I have to say that when this course first started, I was thinking that either it was going to be easy, or extremely difficult. I thought that I was just going to have to do a power point and a blog and reflect. I have to now say since I am finishing up, that it has be a very hard class for me because I am not technologically sound. I found that although interesting, it was very time consuming and probably my least favorite class thus far. I can say that I did achieve the outcomes of the class, by far; only because I was pushed and stretched beyond all of my expectations.
I believe that most people are either integrating technology into their classroom because they love it themselves, or because there is an expectation for it within their school/district. I do integrate technology into my classroom (research based projects, digital storytelling, power point, etc., however, I have found that this is not enough. If I want to keep up with the ever growing world of technology and to keep my students connected and the “light turned on” with technology, then I have (we) have some major work to do. I have found that by taking this class, now I am familiar with technology terms, policies that are in place, laws, and plans for our future in technology education. Because I am now familiar with these things, I have no excuse to not get going and moving forward with the technology and skills that are needed to be successful in this arena.
Now that I have completed all of the assignments that were assigned and stressed and strained over all the knowledge that I was packing into my brain, I find that I am proud to say that I know this information and feel that I will be a better teacher/future administrator because of it. The only thing that I felt was excessive was all of the reading. Many of the articles were written by the same author and were redundant. Other than that however, I feel that I was stretched beyond my comfort zone and am better now for it. Reviewing the Long Range Plan, the STarChart, and AEIS when determining what is needed was an eye-opener for me. I was not familiar with any of these prior to taking this course. Now I see the importance of the STarChart and why we have to take it yearly as stakeholders.
When reflecting back on this course, I have found that the thing that I learned the most about that I guess I took for granted was the copyright and web publishing laws. This has made me think many times how I will need to ensure that my staff will be well trained and how the information will need to be available for not only the staff, but for the students. Cyber safety is definitely a key area that can not be overlooked. I believe that we need to train and retrain to make sure that all rules and laws are being followed.
One of my favorite quotes that I read that I try to live by daily is: “every moment of the day, no matter what it is we are doing is a teachable moment.” Because our students look at what we do and say, we are in the perfect position to ensure that what we do is correct and ethical. If I show them that technology is important, they too will follow. If I show and tell them about the laws, rules and internet safety, it may make the difference in what a student is doing or saying on the internet. Because we are “digital immigrants”, it does not give us the excuse to just give up and not integrate technology into our classrooms. I love it when kids teach me things. If we encourage and invite their expertise, we will find that they have more buy-in and will perform better in the classroom. Since our administration is still in the “old age” of technology by using overheads when we have a meeting, I believe that it needs to be brought up again that they too need to model for the staff. Accountability is key. If educators do not see that it is a necessary thing, many will not take the initiative on their own to correct their current behavior of daily worksheets and more in to modern times of technology.
When using the blog, I found this hard. I am not a “blogger” by nature, nor do I write in a journal. I found that this was a pain to post on the assignment board, discussion board and then again on the blog. I can see however, that blogging has endless possibilities. I can see that it would be beneficial for an administrator and staff to communicate. I also believe that it would a healthy method to use in the classroom. I believe when looking at differentiation in the classroom, this would be a wonderful idea to incorporate. When doing the writing process, I can see blogging as a great tool to write, revise, edit and provide for immediate access to assignments. This also provides limited access to the internet and safety if done directly with the class. It also ensures that no online predator would be able to see their work and they could feel safe to put their feelings down if using a blog in that fashion.
Cyber ethics is probably the thing that needs to be practiced the most. Since we are already teaching values and morals in the classroom, this falls right in line. I love to tell my kids, “Integrity is doing the right thing even when nobody is looking.” This goes with using the computer. Just because I (or an adult), am not looking over your shoulder, it does not mean that what they are doing can not be traced or tracked. Nothing is hidden or erased. Once you put the information out there, you can not take it back; everyone can read it. In order to achieve the intellectual growth and safety that is needed for students and technology, we need to prepare them with the basics of cyber ethics.
In completing this course, I can see that this course has prepared me in the importance of the use of technology in the class, the need for cyber ethics, and the huge responsibility that lies ahead as a future administrator. It has also reminded me that I will need to extremely careful when communicating with stakeholders and what I will need to be equipped with to make sure that what I am doing and saying what I want and need it to say, because after all, once it is said in writing, you can not take it back.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Action Plan for Technology
Professional Development:
Since it is clear that we are way behind in our technology and implementation in our schools, I have outlined the professional development because I learned that if we do not have these in place, we will not meet the goals and objectives outlined in the Long Range Plan.
· Teachers are required to complete and submit a minimum of four technology integration lessons per year, including sample student projects in district
· All professional development topics are designed and based on available scientifically-based research data
· All new teachers are required to take a technology assessment to determine their technology skills and knowledge
· All new teachers are required to attend technology training sessions prior to the beginning of school and to attend follow-up sessions throughout the school year
· The Instructional Technology Content Teachers and Campus Technology Trainers are required to attend bi-monthly meetings and training sessions (primarily during the summer) to develop advanced technology skills, appropriate application methods, enhanced presentation techniques, and knowledge of adult learning strategies to adequately support the teachers.
· All professional development sessions are aligned to the Technology Applications TEKS and the SBEC required technology skills and knowledge for all teachers: Designed to assist teachers in progressing to the STaR Chart Target Tech level
· The Technology Applications Professional Development is designed as a continuous program, which builds upon the accumulated knowledge, skills, and strategies from prior training sessions
· All Professional Development training is structured through a blended learning model in order to meet the needs of all learners
Action Plan
Objective: The district will increase the technology tools available to staff and students.
Supply display devices such as Interactive Whiteboards and Smartboards.
Provide access to other technical equipment for classrooms, such as; copiers, scanners, digital cameras, and other emerging technologies.
Objective: Increase availability and access to appropriate technologies, tools, support, resources and services to enhance and engage all learners.
Utilize various funding resources for classrooms deemed appropriate and/or necessary to implement innovative instructional methods and content.
Provide online technology, integration reference materials, examples, tutorials available to all teachers on an Internet-based Learning system.
Objective: Develop appropriate planning methods and provide adequate support and services to create innovative, integrated technology aligned to State and Federal requirements.
Evaluate the need to provide additional instructional technology specialists to support on-site and on-demand assistance for teachers to create forms of learning and teaching with technology.
All Campus Improvement Plans will include strategies on technology integration.
Objective: All students will develop and use technology to develop life-long learning skills.
Analyze various methods to access District Curriculum for teachers to utilize integrated lessons and as a reference for teaching strategies in order to teach technology skill required.
Develop and administer proficiency assessment for all 5th and 6th graders to measure progress in meeting Tech. TEKS.
Objective: Provide ongoing, sustained, intensive, and effective quality professional development to improve instruction and academic achievement.
Provide training for all District staff on technology fundamentals and basic trouble-shooting.
Provide opportunities for sustained, relevant, and timely professional development focused on technology integration and utilizing blended learning styles.
Develop quality standards measurement methods of blended learning instructional technology professional development and report the results.
Provide required professional development activities, remediation training, and instructional assistance to those employees who do not meet the mandatory competency level measured by the assessment.
Objective: Recognize teachers who use Educational Technology in effective and creative ways.
Establish measures for superior classroom technology integration and recognize teachers for high levels of technology integration in the classroom.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Friday, November 27, 2009
My Opinion on Educator Preparation and Development of the STaR Chart
It is clear when looking at the Long Range Plan set forth that we as a state, district, and campus have a lot of work to do. When looking at the area of Educator Preparation and Development it is clear that in order to teach the technological information to students, we as educators need to modeling and encouraging it's use. In this area many factors come in to play: content of professional development being offered; focusing on skill integration, the capability of teachers; what SBEC standards are they applying daily, access to professional development; are they participating, and do the teachers even understand technology basics and how to use the productivity tools.
Progress is being made both nationally, statewide, and locally, however it is very minor. Out of all four areas of the Long Range Plane for Technology 2006-2020, Educator Preparation has the lowest Advanced Tech level score of only 19.9%. What this tells us is that many teachers are using the use of technology for administrative tasks and classroom management, and only 40% meet the SBEC standards. Only 6-24% of technology budget is being allocated for professional development.
A trends that may cause this is a lack of accountability on administrative part. Many students have more computer savvy than teachers and because of this, teachers don't want to compete. Many feel that if they are not "required" to integrate the technology on a daily/weekly/monthly basis, why do it? It is more hassle than it is worth. On our campus, our faculty felt more confident with technology in the year 2006-07 with a score of 16 points. By the next year, we had fallen four points and only gained on back by the year 2008-2009. This shows me that technology is growing, but our teachers are not with it. Although there may be a campus technology plan, until the funds are allocated to train our educators and assure them that they will have the support, we may find ourselves having a hard time meeting the goals and objectives for the Long Range Plan by 2020.
My recommendation for improvement in this area as an instructional leader is to really push the importance of technology. I have to say that many teachers, are not really aware of the importance of the STaR Chart nor was I aware of the Long Range Plan. Because they are not educated, many teachers answer the STaR Chart questions without a care... they just want to get it over with. Therefore, I am not sure how acurate it is; at least at my school. I believe that we need to explain the plan, the process, and the importance in the same to staff and make technology and the use of it part of the PDAS grading so that more educators will embrace the use and importance in technology growth in the classroom.
Progress is being made both nationally, statewide, and locally, however it is very minor. Out of all four areas of the Long Range Plane for Technology 2006-2020, Educator Preparation has the lowest Advanced Tech level score of only 19.9%. What this tells us is that many teachers are using the use of technology for administrative tasks and classroom management, and only 40% meet the SBEC standards. Only 6-24% of technology budget is being allocated for professional development.
A trends that may cause this is a lack of accountability on administrative part. Many students have more computer savvy than teachers and because of this, teachers don't want to compete. Many feel that if they are not "required" to integrate the technology on a daily/weekly/monthly basis, why do it? It is more hassle than it is worth. On our campus, our faculty felt more confident with technology in the year 2006-07 with a score of 16 points. By the next year, we had fallen four points and only gained on back by the year 2008-2009. This shows me that technology is growing, but our teachers are not with it. Although there may be a campus technology plan, until the funds are allocated to train our educators and assure them that they will have the support, we may find ourselves having a hard time meeting the goals and objectives for the Long Range Plan by 2020.
My recommendation for improvement in this area as an instructional leader is to really push the importance of technology. I have to say that many teachers, are not really aware of the importance of the STaR Chart nor was I aware of the Long Range Plan. Because they are not educated, many teachers answer the STaR Chart questions without a care... they just want to get it over with. Therefore, I am not sure how acurate it is; at least at my school. I believe that we need to explain the plan, the process, and the importance in the same to staff and make technology and the use of it part of the PDAS grading so that more educators will embrace the use and importance in technology growth in the classroom.
Monday, November 23, 2009
In The Beginning…
Pre-K Technology Applications TEKS Summary:
When reviewing what is introduced, taught and expected of our pre-kindergarten children, I was pleasantly surprised! These children are introduced to exploring and discovering technology hardware (computers, TV’s MP3 players, digital camera’s etc.) through the use of software (audio, video, and graphic). This will help improve their vocabulary, phonological awareness and help them create original works). Also, these students will learn the basic technology vocabulary to prepare them when they move to the next grade as well as basic key boarding commands which they will learn through songs, rhymes, pictures and other oral language techniques. I think this is outstanding and can only image the loss of knowledge of the students who never go to Pre-k!
How do the Pre-K Technology Applications TEKS lay the foundation for student performance in future grades?
I believe that these TEKS lay the foundation perfectly so that when the students transition to Kinder and beyond, they will have a solid foundation of knowledge that can be built upon and used as a clear basis of understanding as they grow. As in any other subject, you learn the basics and build from there. It is clear that children are learning younger and younger ways to use technology; mostly in games, and in order for us to keep up with the 21st Century of learning, we must keep these applications in place to ensure that our children; even at this young age, are learning and building a solid foundation for the future.
What is a spiraling or scaffolding curriculum?
I believe that this is a spiraling curriculum; it ties to the level of readiness of the learner and teaches a subject/concept that the students can understand and as they grow. It becomes more comprehensible; the language becomes more familiar and builds a memory bank. It also allows for the subject to be gone over many times as the students grow and the success is based on the vertical and horizontal alignment of the curriculum spiraling up if you will to help the students learn more as they grow. An example of scaffolded technology skills are beginning with Pre-K, the students are introduced to information acquisition via technology; software and websites, and then each subsequent year (grade level), the students will be given the opportunity to gain more knowledge through additional skills and to practice the knowledge and use of those skills by navigating, accessing, and creating finished products.
When reviewing what is introduced, taught and expected of our pre-kindergarten children, I was pleasantly surprised! These children are introduced to exploring and discovering technology hardware (computers, TV’s MP3 players, digital camera’s etc.) through the use of software (audio, video, and graphic). This will help improve their vocabulary, phonological awareness and help them create original works). Also, these students will learn the basic technology vocabulary to prepare them when they move to the next grade as well as basic key boarding commands which they will learn through songs, rhymes, pictures and other oral language techniques. I think this is outstanding and can only image the loss of knowledge of the students who never go to Pre-k!
How do the Pre-K Technology Applications TEKS lay the foundation for student performance in future grades?
I believe that these TEKS lay the foundation perfectly so that when the students transition to Kinder and beyond, they will have a solid foundation of knowledge that can be built upon and used as a clear basis of understanding as they grow. As in any other subject, you learn the basics and build from there. It is clear that children are learning younger and younger ways to use technology; mostly in games, and in order for us to keep up with the 21st Century of learning, we must keep these applications in place to ensure that our children; even at this young age, are learning and building a solid foundation for the future.
What is a spiraling or scaffolding curriculum?
I believe that this is a spiraling curriculum; it ties to the level of readiness of the learner and teaches a subject/concept that the students can understand and as they grow. It becomes more comprehensible; the language becomes more familiar and builds a memory bank. It also allows for the subject to be gone over many times as the students grow and the success is based on the vertical and horizontal alignment of the curriculum spiraling up if you will to help the students learn more as they grow. An example of scaffolded technology skills are beginning with Pre-K, the students are introduced to information acquisition via technology; software and websites, and then each subsequent year (grade level), the students will be given the opportunity to gain more knowledge through additional skills and to practice the knowledge and use of those skills by navigating, accessing, and creating finished products.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
21st Century Technology
In order for our students to keep with the ever changing technology and learning, we have to equip them. This is not an easy task. It is going to take a lot of time, money, resources and willing participants to make this happen! Plans have been put in place to help educators make this a success, but it is more than that; people must work hard to make them a reality! The thing that I love about this Long Range Plan is that it is ongoing. It is realistic and there is continuous follow-up and modification to make sure that it happens. As an educator who is “behind the times” of technology, it is refreshing to see that there is something in place to help with the accountability of educators, state and local government, and students to make sure that we do not fall short of equipping the children of our future to be successful in every way.
As far as this assisting me as an instructional leader who is guiding technology use and integration on the campus, I am happy that this plan is in place because in ensures that continued planning, follow-up, and resources will be available to me as an educator and future leader. Although there will be bumps along the way, I feel confident that our children will be more successful due to the planning and commitment of the people working on the plan and using the plan as well as the government working hand in hand with them to make future success a reality.
As far as this assisting me as an instructional leader who is guiding technology use and integration on the campus, I am happy that this plan is in place because in ensures that continued planning, follow-up, and resources will be available to me as an educator and future leader. Although there will be bumps along the way, I feel confident that our children will be more successful due to the planning and commitment of the people working on the plan and using the plan as well as the government working hand in hand with them to make future success a reality.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Embarrassed.....
Wow! I am a bit embarrassed to write a reflection on my results from these assessments! Being a classroom teacher and pushing technology to my students, it is clear that I have some work to do on my own!
The first assessment, Technology Applications Inventory, had questions in four major areas: Foundations, Information Acquisition, Solving Problems, and Communication. I’m sure you can surmise from my comment above, I scored poorly in knowledge on them. My scores were: Foundations (44%), Information Acquisition (30%), Solving Problems (44%), and Communication (20%). The crazy thing is, I couldn’t even tell you what they were asking if I knew because I had never even heard of them, let alone how to teach someone else how to implement them!
The second assessment, SETDA Teacher Survey, I did not score as badly, however, I do believe that I can do better in learning and passing on the information to students as well as assisting them better when they have questions. I tend to offer technology as supported learning in my class and I assist in a computer learning lab two times a week. In the lab, the assignment has already been set and I merely assist the students with learning. I believe that by allowing students to learn the technology and requiring them to use it in the classroom, more value is added and the students seem involved and connected. We also have two staff members on our campus who assist us with technology issues should any arise; this I have found invaluable.
When comparing and contrasting these two surveys, the Technology Applications Inventory was shorter and easier to answer, whereas, SETDA is longer and more time consuming.
It is clear that I really do not have any strength in technology. My highest area on these assessments is keyboarding skills and basic word processing and browsing the internet. My weaknesses however, lie everywhere; mostly communication and information acquisition and using technology tools to solve problems or create products. As a future administrator, I see the value in becoming proficient in technology and the need for future performance of administrative tasks and modeling the importance of technology to my staff.
As far as whether I agree or disagree with the assessments, I agree. I have not made it a priority to further my knowledge of technology or the skills that go with it. At this point, I believe that many of my students and my children for that matter know more than I do! I have learned from this assessment process that I need to make this more of a priority if I intend to expect my staff and students to keep the ever changing world of technology forefront and up to date.
Wow! I am a bit embarrassed to write a reflection on my results from these assessments! Being a classroom teacher and pushing technology to my students, it is clear that I have some work to do on my own!
The first assessment, Technology Applications Inventory, had questions in four major areas: Foundations, Information Acquisition, Solving Problems, and Communication. I’m sure you can surmise from my comment above, I scored poorly in knowledge on them. My scores were: Foundations (44%), Information Acquisition (30%), Solving Problems (44%), and Communication (20%). The crazy thing is, I couldn’t even tell you what they were asking if I knew because I had never even heard of them, let alone how to teach someone else how to implement them!
The second assessment, SETDA Teacher Survey, I did not score as badly, however, I do believe that I can do better in learning and passing on the information to students as well as assisting them better when they have questions. I tend to offer technology as supported learning in my class and I assist in a computer learning lab two times a week. In the lab, the assignment has already been set and I merely assist the students with learning. I believe that by allowing students to learn the technology and requiring them to use it in the classroom, more value is added and the students seem involved and connected. We also have two staff members on our campus who assist us with technology issues should any arise; this I have found invaluable.
When comparing and contrasting these two surveys, the Technology Applications Inventory was shorter and easier to answer, whereas, SETDA is longer and more time consuming.
It is clear that I really do not have any strength in technology. My highest area on these assessments is keyboarding skills and basic word processing and browsing the internet. My weaknesses however, lie everywhere; mostly communication and information acquisition and using technology tools to solve problems or create products. As a future administrator, I see the value in becoming proficient in technology and the need for future performance of administrative tasks and modeling the importance of technology to my staff.
As far as whether I agree or disagree with the assessments, I agree. I have not made it a priority to further my knowledge of technology or the skills that go with it. At this point, I believe that many of my students and my children for that matter know more than I do! I have learned from this assessment process that I need to make this more of a priority if I intend to expect my staff and students to keep the ever changing world of technology forefront and up to date.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)