Given my previous use of a web-based classroom management system, I was already quite familiar with many aspects of this course. In my teachings over the past few years, I have utilized this system to post information for my students to access. I had established and maintained a wiki in this environment for us to share information and collaborate to produce educational study materials. I also used this environment to post multiple choice quizzes for the students to complete. So I expected this course to reinforce the knowledge I gained from that experience and expose to a few new things. This course turned out to be much of what I expected in that the readings were of familiar content and I learned some new things, especially in the creation of my blog. My outcomes were very positive and actually rekindled my interest in utilizing these types of technology in my teaching.
The content and tools that exposed to the students in this course are very much the cutting of edge of technology available out there for use in teaching. Today’s students are all already quite savvy in their use, so introduction of them into the classroom should be very seamless in terms of student use. The challenge is to push today’s teachers to overcome any inhibition with technology and change the way they do things in their classrooms. It seems that education is undergoing what you might call a paradigm shift. This shift is away for a focus on facts and bits of information to concepts and connections between the facts. On top of all this, students will need skills on how to access information more than they need to know the information itselt. They need to know how to find information and apply it Technology has provided so many tools that are standards in the job world that to be prepared to enter it, a certain bank of prerequisite skills are necessary. This course exposes future leaders to these many tools so that they are aware of their availability and applicability in the classrooms of today.
I don’t feel that there was any one outcome that I had envisioned that I didn’t accomplish. I guess the course covered most of everything I was familiar with or at least had heard of. If was prevented from achieving something, it must have been due to the scope of the course. Given the time frame, I felt like the scope was very appropriate. There are some technology things that I currently use that were not discussed in the course, but it’s hard to cover everything out there in a reasonable amount of time. Beyond this limitation, the only other factor hindering me was possibly time. Given the scope of the course and trying to balance the rest of my life, I wasn’t able to go above and beyond what the course included. Don’t take this as dissatisfaction…it’s just reality. In the end, I’m leaving the course feeling more confident in promoting technology as a educational leader.
As I stated above, my only hindrance in this course was just the reality of having limited time. With my experiences in using technology and working somewhat closely with my campus’ technology facilitator, my background gave me a head start in completing assignments. The only things that was somewhat new to me was blogger.com. The posting of the PowerPoint was really the only difficult thing. I think the size of the file made the conversion process very slow. I gave up on AuthorSTREAM after waiting an hour and went slideshare.net which worked much faster. There wasn’t anything that discouraged me, but I might have been encouraged if the assignments could have included tasks involving the creation of something to implement the technology tools in the course in my current or future teaching capacity. The fact that I was going to get immediately implement something in my own teaching would have provided encouragement to complete the task. The assignments would have then served a dual purpose.
Not to be boastful, but the thing I learned the most was that I’m already quite adept in the educational technology tools available today. What I learn was that it’s how you use the technology is what really matters. It’s not enough to have a computer for each student so that each student can just type up a document or make a PowerPoint presentation. The true power in technology is when it allows the students to go beyond the resources available in the classroom, such as the teacher or the textbook. Technology provides so much more access to knowledge, so teaching needs to add a facet of instruction for students to learn to proper access and utilize this information. I also learned to be mindful of taking advantage of what the students already know, as well as the technology they are bringing into the classroom. Lastly, what’s sticks the most in my mind is how teaching is becoming more about collaborating and communicating with others, and technology provides a unique venue in which to teach these skills. So, as a future campus leader, I need to remain mindful of the application of technology in our schools and stay proggessive in its implementation.
As I stated above, a sound educational background for the 21st century learner must include skills related to collaboration and communication. Blogs provide a powerful media to facilitate the development of these skills. They can be used by students individually to share their ideas for others to give feedback, or they can provide a place for students to collectively create something in a group effort. These allow for an expansion of the classroom. Rather than doing things in class, the teacher can post a writing prompt or other information for students to post comments. They could provide a venue for online discussions to occur. If a teacher runs out of time at the end of class, a blog might be useful to continue the discussion that evening using a blog. In addition, they would also provide a means to communicate with students in terms of due dates and clarification on assignement instructions.
The key in using blogs for educational purposes is that they are used properly. A concern would be that they may become a social venue where the students are not using their properly. It will be important to train the students to only comment in the realm of the coursework involved. This may require more maturity in the students to handle this technology appropriately. Also, there is something to say about the power of a face-to-face conversation. Body language and voice inflection often support what is being said. But when the conversation is occurring online via a keyboard, some of the power of a message can be lost or misinterpreted. This aspect of cautions to using blogs will be crucial to the teaching about how to appropriately use the technology, in addition to teaching how to use it. But in the end, I think the advantages of using blogs in education greatly outweigh these types of problems. With proper training and accountability of use, blogs can provide a fun, technological twist on the normal class discussion.
I’ve mentioned above how blogs can be used to communicate with students, but their reach can be further. Blogs could not only provide information for the students, but also for their parents. Blogs might provide a place for teachers to let parents know what’s going on in class. They might allow parents to provide feedback by adding comments to posts. If we can get all stakeholders in the habit of checking in on a blog, or at least setting up an RSS to notify them of changes, this would greatly improve communication between the classroom and home. What might be even better is that blogs, being somewhat of a public domain if setup accordingly, can provide information to any member of the community. So, even community members without students, who can sometimes grow out of touch with the local schools, could access these educational blogs to keep abreast of what’s going on in education. This appears to me to be an excellent way to create informed voters for local school board elections.
So, as a future campus leader, I feel that this course has provided knowledge and skills that have effectively prepared me to promote the implementation of technology in education.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Campus Technology Action Plan
Technology Professional Development
The STaR Chart results will be used by the principal and the campus Technology Facilitator (described below) to determine how technology is perceived on the campus and assess what needs to be done to improve. At the district level, the district STaR chart is analyzed to see where our downfalls and achievements are as far as the amount of equipment and networking capabilities. This analysis allows for indicating the types and numbers of workshops that we need to make available for the coming year.
Professional development needs to be scheduled to have teachers perform a study of the Technology Applications TEKS as well as analyze and reflect upon STaR chart data for the campus, district, and state. Other possibilities include having teachers complete the TEA’s Technology Applications Inventory to assess the knowledge and skills needed for implementation of the Technology Applications TEKS. Based on staff results, work can be done to provide appropriate training to address discovered weak area.
Also important is collecting input from all stakeholders. Surveys should be distributed to assess teacher’s, student’s and parent’s comfort level with technology. Information regarding what level of support is available in the home would be useful in directing the implementation of certain types of technology.
Utilization of resources already available on campus is a must. Trainings need to be provided to allow teachers to utilize Moodle to implement social networking discussion groups related to curricular content. Training in the use of the Interwrite MOBIs & Pads is also needed. These mobile interactive white boards can be used to get students engaged and participate and “write on the board” in a new way. The campus Technology Facilitator can work to embed these trainings into the teacher’s lesson planning, so the training is ongoing and continued. This strategy provides trainings referenced in curriculum content which utilize technology to accomplish the curricular task at hand. This would avoid training centereing only on the technology itself and promotes an image of technology as a tool to utilize to improve instruction.
It may also be possible to utilize the current mentoring heirarchy in schools where veteran teachers are paired with younger beginning teachers to provide guidance with things such as classroom management and organization. This partnership can be enhanced by urging the young teacher to recipricate by helping the veteran teachers with advancing their technology application in their teaching.
District/Campus Technology Support
Technology Integration support at the district level will included Melissa Fouche, Executive Director of Technology and Information Services who directs both Cheryl McDonald, Coordinator of Elementary Instructional Technology and Pam Weir, Coordinator of Secondary Instructional Technology. They administer to the campus-based technology staff as described below.
Katrina Stroot, Technology Integration Facilitator, (instructional implementation) is assigned at the campus level. She is a certified teacher, who provides campus staff development, helps write technology integration curriculum, and assists with technical support. She provides on-campus professional development to teachers on software integration, such as eInstruction CPS, MOBI, Moodle blogs and wikis, etc.
Ed Arndt, Technology Integration Specialist, (hardware and networking) is also assigned at the campus level. He assists in the planning and integration of technology, serves as the first level of technical support, and manages the media retrieval systems. He is on call to solve technical issues, maintain equipment and connectivity to district network. These trainings will focus on relevant, teacher needs as a means of teaching various software applications
These two partner with teachers via job embedded modeling during a routine school day. This allows us to show teachers how to integrate technology as a learning tool into the core curriculum for all students. By teaching practical applications of software, we encourage teachers to embrace technology as a resource tool for their own practical use. For example, PowerPoint basics are taught while creating a presentation for open house, or Excel basics are taught while creating a lesson plan template.
They will utilize the campus’ technology integration lab(s) during the school day. The Facilitators and Specialists work with teachers and their students on an ongoing basis throughout the year, modeling and providing relevant, practical demonstrations. During the summer, the Facilitators from all campuses come together as a team to teach Technology Integration Academies based on subject area and grade level.
The principal’s role is to support all of the activities by funding needed equipment, providing time for teachers to take advantage of trainings, encouraging teachers to implement technology, and possibly by including criteria in teacher evaluations.
Technology Evaluation
After implementing more technology training during the academic year and encouraging its implementation, and providing ongoing support, the STaR chart survey can be repeated and the results then compared to the previous year to measure outcomes and growth. The STaR chart results indicate areas to emphasize within Professional Development and Teaching & Learning. These aspects are obviously linked. If teachers are provided more training, technology will propagate into the classrooms and impact student learning. In addition, the teacher can re-take the TEA’s Technology Applications Inventory to compare to previous results to check for growth.
Another aspect of evaluation should involve monitoring the volume of student products that are technology-based. Are students creating paper posters to be displayed in the hallway, or are they creating electronic documents that are printed? Activity throughout the Moodle discussion groups and wikis can be monitored and quantified to detect increases in the use of this technology. Efforts should be made to determine if teachers are utilizing the talents of their students to overcome technology hurdles.
Before planning future technology workshops, teachers should be surveyed so that subsequent trainings meet that needs of the teachers. Before each workshop, the facilitators should inspect the roster of attendees to make sure there is something presented that will be useful for each one of them. The goal of trainings should be for teachers to develop ideas and depart with a lesson plan or a sample project that they can take back to their classes.
Progress should involve the consideration of moving technology professional development online. Available applications such as Moodle allow for teachers to log in anywhere, complete “assignments,” and have access to pertinent information. Teachers do not necessarily need to be bound to a classroom or computer lab to participate in professional development. This type of training for the teachers would be perfect to model the types of activity that can be going on in their classrooms.
If professional development moved online, teachers from all over a district could pool their knowledge and resources. This type of venue for training should promote more open and timely discussion of the training content.
The STaR Chart results will be used by the principal and the campus Technology Facilitator (described below) to determine how technology is perceived on the campus and assess what needs to be done to improve. At the district level, the district STaR chart is analyzed to see where our downfalls and achievements are as far as the amount of equipment and networking capabilities. This analysis allows for indicating the types and numbers of workshops that we need to make available for the coming year.
Professional development needs to be scheduled to have teachers perform a study of the Technology Applications TEKS as well as analyze and reflect upon STaR chart data for the campus, district, and state. Other possibilities include having teachers complete the TEA’s Technology Applications Inventory to assess the knowledge and skills needed for implementation of the Technology Applications TEKS. Based on staff results, work can be done to provide appropriate training to address discovered weak area.
Also important is collecting input from all stakeholders. Surveys should be distributed to assess teacher’s, student’s and parent’s comfort level with technology. Information regarding what level of support is available in the home would be useful in directing the implementation of certain types of technology.
Utilization of resources already available on campus is a must. Trainings need to be provided to allow teachers to utilize Moodle to implement social networking discussion groups related to curricular content. Training in the use of the Interwrite MOBIs & Pads is also needed. These mobile interactive white boards can be used to get students engaged and participate and “write on the board” in a new way. The campus Technology Facilitator can work to embed these trainings into the teacher’s lesson planning, so the training is ongoing and continued. This strategy provides trainings referenced in curriculum content which utilize technology to accomplish the curricular task at hand. This would avoid training centereing only on the technology itself and promotes an image of technology as a tool to utilize to improve instruction.
It may also be possible to utilize the current mentoring heirarchy in schools where veteran teachers are paired with younger beginning teachers to provide guidance with things such as classroom management and organization. This partnership can be enhanced by urging the young teacher to recipricate by helping the veteran teachers with advancing their technology application in their teaching.
District/Campus Technology Support
Technology Integration support at the district level will included Melissa Fouche, Executive Director of Technology and Information Services who directs both Cheryl McDonald, Coordinator of Elementary Instructional Technology and Pam Weir, Coordinator of Secondary Instructional Technology. They administer to the campus-based technology staff as described below.
Katrina Stroot, Technology Integration Facilitator, (instructional implementation) is assigned at the campus level. She is a certified teacher, who provides campus staff development, helps write technology integration curriculum, and assists with technical support. She provides on-campus professional development to teachers on software integration, such as eInstruction CPS, MOBI, Moodle blogs and wikis, etc.
Ed Arndt, Technology Integration Specialist, (hardware and networking) is also assigned at the campus level. He assists in the planning and integration of technology, serves as the first level of technical support, and manages the media retrieval systems. He is on call to solve technical issues, maintain equipment and connectivity to district network. These trainings will focus on relevant, teacher needs as a means of teaching various software applications
These two partner with teachers via job embedded modeling during a routine school day. This allows us to show teachers how to integrate technology as a learning tool into the core curriculum for all students. By teaching practical applications of software, we encourage teachers to embrace technology as a resource tool for their own practical use. For example, PowerPoint basics are taught while creating a presentation for open house, or Excel basics are taught while creating a lesson plan template.
They will utilize the campus’ technology integration lab(s) during the school day. The Facilitators and Specialists work with teachers and their students on an ongoing basis throughout the year, modeling and providing relevant, practical demonstrations. During the summer, the Facilitators from all campuses come together as a team to teach Technology Integration Academies based on subject area and grade level.
The principal’s role is to support all of the activities by funding needed equipment, providing time for teachers to take advantage of trainings, encouraging teachers to implement technology, and possibly by including criteria in teacher evaluations.
Technology Evaluation
After implementing more technology training during the academic year and encouraging its implementation, and providing ongoing support, the STaR chart survey can be repeated and the results then compared to the previous year to measure outcomes and growth. The STaR chart results indicate areas to emphasize within Professional Development and Teaching & Learning. These aspects are obviously linked. If teachers are provided more training, technology will propagate into the classrooms and impact student learning. In addition, the teacher can re-take the TEA’s Technology Applications Inventory to compare to previous results to check for growth.
Another aspect of evaluation should involve monitoring the volume of student products that are technology-based. Are students creating paper posters to be displayed in the hallway, or are they creating electronic documents that are printed? Activity throughout the Moodle discussion groups and wikis can be monitored and quantified to detect increases in the use of this technology. Efforts should be made to determine if teachers are utilizing the talents of their students to overcome technology hurdles.
Before planning future technology workshops, teachers should be surveyed so that subsequent trainings meet that needs of the teachers. Before each workshop, the facilitators should inspect the roster of attendees to make sure there is something presented that will be useful for each one of them. The goal of trainings should be for teachers to develop ideas and depart with a lesson plan or a sample project that they can take back to their classes.
Progress should involve the consideration of moving technology professional development online. Available applications such as Moodle allow for teachers to log in anywhere, complete “assignments,” and have access to pertinent information. Teachers do not necessarily need to be bound to a classroom or computer lab to participate in professional development. This type of training for the teachers would be perfect to model the types of activity that can be going on in their classrooms.
If professional development moved online, teachers from all over a district could pool their knowledge and resources. This type of venue for training should promote more open and timely discussion of the training content.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
LHS Shooting StaR Chart
LHS is technology infrastructure rich, has solid instructional support, but needs to improve in technology professional development which will lead to improvements in technology teaching and learning.
LHS StaR Chart
View more presentations from Derek McDowell.
Texas STaR Chart Reflection
I feel that the key to improving the implementation of technology within Texas schools lies in the area of Educator Preparation and Development. The Long-Range Plan for Technology, 2006-2020 states “Whether teaching and learning are impacted through the use of educational technology is directly related to the experiences that are brought to the classroom. These classroom experiences are dependent on an educator taking the initiative to increase personal learning through ongoing professional development or continuing education. Technology can impact curriculum and instruction, but for this to occur, teachers need to learn to incorporate technology appropriately to support the curriculum and bring about learning opportunities that would not be possible without the technology.” It only makes sense for teachers to be able to prepare students for future use of the technology we have available, those teachers themselves must know how to use this same technology.
Since the 2006-2007 mandate for all teacher to complete the Campus STaR Chart we can find that according to Statewide Summary by Key Area data, this is an area of needed improvement. In 06-07 only 17.7% of Texas schools has surpassed Developing Tech ratings. This number improved to 20.5% in 07-08. Nonetheless, this remains an impact area of emphasis to improve teacher training in technology.
I believe that if teachers are exposed to this data, they will become aware of the necessity. I feel that all teachers take pride in their work and that these statewide STaR Chart results are a blemish on Texas schools. By letting data drive the decisions, I see teachers responding positively to demand and take advantage of quality technology training opportunities. This teacher training will then have a direct impact on the technological preparedness of the students in their classrooms.
Since the 2006-2007 mandate for all teacher to complete the Campus STaR Chart we can find that according to Statewide Summary by Key Area data, this is an area of needed improvement. In 06-07 only 17.7% of Texas schools has surpassed Developing Tech ratings. This number improved to 20.5% in 07-08. Nonetheless, this remains an impact area of emphasis to improve teacher training in technology.
I believe that if teachers are exposed to this data, they will become aware of the necessity. I feel that all teachers take pride in their work and that these statewide STaR Chart results are a blemish on Texas schools. By letting data drive the decisions, I see teachers responding positively to demand and take advantage of quality technology training opportunities. This teacher training will then have a direct impact on the technological preparedness of the students in their classrooms.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Spiraling of the Technology Applications TEKS
The use of input devices provides an example of the spiraling of multiple opportunities to master an essential technology skill. The use of different input devices is part of a series of TEKS for each grade level. The keyboard and mouse are both inputs listed for each grade level. Simple double-clicking on the mouse begins in Pre-K, then the complexity expands to include advanced input devices such as touch screens and voice/sound recorders at the higher grade levels.
Pre-K Technology Applications TEKS Summary
The students at this age are expected to learn how to start, use, and exit age appropriate software, as well as make use of different input devices, such as a mouse and keyboard. They should begin use of technical terminology, and use different types of software which has audio, video and graphics components. They should also begin developing communication skills using technology.
The Pre-K TEKS include basic technical skills that are essential to acquire before advancing to skills required in later grades. For example, the expectation for Pre-K students to use different input devices is also an expectation for high school students. The expectation at the high school level includes some additional types of input devices that are not listed in the Pre-K expectation
The Pre-K TEKS include basic technical skills that are essential to acquire before advancing to skills required in later grades. For example, the expectation for Pre-K students to use different input devices is also an expectation for high school students. The expectation at the high school level includes some additional types of input devices that are not listed in the Pre-K expectation
Long-Range Plan Analysis Reflection
It has made me realize the importance and urgency of the implementation of technology into curriculum and instruction. There are many aspects of the plan that still need to be implemented. Many teachers continue to use traditional teaching methods and fail to adjust instruction to meet individual needs of students. As an instructional leader, the first thing that I would need to do is fill in gaps in my knowledge of technology applications. Data would need to be collected to evaluate technology use at my campus. Most importantly, opportunities for professional development must be provided for teachers, along with continued support,in order to make any needed improvements. These decisions would all be data driven, based on data from sources such as the Texas STaR chart.
Tech Surveys Reflection
I feel that I’m quite adept with technology and both surveys supported my belief. In the Technology Applications Inventory that assesses ones knowledge and skills in the four strands of Foundations, Information Acquisition, Solving Problems, and Communication, of the 58 total questions, I only answered “no” to 9 of them. This data shows that I am 85% efficient in terms of the TEA’s technology knowledge and skills. It wasn’t until the last 2 strands, Solving Problems and Communication, that I indicated “no.” Of the things I’m lacking, most are in the communication strand involving publishing, telecommunications, and managerial design issues. To me, this inventory identifies areas to work into my internship plan.
To me the SETDA Teacher Survey was less helpful in my self-assessment. It seemed too convoluted in terms for given me clear feedback, but was very helpful in make me more aware of the many technology issues involved in education. Early in the survey the questions involved data to determine if students are being impacted by technology. I know my campus is utilizing more technology in its teaching, but we haven’t done much to measure the impact. This makes a point to be sure to not just use technology for technologies sake. Its implementation must be beneficial. This survey also stressed the importance that campus leadership collecting data referencing the use and effectiveness of technology. As with the first survey, this one also indicated my area for technology growth involves multimedia editing and authoring tools.
I think the take-home message from these 2 activities is that while I may have knowledge and skills with technology, it is important that I, as a campus leader, must ensure that the campus classroom teachers also have similar knowledge and skills so that they can promote those same abilities in the students.
To me the SETDA Teacher Survey was less helpful in my self-assessment. It seemed too convoluted in terms for given me clear feedback, but was very helpful in make me more aware of the many technology issues involved in education. Early in the survey the questions involved data to determine if students are being impacted by technology. I know my campus is utilizing more technology in its teaching, but we haven’t done much to measure the impact. This makes a point to be sure to not just use technology for technologies sake. Its implementation must be beneficial. This survey also stressed the importance that campus leadership collecting data referencing the use and effectiveness of technology. As with the first survey, this one also indicated my area for technology growth involves multimedia editing and authoring tools.
I think the take-home message from these 2 activities is that while I may have knowledge and skills with technology, it is important that I, as a campus leader, must ensure that the campus classroom teachers also have similar knowledge and skills so that they can promote those same abilities in the students.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)