· What outcomes had you envisioned for this course? Did you achieve those outcomes? Did the actual course outcomes align with those that you envisioned?
When I learned that this course was focused on technology, I was very excited. I enjoy working with technology and was looking forward to what I could learn. I didn’t know what there was out there to learn, but I was sure that by the end of this course I would be able to have some knowledge that was very applicable to today’s classroom as a teacher and to today’s schools as an administrator. This, in fact, is the case. I had only heard of blogs, pod casts, wikis, etc. in passing but I hadn’t really explored them before this course, and certainly wasn’t proficient with them. Now, having completed this course I feel confident in my ability to create and manage some of these applications and beginning to integrate them into my classroom. I am excited about the possibility of improving my instruction and bringing my students lessons that are more engaging.
· To the extent that you achieved the outcomes, are they still relevant to the work that you do in your school? Why or why not?
I think that the outcomes I have achieved are very relevant and current to today’s educational system. I believe this course was designed with the future of education in mind and that goal has been achieved. Those that have completed this course, like myself, now have skills and abilities that will be applicable as the educational field transforms to service the 21st century learner. What I liked about this course was the application of the learning. Not only were we required to study the Technology plan, the district improvement plan, the campus improvement plan, we then had to apply what we were learning through this course with what we were studying and create a realistic action plan which give real world application. Not only can the skills that are learned through this course apply as an administrator, they are immediately applicable within current educational assignments. I have learned how to create a blog and follow other blogs which I can do for my classroom and my students. This will provide them a location to collaborate as well as provide me an avenue to connect with other educators out there and learn as well as collaborate myself.
· What outcomes did you not achieve? What prevented you from achieving them?
I don’t think there were outcomes that I didn’t achieve. In my self evaluation prior to starting this course I scored all of the statements with a 2 stating that I at least had some knowledge of what it was discussing. I did not score any higher than a 3 on any of the statements however, after going back and reviewing the statements again I feel as though I really didn’t know as much as I though I did. I feel this course provided me clear guidance through the Texas Long Range Technology Plan, the STaR chart, and the set up and use of a blog. This along with studying the district and campus plans for technology improvement and applying my knowledge in the development of my own analysis, action plan and staff development I believe gave me the opportunity to experience a true application of the information that is available to administrators in a progressive and innovative way.
· Were you successful in carrying out the course assignments? If not, what prevented or discouraged you?
I was very successful at carrying out the course assignments however I do think that they were very time consuming. I learned a tremendous amount of very applicable concepts and skills through this course and I think that the assignments were very worthwhile. They required studying relevant and applicable material, reflecting, and applying learned concepts through learned skills. I also think that the assigned readings were very informative and educational. I appreciated the fact that they were full of information but short and to the point. Too often readings can be page after page of ramblings about the same thing reworded over and over again. I enjoyed the readings for this class and learned a lot from all of them. What I though was discouraging was the large amount of postings that were required through the discussion board. I thought that the comments on the quotations were a good way to think reflectively and form an opinion about what was being read but it became a very daunting task to read and comment on eight readings and then read and comment on two other classmate’s comments also.
· What did you learn from this course…about yourself, your technology and leadership skills, and your attitudes?
I learned that I am very technologically inclined and open to learning what’s out there that is up and coming. I learned that as much as I do know about technology there is so much more out there to be learned and most of what I know is for the purposes of assisting the teacher in administrative tasks or in the presentation of a lesson. Through this course I discovered that I was not fully integrating technology into my classroom and into my lessons as I should and involving the students in the process as well as creating lessons where the student output demonstrates their technology awareness and capabilities. I have learned that once I learn something new I immediately try to apply it and want to share what I know with others. I have a very open attitude about technology and I embrace its advancement into the educational realm. I agree with what I learned through out this course in that we must step up to the plate as educators and equip ourselves to meet the needs of our 21st century learners. I agree that if we don’t strive to educate our students in the areas of technology we could potentially be depriving our students of a fair and adequate education.
· What is the educational value of blogs and blogging to the 21st century learner?
I can see so many educational benefits to blogs and blogging for the 21st century learner. From an educator’s standpoint I can see using a blog for students to post their work and make it open for other classmates to see, comment on and learn from. The teacher could post class information as well as assignment instructions so that students could easily access it from home or anywhere they may be working. Going electronic has so many benefits for so many different reasons. This cuts down on paper shuffling, lost papers, no name papers, and duplicating someone’s work. For a teacher it would be easy to pull up a blog and everyone’s work is right there. As a student it would be easy to just pull up a teacher’s blog and post the work. The availability of access to other’s work allows for collaboration which takes learning to a higher level and teaches students a valuable skill that will be required of them as they enter the job world. Following other’s blogs can be equally valuable as you can engage in conversation with others regarding topics related to classroom discussion and instruction. This would be beneficial for both teachers as well as students. I think that blogs and blogging connects teachers and students with others in a way that could not otherwise have been accomplished.
· What are the concerns of blogs and blogging in education?
There are many concerns regarding blogs and blogging in education. The concerns range from the validity of a published work to the privacy of students being violated if published without parental consent. For some, blogging is an open forum for statements to be made that are void of sound evidence to support the claim. While encouraging students to read scholarly blogs and follow the discussions teachers must educate their students how to delineate between fact and opinion. Care needs to be taken when encouraging students to follow blogs. Teachers need to do their research and verify blogs for their validity then provide specific URLs for students to use. For students, blogging sometimes can be used carelessly and statements can be made that are damaging and hurtful to others. There is also concern about publishing students and their work. Just as permission has to be granted from parents to publish student’s pictures or statements in a newspaper, so it is with publishing work on blogs.
· How can you use blogging to communicate with school stakeholders?
I am overseeing the student council for my 2-5 campus this year. For our community service project we adopted two families in our district that have children with cancer. We have been met with very uncooperative administrators and difficulty with getting information about our efforts out there. Upon working through the first week assignment and learning how to create a blog I began to contemplate ways to apply what I had learned. When we were denied the ability to use our “Alert Now” phone system to remind students to bring their loose coins to donate to our “Coins for Cancer” fundraiser I realized I could create a blog and get the word out. I promptly did so and began posting. I am able to communicate with the entire community about who we are, what we stand for, and what our cause is. I post weekly updates of our donation totals as well as our major contributors. I have been able to imbed a calendar of events as well as a counter so I can track how many visits I have received. As of tonight I have 225 visits. Due to this site word has traveled and a local reporter has come out and written a story that made the front page. I think there is a real benefit to blogging and I believe that it has provided an avenue to communicate with community stakeholders regarding our efforts that are focused on helping one of our own. Visit us at www.questcouncilcares.blogspot.com for more information
Friday, December 18, 2009
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Action Plan
Huffman Intermediate Action Plan
Mission – to promote the use of cutting edge technology and educational excellence with career connections.
Belief Statements – We believe that students learn best:
1. In an environment that is supportive, safe, disciplined and tolerant.
2. In an environment that has dedicated educators and a unified vision.
3. Where expectations are high and challenges are varied to meet the needs of the individuals.
4. When provided meaningful and relevant instruction.
5. In a safe environment where risk taking is encouraged and learning happens from
mistakes.
6. When encouraged to be an active participant in their own learning.
Vision Statement – Huffman is committed to providing innovative technology integration to meet the needs of today’s learners, integrate higher standards of instruction delivery, empower students to become life-long learners, and prepare students to succeed in their personal and professional life.
District Level Personnel
Director of Technology – MiMi Morrison
The Director of Technology for the district oversees all technology efforts, monitors technology personnel, evaluates all technology needs, develops and manages the technology budget, and creates the district technology plan.
Network Administrator - David Carpenter
The Network Administrator designs, configures, programs, and secures our network infrastructure and services as well as other campus databases like WinSchool, Health Office, V-Soft, TIP, Follett, AR etc.
PEIMS Coordinator – Connie Dyess
The PEIMS Coordinator manages the Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS) for the district and oversees campus PEIMS personnel.
Campus Level Personnel
Technology Specialist - Donny Khalaf
The Campus Technology Specialist manages all campus technology needs, responds to all technology work orders and monitors all campus hardware and software.
Campus PEIMS Coordinator – Laurie Sharp
The Campus PEIMS coordinator manages the student management system for the campus. Oversees the teacher PEIMS representatives.
Campus PEIMS Teacher Representatives – Natalie Lewis and Tanna Padgett
The Campus PEIMS Teacher Representatives are the first responders when fellow teachers need help with the PEIMS system. They are the liaisons between the teachers and the Campus PEIMS Coordinator.
Campus Administrators – Jay Pratt, Melissa Hutchinson, Jessica McDonough
The Campus Administrators are charged with the responsibility of ensuring technology integration into classroom instruction. They are responsible for making technology available and providing training to their staff so as ensure integration of technology into the classroom.
Professional Development Plan
Based on my analysis from Week 3 technology on my campus is still largely used to enhance instruction and efficiently accomplish administrative tasks.
HUFFMAN ISD Technology Plan 2010-2011
Goal 1:
Technology will be integrated into both foundation and enrichment content areas at all grade levels to improve technology literacy and to improve academic achievement in all areas of teaching and learning.
Objective 1.1
Develop and Instructional Technology program responsible for supporting teachers in integrating technology into the content areas to meet the recommendations of Title II, Part D of NCLB (No Child Left Behind), and to achieve its goal as stated in the District Educational Improvement Plan (DEIC) as well as district’s ASPIRE goals
Strategy 1.1.1
Hire 2 district instructional specialists/trainers to provide timely, accurate, and effective instructional technology information and on-going support.
Strategy 1.1.2
Instructional trainers will embed the technology applications TEKS for Grades K-8 within the C-Scope curriculum.
Strategy 1.1.3
Instructional Specialist(s) will develop a Technology Applications guide outlining specific technology requirements for each grade level to assist teachers in identifying technology appropriate grade level activities to include in daily core lessons.
Strategy 1.1.4
Instructional Specialist(s) will monitor the use of instructional technology to ensure that resources and activities enhance rigorous academic content and the school’s mission.
Strategy 1.1.5
Instructional Trainer will train teachers on integrating the adopted on-line curriculum, C-Scope with the installed interactive whiteboards.
With this goal and these strategies from the Technology Plan I have created the following professional development plan:
Purpose of Sessions:
To provide teachers the time and the opportunity to learn applicable technology that can be integrated with the adopted C-Scope curriculum as well as the interactive whiteboards.
To provide teachers time to collaborate with their colleagues and plan engaging lessons incorporating technology applications with the assistance of a technology specialist.
Required Personnel
Technology Specialist (s)
Mission – to promote the use of cutting edge technology and educational excellence with career connections.
Belief Statements – We believe that students learn best:
1. In an environment that is supportive, safe, disciplined and tolerant.
2. In an environment that has dedicated educators and a unified vision.
3. Where expectations are high and challenges are varied to meet the needs of the individuals.
4. When provided meaningful and relevant instruction.
5. In a safe environment where risk taking is encouraged and learning happens from
mistakes.
6. When encouraged to be an active participant in their own learning.
Vision Statement – Huffman is committed to providing innovative technology integration to meet the needs of today’s learners, integrate higher standards of instruction delivery, empower students to become life-long learners, and prepare students to succeed in their personal and professional life.
District Level Personnel
Director of Technology – MiMi Morrison
The Director of Technology for the district oversees all technology efforts, monitors technology personnel, evaluates all technology needs, develops and manages the technology budget, and creates the district technology plan.
Network Administrator - David Carpenter
The Network Administrator designs, configures, programs, and secures our network infrastructure and services as well as other campus databases like WinSchool, Health Office, V-Soft, TIP, Follett, AR etc.
PEIMS Coordinator – Connie Dyess
The PEIMS Coordinator manages the Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS) for the district and oversees campus PEIMS personnel.
Campus Level Personnel
Technology Specialist - Donny Khalaf
The Campus Technology Specialist manages all campus technology needs, responds to all technology work orders and monitors all campus hardware and software.
Campus PEIMS Coordinator – Laurie Sharp
The Campus PEIMS coordinator manages the student management system for the campus. Oversees the teacher PEIMS representatives.
Campus PEIMS Teacher Representatives – Natalie Lewis and Tanna Padgett
The Campus PEIMS Teacher Representatives are the first responders when fellow teachers need help with the PEIMS system. They are the liaisons between the teachers and the Campus PEIMS Coordinator.
Campus Administrators – Jay Pratt, Melissa Hutchinson, Jessica McDonough
The Campus Administrators are charged with the responsibility of ensuring technology integration into classroom instruction. They are responsible for making technology available and providing training to their staff so as ensure integration of technology into the classroom.
Professional Development Plan
Based on my analysis from Week 3 technology on my campus is still largely used to enhance instruction and efficiently accomplish administrative tasks.
HUFFMAN ISD Technology Plan 2010-2011
Goal 1:
Technology will be integrated into both foundation and enrichment content areas at all grade levels to improve technology literacy and to improve academic achievement in all areas of teaching and learning.
Objective 1.1
Develop and Instructional Technology program responsible for supporting teachers in integrating technology into the content areas to meet the recommendations of Title II, Part D of NCLB (No Child Left Behind), and to achieve its goal as stated in the District Educational Improvement Plan (DEIC) as well as district’s ASPIRE goals
Strategy 1.1.1
Hire 2 district instructional specialists/trainers to provide timely, accurate, and effective instructional technology information and on-going support.
Strategy 1.1.2
Instructional trainers will embed the technology applications TEKS for Grades K-8 within the C-Scope curriculum.
Strategy 1.1.3
Instructional Specialist(s) will develop a Technology Applications guide outlining specific technology requirements for each grade level to assist teachers in identifying technology appropriate grade level activities to include in daily core lessons.
Strategy 1.1.4
Instructional Specialist(s) will monitor the use of instructional technology to ensure that resources and activities enhance rigorous academic content and the school’s mission.
Strategy 1.1.5
Instructional Trainer will train teachers on integrating the adopted on-line curriculum, C-Scope with the installed interactive whiteboards.
With this goal and these strategies from the Technology Plan I have created the following professional development plan:
Purpose of Sessions:
To provide teachers the time and the opportunity to learn applicable technology that can be integrated with the adopted C-Scope curriculum as well as the interactive whiteboards.
To provide teachers time to collaborate with their colleagues and plan engaging lessons incorporating technology applications with the assistance of a technology specialist.
Required Personnel
Technology Specialist (s)
Specialists will design and implement a training schedule in which teachers are in attendance at least once every 2 weeks.
Specialists will create trainings specific to their content areas as well as applicable to appropriate grade levels
Specialists will train teachers in the following groups
K-1
2-3
4-6
7-9
10 -12
Teachers grouped by content area
Teachers will attend trainings twice a month grouped by grade and content area
Teachers will be active participants in the professional development, learning, collaborating and developing lessons.
Para-Professional Staff members
Para’s will be used to cover teacher’s classes in an effort to eliminate the expense of scheduling substitutes.
Plan
Technology specialists will be assigned two content areas.
One specialist will focus on Math and Science
One specialist will focus on Reading/Language Arts/ Social Studies
The technology specialist will develop a training schedule that will accommodate all grade level teachers in their focus content areas once every two weeks.
The schedule will be consistent and will assign specific days to each group of teachers.
Para-Professionals will be scheduled to cover teacher classes in order for teachers to attend the trainings.
Trainings will be during the last part of the day
2:00 – 4:00 for K-1, 2-3, and 3-4
1:00 – 3:00 for 6-8 and 9-12
Technology Specialists will design training sessions that are grade and content specific.
Trainings will focus on implementation of technology into instruction using C-Scope and white board with technology application TEKS as a focus and guide.
Trainings will be relevant and current with what is being taught / what is going to be taught in the near future.
Trainings will not be too specific so as to loose a portion of the audience however; will not be too vague so as to not be applicable.
The trainings will be interactive where the trainer will present to the group as a whole and the teachers will participate in the learning by applying what they are seeing on their own laptop.
The teachers will then spend the last hour collaborating other grade level content area teachers to plan lessons that integrate their learning into upcoming C-Scope lessons.
Specialists will facilitate the planning by supporting and encouraging the teacher’s efforts, as well as troubleshoot problems as they arise.
Specialists will not step in and fix problems for the teachers; they will facilitate the solution by supporting, encouraging and guiding teachers as they learn how to fix the mistakes they make.
Teachers will have a minimum of one lesson planed for implementation the following week into the classroom that applies what they have learned.
Evaluation
Technology Specialists will conduct routine weekly walk-throughs to evaluate technology implementation, stay current on instruction and ascertain needs so as to better plan relevant trainings. Walk-through reports will be submitted to the director of technology for review.
Technology Specialists will make themselves available to each campus on specific days at least once every two weeks to assist teachers with implementation, suggestions, and planning.
Teachers will complete survey charts online designed by the Technology Specialists in an effort to track progress of teacher learning, student learning and technology implementation. Survey results will be submitted to the director of technology for review.
Technology Specialists will develop an online forum for teachers to continue their collaboration, post lessons they have created and share thoughts and ideas. Specialists will make themselves available during “specified office hours” so as to offer help through a real time chat application. The director of technology will monitor the teacher’s progress through reviewing the forum monthly.
STaR Testing will be closely monitored by the director of technology over the course of 5 years and increase in ratings will support the maintenance of the Technology Specialist positions.
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Week 3 - Technology Integration
Our district uses an abundance of tools to collect various data to identify campus curriculum, instructional and professional development needs. We gather information from the School Technology and Readiness (STaR) report, Annual Yearly Progress (AYP), the Academic Excellence Indicator System (AEIS), the Data Management Software for Assessment and Curriculum in Texas Schools (DMAC) reports to identify campus and district needs. The STaR chart tracks the campus and teacher progress toward meeting the Target Tech goal in four areas; teaching and learning; educator preparation and development; leadership, administration, and instructional support; and infrastructure. AYP reports shows our campus performance and where we are in terms of meeting the guidelines established by the Federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law. The AEIS system shows campus and district performance as compared to other state campuses and districts. The AEIS breaks performance down by grade levels as well as numerous sub-pops and provides information over the course of several years so progress can be easily tracked. The DMAC program allow teachers and administrators to run reports that track student progress on campus benchmark assessments, TEK assessments, and state exams. All of these tools combined allow the district to track progress and expenditures, assess needs and develop goals towards meeting the State Long Range Plan for Technology.
The director of technology for our district discusses needs that are not revealed through the STaR chart. She says, “…the need for continuous on-site training…requires staffing [.] [Because] districts loathe to hire [we] thus revert to ‘train the trainer’ model which is great IF time permits. However…time is not permitted for teachers to go around and help others. The truth is that the state has lessened the importance of technology by doing away with requiring kids to take a technology course for all graduation plans. It just sends a terrible message about the value of technology. I have written the legislators on their decision to take this requirement out of the curriculum. I [do] use the STaR chart every year to put my number one requirement in...the District Education Plan - the hiring of instructional technology people.” (M.Morrison, personal communication, December 2, 2009).
Technology is integrated on our campus in a variety of ways to deliver and enrich instruction. Last year interactive Smartboards were installed in every classroom K-8th grade providing teacher more diversity in instruction presentation and delivery as well as giving students the opportunity to interact and participate in the lessons more. Accompanying the Smartboards are electronic airliner tablets, document cameras, voice projection equipment as well as United Streaming and online tutorials provided through Smart’s website to name just a few. Students also visit the computer lab three times a week and engage in River Deep math and language arts lessons. Having learned so much through this course it is clear to me that the technology that we have available and that we use is still very much teacher directed and lacks in the student developed product. The availability we have through the Smart technologies does enhance instruction however it does not lend itself to integrating technology into student work. Knowing how to create a blog as well as wikis and podcasts now opens new avenues for me as an educator to enrich my classroom and enhance my students experience even more.
Upon the installation of the Smartboard equipment each teacher attended a full day of training on its functions and uses. Following the first year an additional day of training was offered as a refresher and advancement in usage. The technology director is in the planning stages of presenting training on various uses of technology with our curriculum. The use of virtual manipulatives, online lesson planner, training on various hardware and software available through the technology department, just to name a few. She says, “I want to set up a Moodle server and present demos of equipment use for teachers. They then could log on at their convenience and watch how to do something. We would create a file system for all the videos that would be accessible anytime, anywhere.” (M.Morrison, personally communicated, December 2, 2009). She continued by saying she would love to eventually see the use of NetBooks in every classroom.
Technology is used continuously everyday in the classroom. Teachers are constantly finding and using technology in different and new ways. Through the Smartboard hardware and the Notebook Technology interactive lessons are designed and presented daily along with fun and exciting review games. Teachers are using the electronic airliners to accompany the Smartboard that gives them freedom of movement through out the room. Science teachers are integrating document cameras and projecting images through the Smartboard projection. Susan Eschete, 5th grade science teacher and SBDM member, states, “I use so much technology every day it’s difficult to itemize all of it. If it’s available and I can get my hands on it I am going to use it to better my instruction.” She continues, “…we are so lucky to work in a district that makes technology a priority through its campus improvement plan and by providing outstanding technical support by have an on campus technology person to assist with all of our needs the moment we are in need.” (personally communicated, December 3, 2009).
As I stated before I feel that the availability of technology has dramatically increased for teacher use over the past three years in my district however, I feel as though it is continuing to remain largely reserved for instructional assistance and administrative tasks rather than integrated into student assignments and student products. We take attendance online through a system that was just installed this year. This same system allows teachers to access an abundance of information regarding each of their students from their contact information, their absences over time, course schedule, ethnicity, and their report card grades. Eventually this system will open a parent portal so that grades can be accessed by parents in real time. Mrs. Hutchinson, assistant principal reminded me that, “…we also have 2 portable carts each containing 30 laptops, wireless internet connection and printer for check out at the library along with a couple sets of the Quizdom digital quiz and answer buzzer for instant teacher feedback during class review.” She went on to say that, “teachers are required to keep an updated webpage through the district website to better facilitate parent communication and provide the most up to date information to parents regarding their child’s classroom expectations.” (personally communicated, December 1, 2009).
We as a district are changing and improving however, I think that there is still a lot more that we should be doing with technology that will enrich our student’s classroom and learning experience. I have ongoing conversations with many professionals within the campus and my district regarding technology and their biggest frustration is the lack of training as well as the lack of time to integrate what they know into lessons for their students. Our district has also adopted the C-Scope curriculum for use K-12, all core subject areas. There is a very strong push for full integration of this curriculum in every classroom which is heavy in scripted lessons. Although the lessons are in-depth and very rigorous the curriculum does not allow for any modification, differentiation, or technological integration. Right now there is a push to improve technology integration in the classrooms paralleling the push for the use of a cookie cutter curriculum. Teachers are finding it very difficult to accommodate both expectations.
When I visited with students from my campus I learned that they would very much like to see and be able to interact with technology more often while at school. I asked them if they would prefer the opportunity to demonstrate their learning by producing work through the assistance of technology and they overwhelmingly responded yes. The stated that they would much rather have the opportunity to create a blog or a podcast to demonstrate learning and suggested such activities related to the social studies lesson I am teaching them right now. They are learning about New England colonies and last week I had them write an article as though the were reporters our interviewing members of the colony. One student, Noah, stated that he thought that, “we should all take our articles and create a podcast!” (personally communicated, December 2, 2009). When I asked the students how they felt about getting the opportunity to “teach” teachers how to use technology that they know how to use they responded with much enthusiasm and excitement. I feel giving students the opportunity to participate in the teaching just as much as in the learning enhances their retention ten-fold. I asked the students if they would like to participate in a project that involved collaborating with other students from other locations in the country and their excitement matched that of being able to “teach” the teachers. This activity from the State Long Range Plan for Technology would be a wonderful learning experience for students however, within our district student technology use is very limited therefore, in order to accomplish this, the usage policy would have to be revisited and rewritten to remove the restrictions on student internet use.
I asked the students what their thoughts were on technology usage at school and their response was negative and full of frustration. They stated that just recently they were able to use the laptops in their language arts class to do a research paper on a state of their choice. They stated that one of the biggest problems they faced was the lack of charge the laptops kept. The teacher of that class reported the same frustration. I personally used the laptops for a research project last year in my classroom and after experiencing the same problem, I eventually had to run extension cord from every outlet in my classroom and keep all 25 laptops plugged in continuously (defeating the purpose of laptops in my opinion). Otherwise they would die and student work would be lost. The other problem that surfaced was the intermittent accessibility to the internet through the portable wireless modem. There were times that it took up to 10 minutes to log in and locate a signal which then allowed internet access. When asked about their opinion of their computer lab requirement and the software they were required to do again, their response was negative. They commented that the River Deep program was boring and “too easy”. They said that they would much prefer going and working on teacher assigned project or even better playing educational online games.
The majority of the students interviewed reported having access to the internet at home, having their own email address and many reported having their own Myspace / Facebook page for networking. They reported that they mainly used the internet to interact with friends, download music and play games. They stated that they only accessed the internet for school related information only if they had specific assignment that required them to. Almost all of them stated that they had cell phones however, they did not bring them to school for fear that they might accidentally leave them on and it go off in class resulting in confiscation and a fine. They stated the main use they had for the phones were for text messaging and accessing the internet although many of them stated they still used them for making phone calls but only when absolutely necessary. “I so prefer sending a text, that way I can talk to my friends and not have to actually ‘talk’ to them. Besides, I can text them anytime while I am doing anything and I don’t have to stop and have a conversation with them.” (personally communicated, December 2, 2009).
As I stated before, teachers experience many frustrations when it comes to technology on our campus. With as many positives they could state there were just as many negatives if not more. Not only does our curriculum not allow the integration of technology into the scripted lessons, the instructional focus documents and the scope and sequence does not allow for any additions in instruction. Due to the many websites that the curriculum requires teacher to access the district lifted the fire wall and granted teachers (only) full internet access however there is still now student created products through the use of technology or teacher facilitated lessons are tremendously lacking. The curriculum simply directs teachers to visit specific websites to acquire certain information for a particular lesson, not to facilitate students through a technology rich lesson resulting in and electronic production of learning by the students. Teachers also expressed extreme frustration with the computer lab requirement. Students are required to attend the lab 3 times a week however, time is not allotted for this in the schedule. Core area teachers therefore, have to give up instructional time to take students and sit them in front of a program (River Deep) that they, as well as the students, all think is an absolute waste of time. Lastly, speaking to the new teachers in the district I could sense how overwhelmed they were with all of the training they had to go through in a short period of time. One such teacher, Patricia McDaniel, stated, “I have been trained on so much in such a short period of time that my head is spinning! It will be a long time before I will able to effectively implement all that crammed down my throat this week” (personally communicated, September 1, 2009).
Technology training and integration should be an ongoing and incremental process. Those of us that have been with the district for years have had the opportunity to go through this in an incremental fashion however; those that are new don’t get that opportunity. I feel that there should be a continuous professional development plan implemented that offered continuous trainings to refresh as well as update technological skills. The director of technology’s vision of setting up a site that can be accessed by teachers on their own time with training seminars available for all that the district has to offer in terms of technology hardware and software applications would be a step in the right direction and change the face of technology integration in the district dramatically.
In summary, all of the interviews I conducted described the same barriers to integration of technology; lack of accessibility, training, time, and professional freedom in lesson planning.
The director of technology for our district discusses needs that are not revealed through the STaR chart. She says, “…the need for continuous on-site training…requires staffing [.] [Because] districts loathe to hire [we] thus revert to ‘train the trainer’ model which is great IF time permits. However…time is not permitted for teachers to go around and help others. The truth is that the state has lessened the importance of technology by doing away with requiring kids to take a technology course for all graduation plans. It just sends a terrible message about the value of technology. I have written the legislators on their decision to take this requirement out of the curriculum. I [do] use the STaR chart every year to put my number one requirement in...the District Education Plan - the hiring of instructional technology people.” (M.Morrison, personal communication, December 2, 2009).
Technology is integrated on our campus in a variety of ways to deliver and enrich instruction. Last year interactive Smartboards were installed in every classroom K-8th grade providing teacher more diversity in instruction presentation and delivery as well as giving students the opportunity to interact and participate in the lessons more. Accompanying the Smartboards are electronic airliner tablets, document cameras, voice projection equipment as well as United Streaming and online tutorials provided through Smart’s website to name just a few. Students also visit the computer lab three times a week and engage in River Deep math and language arts lessons. Having learned so much through this course it is clear to me that the technology that we have available and that we use is still very much teacher directed and lacks in the student developed product. The availability we have through the Smart technologies does enhance instruction however it does not lend itself to integrating technology into student work. Knowing how to create a blog as well as wikis and podcasts now opens new avenues for me as an educator to enrich my classroom and enhance my students experience even more.
Upon the installation of the Smartboard equipment each teacher attended a full day of training on its functions and uses. Following the first year an additional day of training was offered as a refresher and advancement in usage. The technology director is in the planning stages of presenting training on various uses of technology with our curriculum. The use of virtual manipulatives, online lesson planner, training on various hardware and software available through the technology department, just to name a few. She says, “I want to set up a Moodle server and present demos of equipment use for teachers. They then could log on at their convenience and watch how to do something. We would create a file system for all the videos that would be accessible anytime, anywhere.” (M.Morrison, personally communicated, December 2, 2009). She continued by saying she would love to eventually see the use of NetBooks in every classroom.
Technology is used continuously everyday in the classroom. Teachers are constantly finding and using technology in different and new ways. Through the Smartboard hardware and the Notebook Technology interactive lessons are designed and presented daily along with fun and exciting review games. Teachers are using the electronic airliners to accompany the Smartboard that gives them freedom of movement through out the room. Science teachers are integrating document cameras and projecting images through the Smartboard projection. Susan Eschete, 5th grade science teacher and SBDM member, states, “I use so much technology every day it’s difficult to itemize all of it. If it’s available and I can get my hands on it I am going to use it to better my instruction.” She continues, “…we are so lucky to work in a district that makes technology a priority through its campus improvement plan and by providing outstanding technical support by have an on campus technology person to assist with all of our needs the moment we are in need.” (personally communicated, December 3, 2009).
As I stated before I feel that the availability of technology has dramatically increased for teacher use over the past three years in my district however, I feel as though it is continuing to remain largely reserved for instructional assistance and administrative tasks rather than integrated into student assignments and student products. We take attendance online through a system that was just installed this year. This same system allows teachers to access an abundance of information regarding each of their students from their contact information, their absences over time, course schedule, ethnicity, and their report card grades. Eventually this system will open a parent portal so that grades can be accessed by parents in real time. Mrs. Hutchinson, assistant principal reminded me that, “…we also have 2 portable carts each containing 30 laptops, wireless internet connection and printer for check out at the library along with a couple sets of the Quizdom digital quiz and answer buzzer for instant teacher feedback during class review.” She went on to say that, “teachers are required to keep an updated webpage through the district website to better facilitate parent communication and provide the most up to date information to parents regarding their child’s classroom expectations.” (personally communicated, December 1, 2009).
We as a district are changing and improving however, I think that there is still a lot more that we should be doing with technology that will enrich our student’s classroom and learning experience. I have ongoing conversations with many professionals within the campus and my district regarding technology and their biggest frustration is the lack of training as well as the lack of time to integrate what they know into lessons for their students. Our district has also adopted the C-Scope curriculum for use K-12, all core subject areas. There is a very strong push for full integration of this curriculum in every classroom which is heavy in scripted lessons. Although the lessons are in-depth and very rigorous the curriculum does not allow for any modification, differentiation, or technological integration. Right now there is a push to improve technology integration in the classrooms paralleling the push for the use of a cookie cutter curriculum. Teachers are finding it very difficult to accommodate both expectations.
When I visited with students from my campus I learned that they would very much like to see and be able to interact with technology more often while at school. I asked them if they would prefer the opportunity to demonstrate their learning by producing work through the assistance of technology and they overwhelmingly responded yes. The stated that they would much rather have the opportunity to create a blog or a podcast to demonstrate learning and suggested such activities related to the social studies lesson I am teaching them right now. They are learning about New England colonies and last week I had them write an article as though the were reporters our interviewing members of the colony. One student, Noah, stated that he thought that, “we should all take our articles and create a podcast!” (personally communicated, December 2, 2009). When I asked the students how they felt about getting the opportunity to “teach” teachers how to use technology that they know how to use they responded with much enthusiasm and excitement. I feel giving students the opportunity to participate in the teaching just as much as in the learning enhances their retention ten-fold. I asked the students if they would like to participate in a project that involved collaborating with other students from other locations in the country and their excitement matched that of being able to “teach” the teachers. This activity from the State Long Range Plan for Technology would be a wonderful learning experience for students however, within our district student technology use is very limited therefore, in order to accomplish this, the usage policy would have to be revisited and rewritten to remove the restrictions on student internet use.
I asked the students what their thoughts were on technology usage at school and their response was negative and full of frustration. They stated that just recently they were able to use the laptops in their language arts class to do a research paper on a state of their choice. They stated that one of the biggest problems they faced was the lack of charge the laptops kept. The teacher of that class reported the same frustration. I personally used the laptops for a research project last year in my classroom and after experiencing the same problem, I eventually had to run extension cord from every outlet in my classroom and keep all 25 laptops plugged in continuously (defeating the purpose of laptops in my opinion). Otherwise they would die and student work would be lost. The other problem that surfaced was the intermittent accessibility to the internet through the portable wireless modem. There were times that it took up to 10 minutes to log in and locate a signal which then allowed internet access. When asked about their opinion of their computer lab requirement and the software they were required to do again, their response was negative. They commented that the River Deep program was boring and “too easy”. They said that they would much prefer going and working on teacher assigned project or even better playing educational online games.
The majority of the students interviewed reported having access to the internet at home, having their own email address and many reported having their own Myspace / Facebook page for networking. They reported that they mainly used the internet to interact with friends, download music and play games. They stated that they only accessed the internet for school related information only if they had specific assignment that required them to. Almost all of them stated that they had cell phones however, they did not bring them to school for fear that they might accidentally leave them on and it go off in class resulting in confiscation and a fine. They stated the main use they had for the phones were for text messaging and accessing the internet although many of them stated they still used them for making phone calls but only when absolutely necessary. “I so prefer sending a text, that way I can talk to my friends and not have to actually ‘talk’ to them. Besides, I can text them anytime while I am doing anything and I don’t have to stop and have a conversation with them.” (personally communicated, December 2, 2009).
As I stated before, teachers experience many frustrations when it comes to technology on our campus. With as many positives they could state there were just as many negatives if not more. Not only does our curriculum not allow the integration of technology into the scripted lessons, the instructional focus documents and the scope and sequence does not allow for any additions in instruction. Due to the many websites that the curriculum requires teacher to access the district lifted the fire wall and granted teachers (only) full internet access however there is still now student created products through the use of technology or teacher facilitated lessons are tremendously lacking. The curriculum simply directs teachers to visit specific websites to acquire certain information for a particular lesson, not to facilitate students through a technology rich lesson resulting in and electronic production of learning by the students. Teachers also expressed extreme frustration with the computer lab requirement. Students are required to attend the lab 3 times a week however, time is not allotted for this in the schedule. Core area teachers therefore, have to give up instructional time to take students and sit them in front of a program (River Deep) that they, as well as the students, all think is an absolute waste of time. Lastly, speaking to the new teachers in the district I could sense how overwhelmed they were with all of the training they had to go through in a short period of time. One such teacher, Patricia McDaniel, stated, “I have been trained on so much in such a short period of time that my head is spinning! It will be a long time before I will able to effectively implement all that crammed down my throat this week” (personally communicated, September 1, 2009).
Technology training and integration should be an ongoing and incremental process. Those of us that have been with the district for years have had the opportunity to go through this in an incremental fashion however; those that are new don’t get that opportunity. I feel that there should be a continuous professional development plan implemented that offered continuous trainings to refresh as well as update technological skills. The director of technology’s vision of setting up a site that can be accessed by teachers on their own time with training seminars available for all that the district has to offer in terms of technology hardware and software applications would be a step in the right direction and change the face of technology integration in the district dramatically.
In summary, all of the interviews I conducted described the same barriers to integration of technology; lack of accessibility, training, time, and professional freedom in lesson planning.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
S Ta R Presentation
The Texas STaR Chart presentation describes the survey and it's purpose. The four performance evlauation areas are discussed and a three year summary of Huffman ISD's results is reviewed.
S Ta R Presentation
View more presentations from Tanna Padgett.
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Instructional Leadership Week 2 Opinion
The Texas Long Range Plan for Technology specifies visionary goals in four key areas; Teaching and Learning, Educator Preparation & Development, Administration and Support Services, and Infrastructure for Technology. Upon examining the most recent three years of the Texas Campus STaR chart for my campus I found the area of Leadership, Administration and Support Services particularly interesting as it revealed a steady increase in improvement.
In the area of Leadership, Administration and Support Services, administrators are expected to emerge as leaders in the integration of technology as they model implementation into their daily tasks. They should pave the way for their teachers to become proficient and are the key component in cultivating change. They must incorporate technology into their vision and campus plan, and create an on-going technology committee representative of all community stakeholders. Leaders must budget for and monitor continually changing needs, create environments that are conducive to innovation, offer a variety of instructional opportunities to students, and provide teachers relevant and continual professional development.
By these definitions I would not have expected my campus to receive a score of Advanced Tech. As a district we have become more technologically advanced, however as a campus I don't think that the leadership is supporting technology as it should. I have examined the campus improvement plan and there are provisions for technology improvement however, a technology committee does not exist on the campus level. There are budgetary funds allotted to technology but continual professional development is not offered. If teachers seek out the opportunity and request support it will be granted yet the administration is lacking leadership in that area. Lastly, the leaders on my campus have not created an environment that is conducive to innovation and allows for the variety of instructional opportunities. We are forced to adhere to a scripted cookie cutter curriculum that is then reinforced by homogeneous practice. Every student in every classroom gets the exact same lesson, exact same classwork, and exact same homework. I would not call this innovation and advancement by any means.
I will say that as a campus and a district there have been numerous advancements in the area of technology over the past 4 years. Our curriculum is ea sly accessible online to be utilized at any time either at work or at home. This has greatly improved planning as it frees up a teacher's schedule to plan from home as well as limits the amount of materials that are required to be transported if planning is to occur outside of the classroom. Secondly, the installation of interactive white boards in all classrooms K-8 has dramatically changed the face of classroom instruction. Student attention and involvement has improved, instruction has improved due to the endless possibilities the white board offers and teachers are planning more engaging lessons with the use of the accompanying software provided with the white boards. Lastly, this year my district moved to a new student management software that is accessible by parents as well as by teachers from home. Again, this improves teacher's home time as they can complete data entry from their computers at home. There are technological improvements happening throughout the district that positively impacts my campus however, I do not feel as though my campus is leading the way for their own advancement.
At the state level the majority of the campuses are in the Developing Tech designation in the area of support as well as staffing. Texas trends and national trends are very similar in that there the most frequent technology use at school is the Internet followed by the school website, creating presentations and finally taking tests online. Hindrances are the same both nationally and within the state with not enough computer time at the top of the list. followed by inoperable equipment and not enough computers for everyone.
My recommendations for improvement at the campus level would be for our leadership to cease their micromanagement and open themselves up thus opening the campus up to innovation. Professional freedom in decision making should be afforded to the teachers and encouragement should be given to teachers that are planning engaging and technologically advanced lessons that are differentiated and individualized. For the state and national level, efforts should be made to improve support staff at all levels. Budgetary funds should be focused on technology improvement in all areas from hardware, software, training and support.
In the area of Leadership, Administration and Support Services, administrators are expected to emerge as leaders in the integration of technology as they model implementation into their daily tasks. They should pave the way for their teachers to become proficient and are the key component in cultivating change. They must incorporate technology into their vision and campus plan, and create an on-going technology committee representative of all community stakeholders. Leaders must budget for and monitor continually changing needs, create environments that are conducive to innovation, offer a variety of instructional opportunities to students, and provide teachers relevant and continual professional development.
By these definitions I would not have expected my campus to receive a score of Advanced Tech. As a district we have become more technologically advanced, however as a campus I don't think that the leadership is supporting technology as it should. I have examined the campus improvement plan and there are provisions for technology improvement however, a technology committee does not exist on the campus level. There are budgetary funds allotted to technology but continual professional development is not offered. If teachers seek out the opportunity and request support it will be granted yet the administration is lacking leadership in that area. Lastly, the leaders on my campus have not created an environment that is conducive to innovation and allows for the variety of instructional opportunities. We are forced to adhere to a scripted cookie cutter curriculum that is then reinforced by homogeneous practice. Every student in every classroom gets the exact same lesson, exact same classwork, and exact same homework. I would not call this innovation and advancement by any means.
I will say that as a campus and a district there have been numerous advancements in the area of technology over the past 4 years. Our curriculum is ea sly accessible online to be utilized at any time either at work or at home. This has greatly improved planning as it frees up a teacher's schedule to plan from home as well as limits the amount of materials that are required to be transported if planning is to occur outside of the classroom. Secondly, the installation of interactive white boards in all classrooms K-8 has dramatically changed the face of classroom instruction. Student attention and involvement has improved, instruction has improved due to the endless possibilities the white board offers and teachers are planning more engaging lessons with the use of the accompanying software provided with the white boards. Lastly, this year my district moved to a new student management software that is accessible by parents as well as by teachers from home. Again, this improves teacher's home time as they can complete data entry from their computers at home. There are technological improvements happening throughout the district that positively impacts my campus however, I do not feel as though my campus is leading the way for their own advancement.
At the state level the majority of the campuses are in the Developing Tech designation in the area of support as well as staffing. Texas trends and national trends are very similar in that there the most frequent technology use at school is the Internet followed by the school website, creating presentations and finally taking tests online. Hindrances are the same both nationally and within the state with not enough computer time at the top of the list. followed by inoperable equipment and not enough computers for everyone.
My recommendations for improvement at the campus level would be for our leadership to cease their micromanagement and open themselves up thus opening the campus up to innovation. Professional freedom in decision making should be afforded to the teachers and encouragement should be given to teachers that are planning engaging and technologically advanced lessons that are differentiated and individualized. For the state and national level, efforts should be made to improve support staff at all levels. Budgetary funds should be focused on technology improvement in all areas from hardware, software, training and support.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Instructional Leadership Week 1 Part 4
The technology TEKS from K-8 are continually spiraling and provide the necessary framework to educate the student in the field of technology. After reviewing the TEKS from PreK to 8th grade I was astounded at how advanced they were and what a young age they were expected to be taught and preform complex tasks.
Spending time studying these TEKS really wrapped this week's work up for me and tied a nice little bow on what I have learned. There is such a push to continually keep up with a technological world that is moving at lightning speed. The generation that we are trying to educate is moving right along with them and their ability to learn advanced technological applications is astounding yet to them is just like second nature.
Starting students in Pre-K familiarizing them with the hardware, teaching them the vocabulary, and using age appropriate software really lays a valuable foundation for the furthering of their technological learning. My opinion is to start them as early as possible. I started my daughter at the age of 2 and her proficiency on the computer and the Internet simply astounds me.
The Technology TEKS provide an excellent example of a spiraling curriculum in that as you follow the expectations from Pre-K to 8th grade you see skills introduced then applied to acquire and practice new skills then reviewed, and applied to master higher level skills. When spiraling occurs students are not taught skills in isolated instances and then never reviewed or given the opportunity to apply their knowledge. They are constantly revisiting, re-learning, and re-applying what they have learned. Within the communication domain of the Technology Application TEKS numbers 11 A, B, and C do just this. In Kindergarten students are introduced to publication of information using the printer, and the monitor, storage files and video. After practicing this through 2nd grade they then move to using the Internet, video and begin to use software to design presentations for a specific audience in grades 3-5. Then as they move to grades 6-8 they continue to practice publishing via printed copy, monitor display, Internet documentation, video and electronic presentations. They apply interdisciplinary multimedia such as audio, video, text, and graphics to their presentation software and use telecommunication tools to publish such as Internet browsers, video conferencing, or distance learning. This series of TEKS is fully developed from it's foundation to it's mastery and spirals with each grade level reviewing previously learned skills and apply their knowledge to acquire new skills and information.
Spending time studying these TEKS really wrapped this week's work up for me and tied a nice little bow on what I have learned. There is such a push to continually keep up with a technological world that is moving at lightning speed. The generation that we are trying to educate is moving right along with them and their ability to learn advanced technological applications is astounding yet to them is just like second nature.
Starting students in Pre-K familiarizing them with the hardware, teaching them the vocabulary, and using age appropriate software really lays a valuable foundation for the furthering of their technological learning. My opinion is to start them as early as possible. I started my daughter at the age of 2 and her proficiency on the computer and the Internet simply astounds me.
The Technology TEKS provide an excellent example of a spiraling curriculum in that as you follow the expectations from Pre-K to 8th grade you see skills introduced then applied to acquire and practice new skills then reviewed, and applied to master higher level skills. When spiraling occurs students are not taught skills in isolated instances and then never reviewed or given the opportunity to apply their knowledge. They are constantly revisiting, re-learning, and re-applying what they have learned. Within the communication domain of the Technology Application TEKS numbers 11 A, B, and C do just this. In Kindergarten students are introduced to publication of information using the printer, and the monitor, storage files and video. After practicing this through 2nd grade they then move to using the Internet, video and begin to use software to design presentations for a specific audience in grades 3-5. Then as they move to grades 6-8 they continue to practice publishing via printed copy, monitor display, Internet documentation, video and electronic presentations. They apply interdisciplinary multimedia such as audio, video, text, and graphics to their presentation software and use telecommunication tools to publish such as Internet browsers, video conferencing, or distance learning. This series of TEKS is fully developed from it's foundation to it's mastery and spirals with each grade level reviewing previously learned skills and apply their knowledge to acquire new skills and information.
Instructional Leadership Week 1 Part 2
After completing the Technology Applications Inventory and the SETDA Teacher survey I have decided that I am farther behind the times than I thought. I am considered a technological “go to” teacher among colleagues and pretty advanced in hardware/software trouble shooting. These surveys however, revealed to me that there is so much more that I am not familiar with and that my district really needs to step up it’s expectations for technology usage and implementation.
I wouldn’t say that I am strong in any of the domains required to be a leader on my campus yet I find myself trying to fill that roll in my limited abilities. As I answered these questions I learned that there were more foreign terms and capabilities than there were familiar ones.
I agree with these surveys as they revealed how much I need to learn as well as how behind my district is in their expectations for teachers and students in the area of technology. I need to advance my abilities in order to integrate technology into my classroom in more ways than simply a format for instruction delivery. I also think my district needs to step up their expectations. At the moment we are lacking the professional freedom to plan innovative lessons and we are limited to our scripted curriculum as well as designated supplementary materials for additional mathematics practice. If these limitations were lifted, professional development was supported, and time was provided to plan, integration of technology into lessons would improve.
I wouldn’t say that I am strong in any of the domains required to be a leader on my campus yet I find myself trying to fill that roll in my limited abilities. As I answered these questions I learned that there were more foreign terms and capabilities than there were familiar ones.
I agree with these surveys as they revealed how much I need to learn as well as how behind my district is in their expectations for teachers and students in the area of technology. I need to advance my abilities in order to integrate technology into my classroom in more ways than simply a format for instruction delivery. I also think my district needs to step up their expectations. At the moment we are lacking the professional freedom to plan innovative lessons and we are limited to our scripted curriculum as well as designated supplementary materials for additional mathematics practice. If these limitations were lifted, professional development was supported, and time was provided to plan, integration of technology into lessons would improve.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)