See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/222545395

Educational technology professional development as transformative

learning opportunities

Article  in  Computers & Education · November 2002

DOI: 10.1016/S0360-1315(02)00073-8 · Source: DBLP

CITATIONS READS
95 630

1 author:

Kathleen Palombo King

University of Central Florida
260 PUBLICATIONS   1,041 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Grant proposal for students with disabilities View project

Program review at Kent State University View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Kathleen Palombo King on 10 April 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Computers & Education 39 (2002) 283–297
www.elsevier.com/locate/compedu

Educational technology professional development as

transformative learning opportunities
Kathleen P. King*
Fordham University, 113 W. 60th St., Rm 1102, New York, NY 10023, USA

Received 28 April 2002; received in revised form 30 May 2002; accepted 4 June 2002

Abstract
The call to integrate technology into education can be used as a starting point for educators’ professional
growth. Looking at teacher preparation and professional development as much more than technology
training, this research bridges the literature and practice of faculty development in educational technology
with adult education’s transformational learning theory. Research conducted in graduate education cour-
ses in educational technology reveals themes of change in their perspective of their profession and educa-
tional practice. Technology learning can sometimes be intimidating or frustrating. This article highlights
the study’s significance of adult learning theory for teachers’ professional development and classroom
practice particularly in learning to cope with new knowledge bases and incorporating them into practice.
# 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Adult learning; Improving classroom teaching; Lifelong learning; Pedagogical issues

1. Introduction

As we enter the 21st century, we are keenly aware of the great impact technology is having on
our personal and professional lives as educators (Knapp & Glenn, 1996; Palloff & Pratt, 1999).
Educators are relentlessly confronted by a call to integrate technology into teaching and learning
from the media, accrediting organizations, professional associations, teachers, administrators,
state and federal departments of education, and parents (Education Week, 1999; International
Society for Technology in Education, 2000; Wilgoren, 1999). This current research demonstrates
how educators may experience deep, significant changes in their perspective and practice of
teaching through educational technology professional development.

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-212-636-6472; fax: +1-212-636-6452.

E-mail address: kpking@fordham.edu (K.P. King).

0360-1315/02/$ - see front matter # 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S0360-1315(02)00073-8
284 K.P. King / Computers & Education 39 (2002) 283–297

Over the last several years, many resources, both public and private, have been designated to
provide technology hardware and software for schools so that students have the opportunity to
learn and use technology in their academic pursuits. During this time, the public and educators
alike have realized that just having the technology in place does not immediately result in it being
used to further educational attainment. Therefore, more recently, we are aware that teachers’
professional development has been more prominently recognized and funded as an essential
component to ensure pedagogically sound technology use in the classroom (Darling-Hammond,
1999; Jelfs & Colbourn, 2002; King, 2002; O’Brien-Vojtek, & Vojtek, 1999).
Consequently, educators are at the center of the discussion, and sometimes, controversy, and
are deeply affected by technology-related standards, requirements, opportunities, and changes. As
we recognize these challenges for implementation, we can benefit from focusing on educators’
needs and situations.
Technology clearly has the ability to confuse, intimidate, and frustrate learners and users.
Learning to cope with these necessary new knowledge bases and skills is a complex process for all.
In addition, educators have additional needs in this learning process as they are urged to imme-
diately and proficiently bring the new learning to significant educational application in their class-
rooms. Just as other adults learn new concepts, engage in critical reflection, and consider new
perspectives, so do educators as they learn new skills and consider how to best apply them to
teaching and learning. A critical question for teacher professional development is how to assist and
guide educators and teachers-in-training through these necessary, but complex, steps of growth.
The adult learning theory of transformational learning provides a rich framework from which
to view faculty development in educational technology and provide insight into faculty learning
processes in this area. Originally explicated by Mezirow’s (1978) research, transformational
learning theory conceptualizes and describes learning as a process of critical reflection and self-
examination of one’s worldview in light of new knowledge and a fundamental reorganization of
one’s perspective or frame of reference (Taylor, 1998). This theory can greatly assist in framing
our understanding the changes educators experience in their perspective and practice of teaching
as a result of their learning technology. Viewing professional development as adult education
assists in not only focusing on the educator as learner, but also enabling us to consciously
appropriate relevant theory, research, and practice from the adult education field.
In order to reveal the nature and scope of this complex perspective transformation experience,
the instructional methods that contribute to it, and its impact on the professional development of
teachers, this research study was conducted on a relatively large scale. Much perspective trans-
formation research is conducted on small groups of learners; but the mixed research methods
used in this and previous studies allow a much larger sample to be examined (Taylor, 1998).
Within the context of this research we can begin to consider educators’ experiences of profes-
sional development in educational technology.

2. Background

Based on pilot studies, a preliminary study, the literature and having taught teachers educa-
tional technology for many years, this researcher recognized that transformational learning the-
ory afforded a unique and revealing perspective from which to examine such educators’
 K.P. King / Computers & Education 39 (2002) 283–297 285

experiences. Coupled with the foundational literature on transformational learning theory

(Cranton, 1994, 1997; Merriam & Caffarella, 1998; Mezirow, 1994; Mezirow & Associates, 2000;
Taylor, 1998), this research has an expansive basis for examining and understanding teachers’
learning experiences in educational technology that is different from the traditional professional
development literature.
In light of this, there are two major bodies of literature that provide a foundation for this
research: educational technology professional development and transformational learning. Brid-
ging these bodies of literature and practice provides a substantial foundation from which to
explore faculty development in educational technology.

2.1. Educational technology professional development

In considering the educational technology professional development literature, it is evident that

the focus has primarily been on technology integration into the curriculum. Numerous books are
being published every year to provide educators with ideas and guidelines to effectively, mean-
ingfully and, in many, innovatively use technology in teaching and learning (Geisert & Futrell,
2000; Jonassen, 2000; Jonassen, Pecks & Wilson, 1999; Robyler & Edwards, 1999). In addition,
the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) and the National Council for
Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) have recently developed materials to guide the
process of using technology to meet educational standards (ISTE, 2000; NCATE, 2000). All of these
publications are essential in promoting the personal professional development of classroom teachers;
however, they do not all address the issues of how to best conduct professional development in edu-
cational technology. As the educational community continues to realize the pressing need for its
teachers to learn and apply technology, the need for professional development becomes essential.
Substantial research has been conducted and literature written about educational technology pro-
fessional development over the years (Goodson, 1991; Passey & Samways, 1998; Persichitte, Caffar-
ella, & Tharp, 1999) and have several good suggestions, but fall short of providing a cohesive concept
of educators’ learning needs and development. Coming close to this goal, are the guidelines for staff
development developed by the National Staff Development Council (NSDC, 2000). This list of
exemplars can serve as a general framework for educational technology professional development.
The NSDC’s research-based standards serve both as goals to reach as well as quality indicators
that measure the success of programs. These standards regarding the context, process and content
of staff development emphasize face-to-face, collaborative, problem-solving, research-based
inquiry, and self-study, for impacting both teachers’ professional development and student
achievement. In particular, many of the guidelines for the Process Standards of staff development
may be applied to educational technology professional development.
The focus of this current research is fundamentally rooted in the second Standard: ‘‘(Staff
development) is based on knowledge about human learning and development,’’ but will also be
seen to incorporate standards 3, 6, 7, 8, and 10:

(NSDC) Process Standards

Effective high school, middle level and elementary school staff development:
(3) provides for the three phases of the change process: initiation, implementation, and
institutionalization.
286 K.P. King / Computers & Education 39 (2002) 283–297

(6) provides a framework for integrating innovations and relating those innovations to the
mission of the organization.
(7) uses a variety of staff development approaches to accomplish the goals of improving
instruction and student success.
(8) provides the follow up necessary to ensure improvement.
(10) requires staff members to learn and apply collaborative skills to conduct meetings, make
shared decisions, solve problems and work collegiality (NSDC, 2000).

These emphases are found in another body of literature that may serve to inform professional
development: adult learning theory. Several researchers and authors have approached educa-
tional technology professional development from this base of adult education (King, 2002; Wil-
hite, DeCosmo, & Lawler, 1996). The NSDC guidelines do not address educational technology
learning specifically; however, they do provide a link between professional development and adult
learning theory.
The adult education literature has recently addressed professional development and teacher
education as adult learning. Premiere among these are the work of Brookfield (1995) and Cranton
(1996), which provide a theoretical and practical foundation to consider faculty development as
potentially promoting transformational learning. Schön (1987) first fully developed the concept
of the reflective practitioner, while Brookfield moved ahead and delineated transformational
learning’s pivotal component—critically reflective thinking for educators. Most directly, however,
Cranton discussed transformational learning explicitly as professional development, developed its
potential and recommended strategies to facilitate it. While none of the professional development
research directly addresses educators’ transformational learning in learning educational technol-
ogy, the adult learning literature provides a basis for this research and discussion.

2.2. Transformational learning

In recent years, transformational learning theory has dominated the adult learning theory lit-
erature (Cranton, 1997; Merriam & Caffarella, 1999; Mezirow & Associates, 2000; Taylor, 1998).
Transformational learning theory serves as a comprehensive way to understand the process
whereby adult learners critically examine their beliefs, assumptions, and values in light of
acquiring new knowledge and correspondingly shift their worldviews to incorporate new ideas,
values and expectations (Cranton, 1994; Mezirow, 1994, 2000). One striking quotation from
Mezirow (2000) captures a current understanding of transformational learning,

Transformative learning refers to transforming a problematic frame of reference to make it

more dependable in our adult life by generating opinions and interpretations that are more
justified. We become critically reflective of those beliefs that become problematic. . .Frames of
reference may be highly individualistic or shared as a paradigm. Transformational learning is a
way of problem solving by defining a problem or by redefining or reframing the problem. (p. 20)

As adults gain new understanding they attempt to integrate it into their prior beliefs and
assumptions. It is at this point that these beliefs may become ‘‘problematic.’’ As these beliefs are
 K.P. King / Computers & Education 39 (2002) 283–297 287

critically examined and the related ‘‘frames of reference’’ challenged and revised, transforma-
tional learning may occur. As stated by Mezirow, this process often includes redefining the
problem. By its fundamental scope, one can see that transformational learning has the potential
to deeply impact the lives and understanding of adults. In this research, teachers involved in
professional development are recognized as experiencing transformational learning as they
examine their beliefs about teaching and learning while learning educational technology. There-
fore the theory is used to examine and understand the changes they experience.
Adults’ perspective transformations are frequently found to be prompted by ‘‘disorienting
dilemmas’’, and proceed through multiple stages of progression (Mezirow et al., 1990). In a
similar fashion, revised state and national standards, school administrators, accrediting organi-
zations, professional associations, parents, peers, students, and the community are requiring that
teachers learn technology and effectively integrate it into their curriculum. These forces create an
intense demand for educators to cope with constantly changing technology and may result in
teachers experiencing a ‘‘disorienting dilemma’’ or ‘‘trigger event’’ that urges them to pursue
technology education. Conditions like these, that cause adults to question their knowledge base
and to change their actions, are the seedbeds of additional profound change of perspective
transformation experiences yet to come.
This research offers a unique examination of the occurrence and nature of perspective trans-
formation experiences related to educational technology learning. The theoretical basis of the
research has three fundamental premises: (1) viewing teachers and teachers-in-training as adult
learners, (2) recognizing that transformational learning may occur in the educational process, and
(3) determining that the scope and nature of change in their professional development may be
examined. The literatures related to educational technology professional development and trans-
formational learning have been synthesized to ground this foundation.

3. Research design

3.1. Method

In this study, teachers and teachers-in-training took a graduate education course (or courses)
where they learned, discussed and developed technology applications to the classroom. The
courses were conducted in formats that included discussions, small group projects, journal writing,
synchronous and asynchronous on-line conferencing, presentations, curriculum development, and
‘‘hands-on’’ experience with technology. Near the end of the courses, an assessment tool, interviews,
and reflective essays were used to record the participants’ reflections about their learning experiences.
The overall research model used was one of phenomenology (LeCompte, Millroy, & Preissle,
1992) as the researcher sought to allow the participants’ responses define the nature of the find-
ings through emergent themes. This study used two research methods. First, an assessment tool
served to identify participants who had experienced perspective transformation for further study.
While most of the assessment tool was quantitative, some of these data were in the form of free
responses and these in addition to the data from their interviews, essays, and journal entries were
analyzed through the qualitative constant comparison method of determining and coding emergent
themes (Gall, Borg, & Gall, 1996; LeCompte, Millroy, & Preissle, 1992). This research design of
288 K.P. King / Computers & Education 39 (2002) 283–297

incorporating qualitative and quantitative methods offers a powerful means of examining the
transformational learning experience of the participants.

3.2. Instrument

‘‘The Learning Activities Survey’’ was the assessment tool used in this study (King, 1998). This
four-page instrument examines transformational learning experiences in education settings and
was adapted through pilot studies to create a ‘‘Technology Form’’. ‘‘The Learning Activities
Survey—Technology Form’’ focuses on whether teachers have experienced transformational
learning while learning educational technology. This instrument uses a series of five objective and
free response questions to determine whether a respondent has experienced a perspective trans-
formation; the researcher assigns a category to each participant based on this assessment. In
addition, respondents identify contributors to perspective transformation and these data, along
with the demographic information, are analyzed in terms of frequencies and percentages. After
the responses are tabulated and coded, the resulting preliminary analysis is then tested in follow-
up interviews, with guided questions and open inquiry. Additionally, in this study, free-form journal
entries throughout the semester allowed participants to describe their experience as they explored and
began to master technology applications for educational purposes. Reflective essays were also com-
posed by a limited number of participants near the end of the courses. Once all of this information
had been gathered, they were analyzed to determine emergent themes of perspective transformation.
The validity of the instrument has been demonstrated through peer review and follow-up
interviews both originally and through the adaptation process. In addition to the assessment tool,
interviews were conducted and proved valuable in presenting an in-depth view of the respondents’
experiences. Both of these processes support the internal validity of the instrument (King, 1998).
Triangulation was also used to verify the gathered information from several sources and was
also critical (Gall et al., 1996). In the developmental stages of the instrument, the completed sur-
veys and follow-up interviews were matched by identification codes. These comparisons demon-
strated the accuracy of the information gathered with the tool. As the information was gathered
by several means, it verified that the perspective transformation experience was both accurately
reported by the participant and understood by the researcher. In the final study the follow-up
interviews continued to act as verification of the researcher’s interpretation of the data.
Administering the instrument at different times with the same individuals may elicit responses
about different perspective transformation experiences; because of this a simple test–retest relia-
bility measure was not advisable. Instead, the reliability question was answered by using, several
discreet evaluations to determine a final evaluation (Gall et al., 1996). A category system, the
PT-Index, was developed for this purpose. In order to answer the difficult question of whether an
adult learner has had a perspective transformation in relation to their education, answers to sev-
eral items in the instrument were used. Each item was evaluated separately and then the compo-
site PT-Index decided; this process strengthened the reliability of the instrument.
Using this instrument, interviews, and journals in this research, the questions considered in this
study were (1) What proportion of the sampled population of teachers and teachers-in-training
have experienced a perspective transformation within the context of their technology education?
(2) In what ways have the teachers’ perspectives regarding their profession changed? and (3)
What common themes of educational practice perspective transformation are evident?
 K.P. King / Computers & Education 39 (2002) 283–297 289

3.3. Participants

This study included 175 teachers and teachers-in-training enrolled in graduate education cour-
ses in educational technology during a 36-month period. This sample was gathered at private
doctoral granting universities in United States Middle Atlantic region metropolitan areas. As will
be demonstrated by the data, a composite profile of a typical participant in this study would be a
white, female educator in her 30s, who has a Bachelor’s degree, is in her first three semesters of
graduate study and has taught just over 10 years.
Several demographic characteristics assist in describing this sample in detail and in determining
similarities and differences to other groups of educators. The participants were predominantly
female (75.4%, 132/175). Distribution by race was White, non-Hispanic, 71.3%, Black, 10.9%,
Hispanic, 8.4%, Asian or Pacific Islander, 6.6%, and other, 2.8%. The mean age range was 30–39
as distributed in Table 1. Regarding marital status 42.1% were single, 50.3% married, 6.9%
divorced or separated, 0.6% widowed.
Several demographics provide information more directly related to the participants’ profession.
Prior levels of educational achievement were primarily distributed among Bachelor’s degrees
(58.4%), Master’s degrees (38.7%) and Doctorates (2.9%). While 34.6% of the participants were in
their first semester of study at the university, 69.2% were in their first three semesters and a cumulative
91.2% were there six or fewer semesters. This demonstrates that the sample was composed of pri-
marily new students as would be expected in Master’s degree programs and courses. The participants
represented considerable teaching experience. The mean number of years teaching was M=10.334,
with the range extending from 0 (teachers-in-training) to 40 years as illustrated in Table 2.

4. Results

4.1. Perspective transformation occurrence

Analysis of the data gathered with the ‘‘Learning Activities Survey—Technology Form’’ indi-
cates that in the context of learning educational technology, 89.1% (156/175) of the teachers and
teachers-in-training had experiences that were consistent with perspective transformation. In the
past, other transformative experiences have been studied to determine how to best facilitate the
Table 1
Frequencies of age distribution
Age range n Percentage
<21 0 0.0
21–24 12 7.4
25–29 34 21.0
30–39 39 24.1
40–49 43 26.5
50–59 30 18.5
60–69 4 2.5
Other 0 0.0

n=175, 13 missing.
290 K.P. King / Computers & Education 39 (2002) 283–297

Table 2
Frequencies of the number of years teaching
Years teaching n Percentage
0–1 30 17.1
2–3 15 8.6
4–5 26 14.9
6–10 31 17.7
11–15 23 13.1
16–20 21 12.0
21–25 14 8.0
26–30 3 1.7
31–35 3 1.7
36–40 3 1.7
No response 6 3.4

n=175. Original responses were individual integers; they were grouped for this report.

experience among participants (Cranton, 1994; Mezirow et al., 1990). Similarly, inquiry about the
nature and occurrence of perspective transformation among teachers and teachers-in-training
from a variety of content areas and grade levels has implications for teacher education.

4.2. Changes regarding teachers’ perspectives of their profession

As evidenced by their journal entries, reflective essays, and follow-up interviews, educators
indicated that they experienced perspective transformation while they learned educational tech-
nology. Participants revealed that technology changed their perspective of their profession in two
ways. Regarding their perspective of their profession, technology learning transformed (1) their
concept of the role of the educator and (2) their worldview of education.

4.2.1. The educator’s role

Teachers recounted how their ideas about their role as educators was expanded as they looked
at and experienced new possibilities with technology in the classroom. The shift from teacher-
centered to student-centered learning is a frequent theme here. These observations are in tandem
with a new view of what learning entails.

I now see the teacher as a facilitator in a technology equipped classroom. When people share
their information they learn more.

As I read for the paper and in our discussions, I kept coming across the idea of teachers
seeing their education as reflection and self-direction. . . . This is absolutely necessary in the
field of teaching technology, distance education and adult education . . . you have taught us
these principles by excample – more learner-centered teaching came alive for me.

I more readily see computers as another doorway to learning. They are a way to make
learning more of an interactive experience and I discovered that it was easier than I thought
to use computers as a teaching/learning tool.
 K.P. King / Computers & Education 39 (2002) 283–297 291

4.2.2. Worldview of education

In addition, the teachers recognized that their classrooms have the opportunity to expand their
concept of education and to incorporate worldwide resources and influence through technology.
For example, moving beyond the potential isolation of the classroom, the teachers’ students can
exchange information and dialogue with experts and students worldwide.

I am amazed at the amount of sites and information that is available to educators and students.
It is so vast and available.

I would like to find ways to integrate the Internet into my curriculum even more and connect
with other schools to network and create teleconferencing courses, etc.

I have had the pleasure of interacting with elementary teachers (in this class) so I had a shift
in my way of thinking about the damage I thought pc’s would do to children’s reading habits.
Technology, I learned, ignites and augments an already committed learning environment
which a good teacher creates.

Technology is not anymore a pure addition, but a crucial source of knowledge communication.

My view of technology and the Internet has changed radically. I saw it just as a highway;
now I view it as a landscape.

Rather than limited to individual classrooms the teachers began to see their work as having a
greater scope. Recognizing the global community of education, they also saw that teaching was
greater than daily interactions in an isolated classroom. Education took on an expansive, more
inclusive dimension rather than their prior restricted perspectives.
In both of these ways, the changing educators’ role and worldview of education, educators
began to see the teaching profession as something much different from what they were used to see
it. While learning educational technology, they realized new possibilities for their teaching. They
could teach their students to find and use resources beyond their traditional form and include
both data and people as resources in research and learning. The concepts of teacher as facilitator
along a journey of continued learning emerges in these accounts. These realizations were at the
core of the teachers’ anticipated changes in practice.

4.3. Common themes of educational practice perspective transformation

Three common themes of perspective transformation among the teachers’ educational practice
revealed by an analysis of the data are: (1) changes in teaching methods, (2) changes in teacher pre-
paration and research methods, and (3) increased self confidence with technology use in their profession.

4.3.1. Changes in teaching methods

What I use in the classroom will change as students will have more hands-on work and learn
how to independently get information. I also want to develop activities parents can get
involved in.
292 K.P. King / Computers & Education 39 (2002) 283–297

I can see that I need to incorporate computers as learning in class. . . . Help children with
skills, not just lecture.

In thinking about the positive effects it [web page building] could have on Middle of High
School students. The listservs are also tremendous resources. . . . Using technology can help
students to get involved in the classroom or beyond and that is what I am interested in;
finding tools to help kids have a better learning experience.

The changes in teaching methods may be further divided into three major categories: (1) teachers
may employ different learning activities with their students; (2) teachers encourage self-directed
learning; and (3) teachers encourage critical thinking skills development (see also King, 2002).

4.3.2. Teacher preparation and research methods

Another area of profound change is the teachers’ preparation and research methods. These
teachers can prepare new types of classroom materials (e.g. multimedia presentations and web
pages) and draw upon information resources previously unavailable or inaccessible to them (e.g.
government agency and research websites, lesson plan archives, etc.). The teachers describe how
they are ‘‘more involved in researching and further studying topics’’ and are excited about greater
access to valuable new information. They also value the benefits in their administrative prepara-
tion and their ability to swiftly deliver essential resources to their students.

4.3.3. Teacher self-confidence

Participants’ accounts repeatedly reflect that these educators not only have a change in
perspective about technology use and technology application to education, but also about
their empowerment, greater confidence, and self-directed learning. The educators describe how
their lack of understanding no longer was a barrier for them. In this way, these three outcomes
merge as the teachers no longer are distrustful, puzzled, or fearful of technology, its use, and
others’ views of themselves. Instead, they are ready to explore how technology can support their
classrooms and how they can engage in academic exchange and dialogue through technology
means.

I am happy to say I have gotten over that fear [of creating web pages] and my basic fear of
the computer. . . . I have learned and experienced technology is an invaluable tool in the field
of education. . . . I firmly believe technology is the way to enter the 21st century. . . . Thank
you for breaking down the barrier.

I was intimidated by computers. . .Once I saw that they were fairly simple to operate and
unbelievably resourceful, I was no longer intimidated.

I have developed a lot of my own material for classes such as new curriculum and I feel much
more empowered and confident in teaching.

I am so much more confident and this was due to the two courses that I took here. This will
be a great help to me in my teaching. My students use computers on a daily basis and now I
 K.P. King / Computers & Education 39 (2002) 283–297 293

can check what they have been doing. I also can communicate with them by e-mail to see
what they really think. What a difference.

At the same time that many educators recognize that their research, preparation and teaching
methods change, they also experience a new-found confidence in using technology in their
classes. Oftentimes this empowerment is expressed in emotional terms and is deeply felt as in
the following examples. The first educator reveals her personal and professional empower-
ment in having a new perspective on teaching, being equipped to discuss technology with
others, and asking for additional resources.

Before the class I was computer illiterate and afraid of computers. Now I am comfortable
with them. I want to do everything, incorporate technology into the curriculum. . . . I now
talk about computers at work. I speak to co-workers, people I never spoke to before. I am
now asking for things from my principal whereas before I never did.

The quote from the next educator reveals the empowerment she senses is available for her and
other adult educators and adult learners through distance learning. Building upon a semester’s
work of learning, using, and discussing educational technology, the firsthand experience in
videoconferencing brings together her deeply felt excitement, vision of new possibilities, and
harsh economic and political realities.

WOW!!! That [videoconferencing] was just extraordinary! I am tremendously impressed by

what we saw tonight. I’m a convert, no doubt about it. I had no idea what to expect but it
really changed my opinion about distance ed[ucation] and the possibilities for ESL. One
could hook up with other classes for collaborative learning. Students could work together on
all kinds of projects. . .Hookups with businesses could teach them about interviewing and
office work. And the possibilities for Adult Basic Education (ABE) students are probably
even greater, because of using distance ed[ucation] for actual coursework. Of course, it’ll
probably never happen for most ESL or ABE students because there is no powerful advocate
for the kind of [money] expenditures necessary. I think it’ll be possible only after school dis-
tricts get the technology and then look around for other ways to use it. Only then might
someone think of adult ESL and ABE students. They’re not powerful constituencies in this
country. Too bad, too, since there’s so much need for skilled workers. All these people
would make great workers if only there were some kind of commitment from government
to help them get the skills they need. I wonder what it takes to get people to understand the
waste of not helping everybody reach his/her highest potential. Not a battle I’m going to
win anytime soon. I can hope though. . .

Based on this research account and observations of the professional development activities, it
appears that this empowerment is further fed by the prominent and revered position that tech-
nology has increasingly gained in our global communities and economies. As educators master
technology application to their profession, they also increase their own self-respect and vision of
teaching and learning. Further research is merited in this area to examine the role that public
values have on the teaching profession in regard to technology learning and use.
294 K.P. King / Computers & Education 39 (2002) 283–297

5. Discussion

Examining the transformational learning experiences of teachers as they learn technology has
educational significance for (1) professional development, and (2) classroom practice.

5.1. Professional development

As one understands professional development in educational technology as potential trans-

formational learning experiences, one can begin to reconceptualize its outcomes. Rather than
focusing solely on technology skills, incorporating group discussions, collaborative work groups,
and curriculum development can help faculty to begin to challenge their concepts of teaching and
learning as they learn educational technology. Professional development has the potential to
engage teachers in fundamental reflection about their work and its place in our global com-
munity. Professional developers have an opportunity to help cultivate reflective practice and
encourage the development of learning communities that may lead to communities of practice
(Wenger, 1999).
By using what the literature tells us about learners, professional developers can create active
learning environments that include collaborative experiences and result in application to learners’
needs. By providing experiences where teachers explore the possibilities for their classrooms
through simulations, examples, case studies, and first-hand experiences (immersion), this study
demonstrates that professional development can create environments that contribute toward
substantial adult learning.
As teachers form a vision of themselves as facilitators rather then dispensers of knowledge and
the connection of their classrooms in a worldwide context, they can experience fresh perspectives
for their individual and professional community roles. Finding new patterns and meaning brings
new possibilities to teaching and learning through learning educational technology. Professional
development programs become opportunities to develop personally and professionally. Going
through this experience of being able to place themselves in the current context of technological
change also can benefit educators in learning how to cope with new knowledge and change—a
lifelong learning need.

5.2. Classroom practice

Classroom practice may be impacted by the outcomes of this study as teacher educators and
faculty developers learn how to assist teachers in employing new teaching methods, additional
learning objectives, and student-centered learning environments. Changes in teaching practice do
not always happen easily; this study demonstrates that educational technology learning may be a
way to catalyze teachers to adopt and reach new state, national, and professional educational
standards. As teachers engage in professional development that includes reflecting on and evalu-
ating their current practice, they can begin to consider and plan changes. Introducing educators
to new applications of technology provides them with additional teaching resources and new
paradigms of classroom teaching. Professional development that results in new and revised cur-
riculum and lesson plans facilitates the transfer of learning as it brings the learning into practice
(Maurer & Davidson, 1998).
 K.P. King / Computers & Education 39 (2002) 283–297 295

However, this research also demonstrates a much more fundamental change and indicates that
a radical alteration of teaching perspectives and practice are possible. Rather than solely aiming
for modified curriculum, professional development initiatives can be used to cultivate new views
of teaching and learning. Fundamentally transforming the educators’ perspective of the profes-
sion and practice can open new worlds of opportunity for the profession and the classroom.
Additional longitudinal research regarding the characterization of the changes in practice from
these forms of professional development and teacher education is also being pursued.

6. Conclusion

New technology is being introduced at such a rapid rate today that it is difficult for teachers to
keep up with it on their own, because of this, professional development of teachers has become
more urgent. Focusing on educators engaged in educational technology as adult learners leads to
teacher education and faculty development initiatives that can build on best practice from the
field of adult education.
This study examined the experience of 175 teachers as they learned technology for educational
purposes within the framework of transformational learning. This vantage-point reveals changes
these teachers experienced in regard to their profession and provides recommendations for tech-
nology education professional development efforts that will not only transform educators’ per-
spectives, but also their practice. Most importantly, this study demonstrates that the adult
education learning theory of transformational learning provides insight into these teachers’
experiences as critical reflection and development.

References

Brookfield, S. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Cranton, P. (1994). Understanding and promoting transformative learning; a guide for educators of adults. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Cranton, P. (1996). Professional development as perspective transformation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cranton, P. (Ed.). (1997). Transformative learning in action: insights from practice. New Directions in Adult and Con-
tinuing Education, No. 74. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1999, Spring). Target time toward teachers. Journal of Staff Development [Online document],
20 (2). Available: http://www.nsdc.org/library/jsd/darling202.html.
Education Week. (1999, September). Building the digital curriculum. [Online document]. Available: http://www.edwee-
k.org/sreports/tc99.
Gall, M. D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (1996). Educational research: an introduction (6th ed). White Plains, NY:
Longman.
Geisert, P. G., & Futrell, M. K. (2000). Teachers, computers, and curriculum: microcomputers in the classroom (3rd ed).
Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Goodson, B. (1991). Teachers and technology: staff development for tomorrow’s schools. Alexandria, VA: National
School Board Association.
International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (2000). National education technology standards for students:
connecting curriculum and technology. Eugene, OR: ISTE.
296 K.P. King / Computers & Education 39 (2002) 283–297

Jelfs, A., & Colbourn, C. (2002). Virtual seminars and their impact on the role of the teaching staff. Computers &
Education, 38, 127–136.
Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Computers as mindtools for schools: engaging critical thinking (2nd ed). Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Merrill-Prentice Hall.
Jonassen, D. H., Peck, K. L., & Wilson, B. G. (1999). Learning with technology: a constructivist perspective. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Merrill-Prentice Hall.
King, K. P. (1998). A guide to perspective transformation and learning activities: the Learning Activities Survey. Phila-
delphia, PA: Research for Better Schools.
King, K. P. (2002). Keeping pace with technology. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Knapp, L. R., & Glenn, A. D. (1996). Restructuring schools with technology. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
LeCompte, M. D., Millroy, W., & Preissle, J. (1992). The handbook of qualitative research in education. New York:
Academic Press, Inc.
Maurer, M. M., & Davidson, G. S. (1998). Leadership in instructional technology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill-
Prentice Hall.
Merriam, S., & Caffarella, R. (1999). Learning in adulthood (2nd ed). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mezirow, J. (1978). Education for perspective transformation; women’s re-entry programs in community colleges. New
York: Teacher’s College, Columbia University.
Mezirow, J. (1994). Understanding transformation theory. Adult Education Quarterly, 44(4), 222–232.
Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning to think like an adult. In J. Mezirow, & X. Associates (Eds.), Learning as transformation:
critical perspectives on a theory in progress (pp. 3–34). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mezirow, J., & Associates. (1990). Fostering critical reflection in adulthood; a guide to transformative and emancipatory
learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mezirow, J., & Associates. (2000). Learning as transformation: critical perspectives on a theory in progress. San Fran-
cisco: Jossey-Bass.
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). (2000). NCATE unit 2000 standards [Online
document]. Washington, DC: NCATE. Available: http://www.ncate.org/2000/2000stds.pdf.
National Staff Development Council. (2000). NSDC standards for staff development [Online document]. Available:
http://www.nsdc.org/list.htm.
O’Brien-Vojtek, R., & Vojtek, R. (1999, Winter). Technology standards. Journal of Staff Development [Online serial],
20 (1). Available: http:www.nsdc.org/library/jsd/vojtek201.html.
Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Passey, D., & Samways, B. (1998). Information technology: supporting change through teacher education. London:
Chapman & Hall.
Persichitte, K. A., Caffarella, E. P., & Tharp, D. D. (1999). Technology integration in teach preparation: a qualitative
research study. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 7(3), 219–233.
Robyler, M. D., & Edwards, J. (1999). Integrating educational technology into teaching (2nd ed). Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Schön, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Taylor, E. (1998). The theory and practice of transformative learning; a critical review. Columbus, OH: ERIC Clear-
inghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education.
Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wilgoren, J. (1999, Oct. 25). Harsh critique of teachers urges attention to training, The New York Times, A18.
Wilhite, S. C., DeCosmo, A. D., & Lawler, P. A. (1996, October). Faculty as adult learners; implications for faculty
development initiatives. The Eastern Adult, Continuing, and Distance Education Research Conference Proceedings.
Penn State University: University Park, PA.
 K.P. King / Computers & Education 39 (2002) 283–297 297

Kathleen P. King, EdD is an associate professor of adult education, program director,

and director of a FIPSE/LAAP grant at Fordham University’s Graduate School of Education.
She teaches adult learning, program planning, educational technology, and research in the
master’s and doctoral programs. She has an EdD and MEd from Widener University, Chester,
PA, a MA from Columbia International University, Columbia, SC and a BA from Brown
University, Providence, RI. She is the author and co-author of three books and many articles;
she is a frequent presenter and keynoter at educational conferences locally, nationally, and
internationally.

View publication stats