Instructional Management: The Technology Link
Course Reflection
Outcomes
As a digital immigrant, I was quite unsure about my expectations for this course. I did not even realize it was technology related until I read the course syllabus. After reading it, I knew that I would be taking a giant step out of my comfort zone-and that I did! In fact, it could be more accurately described as a leap into the world of technology as it relates to education. I felt like I had stepped into a new season of Fear Factor. Of course, one of the positives about taking a three hour credit class in only five weeks is that there is absolutely no perseveration time. I had just had to delve into the coursework and hope for the best. It would be fair to say there was no course alignment with my expectations.
It has been quite a journey with moments of excitement and pride after completing a task, coupled with even more moments of anxiety as I attempted to work through the assignments. I can honestly say that I now feel like I did achieve the course outcomes, and yes, they are relevant to my work. This class has created an awareness of the technology available to educators, along with the standards and skills required for teachers and administrators. I now feel very strongly that every educator should have a solid prerequisite course on cyber safety, ethics, and the legalities surrounding technology usage. Even though I have had some exposure to this subject, it needs to be continuing and ongoing as we model best practices for our students and new innovations become available. Also, the exposure to the Web 2.0 tools was valuable, along with the recommendation to revisit our Acceptable Use Policies. As I worked through the assignments and readings, I began to visualize various ways to apply the new knowledge and skills to my job and others as well. I have to confess, there were times when the terror had turned to enthusiasm. Listening to student voices and their excitement about technology in education made a believer out of me!
The most challenging outcome for me was developing an Action Plan for the district and campus that facilitated the integration of technology into education. While I did complete it, I am not sure if it fulfilled the expectations of the professors.
I did not feel qualified to create an organizational chart with roles and responsibilities defined at the district level. I used our district’s plan to help me accomplish the assigned task. However, it was a good experience gathering and analyzing the data for the plan. Through the assignment, I learned of all the valuable sources of data that are available to us that facilitate the decision-making process. Also, I now have a new perspective in regards to the evaluation process for assessing the plan and professional development. I especially liked the recommendations in the readings for evaluating professional development after teachers have had time to internalize and apply their new learning. It was interesting to see the different interpretations of the assignment while reviewing the plans of other students.
Student Achievement
While I was successful in carrying out the assignments, it certainly was not accomplished without frustration and discouragement. I did enjoy creating a blog and I can also envision several applications for its use on my campus. The power point was another good experience for me, but it was frustrating when I had spent hours trying to follow the rubric, then my coach was not able to open it on my blog. That took a few days to clear up, while working on the week 3 assignment at the same time. However, I did appreciate the responses from the coach and professors. I don’t think it would have been resolved if my son had not happen to come home for the night and told me about compressing the power point. Tech support at Lamar did not even make that suggestion.
Needless to say, I was relieved when week 3 required a report. I could accomplish that assignment without depending on others. The Action Plan was also frustrating because I did not understand the parameters or feel qualified to make those decisions, especially at the district level. I always enjoy the opportunities to reflect because administrators must also be able to “talk the talk.” Reflecting provides time to practice that skill.
I learned quite a bit about technology and its part in the educational process. I especially enjoyed the readings. I felt all of the readings were very informative and provided good information, along with new knowledge regarding the integration of technology into education. As a digital immigrant I need more time to practice and internalize the technology skills, and because of the short time frame, that was not possible. Of course, because of this experience, that will help me when planning professional development for educators. The web conference is also another technology tool that I am now aware of. I have experienced many “firsts” with this course and it does give me a sense of pride for learning about Web 2.0 technologies and other technology related issues. As educators, we need to embrace what is available to us, strengthen our instructional methodologies, and work towards our common goal of preparing our students for success in the 21st century.
Blogs
Blogs have redefined news for the 21st century. We have moved from professional news to personal news 24/7. Its value to education is a 21st century instructional methodology that is now available to excite and motivate learners. Virtually anyone can become a reporter and easily share news for minimal or no cost. It also provides a medium to reflect on your unique perspective about a topic of interest, along with creating communities of bloggers that inspire and motivate each other. Blogging can serve to motivate young writers and encourage them to hone their writing skills. It is a new way to collaboratively communicate, and we must provide our students with the necessary skills to be successful. Blogging has provided the power of the media to everyone! It is now up to educators to take full advantage. The possibilities are endless.
The concerns surrounding blogs and blogs in education are the same concerns with other technologies in regards to internet usage. Educators must be fully aware and prepared to protect their own reputation, along with the district’s. A student could easily post a picture or video from a cell phone that could be incriminating and possible create a PR nightmare for educators. Also, ensuring students blog in appropriate language on appropriate topics must be a priority. Copyright issues can occur on a blog as easily as in other mediums. In order for schools to receive the optimum benefit from technology, a strong, solid prerequisite course on cyber ethics, safety, and legalities should be in place. Students, staff, and parents should all be well-informed regarding these issues. A technology policy and set of procedures should be an important element of the technology integration plan.
There are numerous ways to use blogging to communicate with school stakeholders. To repeat an earlier statement, the possibilities are endless. My initial idea for using blogs as administrator would be to replace our school newsletter with a blog. The newsletter includes important dates and pertinent parent information. Replacing the newsletter with a blog could allow for more timely dissemination of information, along with an archive of previous stories for easy reference. Another idea would be for the principal to use a blog to communicate with staff. It would also allow staff to comment on issues in the blog. It could replace some of the professional learning community meetings or faculty meetings. Teachers could also use a blog as a communication tool with students and parents. Students could use a blog to reflect on new learning. From the district superintendent to students, it is really up to the imagination of the user for the various ways to take full advantage of this Web 2.0 tool. I appreciated the opportunity to learn about blogging and to practice its use. I feel confident that my blogging days have just begun!
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Friday, December 11, 2009
Action Plan
Action Plan
Integrating Teaching, Learning, and Technology
Organizational Chart
District
Executive Director of Technology: should have a district vision for integration of technology that ultimately impacts student learning and achievement; gathers and analyzes data from a variety of sources to develop District Technology Plan (i.e., Texas Long Rang Plan, AEIS, discussions with stakeholders, STaR chart data, etc.); establish a continuous cycle of data gathering, planning, budgeting and implementing, with each level impacting the other; oversee planning and improvement process; model best practices
Associate Executive Director of Technology: support executive director in all duties and responsibilities
Cabinet: provide district directions and strategies; estimate and commit District technology funds from all sources; approve allocation of technology funds for sites and District projects; approve Technology Planning Guidelines for campuses and departments, including technology standards; review CIP’s annually; model best practices
Technology Services Division: briefs cabinet on the overall results of the technology planning process; must emphasize the significance of the plans and the planned support resources to allow adjustments to projects (comprised of District personnel in technology, 2 campus IT’s; 2 campus administrators; representatives from: District Academic Division, Career & Technology, Professional Development, Assistive Technology, Safety, Construction, and Purchasing)
Instructional Technology Committee: (a representative from each campus from a variety of grade levels and content areas, along with some campus administrators) meets monthly to present site issues for clarification during planning process; critique and share site technology plans for horizontal and vertical bridging; propose initiatives and grants; submit recommendations for instructional planning goals and considerations to the Technology Services Division and Cabinet; define and communicate site requirements for District support services
Campus
Principal: gathers and analyzes data for decision-making; leads SBDM in development of CIP (CIP should address technology and elements for integration into the curriculum); facilitate implementation of CIP; ensures organizational chart is implemented (include Action Plan in teacher handbook with other school policies and procedures, ensure staff awareness at PLC meetings); be creative with scheduling to provide for professional development (PD); provide for PD with funding; create a campus culture that encourages risk-taking and implementation of innovations in curriculum (along with personal celebrations at faculty meetings, include instructional celebrations in regards to technology integration); ensure cyber ethics are taught and safety procedures in place for technology use; use ongoing assessment and evaluation to make changes as needed; monitor technology plan through teacher professional development plans (PDPs) and require at least one technology student product (or plans for a product) at annual summative; attend technology related conferences or curriculum-related conferences; keep abreast of research and high yielding instructional strategies; have a vision for the direction of the campus in regards to technology integration into curriculum, leadership, and assessment; model best practices with technology; integrate technology into administrative duties
Assistant Principal: supports the principal in all of the above duties
Campus Technology Committee: (chaired by Instructional Technologist-IT and includes a representative from each grade level team) attend monthly meetings to collaborate on new technologies and make recommendations for staff; discuss problems and concerns of staff related to technology integration; preview new software; review and apply district planning parameters; liaison for staff with IT; model best practices with technology; analyze data to facilitate planning/decision-making
Instructional Technologist (IT): provide professional development opportunities through a variety of delivery systems; support district and campus plan; model best practices; go into classrooms and model lessons integrating technology into curriculum; work with teachers one-on-one to empower them to provide high yielding strategies in regards to technology integration; obtain additional personnel when necessary to conduct training; work with classes in the lab to learn about various software and facilitate technology integration with curriculum; troubleshoot technology problems on campus; teach workshops; provide technology leadership and support at the campus; analyze data to facilitate planning/decision-making
Teachers: maintain individual web pages; participate in professional development for technology integration; model best practices; develop lesson plans integrating technology into curriculum with support of IT; one technology goal included in personal PDP; bring a technology student product or product plan to annual summative; teach cyber ethics and safety in regards to internet and technology usage; use technology for administrative tasks (online gradebook, online lesson plans; online attendance, email to communicate with parents); analyze data to facilitate planning/decision-making
Needs Assessment
The vision and mission of the district is to develop students that can succeed in the 21st century using 21st century technology skills. Students will be able to utilize information, manipulate data, and explore new ideas while mastering the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS). This plan should provide the resources and training necessary to make this vision a reality.
The needs assessment is a collaborative process regarding current and future technology needs of the district. Data is gathered and analyzed by a variety of sources in numerous ways. Any single person or team on the organizational chart is responsible for the gathering and analysis of data. The Executive Director of Technology and other district personnel and teams use data to foster the district decision-making process, while campus principals further refine the process to meet the needs of their respective campuses.
Sources of data that provide the focus for the plans are: Texas Long-Range Plan for Technology, AEIS, AYP, Campus and Teacher STaR Chart summaries, district and campus based assessments, esc works (online professional development management system that includes history of professional development for every employee, site based committee recommendations, administrative surveys, campus technology committee and district instructional technology committee recommendations, discussions with stakeholders (teachers, students, and community), NETS-S and NETS-A standards, Project Tomorrow’s online annual surveys.
The District and Campus Improvement Plans are developed after an analysis of the data. In order to facilitate the collaborative process for both plans, a wiki will be implemented for all stakeholders. This should create a more efficient collaborative process while providing opportunities for staff professional development on the use of this Web 2.0 tool. Both plans will address needs for the following:
• Infrastructure: maintaining and updating; research implementation of automated asset management system to save time, money and human effort
• Professional Development: to include training on new software and technology, along with integrating technology into curriculum (see following section)
• Leadership: facilitate the development of the plans and provide resources for implementation; begin to revisit AUP and update to include more current technologies; other responsibilities listed in organizational chart
Professional Development
Rapid advancements in technology and its applications to education require an aggressive approach to professional development as it relates to technology integration. The Action Plan will be included in the Teacher Handbook (includes all policies, procedures, forms, calendars, etc.) and reviewed at new teacher in-service training.
In order to effectively reach all personnel, professional development will be provided through a variety of delivery systems through a variety of methods. The campus will work toward increasing the amount of time provided to helping teachers in the classroom as they integrate new skills and technologies into the curriculum. Other systems include: face to face workshops, video conferencing, online tutorials, modeling best practices, training during conference periods and Techy Tuesday (every Tuesday after school trainings), pair high-tech specialists with high-content specialists for mentoring.
Professional development will be delivered as an ongoing process for administrators, teachers and paraprofessionals. Integrating technology into the foundations curriculum will be a campus wide focus. Staff will have opportunities through blogs and meetings to celebrate technology successes and share challenges. Administrators will be responsible for providing the necessary resources to foster the campus culture. All staff will be committed to modeling best practices.
Identified areas for professional development are (after a careful, thoughtful, and collaborative analysis of data):
• Cyber ethics, online safety, copyright laws, and intellectual property to become a prerequisite course
• Develop ongoing lessons for each grade level teaching students ethics and safety, along with publishing resources in the school newsletter for parents
• Specific training for new technology skills and software as the need arises
• Training in Web 2.0 tools, skills and instructional methodologies for integrating into the curriculum
• Acceptable Use Policy (AUP): develop lessons in grade level appropriate language and activities to instruct students on the AUP
• Technology Certification required by the district and following district timelines for completion
• Provide staff incentives for university or professional development credit
• Require each grade level team to write a grant proposal that includes integrating technology into the curriculum; staff development on grant writing
Evaluation
The evaluation process is a critical component for assessing the effectiveness of the Action Plan. We need to document progress, along with successes and failures, in order to make informed decisions regarding the plan, programs, and activities.
The district Department of Accountability will lead the district technology assessment. Once again, campus principals will gather data to analyze regarding technology integration at the campus level. The following are methods, assessments, and guiding questions to facilitate informed decision-making about the Action Plan.
• Campus Improvement Plan: Are the goals being met?
• Collect data on staff and student technology usage (through walk-throughs, teacher and student surveys, lesson plans). Establish a baseline for technology usage and measure change over time.
• STaR Chart data: Strive to reach “Target Tech” classification in all 4 key element areas.
• Student Achievement data: TAKS, DBA’s, CBA’s, AEIS; Are we maintaining exemplary rating in all content areas?
• Require a technology goal for each professional in the Professional Development Plan (PDP) to be reviewed at annual summatives.
• Teachers are required to bring an example of a student technology product or a plan for a product to share at annual summative.
• Administrators will maintain a wiki for staff to post lessons integrating technology into curriculum, or share ideas regarding technology integration.
• Require all professional development be evaluated through planning, formative and summative assessment.
• Staff journals of reflections on professional development, or questionnaires or structured interviews following professional development sessions on participant’s use of knowledge and skills
• Administrators develop periodic evaluation reports that offer recommendations for revision, modifications, or further implementation regarding professional development
• Administrators collect data from esc works on individual professional development; monitor content areas and accumulated hours
Integrating Teaching, Learning, and Technology
Organizational Chart
District
Executive Director of Technology: should have a district vision for integration of technology that ultimately impacts student learning and achievement; gathers and analyzes data from a variety of sources to develop District Technology Plan (i.e., Texas Long Rang Plan, AEIS, discussions with stakeholders, STaR chart data, etc.); establish a continuous cycle of data gathering, planning, budgeting and implementing, with each level impacting the other; oversee planning and improvement process; model best practices
Associate Executive Director of Technology: support executive director in all duties and responsibilities
Cabinet: provide district directions and strategies; estimate and commit District technology funds from all sources; approve allocation of technology funds for sites and District projects; approve Technology Planning Guidelines for campuses and departments, including technology standards; review CIP’s annually; model best practices
Technology Services Division: briefs cabinet on the overall results of the technology planning process; must emphasize the significance of the plans and the planned support resources to allow adjustments to projects (comprised of District personnel in technology, 2 campus IT’s; 2 campus administrators; representatives from: District Academic Division, Career & Technology, Professional Development, Assistive Technology, Safety, Construction, and Purchasing)
Instructional Technology Committee: (a representative from each campus from a variety of grade levels and content areas, along with some campus administrators) meets monthly to present site issues for clarification during planning process; critique and share site technology plans for horizontal and vertical bridging; propose initiatives and grants; submit recommendations for instructional planning goals and considerations to the Technology Services Division and Cabinet; define and communicate site requirements for District support services
Campus
Principal: gathers and analyzes data for decision-making; leads SBDM in development of CIP (CIP should address technology and elements for integration into the curriculum); facilitate implementation of CIP; ensures organizational chart is implemented (include Action Plan in teacher handbook with other school policies and procedures, ensure staff awareness at PLC meetings); be creative with scheduling to provide for professional development (PD); provide for PD with funding; create a campus culture that encourages risk-taking and implementation of innovations in curriculum (along with personal celebrations at faculty meetings, include instructional celebrations in regards to technology integration); ensure cyber ethics are taught and safety procedures in place for technology use; use ongoing assessment and evaluation to make changes as needed; monitor technology plan through teacher professional development plans (PDPs) and require at least one technology student product (or plans for a product) at annual summative; attend technology related conferences or curriculum-related conferences; keep abreast of research and high yielding instructional strategies; have a vision for the direction of the campus in regards to technology integration into curriculum, leadership, and assessment; model best practices with technology; integrate technology into administrative duties
Assistant Principal: supports the principal in all of the above duties
Campus Technology Committee: (chaired by Instructional Technologist-IT and includes a representative from each grade level team) attend monthly meetings to collaborate on new technologies and make recommendations for staff; discuss problems and concerns of staff related to technology integration; preview new software; review and apply district planning parameters; liaison for staff with IT; model best practices with technology; analyze data to facilitate planning/decision-making
Instructional Technologist (IT): provide professional development opportunities through a variety of delivery systems; support district and campus plan; model best practices; go into classrooms and model lessons integrating technology into curriculum; work with teachers one-on-one to empower them to provide high yielding strategies in regards to technology integration; obtain additional personnel when necessary to conduct training; work with classes in the lab to learn about various software and facilitate technology integration with curriculum; troubleshoot technology problems on campus; teach workshops; provide technology leadership and support at the campus; analyze data to facilitate planning/decision-making
Teachers: maintain individual web pages; participate in professional development for technology integration; model best practices; develop lesson plans integrating technology into curriculum with support of IT; one technology goal included in personal PDP; bring a technology student product or product plan to annual summative; teach cyber ethics and safety in regards to internet and technology usage; use technology for administrative tasks (online gradebook, online lesson plans; online attendance, email to communicate with parents); analyze data to facilitate planning/decision-making
Needs Assessment
The vision and mission of the district is to develop students that can succeed in the 21st century using 21st century technology skills. Students will be able to utilize information, manipulate data, and explore new ideas while mastering the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS). This plan should provide the resources and training necessary to make this vision a reality.
The needs assessment is a collaborative process regarding current and future technology needs of the district. Data is gathered and analyzed by a variety of sources in numerous ways. Any single person or team on the organizational chart is responsible for the gathering and analysis of data. The Executive Director of Technology and other district personnel and teams use data to foster the district decision-making process, while campus principals further refine the process to meet the needs of their respective campuses.
Sources of data that provide the focus for the plans are: Texas Long-Range Plan for Technology, AEIS, AYP, Campus and Teacher STaR Chart summaries, district and campus based assessments, esc works (online professional development management system that includes history of professional development for every employee, site based committee recommendations, administrative surveys, campus technology committee and district instructional technology committee recommendations, discussions with stakeholders (teachers, students, and community), NETS-S and NETS-A standards, Project Tomorrow’s online annual surveys.
The District and Campus Improvement Plans are developed after an analysis of the data. In order to facilitate the collaborative process for both plans, a wiki will be implemented for all stakeholders. This should create a more efficient collaborative process while providing opportunities for staff professional development on the use of this Web 2.0 tool. Both plans will address needs for the following:
• Infrastructure: maintaining and updating; research implementation of automated asset management system to save time, money and human effort
• Professional Development: to include training on new software and technology, along with integrating technology into curriculum (see following section)
• Leadership: facilitate the development of the plans and provide resources for implementation; begin to revisit AUP and update to include more current technologies; other responsibilities listed in organizational chart
Professional Development
Rapid advancements in technology and its applications to education require an aggressive approach to professional development as it relates to technology integration. The Action Plan will be included in the Teacher Handbook (includes all policies, procedures, forms, calendars, etc.) and reviewed at new teacher in-service training.
In order to effectively reach all personnel, professional development will be provided through a variety of delivery systems through a variety of methods. The campus will work toward increasing the amount of time provided to helping teachers in the classroom as they integrate new skills and technologies into the curriculum. Other systems include: face to face workshops, video conferencing, online tutorials, modeling best practices, training during conference periods and Techy Tuesday (every Tuesday after school trainings), pair high-tech specialists with high-content specialists for mentoring.
Professional development will be delivered as an ongoing process for administrators, teachers and paraprofessionals. Integrating technology into the foundations curriculum will be a campus wide focus. Staff will have opportunities through blogs and meetings to celebrate technology successes and share challenges. Administrators will be responsible for providing the necessary resources to foster the campus culture. All staff will be committed to modeling best practices.
Identified areas for professional development are (after a careful, thoughtful, and collaborative analysis of data):
• Cyber ethics, online safety, copyright laws, and intellectual property to become a prerequisite course
• Develop ongoing lessons for each grade level teaching students ethics and safety, along with publishing resources in the school newsletter for parents
• Specific training for new technology skills and software as the need arises
• Training in Web 2.0 tools, skills and instructional methodologies for integrating into the curriculum
• Acceptable Use Policy (AUP): develop lessons in grade level appropriate language and activities to instruct students on the AUP
• Technology Certification required by the district and following district timelines for completion
• Provide staff incentives for university or professional development credit
• Require each grade level team to write a grant proposal that includes integrating technology into the curriculum; staff development on grant writing
Evaluation
The evaluation process is a critical component for assessing the effectiveness of the Action Plan. We need to document progress, along with successes and failures, in order to make informed decisions regarding the plan, programs, and activities.
The district Department of Accountability will lead the district technology assessment. Once again, campus principals will gather data to analyze regarding technology integration at the campus level. The following are methods, assessments, and guiding questions to facilitate informed decision-making about the Action Plan.
• Campus Improvement Plan: Are the goals being met?
• Collect data on staff and student technology usage (through walk-throughs, teacher and student surveys, lesson plans). Establish a baseline for technology usage and measure change over time.
• STaR Chart data: Strive to reach “Target Tech” classification in all 4 key element areas.
• Student Achievement data: TAKS, DBA’s, CBA’s, AEIS; Are we maintaining exemplary rating in all content areas?
• Require a technology goal for each professional in the Professional Development Plan (PDP) to be reviewed at annual summatives.
• Teachers are required to bring an example of a student technology product or a plan for a product to share at annual summative.
• Administrators will maintain a wiki for staff to post lessons integrating technology into curriculum, or share ideas regarding technology integration.
• Require all professional development be evaluated through planning, formative and summative assessment.
• Staff journals of reflections on professional development, or questionnaires or structured interviews following professional development sessions on participant’s use of knowledge and skills
• Administrators develop periodic evaluation reports that offer recommendations for revision, modifications, or further implementation regarding professional development
• Administrators collect data from esc works on individual professional development; monitor content areas and accumulated hours
Friday, November 27, 2009
Monday, November 23, 2009
STaR Chart Chatter
After analyzing my campus data for the last three years, I recognized a trend that could possibly be a concern in the area of Educator Preparation and Development. Because of the campus decline in the key area total, I thought it would be beneficial to take a closer look at this area and begin dialogue on its description, trends, progress, and recommendations.
Description
In order to effectively integrate technology in our schools, teachers and administrators must be well prepared for this important challenge. Teachers must effectively facilitate 21st century learning in technology with 21st century learners. This could very well be the catalyst that moves us from traditional schools to education in a global economy.
Trends
In 2007-2008 state educators were primarily in the Developing Tech (74.2%) classification and close to 20% in the Advanced Tech. Developing Tech is characterized as using technology for administrative tasks and classroom management. There is use of online resources with 40% of educators meeting SBEC standards. The technology budget allocates 6-24% for professional development.
Progress
Progress appears to be moving forward, at least from personal experience. I started at my campus 17 years ago when we were using floppy disks and MacIntosh computers. Today, there are 4 desktops per classroom, two computer labs, and even a small studio for televising morning announcements over closed circuit TVs. A classroom set of laptops is also available for checkout. Professional development is available and sometimes required for many new technologies, however, there is lack of time to practice and internalize new learning. Also, preparation for state mandated testing remains a barrier to exploring new instructional methodologies that could enhance student learning.
Recommendations
Distrcts will need to work with campuses to creatively find time to allow for teacher professional development and practice as innovations emerge. Teacher preparation programs must prepare teachers for developing students with 21st century technology skills. Technology administrators must seek to improve professional development models that will make optimum use of the time allocated. Dialogue among administrative teams could begin to brainstorm solutions to the technological barriers. Finally, all educators need to become more actively involved in the political process, in order to focus all stakeholders on a common goal of improved educator preparation.
Description
In order to effectively integrate technology in our schools, teachers and administrators must be well prepared for this important challenge. Teachers must effectively facilitate 21st century learning in technology with 21st century learners. This could very well be the catalyst that moves us from traditional schools to education in a global economy.
Trends
In 2007-2008 state educators were primarily in the Developing Tech (74.2%) classification and close to 20% in the Advanced Tech. Developing Tech is characterized as using technology for administrative tasks and classroom management. There is use of online resources with 40% of educators meeting SBEC standards. The technology budget allocates 6-24% for professional development.
Progress
Progress appears to be moving forward, at least from personal experience. I started at my campus 17 years ago when we were using floppy disks and MacIntosh computers. Today, there are 4 desktops per classroom, two computer labs, and even a small studio for televising morning announcements over closed circuit TVs. A classroom set of laptops is also available for checkout. Professional development is available and sometimes required for many new technologies, however, there is lack of time to practice and internalize new learning. Also, preparation for state mandated testing remains a barrier to exploring new instructional methodologies that could enhance student learning.
Recommendations
Distrcts will need to work with campuses to creatively find time to allow for teacher professional development and practice as innovations emerge. Teacher preparation programs must prepare teachers for developing students with 21st century technology skills. Technology administrators must seek to improve professional development models that will make optimum use of the time allocated. Dialogue among administrative teams could begin to brainstorm solutions to the technological barriers. Finally, all educators need to become more actively involved in the political process, in order to focus all stakeholders on a common goal of improved educator preparation.
Friday, November 20, 2009
Pre-K Technology Applications TEKS
Summary of the Pre-K TEKS
Prekindergarten guidelines for Technology Applications were made available to schools in 1999. They articulate what three- and four- year olds should know and be able to do using technology. TEA developed a web-based interactive professional development tool to introduce educators to the guidelines, along with instructional strategies to support students.
This domain provides for student immersion into a wide range of technology (i.e., computers, voice/sound recorders, digital cameras) that will prepare them for the development of 21st century skills. The instructional strategies include integration with the content areas, modeling, instruction time, guided practice, and time to interact with different programs.
A Foundation for Performance in Future Grades
Prekindergarten students are able to learn how technology can enhance their learning and their lives. Through the immersion process, students become confident and independent users of age-appropriate technologies. Their confidence will allow them to learn, grow, and become risk-takers as they move through the curriculum in upper grades with new technologies and innovations.
A Spiraling Curriculum
The Technology Applications TEKS are designed as a dynamic, spiraling curriculum--not a static or linear framework. Since the TEKS occur in domains of skills, students can move dynamically from one domain to another to accomplish objectives. If the evaluation in one domain is unsatisfactory, the student can revisit the skills to learn or relearn in another domain. The framework flows in a circular manner, inward to outward, or vice-versa. Students have multiple opportunities to master the objectives.
Prekindergarten guidelines for Technology Applications were made available to schools in 1999. They articulate what three- and four- year olds should know and be able to do using technology. TEA developed a web-based interactive professional development tool to introduce educators to the guidelines, along with instructional strategies to support students.
This domain provides for student immersion into a wide range of technology (i.e., computers, voice/sound recorders, digital cameras) that will prepare them for the development of 21st century skills. The instructional strategies include integration with the content areas, modeling, instruction time, guided practice, and time to interact with different programs.
A Foundation for Performance in Future Grades
Prekindergarten students are able to learn how technology can enhance their learning and their lives. Through the immersion process, students become confident and independent users of age-appropriate technologies. Their confidence will allow them to learn, grow, and become risk-takers as they move through the curriculum in upper grades with new technologies and innovations.
A Spiraling Curriculum
The Technology Applications TEKS are designed as a dynamic, spiraling curriculum--not a static or linear framework. Since the TEKS occur in domains of skills, students can move dynamically from one domain to another to accomplish objectives. If the evaluation in one domain is unsatisfactory, the student can revisit the skills to learn or relearn in another domain. The framework flows in a circular manner, inward to outward, or vice-versa. Students have multiple opportunities to master the objectives.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Texas Long-Range Plan for Technology, 2006-2020
Introduction
The current long-range plan had its beginnings in 1988 as a mandate in the Texas Education Code. Due to changes in legislation and in technology, it has been updated in 1996, 2002, and finally in 2006 after a two-year work-study. In order to benefit from federally funded technology programs, the goals and objectives had to be aligned with the federal plan. This comprehensive plan is all new learning for me.
New Learning
The ambitious vision addresses all stakeholders and provides for 24/7 access to technologies that foster higher performance and deeper engagement in academic and real world endeavors. It addresses the TEKS, high stakes testing, professional development, and planning and resources while ensuring an appropriate infrastructure system. It should result in all learners well-prepared for 21st century skills in a life of global citizenship. Supporting data makes the case for the vision, along with an introduction to the 21st century learner. Without a doubt, these learners require a significant paradigm shift in teaching methodology.
Teachers were surveyed on their views of technology at school and at home. They acknowledged barriers to the use of technology were lack of time, lack of enough computers, and home access for students. The plan reminds us of the value for teaching and learning, such as equalizing the learning environment and distance learning. The challenges for implementation are numerous, starting with a change to the traditional model of schooling.
The plan also reviewed educator preparation and development, leadership and instructional support, infrastructure for technology and a study of needs. As a student studying leadership, it is overwhelming to think of the huge paradigm shift and change that will need to occur.
Application
This new learning can assist me as an instructional leader that will guide technology use and integration at a campus by creating awareness of its very existence. Instructional leaders do not manage-they foster a shared vision in their organization while empowering teachers and staff. A challenge will be to create a campus culture that is open and conducive to change, along with allocating resources to support the change. Innovations in technology are a regular occurrence, and campus leaders must remain flexible while continuing to seek new learning and ideas that will empower their organization and foster student success.
The current long-range plan had its beginnings in 1988 as a mandate in the Texas Education Code. Due to changes in legislation and in technology, it has been updated in 1996, 2002, and finally in 2006 after a two-year work-study. In order to benefit from federally funded technology programs, the goals and objectives had to be aligned with the federal plan. This comprehensive plan is all new learning for me.
New Learning
The ambitious vision addresses all stakeholders and provides for 24/7 access to technologies that foster higher performance and deeper engagement in academic and real world endeavors. It addresses the TEKS, high stakes testing, professional development, and planning and resources while ensuring an appropriate infrastructure system. It should result in all learners well-prepared for 21st century skills in a life of global citizenship. Supporting data makes the case for the vision, along with an introduction to the 21st century learner. Without a doubt, these learners require a significant paradigm shift in teaching methodology.
Teachers were surveyed on their views of technology at school and at home. They acknowledged barriers to the use of technology were lack of time, lack of enough computers, and home access for students. The plan reminds us of the value for teaching and learning, such as equalizing the learning environment and distance learning. The challenges for implementation are numerous, starting with a change to the traditional model of schooling.
The plan also reviewed educator preparation and development, leadership and instructional support, infrastructure for technology and a study of needs. As a student studying leadership, it is overwhelming to think of the huge paradigm shift and change that will need to occur.
Application
This new learning can assist me as an instructional leader that will guide technology use and integration at a campus by creating awareness of its very existence. Instructional leaders do not manage-they foster a shared vision in their organization while empowering teachers and staff. A challenge will be to create a campus culture that is open and conducive to change, along with allocating resources to support the change. Innovations in technology are a regular occurrence, and campus leaders must remain flexible while continuing to seek new learning and ideas that will empower their organization and foster student success.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Welcome to the Scholarly Scoop
This is a year of many firsts for me. This blog probably ranks as the biggest surprise! It all began with a decision to get my masters in educational administration, preparing for and taking the GRE, navigating distance learning, and finally here reflecting on my new learning in a blog. In the midst of all this hoopla, I managed a trip to Macedonia to visit my oldest son serving in the Peace Corps while my youngest son is about to complete graduate school. This is all occurring simultaneously as my friends are retiring from education. Let the journey begin. . .
Reflection On Technology Assessments
The first technology skills assessment comes from the Texas Education Agency (TEA) as a resource for educators to create self-awareness of present levels of technology knowledge and skills. The Technology Applications Inventory assesses the following four strands.
I am strongest in the Foundations domain (83% mastery) which includes basic information technology skills. I have mastered 50% of the Information Acquisition domain with weaknesses in working with images, audio, and video files; Boolean strategies; and evaluating information for relevancy and validity. My weakest areas were Solving Problems (44%) and Communication (42%).
The SEDTA Teacher Survey is about my personal technology use and about my school's technology use. Even though the teacher survey was the most appropriate, I am in a unique position as an instructional support teacher. I co-teach in two elementary math classes, but the rest of my day is working with small groups of at-risk students and serving as an ard manager to support the school psychologist. Since I do not have a classroom of students, I have less technology in my room as compared to regular education teachers. After consulting with our school's technology teacher, I learned that data is not being collected at the campus level in regards to the impact of technology on students and their computer literacy skills. This survey fostered a realization that I have many areas to develop in order to lead an organization in the 21st century. Our staff has access to new technology and innovations, however, finding the time to master the skills for implementation is a challenge. I see that as one of the greatest challenges facing school leaders. I have witnessed our school grow dramatically in the last 17 years in the technology arena, however, continuous growth must occur at a stepped up pace to reach new levels of competencies.
I am strongest in the Foundations domain (83% mastery) which includes basic information technology skills. I have mastered 50% of the Information Acquisition domain with weaknesses in working with images, audio, and video files; Boolean strategies; and evaluating information for relevancy and validity. My weakest areas were Solving Problems (44%) and Communication (42%).
The SEDTA Teacher Survey is about my personal technology use and about my school's technology use. Even though the teacher survey was the most appropriate, I am in a unique position as an instructional support teacher. I co-teach in two elementary math classes, but the rest of my day is working with small groups of at-risk students and serving as an ard manager to support the school psychologist. Since I do not have a classroom of students, I have less technology in my room as compared to regular education teachers. After consulting with our school's technology teacher, I learned that data is not being collected at the campus level in regards to the impact of technology on students and their computer literacy skills. This survey fostered a realization that I have many areas to develop in order to lead an organization in the 21st century. Our staff has access to new technology and innovations, however, finding the time to master the skills for implementation is a challenge. I see that as one of the greatest challenges facing school leaders. I have witnessed our school grow dramatically in the last 17 years in the technology arena, however, continuous growth must occur at a stepped up pace to reach new levels of competencies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
