CYBER CAMP

Cyber Camp for K-12 Inland Empire Teachers

Arturo Aviles

Elva Fanty

Susan Moss

Sarah Pentony

California State University San Bernardino

ETEC 543

Dr. Leh

November 29, 2015

CYBER CAMP
2
Introduction

The Strategic planning committee at California State University, San Bernardino

(CSUSB), is planning to host a cybercamp in 2016, which will augment Community

Engagement and Partnership for the University. The purpose of the cybercamp will be

to provide technology training to K-12 teachers in the region. This cybercamp will be

more distinctly molded to fit the participants expressed needs, than the typical

technology training events, and it will provide additional value to Inland Empire

teachers. This project serves to investigate how this event should be structured and

what content should be included for a successful cybercamp experience. Two research

questions were selected to carry out the investigation. The research questions are as

follows:

1. What is the appropriate content of the cybercamp at CSUSB?

2. What is the appropriate structure of the cybercamp at CSUSB?

Methodology

Two groups of participants were selected to answer the research questions. The

first group consisted of the school districts technology coordinators who trained

teachers in the region and had a close relationship with them; approximately 20

technology coordinators. The second group was a lot larger; composed of

approximately 200 EdTech Classroom Conference (ETCC) participants from previous

events, who would be likely to participate in the actual cybercamp event.

To collect data for the study an email was sent to the participants, with an online

survey on Google forms, designed to help answer the research questions. The survey
CYBER CAMP
3
included check box questions, as well as open and close ended questions. The survey

consisted of 13 questions total and they are as follows:

1. Name

2. Email

3. Phone Number

4. School Name

5. I am a (check box question)

6. How many days are appropriate for Inland Empire teachers who will be more likely to

attend the cybercamp?

7. When will be a good time to host the cybercamp?

8. Would you attend the cybercamp if you need to pay a reasonable fee?

9. How much will you be willing to pay for such a cybercamp?

10. Click on all topics that should be in cybercamp?

11. Could we contact you should we need additional information about the cybercamp

preparation?

12. Would you be interested in serving on a planning committee of the cybercamp?

13. To prepare a successful cybercamp for Inland Empire teachers, what do we need to

do or to know from your points of view?

The survey was completely voluntary and was suggested to take 2-5 minutes to

complete, depending on the type of answers given by participants. There was no

identified risk involved for participants in the study.

A mixed-method design process was used for collecting and analyzing the

research. The analysis of the data began by using a quantitative method for questions
CYBER CAMP
4
5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12. After interpreting the results, the results were displayed by creating

5 bar graphs and 2 pie charts. The bar graphs and pie charts made analysis of the data

clear and visible to help answer the research questions. After the quantitative analysis

of the data was recorded, a qualitative analysis of the data was conducted. In a word

document, the open ended questions were obtained and the results of the data were

color coded, with the colors red, blue, and green. For each color, a question was

selected to go with the stated color as the data was. The three questions, with the

assigned colors, were as follows:

1. Participants stated is a need to know for a successful cybercamp = Red

2. Participants stated is a need to do for a successful cybercamp = Blue

3. Additional topics to be included in cybercamp = Green

The questions, along with the color coding, organized the data and made it easier to

analyze.

Results

The results of the survey yielded both quantitative and qualitative data. The

quantitative data analysis was conducted using descriptive statistics. The qualitative

data analysis was conducted using inferential statistics.

The survey contained 13 questions, but not all of the data was provided. Missing

information from the data set included participant names, email addresses, and phone

numbers, which accounted for the lack of data for questions one through three.

Additionally, the results of question four, the participants school, showed that there was

no specific grade level that participants belonged to. Participants in this study were all
CYBER CAMP
5
educators in the Inland Empire, but their job assignments varied from the elementary

level to the collegiate level, with certain sites showing up multiple times.

The results for the quantitative data analyzed are listed as followed:

Makeup of the interviewee:

Figure 1

Title of interviewee?
ETCC 21
TL 32
Both 12
None 18
total 83

Table 1

Question five asked participants to state who they were, either: a former ETCC

participant, a technology leader, both, or neither. The analysis of Table 1 revealed that

there were 21 former EdTech Classroom Conference participants, 32 technology

leaders, 12 participants that matched both descriptions, and 18 participants that did not

match either description. Figure 1 showed that most of the survey respondents were

technology leaders.

Total length for cybercamp:

CYBER CAMP
6
Figure 2

How long should cybercamp be?

1/2 day 4
1 day 37
2 day 37
3 day 5
total 83

Table 2

Question six asked respondents how many days the cybercamp should run, so

teachers in the Inland Empire would be more inclined to attend. According to Table 2,

four respondents selected half a day, thirty-seven selected one day, thirty seven

selected two days, and five selected three days. Figure 2 shows there was a split

decision between holding the camp for one day versus two. Based on the results, the

majority of the participants believe the cybercamp should last from one to two days.

Time of year for the cybercamp:

Figure 3
When to offer cybercamp?
summer 30
winter 4
spring 4
A. Y. 46
total 84

Table 3

Question seven asked respondents the best time of year to host the potential

cybercamp. According to Table 2, thirty respondents said the summer, four respondents
CYBER CAMP
7
said the winter, four respondents said the spring, and forty-six respondents said during

the academic year. Based on the results of Figure 3, the best time of year to host the

cybercamp would be during the academic year.

Cost involved in attending cybercamp:

Figure 4

would attend cybercamp?

yes 41
no 8
maybe 34
total 83

Table 4
Question eight asked respondents if they would be willing to attend the

cybercamp is there was a fee involved. According to Table 4, forty-one said they would

still attend, eight said they would not attend, and thirty-four said maybe they would

attend. Based on the results of Figure 4, the majority of respondents said they would

still be willing to attend the conference if they had to pay. However, the figure also

shows a strong respondent base, the maybes, that are unsure if they would attend if

they had to pay.

Topics included in cybercamp:

CYBER CAMP
8

Figure 5

Classes to offer?
social media 41
tech standard 69
digital learning 57
cyber safety 35
OL learning 42
other 8
total 252
Table 5

Question ten asked respondents which classes they would like to see offered at

the cybercamp. According to Table 5, forty-one respondents would like to see social

media classes, sixty-nine respondents would like to see technology and the common

core standards classes, fifty-seven would like to see digital learning, thirty-five would

like to see cyber safety, forty-two would like to see online learning, eight would like to

have other classes offered. Based on the results displayed in Figure 5, technology and

the common core standards and digital learning generated the most interest for

potential class offerings.

Contact for more info:

Contact for more class prep

info?
yes 74
no 10
total 84
Table 6
CYBER CAMP
9

Question 11 asked respondents if they would be willing to be contacted for more

information surrounding the preparation of the cybercamp. Table 6 shows that seventy-

four respondents would be willing to be contacted, whereas ten respondents would not.

Based on the results, the majority of the respondents would be willing to hear more

information about the cybercamp.

Interested in serving on a planning committee:

Would like to join plan

committee?
yes 32
No 29
Unsure 23
total 84
Table 7
Question 12 asked respondents if they would be willing to join a planning

committee for the cybercamp. According to Table 7, 32 said yes, 29 said no, and 23

were unsure. Based on the results, there is no majority, all of the answer choices

received nearly the same amount of votes.

Preparing for a successful cybercamp:

Question 13 asked respondents what needed to be known, what needed to be

done, and what additional topics needed to be included in order to make the cybercamp

successful.

After analyzing the results for question thirteen, there were many things that

needed to be known prior to the onset of the cybercamp. The major themes identified, in

response to what needed to be known, include: the level of digital implementation in

CYBER CAMP
10
classrooms, the amount of student access to technology both at school and at home,

the level of experience of the individual teacher, district requirements for certain

technologies, and participants would most likely be giving their own time to attend the

conference.

Additionally, there were many themes identified in response to the results of what

needed to be done for a successful cybercamp. The major themes identified were:

major advertising for specific topics, differentiated levels of presentations for beginners

through experts, provide multiple strategies during presentations, provide a short

overview of the topics, provide printouts from each meeting, consider the testing

window, and the lack of sub availability in most districts.

Furthermore, there were major themes identified in response to the additional

topics that should be included the cybercamp. The major trends include: flipped

classrooms, topics aligned to developing trends in education and technology, topics

regarding special needs and English learners, as well as courses that focus on different

technologies like the iPad or chromebook.

Conclusions and Recommendations

After analyzing the data surrounding the cybercamp at CSUSB, it is evident that

most respondents are interested in attending the cybercamp, even though there were

varying ideas surrounding the content and structure of the cybercamp. Overwhelmingly,

the majority of respondents would like to see the cybercamp held during the academic

year, sometime outside the SBAC testing window. Most of the participants would like to

see differentiated levels of ability in regards to technology integration in the classroom,

CYBER CAMP
11
with courses for beginners as well as experts. Many participants are interested in

learning about the current developing trends in technology and education, such as

flipped classrooms, STEM, and technology tools like Google for education.

Recommendations for the cybercamp include ensuring there are no problems

with connectivity. Respondents suggested that wifi connection was one of the biggest

problems with past conferences attended, stating that even just logging online was an

issue. Organizers of the cybercamp should find presenters that are up-to-date with the

newest trends in technology and education. The cybercamp should also include topics

that could be easily implemented in the classroom, without requiring much resources or

further training. Many respondents expressed an interest in a course overview or

handouts that go along with each potential course. Therefore, organizers should

advertise the camp through a website. By utilizing a website, the organizers can

describe each course offered and provide a forum for presenters to upload information

regarding their specific topic. On the website, organizers could post polls asking viewers

about the best times for the conference, or anything else they may need to gather more

information on. After the conference is over, the website could serve as a reflection for

organizers, presenters, and attendees alike, all with the opportunity to address their

concerns surrounding the successes and weaknesses of their conference experience.