This document discusses the benefits of cross-institutional research and collaboration in teacher education. It defines cross-institutional research as building relationships across multiple institutions to work toward common educational goals. Several studies are summarized that show benefits like community building, learning from peers, and modeling technology use for students. Challenges include technology issues, partner selection, planning, and cultural misunderstandings. Implementation requires finding partners, project planning, clear expectations, and communication. The document advocates experimenting with new technologies and expanding collaborative networks to advance teacher education.

1. Reflections on cross-institutional and cross-collaborative research and pedagogy in teacher education “Cross –institutional research is an important and often undervalued and overlooked means of extending the reach and capacities of any given institution” (wikia.com) Lara Lomicka, The University of South Carolina lomicka@sc.edu

2. Goals for the Talk Discuss and reflect on cross-institutional research Background Definitions Research Gains Tools Challenges Implementation Next step

3. Background American Educational Research Association (AERA) Panel on Research and Teacher Education recommendation for more cross-institutional studies (Cochran-Smith, 2005)

4. Background Standards for Teacher Educators from the Association of Teacher Educators Standard 5 - Collaboration Collaborate regularly and in significant ways with representatives of schools, universities, state education agencies, professional associations, and communities to improve teaching, learning, and teacher education. http://www.ate1.org/pubs/Standard_5.cfm

6. Research Cross-institutional and cross-collaborative projects In language learning contexts In language teacher education

7. Cross-Institutional Research Add chart

8. Arnold et al., 2005 Goal: examine how CMC facilitates positive social interactions and the formation of communities for professional growth among FL teachers Cross-institutional set up: graduate students from 3 US institutions enrolled in methods courses (new teachers) participated in regular exchange via discussion forums Results: benefits for FL teacher ed programs, connections to peers and community development, successful modeling encouraged them to incorporate technology in own teaching

9. Müller-Hartmann (2005) Goal: to look at the development of both intercultural communicative competence and critical media literacy in foreign language teachers Cross-institutional set up: pre- and in-service student-teachers in two upper-level courses in Germany and in the US, both novice and experienced; collaboration on tasks and regular exchange Results: development of ICC; wanted to develop more technical skills

10. Arnold et al., 2009 Goal: to examine the nature of online group interaction and cooperation in the process of developing a collaborative product Cross-institutional set up: New teachers from three large US universities worked together to develop a wiki during semester Results: successful interaction depends on group members; differing levels of participation point to unequal levels of involvement, which affected the level of collaboration, the group dynamics, and the final product. In addition, the leader in each group influenced the degree of collaboration taking place in the group.

11. Fuchs, 2010 Goal: Exploratory case study of teachers in US and in Germany and their evaluation of a blended learning course using task based language teaching (TBLT) Cross-institutional set up: ESL teachers in the US and in Germany; shared perspectives about teaching contexts and practices in chat, wikis, forums Results: more technology in teacher education; learned about TSLT

12. What did students gain? Involvement in a “community” of learners and/or teachers/experts Learning from and teaching one another Sharing ideas and experiences Mentoring opportunities Motivation to complete work/projects Technology

13. What technological tools used?

14. Tool Trends Variety of tools Use of model teaching (Fuchs,2010; Hubbard & Levy, 2006; Muller-Hartmann, 2005; Willis, 2001) Importance of innovative uses of technology Future?

15. Challenges Technology can be a hindrance A suitable partner to work with Careful planning, sometimes a great deal of time in advance Frequent and regular communication between teachers involved Resolving issues that relate to a colleague’s students or your own students Preparing for and dealing with cultural misunderstanding, miscommunication, frustrations Keeping up to date on the best tools for each project

16. Implementation Locate possible partners Project development (what and how it might be achieved) and possible tools Clear and realistic expectations for each partner Realistic timeframe for communication/ feedback

17. The next step? Think big, think collaborative Experiment with new technologies – microblogging, social networking, social media, iPads, etc. Involve different groups Use collaboration to lead to another project, if possible

18. Selected References Arnold, N., Ducate, L., Lomicka, L., & Lord, G. (2005). Using Computer-mediated Communication to Establish Social and Supportive Environments in Teacher Education. CALICO Journal, 22(3): 537-566. Arnold, N., Ducate, L., Lomicka, L., Lord, G. (2009). Assessing online collaboration among language teachers: A cross-institutional case study. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 8(2): 121-139. Arnold, N., & Ducate, L. (2006). Connecting universities, constructing meaning: An analysis of beginning and future FL teachers ‘meeting’ online. Language Learning and Technology, 10(1), 42-66. Arnold, N., Ducate, L., and Lomicka, L. (2007). Virtual communities of practice in teacher education. In M. Kassen, R. Lavine, K. Murphy-Judy, & M. Peters (Eds.). Preparing and Developing Technology-proficient L2 Teachers (pp. 103-132). San Marcos, TX: Computer Assisted Language Instruction Consortium. Cochran-Smith, M. (2005). Studying teacher education: What we know and need to know. The Journal of Teacher Education 56: 301. DOI: 10.1177/0022487105280116. Egbert, J., Paulus, T., & Nakamichi, Y. (2002). The impact of CALL instruction on classroom computer use: A foundation for rethinking technology in teacher education. Language Learning & Technology, 6(3), 108-126. Available: http://llt.msu.edu/vol6num3/egbert.default.html Hubbard, P. & Levy, M. (Eds.). (2006). Teacher education in CALL. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Fuchs, C. (2003). Negotiating over a distance: The challenges of computer-mediated communication (CMC) in foreign language teacher education. In M.K. Legutke, & D. Rsler (Eds.), Fremdsprachenlernen mit digitalen Medien. Beitrge des Giessener Forschungskolloquiums. [Foreign language learning with computer technologies. Articles by the Giessen research colloquium.] (pp. 179-208). Tbingen: Narr. Fuchs, C. (2006a). Exploring German pre-service teachers' electronic and professional literacies. ReCALL, 18(2), 174-192.

19. Selected References Fuchs, C. (2006b). Computer-mediated negotiation across borders: German-American collaboration in language teacher education. Frankfurt: Peter Lang EuropischerVerlagderWissenschaften. Fuchs, C. (2009). Computer-mediated task design: Language student teachers' expectations and realizations. Letras & Letras. 37-64. Fuchs, C. (2010). Cross-institutional blended learning in teacher education: A case study. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 2(2), 30-49 Fuchs, C. (2011). Methodological Implications of Using Google Applications (Google Sites and Google Wave) for Cross-Institutional Collaboration in Language Teacher Education. Paper presented at American Association for Applied Linguistics Conference, Chicago. Lord, G., & Lomicka, L. (2008). Blended learning in teacher education: An investigation of classroom community across media. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 8(2). Lord, G., & Lomicka, L. (2007a). Social presence in virtual communities of FL teachers. System 35: 208-228. Lord, G., & Lomicka, L. (2007b). Foreign Language Teacher Preparation and Asynchronous CMC: Promoting Reflective Teaching. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education. 15 (4): 513-532. Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Muller-Hartmann, A. (2005). Learning how to teach intercultural communicative competence via telecollaboration: A model for language teacher education. In J. A. Belz & S. L. Thorne (eds.), Internet-Mediated Intercultural Foreign Language Education (p. 63-83). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle. Willis, J. (2001). Foundational assumptions for information technology and teacher education. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 1(3), 305-320.