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)