocabulary card system to be

adopted.

6 high speed internet

7 conversion of books to digital/electronic technology.

Use laptops/notebooks etc. for textbook or classroom

presentation rather than old books, which are expensive.

Electronic media can be updated and adapted much

quicker.


8 more curriculum-provided materials

9 student laptops / notebooks instead of books; cell phone

usage in the classroom for academic purposes

10 Considering the restrictions that the military imposes on

the types of technology that we can use, I feel that we

have several fairly good tools from which we can

choose. I would like to see us use e-books on tablets

that are interactive for the students. I would also rather

have Promethean boards.

11 I would like to see DLI invest in a much larger (better

capacity) database system.

12 legalization of cell phones for learning purposes & at

the discretion of the instructor

13 Faster internet, 3-D Smart Board updates (would be

very useful for aviation mechanics and other tech

classes.

14 Perhaps activities using technology where one class

could communicate with another over the computer to

accomplish a task as a group. This encourages good

communication among students.

15 Speech recognition hardware and software.

16 Whatever is being used in public schools and colleges

or universities.


Of course this question is the author of this analysis fishing for ideas. Some of the themes

that came out of this are commonly discussed around DLI and may be subject to policy and

budgetary constraints. For example it is policy that students not use cell phones in class because

of the distraction they present. This is not to say they can never be used by the teacher and it is

implied that it should be done at their discretion. This implication is not universal, though, and

can vary in degree depending on who your supervisor or section chief is. The other issue is that

not all students have smart phones. An in-service-training on the use of cell phones as a teaching

tool for those who are interested would be desirable, but a blanket policy or training for all

probably isn't necessary.

Some of the infrastructure and database concerns raised are out of our control and some

are currently under process improvement. There likely isn't much training we can do to to

address these problems aside from some user education on available workarounds.

Electronic or PDF versions of our materials are in development or already available in

many cases. So far this has been done primarily to give teachers better access and control of the

materials and a few have been enhanced with interactive answers to exercises and embedded

links. I don't know that there is any plan to provide it to the students in this format.

I would like to form a focus group to further explore this question to solicit more ideas

for the future.


The seventh question asked what types of training respondents would like to see offered

as In-Service Training (IST).

Table 8

Types of tech training you would like to see offered


1 1. General familiarization with apps available 2. Specific

training in same apps 3. Instruction on how to find new

apps

Smart Board training and how to

make its use more interactive

General familiarization/continuous

training on existing applications

Integrating technology

How to better leverage the Internet

SharePoint/File sharing

Collaboration

Schoology

2 Anything we don't already get.

3 I need a Schoology primer, and we could all use some

SharePoint training.

4 Continual refreshers and updates

5 integrating speaking/listening/vocabulary/language

functions activities with technology

6 for all of those things listed above that I hardly know

anything about.

7 more curriculum-provided materials

8 Is there a way on the .edu or network to share smart

board activities? Can the activities we create be made

accessible to other instructors (without copying them on

CDs to share)?

9 I would like to see a technology training for the Smart

Board that is interactive as opposed to sitting and

watching someone manipulate the program. I am a


hands-on learner, and the ISTs that have been offered,

while informative, are not useful for me in learning the

software.

10 I would like to have a review of Smart Board. I would

like to be made aware of any other software that is

available to us to enhance my instruction.

11 training for the new technology they place on our

computers, e.g. Lync or at least a cheat sheet on how to

use it.

12 Better use of the internet (i.e. different websites for

different types of classes such as those in Specialized).

13 Just whatever will keep us up to speed on what we need

in our classrooms.

14 SMART board training limited to a small learning group

to allow more questions and clarification.

A number of the respondents mentioned refresher courses on the programs we already

use and that's not a bad idea. In the case of the office programs we use there is already a resource

we can use on the Air Force Portal to learn more about things like Excel, PowerPoint, and other

Microsoft Products. Likely a guide on how to access and use these materials would be enough to

address the need.

Training was provided on the Smart Boards when we first received them and training is

available online, but new people have joined us and others have moved around or may not have

been present for the initial training. In-service-training and refreshers are definitely needed.


Respondent number 11 mentioned cheat sheets for commonly used applications and this

type of job aid would be fairly easy to create and distribute. This echos the recommendation of

one of the supervisors to create a notebook of job aids.

Respondent number 5's discussion of technology integration strikes at the heart of the

issue for many. In time we will see more of this based on current curriculum projects. Otherwise

teachers who already integrate technology effectively with their lessons should be encouraged to

share their techniques in IST.

The eighth question asked whether respondents had any other comments, questions, or

concerns.

Table 9

Do you have any other comments, questions, or concerns?


1 Broadband, Connectivity, and Lackland Air Force IT

policies are the major obstacles for incorporating

technology in the classroom

Network/ Equipment reliability

and IT support lacking

Electronic media/ eBooks

2 Smart Boards are not all reliable; system drives are not

all reliably accessible. I would like this to be addressed

and corrected

3 As a World Class Institution we are pretty much third

world in our application of the available products and

technologies available today. Many times I have had to

use students laptops, phones, or subscriptions to internet

assets to utilize media possibilities. My edu laptop was

unable to process the data to show on the Smart Board as


bandwidth prohibited use.

4 If the DLIELC would at least keep its IT updated and

working, it would be serving students well. As it is, our

super-slow internet, outdated laptops, and abject refusal

to allow cellphone-based technologies in the classroom

are signs that we are NOT the "world-class institution"

that we purport to be.

5 If we used more electronic media for instruction rather

than hard or soft-bound books it wouldn't take two years

or more to update materials.

6 I do NOT like games and do not want training in any.

7 Aren't we supposed to avoid using social media at DLI

and with DLI students?

8 If the equipment doesn't work, because it's out of our

control, this is all moot. We also should be given a

"heads up" if something is going to change on our

computers, such as new OS or software.

9 FYI- #4 on this survey only allowed me to choose one

form of technology. I would mark The Smart Board,

IMI, & the Internet

10 In general,the technology is very good, but the upkeep

and the updates of the technology isn't always timely.

11 Lack of support from the IT folks.

12 No.


The common response to this question points to failure of our infrastructure and IT

representatives to keep up with our needs. There is much more involved in this than we see as

teachers and I doubt the network and systems will ever be as high-speed as we would like.

Having said that, we can work together to make what we have work. All of us have found one

work-around or another we use to get around slow networks and lack of support. We do have an

Educational Technology Response Team, but maybe it's time to consider and Educational

Technology Users Group.

Findings of Needs Analysis

This analysis revealed that the use of technology in our organization is generally good,

but that we all have room for improvement. There are those who tend to avoid technology,

though the general population is trying to use it effectively. Given our busy schedules some of

the more complex technologies and learning are not always acquired or applied.

Need for Instruction

There is a definite need for updated training on the basic technologies teachers are

expected to use effectively. Some of this training is already available and can be better

advertised, and some will need to be developed.

The Air Force provides basic Office and Windows training online, but many do not know

that it exists or how to access it. A short training on how to use these resources would be

beneficial.


Job aids should be created that illustrate how to access some of the technology available

to us but that isn't as commonly used. This could be in the form of a simple computer users guide

at each workstation.

Some of the other tasks teachers and supervisors have asked for can be taught through in-

service-training sessions and those who are already proficient in these areas should be

encouraged to offer the training. There is really no reason we should have to seek outside

training resources for much of this.

Teachers need to know where to go or who to ask if they don't know what to do. Training

can emphasize the aids and resources already available, such as the response team and

information technology assets.

Goal of Instruction

Given effective training and job aids, teachers at DLI will integrate technology in their

classroom and demonstrate their proficiency in it when asked or on a yearly review by their

supervisor.


Appendix A: Data Collection Instrument 1 - Section Chief Interviews

The Core Document states that teachers should be able to use technology in the classroom

effectively. How should they be meeting this goal?

How would you define effectively in this case?

Is there a specific technology teachers aren't using effectively?

Are there technologies or tools the teachers need better training to use?

Are there technologies we currently use that are not an effective use of teachers' time?

Are there technologies you would like to see our organization adopt? Why?

Appendix B: Data Collection Instrument 2 - Supervisor Interviews

The Core Document states that teachers should be able to use technology in the classroom

effectively. How should they be meeting this goal?

How would you define effectively in this case?

Is there a specific technology you feel teachers aren't using effectively?

Are there technologies or tools the teachers need better training to use?

Are there technologies we currently use that are not an effective use of teachers' time?

Are there technologies you would like to see our organization adopt? Why?

Have individual teachers identified technology they can't use?

Have individual teachers identified technology training they would like to receive?

What technologies or processes have you observed teachers using or performing

improperly?


Have you received mandates regarding the use of technology that are not

achievable or that are beyond current teachers' training or understanding?

Appendix C: Data Collection Instrument 3 - Teacher Surveys

Presented as a Survey Monkey Survey:

1. Do you know who the members of the Educational Technology Response Team are for

your section? (Yes/No)

2. Rate your ability to use the following in your day-to-day work (not at

all/somewhat/average/fairly well/expert)

◦ Email

◦ The Smart Board

◦ PowerPoint

◦ Excel

◦ SharePoint

◦ Lync (Skype for Business)

◦ The document camera

◦ The Online Learning Center (OLC)

◦ Individualized Media Instruction (IMI)

◦ Curriculum Provided Materials


◦ CAD, CAR, PE Input (Attendance, Student Records, Student Performance

Evaluation)

3. How knowledgeable are you of the following tools or concepts? (not at all/I have heard

of it/somewhat familiar/ have used/ very familiar or expert)

◦ Learning Management Systems (LMS)

◦ Globalnet

◦ Ilias

◦ milSuite

◦ Blended Learning

◦ Document encryption

◦ Secure file sharing

◦ Wiki

◦ Blogs

◦ Social Media

◦ Simulators

◦ Cloud computing and storage

4. What Technology in the classroom do you feel uncomfortable using?

◦ The Smart Board

◦ Social Media

◦ IMI or other computer based tools


◦ The Internet

◦ Other (Please Specify)

5. Do you feel appropriate tools (classroom tech, tutorials, job aids, classes) have been made

available to address your technology needs? (Yes/I don't know/Not Really)

6. What kinds of classroom technology would you like to see adopted at DLI?

7. What types of technology training would you like to see offered as In Service Training

(IST)?

8. Do you have any other comments, questions, or concerns?

Documents

Classroom Technology at Defense Language Institute English ... · Classroom technology at defense language institute 4 Current Conditions and Desired Conditions Current condition