Page 1 of 3

Preparing Tomorrow's Teachers to Use Technology - 2002

CFDA Number: 84.342 - Preparing Tomorrow's Teachers to Use Technology

Goal 8: To improve the knowledge and ability of future teachers to use technology in
teaching practices and student learning opportunities, and to improve the quality of
teacher preparation programs.
Objective 8.1 of 2: Strengthen teacher preparation programs so that they provide high-quality training in the use of
technology for instructional purposes.
Indicator 8.1.1 of 2: Curriculum redesign: The percentage of funded teacher preparation programs that redesign
their curriculum to incorporate best practices in the use of technology in teacher education will increase.
Sources and Data
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress
Quality

Percentage of programs Status: Target not met Additional Source

Information:
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets Progress: The percentage Project
Capacity Capacity of projects that redesigned Performance
Building ImplementationCatalyst Building ImplementationCatalyst curriculum during this Reports.
Projects Projects Projects Projects Projects Projects reporting period has
decreased. Frequency:
2000 78 82
Annually.
2001 87 66 89 68 Explanation: Curriculum Collection Period:
2002 84 68 89 68 design is a priority for 2003
many Implementation Data Available:
projects, and some had December 2004
completed redesign before Validated By: No
this reporting period. The Formal Verification.
cumulative percent of
Implementation projects Limitations:
that have redesigned Performance report
curriculum as a grant data will be self-
activity since the beginning reported from
of the program is ninety- program grantees.
one percent (91%). ED does not collect
Curriculum redesign is not national level
the purpose of all Catalyst baseline data for
projects, many of which are this indicator.
not located at an institution Capacity-building
of higher education. grants were one-
year grants given in
1999 so there are
data only for 2000.

Indicator 8.1.2 of 2: Technology-proficient faculty: The percentage of faculty members in funded teacher
preparation programs that effectively use technology in their teaching will increase.
Sources and Data
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress
Quality

Percentage of faculty members in funding teacher preparation Status: Target not met Source:
programs that effectively use technology in their teaching will increase. Performance
Progress: Positive Report
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets movement toward target. Contractor
Capacity Capacity The percentage of Performance
Building ImplementationCatalyst Building ImplementationCatalyst technology proficient Report
Projects Projects Projects Projects Projects Projects faculty is increasing.
2000 56 53
Explanation: Additional Source
2001 61 63 Implementation projects Information:
are using various methods Project

1/31/2003
 Page 2 of 3

2002 62 63 to assess technology Performance

proficiency. Fifty-seven Reports
percent (57%) of faculty
were rated to be proficient Frequency:
using self-assessment, Annually.
fifteen percent (15%) using Collection Period:
observation, and thirty- 2002
three percent (33%) using Data Available:
other methods such as December 2003
exams and portfolios. Validated By: No
Formal Verification.

Limitations:
Performance report
data will be self-
reported from
program grantees.
ED does not collect
national level
baseline data for
this indicator.
Capacity building
grants were one-
year grants given in
1999 so there are
data only for 2000.

Objective 8.2 of 2: Increase the technology skills and proficiency of new teachers for improved classroom
instruction.
Indicator 8.2.1 of 1: Technology-proficient new teachers: The percentage of new teachers who are proficient in
using technology and integrating technology into instructional practices will increase.
Sources and Data
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress
Quality

Percentage of students assessed at catalyst projects that demonstrated Status: Target not met Additional Source
proficiency in using technology. Information:
Progress: The percentage Project
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets of graduating students who Performance
Capacity Capacity are rated as technology Reports.
Building ImplementationCatalyst Building ImplementationCatalyst proficient out of all those
Projects Projects Projects Projects Projects Projects assessed has decreased. Frequency:
Annually.
2000 42 32
Explanation: Fifty-nine Collection Period:
2001 34 38 36 40 percent (59%) of 2002
2002 29 19 36 40 Implementation projects Data Available:
required preservice December 2003
teachers to demonstrate Validated By: No
technology as a grant Formal Verification.
activity during the reporting Evaluation data
period and an additional collection will be
thirty-one percent (31%) verified by on-site
required proficiency but not monitoring and
as a grant activity. review as well as
Implementation grantees survey and analysis
are assessing a growing performed by an
number of graduating experienced data
students for technology collection agency
proficiency. Many Catalyst with internal review
projects are not located at procedures.
institutions of higher
education and therefore do Limitations:
not assess the technology Performance report
proficiency of preservice data will be self-

1/31/2003
 Page 3 of 3

teachers. reported from

program grantees.

1/31/2003