Search

Competency-based medical education systems allow institutions to individualize teaching practices to meet the needs of diverse learners. Yet, the focus on continuous improvement and individualization of curricula does not exempt programs from treating learners in a fair manner. When learners fail to meet key competencies and are placed on probation or dismissed from training programs, issues of fairness may form the basis of their legal claims. In a literature search, we found no in-depth examination of fairness. In this paper, we utilize a systems lens to examine fairness within postgraduate medical education contexts, focusing on educational opportunities, assessment practices, decision-making processes, fairness from a legal standpoint, and fairness in the context of the learning environment. While we provide examples of fairness issues within US training programs, concerns regarding fairness are relevant in any medical education system which utilizes a competency- based education framework. Assessment oversight committees and annual programmatic evaluations, while recommended, will not guarantee fairness within postgraduate medical education programs, but they can provide a window into 'hidden' threats to fairness, as everything from training experiences to assessment practices may be examined by these committees. One of the first steps programs can take is to recognize that threats to fairness may exist in any educational program, including their own, and begin conversations about how to address these issues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Teacher education faculty must incorporate and model effective use of Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge (TPACK) in the classroom and across the curriculum. Teacher education leaders have a responsibility to set direction, develop people, and redesign their teacher preparation programs into TPACK ready environments. As such, a change process may occur that may be challenging and difficult for some leaders and their faculty. In this article, the authors examine the process and product of creating a TPACK leadership diagnostic tool that provides leaders in teacher education with support and guidance for the process of developing TPACK ready teacher preparation programs. Suggestions for further development and usage of the diagnostic tool are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When preparing TPACK ready teacher candidates, faculty must incorporate and model TPACK within the teacher education curriculum, which often requires an ongoing change process. But for change to take place we must consider the role leadership plays in the innovation of change. Leaders, deans and department heads must be an integral part of this process. The challenge for innovation, change and education technology leaders is to transform teacher preparation programs into fully realized TPACK environments and determine the necessary learning opportunities and support necessary to motivate college leaders and faculty to fully embrace the change process. This article outlines a collaborative ongoing process and blueprint that leaders should consider as they make plans for the effective integration of TPACK into their colleges. 'Tomorrow's teachers must be prepared to rethink, unlearn and relearn, change, revise, and adapt' (Niess, , p.225). Leaders, deans and department heads must be an integral part of this process if it is to be successful. While technology can support changes in how teacher educators teach and future teachers learn to teach (Dilworth et al., ), teaching with technology is a 'wicked problem' in that it has 'incomplete, contradictory and changing requirements' (Koehler & Mishra, , p.10). New and innovative ways of confronting this complexity must address core knowledge base components that include content, pedagogy, and technology. These components have been used as the foundation for a technology , pedagogy , and content knowledge (TPACK) framework known as technological pedagogical content knowledge, or TPCK (AACTE, 2008; Koehler & Mishra, 2008; Mishra & Koehler, 2006; Pierson, 1999). But what is the role of leaders where TPACK based processes are being implemented in university teacher preparation programs? Educational technology leaders often approach models for teacher preparation in collectives that examine them iteratively. The 2012 National Technology Leadership Summit brought together the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (AACTE) and its Innovation and Technology Committee. Representatives from college administrations met and examined leadership issues facing deans, directors and chairs as they work to support college-wide change facilitating faculty and teacher candidates in the task of becoming TPACK proficient. This work built upon a CITE (Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education) journal editorial focused on initial conversations around leadership needs for effective TPACK implementation (Dexter, Herring, & Thomas, ). A presentation at AACTE 2013 extended this work with teacher preparation and education technology leaders sharing 'what worked' in their colleges around these processes. A panel presentation at the 2013 Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education (SITE) Conference also shared insights into a blueprint for key areas that leaders should consider as they make plans for the effective integration of TPACK into their colleges as well as several implementation case studies. This article compiles this iterative work from a leadership perspective. While the challenge is to transform teacher preparation programs into fully realized TPACK environments, leadership becomes the key in developing new ways of confronting this complex issue that must address core knowledge base components inclusive of content, pedagogy and technology. To accomplish this task, faculty are faced with incorporating modeling these ideas within a teacher education curriculum in concert with ongoing change processes. A solid understanding of the interactions of these components can result in effective teaching with technology in varied and diverse settings; but the critical role of leadership in making such changes must first be considered. The critical features of a blueprint for leaders is based upon the work of Leithwood and colleagues' framework comprised of three key leadership functions associated with improved student outcomes (Day, Sammons, Leithwood, Kington, ; Leithwood, Harris & Hopkins, ; Leithwood & Jantzi, ; Leithwood & Riehl, ). The three major component of the Leithwood transformational leadership model are: (1) Building vision and setting direction (2) Developing people through understanding people and (3) Developing the organization through redesigning it. Leithwood, Begley and Cousins () define transformational leadership as follows: The term 'transform' implies major changes in the form, nature, function and/or potential of some phenomenon; applied to leadership, it specifies general ends to be pursued although it is largely mute with respect to means. From this beginning, we consider the central purpose of transformational leadership to be the enhancement of the individual and collective problem-solving capacities of organizational members; such capacities are exercised in the identification of goals to be achieved and practices to be used in their achievement (p. 7). Transformational leaders can create significant change in both followers and the organization with which they are associated (Griffin, 2003). Transformational leaders also find common ground that allows them to enlist followers in processes of change. Fullan () finds that for true reform to take place, resolute leadership that remains focused is critical when new ideas encounter serious difficulty, thereby sustaining and building on success. To achieve this task and create significant change, transformational education leaders realize that true technology integration means understanding and negotiating the relationships between the three components of knowledge and going beyond a 'business' organizational model to create change in teacher preparation programs. Too often organizations start down the road to change without being clear on key factors that influence the outcomes of the initiative. Deans and educational leaders must develop a model for change based upon both the organizational culture and the environments they need a set of resources to help and guide them to integrate a framework like TPACK. Through ongoing collaboration and discussion the focus has been around the development of a leadership module which would help leaders establish a vision and set a direction for addressing TPACK. The purpose of a leadership module would be to provide Deans and other educational leaders with the tools they need for full-scale implementation and motivate them to redesign their programs while continuing to improve and sustain a developing / changing curriculum. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the statements of the two president-elect candidates and two secretary-treasurer candidates of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) in the U.S. It states that the two candidates for president-elect are Marc Childress, professor at the Emporia State University in Kansas and Anthony A. Piña, division president of AECT Executive Board. It also notes the candidates for AECT secretary-treasurer including Ellen Hoffman and Lara Luetkehans.

The article offers information on the 2011 Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) conference to be held at Hyatt Regency Jacksonville Riverfront hotel in Jacksonville, Florida on November 8-12, 2011.

The article offers information on the 2008 Associations for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) International Convention to be held in Orlando, Florida on November 4-8, 2008.

Reports on the lack of distance education training within preservice programs on the Iowa Communications Network's (ICN). Support of Star Schools grants, materials, workshops; Teacher Education Alliance Preservice Distance Education model.

The article offers information on the 2011 Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) conference to be held in Jacksonville, Florida on November 8-12, 2011.

The article offers information on the 2011 Association for Educational Communication and Technology (AECT) conference to be held in Jacksonville, Florida from November 8-12, 2011.

The article offers information on the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) International Convention to be held in Jacksonville, Florida in November 2011.

The article discusses the author's leadership as president of the Association for Educational Communications & Technology. He states that his interactions with the members and attend to affliate meetings enforced his belief in AECT's mission and service. He presents the developments of AECT under his management which includes the AECT web site which will be introduced at the 2009 convention, increased numbers of members, and the National Technology and Leadership Consortium (NTLC). Moreover, he expresses his gratitude for the opportunity given to him as president.

Information on the "National Technology Leadership Summit" (NTLS), an annual meeting of the National Technology Leadership Coalition (NTLC), is presented. It relates that the NTLS highlights participatory media and informal learning. It highlights speakers including James Gee, who talked about video games as a new form of learning. The author also discusses the role of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) members in continuing the discussion on informal learning.

The author presents views on the affiliates of the Association for Educational Communications & Technology (AECT) in the U.S. He stresses the important functions of affiliating with organizations and defines the affiliates of AECT according to the by-laws. He identifies the five affiliation categories such as the regional, national, and international and the opportunities that are included in the affiliation.

The article reports on the study tours to be offered by the Association for Educational Communications & Technology (AECT) during the 2008 International Convention to be held in Orlando, Florida on November 6-9. According to the author, the tours will be made available in the University of Central Florida's Florida Interactive Entertainment Academy (FIEA) and the Institute for Simulation and Training (IST). Furthermore, she mentions the offerings of FIEA and IST. Other information related to hte study tours are also mentioned.

This article focuses on the 2004 International Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) in Chicago, Illinois. Around 1,000 attendees participated in the conference. Conference evaluations showed that the high quality sessions allowed participants the opportunity to "jazz" up both their professional and program development. Pre-convention workshops offered a chorus of in-depth, hands-on experiences conducted by some of the top experts and vendors in the field.