Thesis on "Confidential Interview From High School English Teacher"

Quoted Instructions for "Confidential Interview From High School English Teacher" Assignment:

You are to write a 4-page paper.

This is a 2-part paper. Part 1 and Part 2 is to be done separately. Do Not Use Outside Sources!

Part 1

You are to write a 3-page paper. Summarize results of the confidential interview below*****¦ they are to be put into a summary report of 3 pages.

Part 2

You are to write a 1-page Analysis of your most interesting findings from the interview.

1.Background information on the programmer/organizer:

*****¢What is your social, educational, and work experience?

I come from a lower middle class background. I went to a private college on scholarship as an undergraduate. After graduating from college I taught high school English for several years, then stayed home with my kids for 10 years and provided in-home day care to several other children. When my youngest started first grade, I started the M.Ed. program in Adult Education at Penn State, and then immediately on finishing that started the doctoral program. I graduated with a D.Ed. in 1996.

While I was a doctoral student, and for about a year after receiving my degree, I worked at the American Center for the Study of Distance Education as a publications editor. In 1997 I joined the newly formed World Campus as Assistant Director for Operations and Evaluation. I worked for the World Campus 9 years, finishing my time there with a dual appointment as Director of the American Center for the Study of Distance Education and Director of Research and Planning.

*****¢How did you become involved in program planning?

Much of my responsibility at the World Campus involved interacting with the representative of our primary funder, the Sloan Foundation. The World Campus would occasionally propose new program ideas*****”in addition to the University*****s academic degree programs--to the Sloan Foundation. These would be programs related to online education that would complement the World Campus*****s and the Sloan Foundations***** missions. One of these programs was an invited conference on collaborative possibilities to strengthen online K-16 education.

2.What is your "philosophy" of program planning, if any? I don*****t have an articulated philosophy of program planning.

3.What models of program planning are you familiar with? Those of Tyler, Houle, Knowles, Sork, Caffarella, Cervero and Wilson

*****¢Which particular model have you used in the past?

I have not used either of these in their *****pure***** form, but rather incorporated elements of several models.

*****¢Do you have any preference for any model? Why?

I think Cervero and Wilson*****s model, which recognizes multiple agendas and different power relationships, is the one that most closely reflects the *****political***** nature of planning decisions in the University.

4.How has your approach to program planning changed over the years?

I have become more aware that my personal values need to be considered and reflected in any program with which I*****m associated. I can*****t set those values aside and plan programs that run counter to my beliefs about the appropriate goals for or methods to deliver educational activities.

5.What do you consider the single most important skill in planning effective programs?

Building trust among stakeholders.

6.Information about a particular program he/she designed (workshop, class, etc.):

*****¢How did the agency become aware of the need for the program?

There had been a developing recognition in the higher education community, as reflected in articles and policy papers, that it no longer made sense to think of K-12 education and higher education as unconnected. Many policy makers had noted the need for greater collaboration between the two levels, a more integrated K-16 system, that would lead to greater student success in progressing through the system. The Sloan Foundation*****s primary focus is on improving higher education, including online higher education, and the World Campus proposed to the Foundation that they support a conference on K-12/higher education collaboration around online education activities.

*****¢What information did the agency require to proceed with the program?

They required a formal proposal that included a list of conference goals and themes, possible participants, other potential partners who might support and/or host the conference, a budget, and proposed evaluation activities.

*****¢What was the setting of the program and who were the learners?

The setting was the corporate headquarters of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting in Washington, DC. Participants were 35 representatives from higher education, the K-12 sector, alternative education providers (e.g., museums, PBS, National Geographic Foundation), and professional organizations

*****¢What resources were available for the program and how did you determine registration fees, if any?

Because this was an invitational conference, there was no registration fee. The Sloan Foundation funded travel for the participants to DC as well as hotel accommodations. The CPB, as host for the event, provided a reception for participants the night before the conference and breakfast, breaks, and lunch on the day of the conference. Four staff from the World Campus attended to implement the activities, and two staff from the Team Decision Center of the Penn State Conference Center were on hand to implement the technology (networked laptops for each participant) that was used for collecting and analyzing participant input into the discussions.

*****¢What were the goals and objectives and how were they established?

The goals were to 1) share information on the current status of online K-12 education and the success of the *****pipeline***** from K=12 to higher education; 2) explore possibilities for collaboration between the online K-12 education and online higher education, and 3) to identify successful models of K-12*****”higher education collaboration, and 4) to explore opportunities for extending Sloan Foundation partnerships into the K-12 arena. These goals were proposed by the World Campus and approved by the Sloan Foundation.

*****¢What teaching and learning methods were employed?

Presentation followed by discussion was the primary method used, followed by brainstorming and team decision making, supported by Penn State*****s mobile electronic team-decision center.

*****¢How was the learning sequenced?

The first half of the day was devoted to information sessions. The first information sessions presented baseline data related to numbers of programs and enrollments. Next, presenters offered specific examples of the three program foci: dual enrollment programs, online teacher professional development, and online alternative certification for teachers. General discussion followed these presentations. During the afternoon participants used Penn State*****s mobile electronic team-decision center to identify 1) successful models for collaboration between K-12 and higher education and 2) next steps in extending Sloan-Consortium/higher education partnerships into the K-12 sector.

*****¢What were the criteria for evaluation? How was the program evaluated and who conducted the evaluation?

Criteria for evaluation were developed by the funder and focused on the funder*****s expectation of recommendations and action steps from the participants as a result of the day*****s discussions. Data for this evaluation were collected via the electronic team-decision center and developed into a report to the Sloan Foundation.

*****¢What problems arose in the development and delivery of this program?

The program was originally envisioned to include 50 participants and to span one and a half days in order to cover all of the material deemed important. However, the funder cut the budget, necessitating a shorter program with fewer participants. There were no problems with the actual delivery of the program.

*****¢How did you incorporate adult education theories and principles?

The primary adult education principles were active engagement of all participants and an integration of participant experience into the activities. The participants were themselves the teachers, as well as the learners.