This paper addresses the use of student portfolios to demonstrate technological competency as a required component of acquiring an initial license to teach music in the public schools. Included in this paper is a discussion of the state mandate, portfolio development process, challenges to the integration of technology across the music education curriculum, and the coming transition from a technology-specific portfolio to a comprehensive teaching portfolio based on the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC) standards that will still fulfill the state-mandated technology requirements.

"Music 355: Technology in the Music Classroom" was added to the music education curriculum at The University of North Carolina at Greensboro in the spring of 1994. This one-semester hour course was created in response to an anticipated North Carolina Department of Public Instruction mandate to include technology, special learners, and multiculturalism within the curriculum of degree programs leading to initial teaching licenses. It should be noted that, while the School of Music developed three separate courses, other units on campus included these three areas in a single course. Music 355 is typically taken in the second semester of the freshman year,

In 1995, the President of the University of North Carolina System, the Chairman of the State Board of Education, and the President of the Community College System announced a major initiative to provide assistance to the public schools of the state by developing and implementing a comprehensive plan for addressing the technology-related professional development needs of the state's current education workforce. The Department of Public Instruction initiated a series of efforts to enhance the educational uses of technology. In October 1995, the Technology User Task Force developed a plan for professional development in the area of technology. The necessary skills identified for preservice and inservice teachers and administrators are known as Basic and Advanced Technology Competencies for Educators.

On March 14, 1996, the North Carolina Board of Education endorsed the School Technology Users Task Force Report and approved a recommendation stating that all of the state’s educators should focus three to five renewal credits on technology competencies. These should be relevant to their licensure area, as deemed appropriate by their local school system, and take place during each five year cycle for license renewal. This measure was made effective immediately.

On December 5, 1996, the Board of Education adopted a strategy for the assessment of preservice teachers in the area of instructional technology. Basic skills were to be assessed through administration of the Essential Technology Skills Inventory. Advanced competencies were to be assessed through the development of a product-based portfolio. Since April 1999, graduates of teacher education programs in our state applying for an initial teaching license have been required to demonstrate an acceptable level of mastery of both the essential and advanced technology competencies.

For all teachers, the basic competencies include the following areas of focus:

Initially, each student’s basic skills were assessed using the Essential Technology Skills Inventory (ESTI), a written assessment of basic computer knowledge. The passing rate for the ESTI was nearly 100% As of spring 2000, basic skills are demonstrated by successfully completing the portfolio rather than the ESTI.

The advanced competencies are reflected in the following categories:

10.0 CURRICULUM: ESSENTIAL KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS

Demonstrate these skills:

EXPANDED KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS

Demonstrate these skills:

11.0 SUBJECT-SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE: ESSENTIAL KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS

Demonstrate these skills:

12.0 DESIGN AND MANAGEMENT OF LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS/RESOURCES: ESSENTIAL KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS

Demonstrate these skills:

Demonstrate knowledge through practical application:

Demonstrate these skills:

13.0 CHILD DEVELOPMENT, LEARNING AND DIVERSITY: ESSENTIAL KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS

Demonstrate these skills:

Demonstrate these skills:

Each area of study at each institution has developed domain-specific portfolio requirements that reflect the framework provided by the basic and advanced competencies. The music education portfolio is organized around the following topics:

• Internet Resources–Web Authoring, Searching, Useful Websites
• Notation- Scores and Parts, Musical examples in Documents
• Sound Production–MIDI, Digital, Web Use
• Multimedia–Pre-Packaged, Powerpoint, Hyperstudio
• Word Processing–Materials, Concert Programs
• Database–Personnel, Inventory
• Spreadsheet–Budget, Fund Raising, Gradebook
• Classroom Software–Use of Pre- Packaged Software

While all of these applications are not necessarily music-specific, the use of each is directed toward the manner in which a music teacher might use technology. To demonstrate word processing ability, for example, a student might include a concert program and a worksheet that included computer-generated music notation. Also, the inclusion of uses that are not necessarily music-specific reflects the requirements of the basic competencies.

A major component of the process is reflective writing. Each portfolio includes a brief paper on the student’s growth in technology and how that student plans to use it as a music educator. Additionally, the portfolio includes for each topic:

1. A topic summary that provides the following information for each example within the topic
1. software used,
2. a description of the process, and
3. how the student believes that they might be able to use this in music teaching/learning.
2. Samples of work
3. Lesson plans, where appropriate, that demonstrate how each student uses technology in their teaching.
4. A list of web resources for each topic.

The portfolio is evaluated by a four-member committee that includes three members from the School of Music and one member who is a practitioner in the area schools. The portfolio must reflect competency within each of the twenty-four sub-categories of the advanced competencies, as well each music-specific topic. Each sub-competency is evaluated using the following criteria: DK=Do not Know, K=Know, but Need Additional Help, U=Know and Use. Students are given an opportunity to correct deficiencies and to have the portfolio re-evaluated. The student portfolios are also evaluated by a university technology task force, housed within the Teachers Academy of the School of Education.

Several challenges have surfaced in the development of the portfolio process. These include:

• Curriculum Integration–all faculty must be willing to encourage and/or require technology use
• Use of Technology in Field Experiences–require use in authentic ways and by cooperating teachers
• Communicating Appropriate Use for Music Teachers to Others–What do you mean there are no words?
• Method of Presentation–Hard copy versus virtual portfolio
• Willingness to Use Technology–Improving each year
• Reflective Writing–Students lack experience to reflect at deep levels

Progress is being made in each of these areas, as our students have become ambassadors for technology use in school music programs.

The development of technology portfolios as a part of teacher licensure has greatly accelerated student–and faculty–learning in music technology. A major challenge of the portfolio process has been the authentic integration of technology into the coursework. At first, each student’s portfolio was largely the product of the work done in a 300-level music education technology course and during the student teaching semester. This often led to a portfolio that reflected competency by did not necessarily reflect use in other methods courses. A continuing effort is being made to focus on how technology is incorporated across the curriculum. The next step is developing comprehensive teaching portfolios that reflect INTASC standards and integrate the technology competencies. This will require both a greater sense of integration and a marked improvement in the quality of reflective writing. The reflective writing will need to incorporate guided writing based upon the "Reflection Cycle:" select, describe, analyze, appraise, and transform.

The portfolio process continues to be both challenging and rewarding. As students find ways to authentically use technology in their teaching, they have a more positive view of technology and its potential.