wbej spring summer 2013
DESCRIPTION
WBEJ Spring Summer 2013TRANSCRIPT
volume 62, number 1
Congratulations
Grant Winners! Page 3
Text Messaging During Classes Page 10
WBEA Fall Convention — Badger Style! Page 31
WISCONSIN BUSINESS EDUCATION ASSOCIATION
2 Wisconsin Business Education Association
The Wisconsin Business Education Journal is a refereed journal and is an excellent opportunity for business educators to share their thoughts and ideas relating to business and marketing education. Do you have a great idea or want to share a tip from your classroom? We would love to hear from you! Articles can be submitted via
email or on disk. Photos should be submitted
as black and white with at least 300 dpi resolution.
WBEJ submission deadlines: Spring ................................... April 1 Fall ......... 2 weeks after convention Winter ....................... December 15 I am looking forward to serving as your interim WBE Journal Editor. Please feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns. Michelle McGlynn WBEJ Editor Waunakee High School 301 Community Drive Waunakee, WI 53597 608-849-2130 608-849-2164 fax [email protected] _____________________________ WBEA Fall Convention
Madison October 10 & 11, 2013
_________________________
Mark your calendar and register early
CALL FOR MANUSCRIPTS
The Wisconsin Business Education Journal is a refereed journal listed in Cabell’s Directory of Publishing Opportunities in Education. Submitted manuscripts are given a blind review by three external reviewers. Accepted manuscripts are published twice a year, Winter and Spring. The deadline for submission of manuscripts for the Winter issue is June 1 and for the Spring issue is November 1. The purpose of the WBEJ is to provide educators with articles reflecting present and future teaching strategies, research-based articles, and technology ideas in business and marketing education. Only manuscripts which meet this purpose will be considered for publication. Research-based manuscripts will be submitted for review. Non-research manuscripts, such as teaching tips, will not be reviewed and are forwarded to the General Editor for publication decision on a space-available basis. Publishing Guidelines 1. All manuscripts should use APA style and be between 1-10 single-spaced pages
in length. Leave one blank line between paragraphs and before and after headings.
2. The manuscript should be submitted in camera-ready format, typed in Microsoft Word using Times New Roman, 12-point font.
3. All graphics (tables, graphs, charts, etc.) should be encased in boxes. 4. Manuscripts should have 1-inch top, side, and bottom margins with no page
numbers. 5. A title page that includes manuscript title and name, address of institution,
email address, and phone number of each author must be attached to the manuscript. No identification information of authors should be included within the manuscript.
6. Four original hard copies of the manuscript should be mailed and one electronic version, an email attachment or CD, should be submitted to:
Debbie Stanislawski, Ph.D., Research Editor, WBEJ UW-Stout Chair, School of Education 276 Heritage Hall, Menomonie, WI 54751 [email protected] Phone: (715) 232-1088
President’s Message ............................................................................................................. 3 Elementary Keyboarding .................................................................................................... 4 WBEA Convention—Graduate Credits Available ..................................................... 4 Beyond WBEA ....................................................................................................................... 5 Business Ed Listserv Ideas ................................................................................................. 6 WBEA Award Nominations .............................................................................................. 7 Financial Education Summer Institutes ........................................................................ 8 Online Teacher Certification ............................................................................................ 9 Text Messaging During Classes ..................................................................................... 10 Horizon Report ....................................................................................................................16 Wisconsin Skill Standard Certificate Programs ........................................................ 17 The Infusion of Common Core State Standards with Bus Ed ................................. 18 CLEP Exams ......................................................................................................................... 18 Katie’s Google™ Korner .................................................................................................... 22 Business Education Hall of Fame Inductees ............................................................... 25 CTE Advocacy Resources ................................................................................................ 26 UW-Whitewater Awards Banquet .............................................................................. 27 Equivalency Credits ........................................................................................................... 28 Disciplinary Literacy Resources ..................................................................................... 29 UW-Whitewater Online Teaching Workshop ......................................................... 30 WBEA Annual Convention .............................................................................................. 31 WBEA District Realignment .......................................................................................... 34 Executive Board Members ............................................................................................... 35
Spring/Summer 2013 3
Greetings: I hope everyone is beginning to enjoy the weather after Mother Nature did its’ best to disrupt activities both in the classroom and our spring sports! It is getting down to the final days of the school year and I would like to remind everyone stay focused on keeping a positive attitude in your classroom. I realize it can be difficult when the weather gets nice and the kid’s attention may begin to wander. I would like to remind everyone of our convention in October which is being held in Madison this year. This convention is also the same weekend as the Wisconsin Badgers homecoming, so Madison will have tons of activities going on. Also, please remember to take advantage of any professional development opportunities. As business educators, we must continue to keep up with the latest technologies, which will enhance our classroom activities and keep a positive influence with administration and school boards. Finally, enjoy the last few weeks of school with your students. Have a safe, enjoyable summer and do something out of the ordinary to re-charge your batteries. Warm regards, Scott Kosidowski President, WBEA Business Education Teacher St. Thomas More High School [email protected]
The following districts were awarded money from the Discover Pathway to Financial Success Grant!
Altoona High School, Kelly Ostrander Cambridge High School, Julie Woletz Elk Mound High School, Randi Stanley Glenwood City High School, Carrie Hentz Hustisford High School, Denise Tribbey Kenosha Tremper, Linda Hartschuh Ladysmith High School, Bonnie Titera Lakeland Union High School, Tammie Woodie Sauk Prairie High School, Mary Halweg Waunakee High School, Michelle McGlynn
4 Wisconsin Business Education Association
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY UW-Whitewater
UW-Whitewater will be offering this summer a three-credit class at the undergraduate or graduate level for teachers, media specialists, or other educators who are or will be teaching elementary keyboarding. This workshop will focus on:
1. Issues regarding elementary keyboarding; 2. Research on elementary keyboarding; 3. Standards pertaining to keyboarding; 4. Methodology in teaching keyboarding; 5. Lesson Planning in teaching keyboarding; 6. Development of speed and accuracy; 7. Integrating keyboarding in academic areas; 8. Handling individual needs; 9. Assessment of student learning; 10. Computer hardware and software in teaching keyboarding.
This workshop also offers Business Education teachers the opportunity to extend their 250 Business Education license to the elementary level by applying for an “EC-A Business Education 250” license. For more information about this “Teaching Elementary Keyboarding” Workshop, CIGENRL 490 or 690, contact Dr. Harriet D. Rogers at [email protected].
GLS Conference 9.0 “Games+Learning+Society (GLS) is a group of videogame scholars and designers dedicated to doing more in these media environments. With our friends and partners in the Wisconsin Institute for Discovery and Learning Games Network, GLS delves into how videogames capture our imaginations, how their power can be used to transform learning, and what this engaging medium means for society. Combining faculty, students, and academic staff from the Digital Media program in Curriculum & Instruction with industry-tested game designers, we’ve discovered that well-designed, compelling games can improve learning outcomes and make education fun.” (from the GLS Website) __________________________________________________
To register for the conference at the Memorial Union in Madison on June 12-14 , visit GLS Conference Registration
Graduate Credits Available
UW-Whitewater will offer graduate credit for attendance at the WBEA conference October 10-11 in Madison. One graduate credit may be earned by attending all sessions, attending a meeting with a UW-Whitewater faculty member during the conference, and submitting a graduate-level report summarizing all sessions attended. The current cost for one graduate credit at UW-Whitewater is $454. The tuition for Fall 2013 has not yet been determined, but it will be at least $454 per credit. If you are not already a graduate student at UW-Whitewater, you may apply as a Non-Candidate for Degree student at http://www.uww.edu/gradstudies/application.php. Once enrolled, contact Julie Marino at 262-472-6232 or [email protected] in order to register. Indicate that you wish to enroll in CIGENRL 798 for one credit for WBEA conference attendance. Julie will only be able to register you if you are enrolled as a student and hold a UW-Whitewater student ID number.
Spring/Summer 2013 5
Consider taking your professional affiliation one step further by joining NBEA and SIEC/ISBE
SIEC/ISBE provides a vital link between business and education. Both business representatives and educators benefit from an affiliation with SIEC-ISBE. SIEC/ISBE will:
Address common challenges in national chapters
Exchange experiences in business education
Provide international networking opportunities
Provide international educational opportunities
Provide diversity through experiencing various cultures
Encourage the development of chapters International Conference Opportunities
85th Annual International Conference Berlin, Germany August 5 - 9, 2013 Conference Website 86th Annual International Conference Helsinki, Finland August 3 - 8, 2014 Theme: Service and Design Management Conference Website
The National Business Education Association (NBEA) is the nation's leading professional organization devoted exclusively to serving individuals and groups engaged in instruction, administration, research, and dissemination of information for and about business. NBEA is the leading association devoted to the recognition that business education competencies are essential for all individuals in today's fast-changing society. Conferences Opportunities
NBEA 2014 Annual Convention Los Angeles, California April 15-19, 2014 NBEA 2015 Annual Convention Chicago, Illinois March 31 - April 4, 2015
Great News! When you register for the WBEA Convention online through CVENT, you can renew your WBEA, NBEA, and ISBE memberships at the same time!
Or become a member for the first time!
6 Wisconsin Business Education Association
From Randi Stanley, Elk Mound High School Everfi, a Financial Education, STEM, and Civic Education program! Scan the QR Code or visit www.everfi.com
From Dave Thomas, Wisconsin DPI Teaching students about The Federal Reserve System Scan the QR Code or visit http://tinyurl.com/thefed‐you
From Michelle Gibson, Sturgeon Bay High School Annual Reports for free—search by industry, stock exchange, sector, or name. Scan the QR Code or visit www.annualreports.com From Kurt Wismer, Shiocton School District Retail Alphabet Game—Guess the Corporate Logo Scan the QR Code or visit http://www.joeykatzen.com/alpha/index.html
From Scott Fernholz, Madison La Follette High School Using Comics in the Classroom Scan the QR Code or visit http://tinyurl.com/comicsintheclassroom
Thanks for Sharing!
Spring/Summer 2013 7
Do you know a current WBEA member who . . .
Excels in business education? Willingly gives of themselves to assist in the development of business education? Serves as a mentor or role model for others? Shares their love for teaching and children?
Do you know someone who. . .
Supports business education or business educators but is not an instructor? Contributes to the advancement of business education? Promotes business education? Makes the time to support others in their pursuits? Then consider nominating that teacher or Friend of WBEA for one of these awards by clicking on the link and completing the online nomination form: 1 Friend of WBEA Award
2 ISBE Scholarship
3 Lorraine Missling
4 NBEA Scholarships
5 Outstanding K-12 Educator
6 Outstanding Post Secondary Educator
7 Russel J. Hosler Award
Education doesn’t need to be reformed—it needs to be transformed. The key is not to standardize education, but to personalize it, to build achievement on discovering the individual talents of each child, to put students in an environment where they want to learn and where
they can naturally discover their true passions. ~ Ken Robinson
8 Wisconsin Business Education Association
EXPANDING OPPORTUNITIES THROUGH
FINANCIAL EDUCATION
You’re Invited to Our 13th Annual Summer Institutes DO YOU… Have the courage to double your classroom effectiveness in five days? Seek to master the teaching of financial topics and increase your job security in
one week? Want to quickly make yourself more indispensable than you might think
possible? A 2009 National Endowment for Education survey showed that 44 states have now adopted personal finance education standards. Yet only 37% of K-12 teachers have taken even one college personal finance course. Quite simply, a lack of qualified educators exists. We give you skills to fill this shortage. The simple NIFEL system is the most successful training program of its kind in the U.S. In its 12 years, it has given over 1,250 educators from 13 states expertise and a career edge—FAST. We offer ... An unmatched group of presenters A trove of hard-to-find resources and curricula that would take you countless
hours to compile yourself A field trip to the Chicago financial district (August) plus other field trips.
WHO BENEFITS MOST, AND WHO SHOULD ATTEND? Teachers of personal finance, family and consumer sciences, social studies, economics, math, business and others who want to acquire the skills to teach personal finance—financial counselors, tech college faculty, corrections staff and school principals and administrators.
A proven opportunity awaits!
SESSIONS
Paychecks, Financial Contracts and Entrepreneurship June 24-28, 2013 Investor Education, Economics and Insurance July 15 -19, 2013 Credit and Money July 29-31, 2013
REGISTER TODAY
Spring/Summer 2013 9
These courses meet the WI DPI guidelines for the 30-hour professional development requirement for online teaching, Wisconsin State Statute 118.19 (13)
UW-Whitewater: TEACHING ONLINE The Online Teaching Workshop will be offered again in summer 2013! The on-campus dates are August 12 & 13 from 9:00 a.m.-2:00 p.m. It will be available for non-credit or 1 credit, undergrad or grad. Students interested in taking it for credit can contact Carrie Lencho at [email protected]. Non-credit participants can contact [email protected]. Courses for Developing and Improving Online Teaching Strategies and Promising Practices: OTA 121 Summer: June 17 - July 26, 2013 (Off week of July 4th) Register at: http://tinyurl.com/7pvsmqm Summer: July 8 - August 6, 2013 Register at: http://tinyurl.com/72bzpnb Course Fee: $350.00, 2 optional graduate credits are available from Viterbo University for an additional $220.00 per credit.
Summer 2013 Course Offerings in Business & Marketing Education CIGENRL 770 SUPERVISION OF STUDENT TEACHERS (2‐3 credits online) Basic course in supervision of student teachers, open to UW‐W coopera ng teachers, explores the respec ve roles and responsibili es of all student teaching personnel, nature of student teaching programs, procedures followed in the selec on of coopera ng teachers and assignment of student teachers. A en on is also given to the recogni on of skills and ac vi es fundamental to the development of effec ve teachers. July 29‐August 16 Instructor: Simone J DeVore ITBE 762 CURRICULUM ISSUES AND DESIGN FOR BUSINESS AND MARKETING EDUCATION (3 credits online) A study of the issues currently confron ng the supervisor, teacher, and students of business and marke ng educa on on the middle, secondary and post‐secondary levels. Includes a study of curriculum development and objec ves of business and marke ng educa on. Meets No. 50 curriculum requirements for WTCS cer fica on. PREREQ: ITBE 500 OR CONSENT OF INSTRUCTOR June 17‐July 5 Instructor: Terry Alan Hurst ITBE 490/690 Online Teaching Workshop (1 credit Hybrid) This workshop will assist teachers in mee ng Wisconsin state mandates for required professional development and fulfilling the 30‐hour online training required prior to teaching online courses within a school district. The workshop will be conducted online with required mee ngs on campus August 12 and 13. July 24‐August 13 Instructor: Michelle Gibson Herman A complete list of all Summer 2012 course offerings may be accessed at: http://www.uww.edu/registrar/schedule/
10 Wisconsin Business Education Association
Text Messaging During Classes: Do Demographic Variables Make A Difference?
By Dr. Melody W. Alexander, Dr. Rodney E. Davis, Dr. Jensen J. Zhao, and Dr. Allen D. Truell
Dr. Melody Alexander is a professor in the Department of Information Systems and Operations Management of the Miller College of Business at Ball State University. Her research interests include business applications, communication, and online education. Dr. Alexander can be contacted at [email protected] Dr. Rod Davis is a professor in the Department of Information Systems and Operations Management of the Miller College of Business at Ball State University. His research interests include career and technical education, classroom pedagogy, and e-commerce. Dr. Davis can be contacted at [email protected] Dr. Jensen Zhao is a Professor and Chairperson in the Department of Information Systems and Operations Management of the Miller College of Business at Ball State University. His research interests include business communication, e-commerce, e-government, social media, and Internet security. Dr. Zhao can be contacted at [email protected] Dr. Allen Truell is a Professor in the Department of Information Systems and Operations Management of the Miller College of Business at Ball State University. His research interests include business communication and online education. Dr. Truell can be contacted at [email protected]
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to document college students’ non-academic use of text messaging during classes and to identify any differences in use in regard to demographic variables of gender, age, and class level. A total of 290 college students in business applications courses completed an online survey reporting their use of text messaging during classes. Results of the study will provide insight to business educators as they face rising student use of communication technologies, such as text messaging, during classes.
Introduction
The use of technology in the classroom to support and enhance learning has been widely recognized and embraced. However, technology in the classroom has also frequently generated conflict between educators and students. As reported by the editors of Maclean’s (2010) “The role of technology in the classroom has no doubt been a contentious issue since the first Roman student brought an abacus to his grammaticus” (p. 6). In the last 50 years the constant development and improvement of electronic devices has given us a multitude of wonderful new tools for the classroom including the portable audio cassette player, mathematical calculator, computer, personal digital assistant, and cell phone (Baker, Lusk, & Neuhauser, 2012). And, the age old issue of appropriate use and disruptive misuse in the classroom continues into the 21st century.
Today’s college student’s life revolves around using technology for communicating with family and friends. This generation of Millennials has grown up multi-tasking with computers and digital devices and is extremely comfortable with all types of technology (Junco & Cotton, 2012; Wood, Zivcakova, Gentile, Archer, De Pasquale, & Nosko, 2012). Cell phones are considered by most college students as essential and nearly 97% of college students in the United States use text messaging over other types of communication such as email or instant messaging (Kelly, 2010). College students have reported spending approximately 14.35 hours per week texting, as compared to 11.91 hours per week studying (Hanson, Drumheller, Mallard, McKee, & Schlegel, 2011). This generation stays constantly connected, including in the classroom, to friends and family through technology devices.
The need and expectation of students for constant and instantaneous communication has created the necessity for students to bring their cell phones to class and use them for personal, non-academic purposes. In fact, according to Braguglia (2008), most college students do not use their cell phones for learning purposes. Braguglia reported that approximately three out of every four students surveyed stated they seldom or never used their cell phone in class for a learning related purpose. Furthermore, slightly over 60% indicated they seldom or never used their cell phone to assist
Spring/Summer 2013 11
them with learning outside of class. Given the desire of faculty members to have the full attention of students and the need of students to be in continuous contact with family and friends has created this classroom conflict.
To assist with this conflict of interest, websites have been designed to present cell phone etiquette guides such as turning off cell phone ringers and refraining from text messaging during class; behaviors which seem obvious to earlier generations. Each time a student engages in reading, creating, or sending a text message during class time, their attention is diverted from learning (Wei, Wang, & Klausner, 2012). As well as being disruptive to the student’s classroom learning, these behaviors can also be distracting to other students. Interestingly, students are aware of the distractions and missed learning, but continue this behavior. Experimenting with expected and actual deleterious effects of classroom texting, Froese, Carpenter, Inman, Schooley, Barnes, Brecht, and Chacon (2012) found quiz scores significantly lower when students engaged in texting. The actual quiz scores were very close to the students’ estimates of what their scores would be when texting in class during the lesson.
As cell phone abilities and usage by college students increases, several researchers have studied the positive and negative aspects of text messaging both in and out of the classroom (Burns & Lohenry, 2010; Drouin, 2011; End, Worthman, Mathews, & Wetterau, 2010; Harrison, 2011; Junco, 2012). In a survey conducted by Tindell and Bohlander (2012), students perceived teachers have no idea of how much text messaging is going on in their classes. Although most professors have policies on cell phone connectivity and text messaging during class, students have to be continuously reminded of inappropriate use. As concluded by Wei and Wang (2010) students’ text messaging behaviors during class is an important area that needs to be studied. Therefore, the present study investigated college students’ use of text messaging during classes. Use was further analyzed in relation to gender, age, and class level.
Purpose
The purpose of this study was to document college students’ use of text messaging during classes. Further analysis was conducted to identify any differences in use in regard to the variables of gender, age, and class level. To address this purpose, answers to the following research questions were investigated: 1. What is students’ use of text messaging during classes? 2. Are there significant differences in students’ use of text messaging during classes based on gender? 3. Are there significant differences in students’ use of text messaging during classes based on age? 4. Are there significant differences in students’ use of text messaging during classes based on class level?
Procedures
The procedures used to conduct the study are outlined in the following section. The participants,
instrumentation, data collection, and analysis of data are discussed.
Participants
The participants for this study consisted of college students enrolled in eight sections of business applications courses offered at a mid-sized, Midwestern university. As required by Institutional Review Board (IRB) protocol, only students who were willing volunteers participated in the study. A total of 290 volunteered to participate in the study.
Instrument
The researchers developed a 25-item survey instrument based on a review of the literature, classroom observation, and teaching experience. The survey instrument consisted of demographic information and text messaging use. Participants reported text messaging behaviors during all their classes, not just the class where the survey was administered.
Instrument validation. The survey instrument was reviewed for validity by a 12-member panel of experts who
evaluated each question. The panel of experts included business faculty, university computer systems administrators, and researchers from both areas. The panel concluded that the questions addressed the researchers’ stated objectives and agreed that the survey had face validity.
(Continued on page 12)
12 Wisconsin Business Education Association
Instrument clarification. A group of 31 students volunteered to pilot test the clarity of the instrument’s directions and questions. These participants were enrolled in a business class during the previous semester. As the pilot group reported no difficulties, no changes in directions or wording were implemented.
Data Collection
Students enrolled in business applications courses were asked to complete an online survey involving individual
use of text messaging during classes. In eight sections with an approximate enrollment of 325 students, 290 volunteered to participate in the study. In accordance with Institutional Review Board (IRB) protocol, students were informed that participation in this study was voluntary, anonymous, and would not have an impact on their final course grade. All students were required to read a consent form and had to check with an “I Agree” before they could participate in the survey.
Analysis of Data
All participant identification information was removed before data were analyzed. The participant profile
included frequencies and percentages for gender, age, and year in school. Pearson’s chi-square test was run to identify any text messaging differences within gender, age, and year in school. Tests of significance were determined at the .05 alpha levels.
Participant Demographic Profile
The participants consisted of 178 (62%) males and 112 (38%) females. The majority (80%) of respondents were between the ages of 19 and 21, and there were 123 underclassmen (42%) and 167 upperclassmen (58%). This profile is displayed in Table 1.
Table 1 Participant Demographic Profile
Findings
The findings from the research questions are shown below. This includes documentation of students’ reported use of text messaging during classes, followed by an analysis of differences in use in relation to gender, age, and class level.
(Continued from page 11)
Variable: Frequency (N=290)
Valid Percent
Gender
Male 178 61.6
Female 112 38.4
Age range
19 70 24.1
20 92 31.7
21 71 24.5
22+ 57 19.7
Class Level
Freshmen/Sophomore 123 42.4
Junior/Senior 167 57.6
Variable: Frequency (N=290)
Valid Percent
Gender
Male 178 61.6
Female 112 38.4
Age range
19 70 24.1
20 92 31.7
21 71 24.5
22+ 57 19.7
Class Level
Freshmen/Sophomore 123 42.4
Junior/Senior 167 57.6
Spring/Summer 2013 13
Text Messaging During Class
Research question one was asked to document students’ use of text messaging during class. The vast majority of participants indicated their phone was always on to receive messages (96%), they responded to text messages received
(93%), and they create and send original text messages during class (88%). This documentation is illustrated in Table 2.
Table 2 Text Messaging During Class
Gender Differences in Students’ Use of Text Messaging
Research question two was asked to identify any differences between genders in text messaging during classes. Although males were slightly more inclined to always have their phones on, respond to text messages received, and create or send original text messages, when compared to females these differences were not significant. (See Table 3.)
Table 3 Gender Differences in Students’ Use of Text Messaging During Class
Age Differences in Students’ Use of Text Messaging
Research question three sought to determine if there were any differences among age in relation to use of text
messaging during class. Although 19 year olds indicated they respond to text messages received slightly more than other age groups, and create and send original text messages slightly less than other age groups, these differences were not significant. These results are illustrated in Table 4.
Table 4 Age Differences in Students’ Use of Text Messaging During Classes
(Continued on page 14)
Text Messaging Use: Frequency (N=290)
Valid Percent
Phone always on to receive messages 279 96.2
Respond to text messages received 271 93.4
Create/send original text messages 254 87.6
Text Messaging Use: Male
N=178 Female N=112 Value df p
Phone always on to receive messages 97.2 94.6 1.223 1 .213
Respond to text messages received 93.8 93.7 .002 1 .575
Create/send original text messages 87.6 87.5 .000 1 .554
Text Messaging Use: 19
N=70 20
N=92 21
N=71 22+
N=57 Value df p
Phone always on to receive messages 97.1 94.6 97.2 96.5 1.046 3 .790
Respond to text messages received 95.7 91.3 94.3 94.7 1.534 3 .674
Create/send original text messages 85.7 90.2 87.3 86.0 .954 3 .806
Text Messaging Use: 19
N=70 20
N=92 21
N=71 22+
N=57 Value df p
Phone always on to receive messages 97.1 94.6 97.2 96.5 1.046 3 .790
Respond to text messages received 95.7 91.3 94.3 94.7 1.534 3 .674
Create/send original text messages 85.7 90.2 87.3 86.0 .954 3 .806
Text Messaging Use: Male
N=178 Female N=112 Value df p
Phone always on to receive messages 97.2 94.6 1.223 1 .213
Respond to text messages received 93.8 93.7 .002 1 .575
Create/send original text messages 87.6 87.5 .000 1 .554
Text Messaging Use: Frequency (N=290)
Valid Percent
Phone always on to receive messages 279 96.2
Respond to text messages received 271 93.4
Create/send original text messages 254 87.6
14 Wisconsin Business Education Association
Class Level Differences in Students’ Use of Text Messaging
Research question four was asked to find any differences in text messaging use between class levels. Although upper classmen indicated always having their phones on and creating or sending original text messages as compared to under classmen, these differences were not significant. This analysis is illustrated in Table 5.
Table 5 Class Level Differences in Students’ Use of Text Messaging During Classes
Limitations
When interpreting the results of the findings of the present study, it should be noted that following IRB protocol, only students who were willing volunteers participated in the study. The students were enrolled in business application courses at a mid-sized, Mid-western university. Participants were instructed to indicate text messaging behaviors in all university courses. The following conclusions were drawn with these limitations in mind.
Conclusions
Students’ use of text messaging during class is an important area of study for educators. This study sought to
identify the use of text messaging during classes and whether demographic variables of gender, age, or year in school affected that use. As the results indicated, almost all students leave their phones on in order to know when text messages are received. The majority also responds to messages received and creates and sends original messages. There are no differences within gender, age, or class level.
These results come as no surprise to business educators, who have to continually remind students to turn phones off or to stop texting. Although many educators have cell phone use policies stated on their syllabi, as indicated by the findings from this study, the majority of students will continue to have their phones on and text message during class. For educators who are encountering classroom disruptions as a result of students’ text messaging, stricter policies with appropriate consequences for texting may be needed.
Implications
It seems clear that regardless of syllabi rules prohibiting cell phone use, a vast majority of students are texting during class time. In addition, research supports the notion that texting interferes with learning. These circumstances create a conundrum for faculty members. What can be done to reduce texting during class when students blatantly ignore the rule prohibiting texting?
While the hindrance of texting and other technological
devices in the classroom may appear to be new, it may also be viewed as the latest in a long line of methods to disrupt and disturb classroom activity and learning. Fifty years ago, students interrupted classroom learning by passing notes and whispering to one another. Today, students may produce the equivalent disruption by texting.
(Continued from page 13)
Text Messaging Use:
Freshmen/ Sophomores
N=123
Juniors/ Seniors N=167 Value df p
Phone always on to receive messages 95.9 96.4 .043 1 .535
Respond to text messages received 95.1 92.8 .669 1 .287
Create/send original text messages 87.0 88.0 .069 1 .464
Text Messaging Use:
Freshmen/ Sophomores
N=123
Juniors/ Seniors N=167 Value df p
Phone always on to receive messages 95.9 96.4 .043 1 .535
Respond to text messages received 95.1 92.8 .669 1 .287
Create/send original text messages 87.0 88.0 .069 1 .464
Spring/Summer 2013 15
While it may be very difficult to force students to abide by a no texting rule, it may be more productive to consider alternative means to engage students in classroom activities that are sufficiently compelling to make texting less desirable. Over the years faculty members have overcome classroom disruptions and disturbances. Perhaps today technology can be used to engage students in classroom learning and simultaneously reduce students’ desires to use technology for personal and social purposes while in class.
Recommendations for Future Research
Based on the findings from this study, additional research for business educators as they experience students’ text
messaging in the classroom is suggested. 1. Further research should identify how text messaging is affecting student attention and learning, both from the
educator and student viewpoint. 2. As this study focused on students in a business applications course, further research should be conducted with
students from other disciplines. 3. Additional research should investigate the main reasons students are text messaging during class so educators can
address these areas. 4. Further research should address educator morale when dealing with text messaging issues and identify best practices
for dealing with text messaging classroom behaviors. 5. Additional research should explore methods to engage students in classroom activity that will reduce and ameliorate
student texting.
References Baker, W. M., Lusk, E. J., & Neuhauser, K. L. (2012). On the use of cell phones and other
electronic devices in the classroom: evidence from a survey of faculty and students. Journal of Education for Business, 87(5), 275-289.
Braguglia, K. H. (2008). Cellular telephone use: a survey of college business students. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 5 (4), 55-61. Burns, S. M., & Lohenry, K. (2010). Cellular phone use in class: Implications for teaching and learning a pilot project. College Student Journal, 44(3), 805-810. Don't give students more tools of mass distraction. (2010). Maclean's, 123(38), 6-7. Drouin, M. A. (2011). College students’ text messaging, use of textese and literacy skills. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27 (1), 67-75.
End, C. M., Worthman, S., Mathews, M. B., & Wetterau, K. (2010). Costly cell phones: the impact of cell phone rings on academic performance. Teaching of Psychology, 37(1), 55-57.
Froese, A. D., Carpenter, C. N., Inman, D. A., Schooley, J. R., Barnes, R. B., Brecht, P. W., & Chacon, J. D. (2012). Effects of classroom cell phone use on expected and actual learning. College Student Journal, 46(2), 323-332.
Hanson, T. L., Drumheller, K., Mallard, J., McKee, C., & Schlegel, P. (2011). Cell phones, text messaging, and Facebook: Competing time demands of today’s college students. College Teaching, 59(1), 23-30.
Harrison, M. A. (2011). College students’ prevalence and perceptions of text messaging while driving. Accident: Analysis and Prevention, 43(4), 1516-1520.
Junco, R. (2012). In-class multitasking and academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(6), 2236-2243.
Junco, R., & Cotten, S. R. (2012). No A 4 U: The relationship between multitasking and academic performance. Computers & Education, 59(2), 505-514.
(Continued on page 16)
16 Wisconsin Business Education Association
(Continued from page 15)
References (continued)
Harrison, M. A. (2011). College students’ prevalence and perceptions of text messaging while driving. Accident: Analysis and Prevention, 43(4), 1516-1520.
Junco, R. (2012). In-class multitasking and academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(6), 2236-2243.
Junco, R., & Cotten, S. R. (2012). No A 4 U: The relationship between multitasking and academic performance. Computers & Education, 59(2), 505-514.
Kelly, T. (2010, June 17). Student smartphone use doubles; instant messaging loses favor. Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com.
Tindell, D. R., & Bohlander, R. W. (2012). The use and abuse of cell phones and text messaging in the classroom: a survey of college students. College Teaching, 60(1), 1-9.
Wei, F.F, Wang, Y. K., & Klausner, M. (2012). Rethinking college students’ self-regulation and sustained attention: does text messaging during class influence cognitive learning? Communication Education, 61(3), 185-204.
Wei, F.F., & Wang, Y. K. (2010). Students’ silent Messages: Can teacher verbal and nonverbal immediacy moderate student use of test messaging in class? Communication Education, 59(4), 475-496.
Wood, E., Zivcakova, L. Gentile, P., Archer, K., De Pasquale, D., & Nosko, A. (2012). Examining the impact of off-task multi-tasking with technology on real-time classroom learning. Computers & Education, 58(1), 365-374.
While there are many resources available that support conversations related to technology, a document titled the "Horizon Report" provides a good foundation for local conversations about the future of technology instruction. ISTE (International Society for Technology in Education) has released the NMC Horizon Report: 2012 K–12 Edition (PDF). This fourth edition in the annual K–12 series of the New Media Consortium (NMC) Horizon Project examines emerging technologies for their potential impact on and use in teaching, learning, and creative expression within the environment of pre-college education. This report was produced in collaboration between ISTE, NMC, and the Consortium for School Networking (CoSN). Shared via Business Ed Listserv, Dave Thomas, March 12, 2013.
The WBEA Annual Convention is in Madison on October 10 and 11?
Stay at the Concourse and enjoy State Street with your Business Education colleagues when not participating in conference activities!
Spring/Summer 2013 17
18 Wisconsin Business Education Association
The Infusion of Common Core State Standards with Business Education
By Lila Waldman, Glenn Bailey, Julie Chadd, Kim Bartel, and Todd Farr
Lila Waldman is a Professor of Business Education at the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater. Her research interests include the importance of career and technical education and the preparation of business education teachers. She is active in the Association for Research in Business Education--Delta Pi Epsilon and the International Society for Business Education. Dr. Waldman may be contacted at [email protected] Glenn Bailey is an Associate Professor of Business Teacher Education at Illinois State University. Dr. Bailey's research interests include the preparation of business education teachers and technology used in business education classrooms. He currently serves as the President of the Association for Research in Business Education--Delta Pi Epsilon. Dr. Bailey may be contacted at [email protected] Julie Chadd is an Associate Professor with the Career and Technical Education program at Eastern Illinois University. Her research interests include teaching methods and their effects on learning and application. Dr. Chadd may be contacted at [email protected] Kim Bartel is CTE Program Director and Professor, Business and Marketing Education, at Central Washington University. Her research interests include Business Education and Academic Standards and IT Education, and she currently serves on the Washington Business Education Association Executive Board. Dr. Bartel may be contacted at [email protected] Todd Farr is a Director for Career Technical Education with Mission Trails Regional Occupational Program in Monterey County California. He serves on the Monterey County Workforce Investment Board Youth Council, is a frequent presenter at local and state conventions, and is active in the California Business Education Association. Todd may be contacted at [email protected]
(continued on page 19)
Developed by the College Board, the people behind AP and SAT, the College-Level Examination Program (CLEP) has been the most widely trusted credit-by-examination program for over 40 years, accepted by 2,900 colleges and universities and administered in over 1,700 test centers. CLEP helps students earn college credit for knowledge they have acquired through independent study, prior course work, on-the-job training, professional development, cultural pursuits, or internships. Each examination costs $80 and qualifying scores will earn college credits at participating colleges. Available Business Exams Financial Accounting Information Systems and Computer Applications Introductory Business Law Principles of Management Principles of Marketing
Many Wisconsin campuses participate in the CLEP and offer up to 3 or 4 college credits for
qualifying scores on Business Exams.
Visit http://tinyurl.com/wiclep for a complete list!
Spring/Summer 2013 19
Introduction The Common Core Standards are being incorporated in K-12 education throughout the United States.
Adopted by the Council of Chief State School Officers and the National Governors Association in June 2010 (Common Core Standards, 2012; Gregg, 2010; Overturf, 2011), these standards address the areas of English/language arts and mathematics and are designed to measure college and career readiness for students prior to graduation from high school. Business educators are in an outstanding position to incorporate these standards in their programs or align their courses with them.
Literature Review
Much has been written regarding the infusion of core competencies for reading, writing, language arts,
and mathematics within business education offerings. However, the Common Core State Standards are a recent development, and the literature is in the early stages of reporting the infusion of the Common Core State Standards with career and technical education (including business education) offerings.
The concept for developing the Common Core State Standards is to include fewer, clearer, more
rigorous standards to prepare high school graduates to become college and career ready. Being college and career ready is described as having the skills and knowledge to be successful without remediation. Programs that have adopted the standards will provide graduates with the competencies to succeed in two-year transfer programs or four-year colleges as well as being successful in occupational certificate programs and on-the-job training after high school (Phillips & Wong, 2010). Heibert & Mesmer (2013) cited an ACT report which showed the need for improved reading abilities to increase success in high school courses. They praised the increased Common Core reading standards and recommended the incorporation of “complex reading materials into all high school courses” (49).
The Common Core State Standards currently includes standards for English language arts and mathe-
matics. The Standards are internationally benchmarked. They are based heavily on standards in Japan, Singa-pore, Hong Kong, and Korea, countries that have consistently outperformed the United States (Glenn, 2010). In addition, the Standards, aligned with college and work expectations, include rigorous content and applica-tion of knowledge through high-order skills, and are evidence based (National Governors Association, 2011).
As of September 2012, all but four states had formally adopted the Common Core State Standards
(Common Core Standards, 2012), and implementation is scheduled to begin in 2014 (DeWitt, 2011). The efforts of several states have been highlighted in the literature. Colorado has been updating, creating, and aligning the state’s career and technical education (CTE) standards through the use of career clusters (DeWitt, 2011). Legislation was passed in Colorado which instructs the state board to take into account the CTE standards and to align them appropriately with Common Core State Standards. Legislation in Kentucky called for the revision of Kentucky’s academic standards by December 2010 (Overturf, 2011).
The Common Core State Standards are not mandated Federal standards; they are standards that states
may or may not choose to adopt. However, President Obama proposed that states be required to adopt common college- and career-ready standards in reading and mathematics, and adopting the Common Core State Standards is required by the U.S. Department of Education for applications for Race to the Top funding (Lee, 2011). What does this mean for business educators and others involved with career and technical education? Former National Business Education Association President Madge Gregg (2010) stated that more than ever, business educators must show the relevance of our classes and how they make vital contributions to the academic achievement of students. National Career Clusters Knowledge and Skills provide three areas which need to be included within career and technical education standards: essential standards for all careers, Career Cluster
(Continued on page 20)
20 Wisconsin Business Education Association
level standards expected within an industry, and Career Pathway standards which are expected within specific careers (Folkers, 2011). Incorporating English Language Arts into a business education lesson plan can include areas such as oral presentation, Internet research, and the use of presentation software (Clark, 2011). Mathematics standards can be readily infused within accounting or financial literacy courses.
Background
The Agnew Group (TAG) was originally formed in 2003 to work proactively for the future of business
education. Its goal was “to ensure the survival and promote the growth of business education in the 21st century” (The Agnew Group, 2012, 1). In Fall 2008 the second generation, TAG 2, was formed. The first year of activity involved sharing current, critical issues in business education to determine a focus for the new team. In 2010 this focus was determined to be a study on the integration of business education with academic courses at the secondary level. The team of five researchers, from TAG 2 group, consists of university educators actively involved in the preparation of K-12 business teachers and one secondary education representative in a regional supervisory capacity.
Research Questions
The research questions for this project consisted of:
1. Are states’ core academic standards currently being incorporated in business education courses in each state?
2. Have efforts been made in the states to align business education courses with these standards? 3. Do any business education courses in the states also meet academic core requirements for high school
graduation (math, English, etc.)?
Methodology
The researchers collaborated to develop a telephone script for consistent use in the collection of data. The following questions were included in the script:
1. How are your state’s core academic standards currently being incorporated in business education courses
in your state? Please share some examples. How could I obtain a copy of the state core academic standards?
2. Do any business education courses in your state also meet academic core requirements for high school graduation (math, English, etc.)? Are there policies in place which allow students to earn academic credit through business education courses?
3. Has your state identified any essential college and/or career-readiness standards for reading, writing, and math? Is it possible to receive a list of these standards?
4. Have efforts been made in your state to align business education courses with these standards? If so, please describe these efforts.
In the spring and summer of 2011 all business education state consultants/supervisors, as listed in the December 2010 Business Education Forum, were contacted by telephone. Changes were made to the contact list if the initial telephone contact indicated that the person listed was no longer in that position. If messages needed to be left, the consultants/supervisors were given the option of returning the call or responding by email. After three attempts to contact the consultant or supervisor, the researchers made additional attempts in the state to determine if another person at the state office should be contacted. By the end of the fall semester, responses were collected from 48 states. Data were not collected from Louisiana and Wyoming.
(Continued from page 19)
Spring/Summer 2013 21
Findings During the process of this data
collection, the National Common Core Standards (Common Core Standards, 2012), released in June 2010, were being adopted. So, the responses to research questions 1 and 3 re-flected these Common Core Standards. As Figure 1 shows, by the end of 2011 over 25% of the states indicated that core academic standards had already been incorporated in business education courses, and in over 10% of the states the consultant indicated that such in-corporation was in progress. Five of the states indicated that this decision was determined by local control and was not a state mandate.
Figure 1. Are core academic standards being incorporated in business education courses in your state? N = 48 states When the state consultants/supervisors were asked if any business education courses met academic core requirements for high school graduation, nearly 20% of the states indicated that they did and over 15% that they did not. As Figure 2 shows, this decision is determined at the local level in a higher percentage of the states. Figure 2. Do any business education courses also meet academic core requirements for high school graduation in your state? N = 48 states
The state consultants/supervisors gave several examples of specific business courses that met academic core requirements for high school graduation. A few of the common examples are listed below. Accounting as Math credit (Kentucky, North Carolina, Utah, New Mexico-local board can approve, Georgia-working on) Business Communication/English as English credit (Utah, Ohio, Nebraska, Wisconsin-working on) Computer Science as Science or Math credit (Georgia, North Carolina) Economics as Social Science credit (Kansas, Nebraska, Ohio, Wisconsin-working on) Marketing as Economics credit (Wisconsin-working on) Personal Finance as Social Science or Math credit (Connecticut, Nebraska, North Carolina, Wisconsin-working on)
(Continued on page 23)
22 Wisconsin Business Education Association
Katie’s Korner
Katie Grassel, Seymour Community High School Google Certified Teacher & Google Apps Certified Trainer
Twitter: kgrassel [email protected]
Hot off the Google Press Release!
Just released! Two new types of questions that you can use on Google Forms.
You can add date and time. You can use a date picker but also enter dates manually. You can customize the time question to ask a question like how much time do you spend reading your
homework.
Here is more information on these two new questions.
Great News! Katie will be presenting Google work-
shops at the WBEA Fall Convention in
Madison! Don’t miss out!
Google Education on Air—Videos with Katie Grassel
Doctopus Creating Citations in Google Docs Your Life in Chrome Shared Folders in Google Drive Docs for Teachers Chromebook Management Creating Google Contact Groups
Google Education On Air
“You have the best seat in the house to learn with educators around the world. Connect with them on
the web for free using Google+ Hangouts On Air.”
https://sites.google.com/site/eduonair/
Proofreading—Google Style! There is an extension for Chrome called
Slickwrite that analyzes your writing for
grammar, common mistakes, and even text
analysis. Chrome Extension Link
It is finally here! A way to insert images into a Google Form.
Check it out at http://goo.gl/2pPcE
Spring/Summer 2013 23
Conclusions and Recommendations
The Common Core State Standards were developed to provide a consistent framework to prepare
students for college and careers. These Standards have been readily adopted throughout the country. As a result, the findings reveal that in many states business education courses are being reviewed by business educators to determine which Common Core State Standards are currently being addressed and align their courses to them. Recognizing how these standards, which include rigorous content, are infused in business education courses is imperative in showing how business courses prepare students for college and careers by covering the concepts.
In addition, a few of the states have approved business courses to meet the academic core requirements
for high school graduation. This provides evidence that business education courses are providing rigorous content and addressing the core academic areas required for graduation. This recognition of the value of business education courses for students as they plan for college and careers is important in securing the future of business education at the secondary level.
As business courses are reviewed for inclusion of Common Core State Standards, noting where the
Standards are included and how and making this information available to business teachers across the country would provide helpful information in the struggle to justify the need for business courses. This information would outline how business courses prepare students for college and careers.
Providing lists of business courses which are meeting academic core requirements for high school
graduation would also assist teachers as they approach this topic with administrators and school boards. Being able to provide an outline of the course content, objectives, and Common Core State Standards that are ad-dressed in these classes helps teachers promote their courses to students, parents, and administrators and in-creases the likelihood they will be valued enough to become required for graduation or to fulfill a graduation requirement.
Further Research
The research project consists of two parts. A fifth question asked of the state Business Education
consultants/supervisors was a request for at least ten schools/departments/teachers in their state whom they considered to be successful with incorporating core academic standards in business education courses. Round 2 will involve contacting (likely by online survey) the secondary business education programs identified by the state contacts. Tentative research questions include the following: (1) How are secondary business education programs infusing core academics into their courses? (2) How do secondary business education programs sup-port core academics at their schools? (3) Are any business education courses required for graduation? If so, do any business education courses meet academic core requirements for high school graduation?
(Continued on page 24)
(Continued from page 21)
Click on the image to visit the Wisconsin
Department of Public Instruction Common
Core web page
24 Wisconsin Business Education Association
(Continued from page 23)
References
The Agnew Group. (2012). New York University Steinhardt - Administration, Leadership, and Technology. Retrieved from http://steinhardt.nyu.edu/alt/tag/
Clark, L. (2011). Sneak in some core subjects. Techniques, 86(7), 44-45. Common core standards initiative. (2012). Retrieved from http://corestandards.org/ DeWitt, S. (2011). Preparing now for common core: A state and local view. Techniques, 86(7), 22-24. Folkers, D. R. (2011). Setting a new standard with a common career technical core. Techniques, 86(7), 26-29. Glenn, J. M. L. (2010). The common core standards initiative: A common solution to the issue of college and
career readiness. Business Education Forum, 65(1), 6-11. Gregg, M. L. (2010). Business educators prepare students to meet common core state standards. Business Edu-
cation Forum, 65(1), 4. Heibert, E. H. & Mesmer, H. A. E. (2013). Upping the ante of text complexity in the Common Core State
Standards: Examining its potential impact on young readers. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 44-51. Lee, J. O. (2011). Reach teachers now to ensure common core success. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(6), 42-44. National Governors Association. (2011). Common core state standards initiative: Preparing America’s stu-
dents for college and career. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/ Overturf, B. (2011). Kentucky leads the US in implementing common core standards. Reading Today, 29(2),
24-25. Phillips, V. & Wong, C. (2010). Tying together the common core of standards, instruction, and assessments.
Phi Delta Kappan, 91(5), 37-42.
The 17th Annual Summer Instructional Technology Academy will be held on Ju‐ly 29‐August 1 at West De Pere High School in De Pere. EWITC (Eastern Wiscon‐
sin Instructional Technology Consortium) members attend FREE— non‐members can attend for $25 per session!
Visit http://www.ewitc.org/sita for more information!
Spring/Summer 2013 25
On Saturday, October 13, 2012, Dr. Doris Howell Crank and Dr. Jane M. Thompson were inducted into the Business Education National Hall of Fame at the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater. Dr. Crank held degrees from Illinois State University and Northwestern University. She taught Business Education for 42 years at the secondary and post-secondary levels, including 15 years at Illinois State University. She was active in a variety of professional organizations, including ISBE and DPE. She earned the Excellence in Teaching award at Northern Illinois University and the John Robert Gregg award from NBEA. Dr. Thompson held degrees from Nova Southeastern University, Indiana University, and James Madison University. She has teaching experience at the secondary and post-secondary levels, including over 20 years at Solano Community College in California. She was very active in a variety of professional organizations, including NBEA, ISBE, the Western Business Education Association, and the California Business Education Association. She earned many awards, including the NBEA Distinguished Service Award. The primary purpose of the Hall of Fame is to pay tribute to those men and women who have made significant contributions to business education in the United States. The Business Education National Hall of Fame was relocated to the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater in 1995. Prior to that time, the Hall of Fame was located at Rider University in Lawrenceville, New Jersey, from 1977 to 1994. Nomination Procedures Names of proposed nominees must be submitted in writing no later than May 1, in even numbered years, on forms obtained from the Director of the Hall of Fame. To be nominated, a candidate must have been an active business educator (teacher, lecturer, author, supervisor, publisher, inventor) and have been deceased at least three years prior to the nomination deadline. Elections to the Business Education National Hall of Fame are held every two years. Up to three persons may be elected to the Hall of Fame each induction. The Selection Committee is comprised of an anonymous group of business education leaders from throughout the United States. Donations Tax-deductible contributions are needed to continue the Business Education National Hall of Fame. Please send your donations to the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater Foundation, 800 W Main St, Whitewater, WI 53190. Contributors of $1,000 or more will have their names prominently displayed on a center plaque of the Hall of Fame in the university’s College of Business and Economics. For more information about the National Business Education Hall of Fame, contact Lila Waldman, Department of Information Technology/Business Education Director, Business Education Hall of Fame University of Wisconsin-Whitewater Whitewater, WI 53190 Phone: (262) 472-5475 Fax: (262) 472-5716 E-mail: [email protected]
26 Wisconsin Business Education Association
There is no better time to promote Career and Technical Education (CTE) than today! Our CTE advocacy website http://cte.dpi.wi.gov/cte_cteadvocacy offers a vast array of resources you can use throughout the year. The value of CTE should be highlighted to inform students, parents, school personnel and counselors, community members, and legislators about CTE programs, student success, and the impact on college and career readiness. Advocacy Resources On the website, there are a variety of tools that can be used on a regular basis including:
Public service announcement from Wisconsin State Superintendent Dr. Tony Evers
Public address announcements
Explore www.wicareerpathways.org and encourage students to create accounts
Letters to the editor
Success stories video
Access the weekly Career Cluster classroom activity
These resources can and should be adapted to strategically promote your program. http://www.facebook.com/pages/Wisconsin-Career-Technical-Education/ Shared with the Business Ed listserv via David Thomas, DPI Business & Information Technology Consultant
October 10 and 11 is a great time to be a
Wisconsin Business Education teacher and join in on the WBEA Fall Convention.
October 12 is a great day to be a Wisconsin Badger fan! October 12 is the UW Homecoming Game — so to celebrate we are
inviting all WBEA Conference participants to wear Wisconsin Badger attire during convention activities!
Spring/Summer 2013 27
Here are some highlights of the 2013 B&IT PD Calendar: June 27-30 FBLA National Leadership Conference, Anaheim, California August 5-9 SIEC-ISBE 85th International Conference, Berlin, Germany October 17-18 WBEA Fall Convention, Madison December 5-7 ACTE Conference, Las Vegas, Nevada
To view the 2013 calendar in its entirety, visit http://bit.dpi.wi.gov/bit_calendar
- The photo below was taken at UW-Whitewater's Business & Marketing Education student awards banquet on April 30. Outstanding students and scholarship winners were recognized at this event. Congratulations to all award winners! Front row (seated): Courtney White, Bailey Hearley, Sara Richmond, Denise Schulz (faculty) Middle row: Laura Schoenike, Dr. Lajuan Davis (faculty), Heather Paulson, Kris-ten Vanderwerff, Michelle GIbson Herman (faculty), Jennifer Larson, John Smith (faculty) Back row: Keith Wartzenluft, Melissa Ellis, Brent Gostomski, Dustin Elsbury, Dr. Lila Waldman (faculty), Dr. Paul Ambrose (faculty)
28 Wisconsin Business Education Association
WHAT ARE EQUIVALENCY CREDITS? Section PI 18.02, Wis. Admin. Code, defines "equivalent graduation policy" as "a board policy which meets the credit requirements specified for each subject area, but which permits selected equivalent courses as long as such courses contain the time allotment and substantially the same objectives to develop the knowledge, concepts, and skills of the course for which an equivalent is proposed." WHAT CORE CONTENT CAN BE CROSSWALKED WITH B&IT? English Language Arts (ELA) and Social Studies/Economics HOW DO I GET MY B&IT COURSE APPROVED FOR EQUIVALENCY CREDIT? Information from the DPI website includes the following process needed to obtain DPI approval for designating a B&IT course as an equivalency credit (sample is for ELA Equivalency):
FOR MORE INFORMATION, REQUIRED FORMS,
AND SAMPLE CROSSWALKS, VISIT HTTP://BIT.DPI.WI.GOV/BIT_EQUIVALENCY
Spring/Summer 2013 29
The State of Wisconsin introduced the new Common Core State Standards for Literacy in All Subjects in mid-September, with a new resource page available for educators was made available in early October. General information regarding this initiative can be found at the agency website at: http://dpi.wi.gov/standards/disciplinaryliteracy.html . Also called “disciplinary literacy”, this increases concentration on reading, writing, listening, speaking, and performing in all content areas, from kindergarten through twelfth grade as a way to enhance learning of specific content and concepts. This not only strengthens reading, writing and communication skills, but also increases comprehension in subject areas. Originally part of the Common Core State Standards in English Language Arts, Wisconsin is a front-runner in expanding these standards for all areas and grade levels.
The Career and Technical Education Team at the Department of Public Instruction has put into place multiple strategies to share relevant, timely, and important information that affects CTE in Wisconsin. This communiqué is meant to outline the many options available. Please note: some require you to “opt-in” to receive this type of communication. CTE Team Website: Find relevant and up-to-date materials, resources, and professional development opportunities related to programs falling under the CTE umbrella. Check out our website at http://cte.dpi.wi.gov/. From this home pages, you can access each content area and Career & Technical Student Organizations (CTSOs—FFA, FBLA, FCCLA, DECA, HOSA, SkillsUSA) websites. CTE Team Newsletter: A newsletter delivered four times per year (September, December, March, and May/June) with upcoming event information, a link to the CTE calendar, and a re-cap of happenings in each program area. All current CTE-coordinators are automatically subscribed to this newsletter. The newsletter is also sent to each content area list serve. You may opt-in to receive this email directly by sending a request to Deb Motiff at [email protected]. CTE List Serve: A new option in the last month is a CTE list serve. Get general communications around professional development, Carl Perkins, and other important news and resources around CTE in Wisconsin and across the country will be posted on this list serve. Opt-in at http://dpi.wi.gov/subscribe_dpilistserv. Content Area List Serves: Each content area (Agriculture & Natural Resources, Business & Information Technology, Family & Consumer Science, Health Science Occupations, Marketing, Technology & Pre-Engineering Education) maintains its own list serve. To opt-in to one or more content area listserv, visit the following site: http://dpi.wi.gov/subscribe_dpilistserv. Content Area Email Lists: Most content areas and Career & Technical Student Organizations (CTSOs—FFA, FBLA, FCCLA, DECA, HOSA, SkillsUSA) maintain their own specific member/teacher email lists. Share your contact information with your CTE consultant at DPI and ask to be added to the email list.
30 Wisconsin Business Education Association
Spring/Summer 2013 31
October 10-11, 2013
The Madison Concourse Hotel Madison
Schedule Overview See Page 33 for a list of Tentative Sectionals!
Thursday, October 10 7:30 a.m.-5:00 p.m. Registration 8:00-8:30 a.m. Continental Breakfast 8:30-10:00 a.m. KEYNOTE SESSION (Corinne Hoisington) 10:15-11:00 a.m. Session 1 (5 Sessions) 11:15-12:00 p.m. Session 2 (5 Sessions) 12:00-1:00 p.m. Lunch (with a guest presentation!) LUNCH CHOICES INCLUDE: Honey Ham, Smoked Turkey, Slow-Roast Beef, or Hummus Sandwich OR Grilled Chicken Caesar Salad, TENTATIVE COST $20.00) 12:00-6:00 p.m. Exhibits Open (1 Day Only!) 1:15-2:00 p.m. Session 3 (5 Sessions) 2:15-4:00 p.m. TOURS or VENDOR VISITS (Tentative Tours: Epic Medical Center, Kohl Center, American Family Insurance) 4:15-4:45 p.m. Session 4.1 (5 Roundtable Options) 4:45-5:15 p.m. Session 4.2 (5 Roundtable Options) 5:15-6:15 p.m. VENDOR RECEPTION 6:15 p.m. GRAND PRIZE DRAWING
Remainder of evening is open for participants to network, socialize, and enjoy the capital city. A possible bus to Ho-Chunk Casino may be available.
Friday, October 11 6:30 a.m. FUN RUN WALK 7:30 a.m.-12:00 p.m. Registration 8:00-9:15 a.m. DPI BREAKFAST WITH DAVE & ANNUAL MEETING (Continental breakfast) 9:15-9:45 a.m. Hotel check-out time 10:00-10:45 a.m. Session 5 (5 Sessions) 11:00-11:45 a.m. Session 6 (5 Sessions) 12:00-1:00 p.m. AWARDS LUNCHEON (MEAL CHOICES INCLUDE: Lemon-Scented Walleye, Seared Herb Marinat-
ed Chicken Breast, Charbroiled Cabernet Marinated Sirloin Steak, TENTATIVE COST $25.00) 1:15-2:00 p.m. Session 7 (5 Sessions) 2:15-2:45 p.m. Session 8.1 (5 Roundtable Options) 2:45-3:15 p.m. Session 8.2 (5 Roundtable Options) Lodging Information The Madison Concourse Hotel 1 West Dayton Street Madison, WI 53703 Tel: 800-356-8293 http://concoursehotel.com/ Single/Double $125 + 14.5% tax Triple/Quad $135 + 14.5% tax Tax Exempt? Be sure to mention and bring a copy when you check-in! Mention WBEA when calling for reservations.
32 Wisconsin Business Education Association
October 10-11, 2013
The Madison Concourse Hotel Madison
Plans are well underway for the WBEA Convention being held in our State Capital this October 10-11, at the Madison Concourse Hotel. The committee is working on some
changes and hopefully you will be able to join us for what will be a great time to network and en-joy the city of Madison.
This year we are going to be offering both a
1-day and 2-day registration fee!
One of the many concerns we hear from members is that they are unable to attend both days. To encourage attendance, even for one day, we now have options!
Registration Fees—Early Bird (April 15 through July 15)
$65.00 for 1 day registration (WBEA MEMBERS) $110.00 for 2 day registration (WBEA MEMBERS)
Registration Fees—Regular (July 16-October 4)
$75.00 for 1 day registration (WBEA MEMBERS) $120.00 for 2 day registration (WBEA MEMBERS)
Registration Fees—Onsite (October 10-11)
$85.00 for 1 day registration (WBEA MEMBERS) $150.00 for 2 day registration (WBEA MEMBERS)
A TENTATIVE schedule is on the next page.
Please check our website for convention updates as they become available!
Please note: Exhibitors will only be at the convention the first day. We are shortening
their participation but hopefully giving you more time to visit them.
And leading workshops on Flipped Classrooms and E-Learning!
Spring/Summer 2013 33
October 10-11, 2013
The Madison Concourse Hotel Madison
TENTATIVE Sectional Offerings
See Page 31 for the Conference Schedule Overview!
Thursday, October 10 Session 1, 10:15 to 11:00 a.m. E-Learning Cool Tech Projects to Personalize Student Learning Business Technologies and 21st Century Learning Organizing your Google Drive The Finance & Investment Challenge Bowl Session 2, 11:15 to 12:00 p.m. TBD TBD Google+, Are you Using it? Higher Ed Reaches Out, Shared Experiences between College and HS WICPA—Three Views on Accounting Session 3, 1:15 to 2:00 p.m. The Flipped Classroom TBD Google Scripts for Teachers iCEV online, Curriculum on Demand Using Web 2.0 to Communicate, Collaborate, Create and Think Critically Round Table Topics for Thursday and Friday Accounting General Business FBLA Marketing Business Law
Friday, October 11 Session 5, 10:00 to 10:45 a.m. Engaging the Middle School Mind with Technology Business Communication Equivalency Learning in the 21st Century Kurzweil 3000 TBD Session 6, 11:00 to 11:45 a.m. edTPA—Changes in Teacher Licensing Financial Literacy—TEACH IT! Power Searching with Google Google Forms TBD Session 7, 1:15 to 2:00 p.m. TBD TBD Google Scripts for Teachers Standards Based Grading TBD
IT Personal Finance School Stores Middle School Topics Standards Based Grading
Check the listserv and wbeaonline.org for the most up-to-date
information on the fall convention. A registration link for the convention will
be available soon!
34 Wisconsin Business Education Association
The map below shows the new WBEA District alignment (labeled as Region 1-7). This change was voted on by WBEA membership in September 2012. An additional Region/District was added as well as some realignment of counties within each Region/District. WBEA Districts currently align with FBLA Regions.
Spring/Summer 2013 35
Title Name Email
President Scott Kosidowski [email protected]
Co President-Elect Rebecca Ackermann Jennifer Bishop
[email protected] [email protected]
Secretary Kathryn Morgan [email protected]
Treasurer Allie Holtzer [email protected]
Past President Michelle McGlynn [email protected]
District 1 Open
District 2 Open
District 3 Kay McLain [email protected]
District 4 Travis Johnson [email protected]
District 5 Lauretta Pickel [email protected]
District 6 Sheri Schmidt [email protected]
Student Representative TBD
Student Representative TBD
Legislative Chair Open
Marketing Director Ginger Verhulst [email protected]
WBE Journal Editor Michelle McGlynn [email protected]
WBE Journal Research Editor Debbie Stanislawski [email protected]
Webmaster Katie Grassel [email protected]
NCBEA Representative Tina Trumbower [email protected]
DPI Representative David Thomas [email protected]
WTCS Representative Moira Lafayette [email protected]
WBEA Executive Board 2012-2013
Convention Coordinator Mike Carpenter [email protected]
Chief Information Officer Josh Firgens [email protected]
District 7 Kyla Stefan [email protected]
President-Elect
Secretary WBEJ Editor
Legislative Chair Marketing Director
District 1, 3, and 5 Reps If you are interested in serving on the board of this great organization, go to wbeaonline.org and follow
the links under about WBEA for more information or email Jen Bishop at [email protected] or Becky Ackermann at [email protected].
Mark Your Calendar NCBEA/IBEA (Iowa) Convention Ankney, Iowa July 23-24, 2013 ISBE International Convention Berlin, Germany August 5-9, 2013 WBEA Convention Madison October 10-11 , 2013
Are you looking for a way to provide honor and national recognition to outstanding students in your business education program? Look no further. The National Business Honor Society is the perfect way to bring greater recognition to your students AND your business education program. By starting a chapter of the honor society, you will be able to promote and recognize your dynamic students’ academic achievement in business education at the secondary level. Who’s eligible? Any high school junior or senior who has completed or is currently enrolled in his/her third business course and has a 3.0 (overall) and 3.5 (business course) GPA.
What school can start a chapter? Any public or independent secondary school offering business curriculum reflective of National Standards for Business Education is eligible to apply for a local chapter charter. Start a chapter today. It’s so easy…you’ll be glad you did! The National Business Honor Society is an official division of the National Business Education Association. Through starting a chapter your students’ names and school will be recognized in NBEA publications and on our Web site. More information is available at www.nbea.org.
Congratulations to Randi Stanley of El k Mound High School for being named the 2013 El k Mound
Teacher of the Year by the Menomonie Chamber of Commerce!