· What outcomes had you envisioned for this course? Did you achieve those outcomes? Did the actual course outcomes align with those that you envisioned?
To be honest, I thought the content of this course would be about the development of instruction across the board. I though maybe we would study different content areas specific to our grade level and then either develop staff development plans that would help improve our school’s TAKS scores or AEIS. I was not aware that the content of this course would be so heavily weighted on technology. The outcome I came away with was something that I already knew: technology should be a prevalent part in the development of instruction for students in today’s 21st Century.
· 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?
The content of this course as it relates to the work I do in my school is very relevant. As my campus’s technology instructor, I am exposed to technology on a daily basis. I am responsible for training the teachers on my campus in regards to their use. If they don’t know how to use a piece of equipment, it becomes my responsibility to show them how to use it. I realized, through this course, that there are many avenues not yet addressed in regards to my campus. Blogs, pod casting, and even online discussion boards, while seemingly unrealistic for elementary aged students, can be beneficial to all students learning and success.
· What outcomes did you not achieve? What prevented you from achieving them?
An outcome I did not achieve was in regards to instructional development across the board. As I state earlier, the entire content of this course focused on technology. Instructional development goes across the board from English to science; from math to physical education. There was just so much other content that could have helped me understand and better facilitate my future staff as they develop their lessons for their students. Also, technology is not something that can be forced on people; they have to be open and willing to try it. Yes, our students need technology to aid them in their learning; but forcing teachers to use it without the necessary support is a losing battle.
· Were you successful in carrying out the course assignments? If not, what prevented or discouraged you?
These assignments had to be some of the most difficult that I have experienced in my Lamar classes. One of the main reasons for this difficulty is that the directions and pre-text leading up to the directions were so vague. The instructions specifically for Week 4, Part 3 were not even I the form of a directive. The instructions were in the form of statement. It is difficult to infer what the professors were wanting based on a set of 3-4 statements. Because of this, there was such a wide variety of responses possible, I feel that it took away the credibility of the assignment. We were asked to post our action plan on the discussion board. We were also required to respond to two separate posts by other students. In looking at other student’s work, it was clear that we all approached Part 3 from different perspectives. That is good….if one is “looking” for an answer instead of “knowing” what the answer should look like; however, it made it impossible for me to even read some of the posts because our perspectives on the assignment were so totally different. How do you critique another’s work when you don’t even know if what you’ve done is correct? It would just lead to conflict among a group of frustrated individuals.
· What did you learn from this course…about yourself, your technology and leadership skills, and your attitudes?
This course did succeed in opening my eyes to new possibilities in regards to technology use. Pod casting, blogging, and even online discussions seem to be things in which high school students would thrive. Because of this, I do see the benefit. On the flip side of that, I do see district technology departments putting their foot in the ground to halt this type of learning. There are too many dangers and pitfalls involved in opening up these types of educational venues. There has to be great control on the part of the administrator, and I just don’t know that districts will expend the time and efforts needed to ensure these things.
· What is the educational value of blogs and blogging to the 21st century learner?
Blogging, in my opinion, has a negative connotation. This is mainly because I have friends who blog, and it just looks like a bunch of people who are writing their diary for the whole world to see. This class has shown me that it can be used for an educational venue instead of a personal one. Again, students like this type of activity, so I do see students, those who might not necessarily join in a classroom discussion, join a blog to express their opinion on a teacher guided topic. I do see a reliance on this type of communication becoming prevalent in the near future, so educators had better get on the wagon before it passes them by.
· What are the concerns of blogs and blogging in education?
An obvious concern of blogging is the content that may be posted. In an educational setting, there must be guidelines and filters in place to catch inappropriate vocabulary and content. I see this as one of the main reasons school districts shy away from allowing students to blog. Another issue is the “hosting” aspect. If the blog is directly related to a school campus, and if a student posts inappropriate content, who is the responsible one. There would have to be a person in charge of reading each and every blog to make sure it follows the district’s acceptable use policy. Without that monitoring, anything and everything will be said. Identity of authors must also be known. Schools cannot have anonymous posters to their blog.
· How can you use blogging to communicate with school stakeholders?
Blogging is a good way to keep stakeholders involved. Maybe not blogging, specifically, but online forums such as Twitter or Facebook are avenues in which many parents and students have immediate access to information. This can aid in getting quick messages out to them in emergency situations. Many people today carry telephones or other electronical equipment that allows them to access information and news with the click of a button. School districts could use this to their advantage in communicating with students and stakeholders.
Monday, December 14, 2009
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Technology Action Plan
Goal: To improve teaching and learning through the use of technology. Based on Sorters Mill Elementary’s 2009-2010 STaR Chart
Content Areas
Focus on basic skills and higher level thinking skills.
Encourage lifelong learning.
Provide connections between real world applications and lessons in the classroom.
Provide opportunities to apply skills learned.
Challenge and engage all learners.
Offer opportunities for smaller groups and individualized instruction.
Incorporate technology as an integral part of learning.
Technology Currently Available:
o Multimedia computers
o Televisions with AverKey
o Document Cameras
o InFocus Projectors
o Digital Cameras
o Video Recorder
o DVD Burner
o CPS Chalkboards
o Wireless Mouse
Current Integration of Technology:
Accelerated Reader & Math
Math Facts in a Flash
Study Island
Computer Lab
Internet Access
Brain Pop
PowerPoint/Word processing applications
Based on the research in Week 3’s assignment, one of the major focuses of my action plan is to get technology into the hands of our students. As you can see from the information above, Sorters Mill Elementary has technology available; it is just not being used actively with students in the classroom in a collaborative manner.
The first step in meeting this objective is to train the teachers to use the technology equipment available. They have to be comfortable enough with the equipment, software, and applications in order for them to even consider letting their students use it themselves. In-depth, on-going, regular, consistent trainings will be held throughout the summer months in order to have teacher ready for the first day of class. Teachers will be allowed time during the week to meet during the school day to collaborate on ideas and ways they use technology in their classroom. The focus at the beginning is on the teacher; he/she must be confident in their own abilities in regards to their use of technology. Principals will conduct walk-throughs of all teacher’s classrooms on a regular basis in order that teachers can be observed using technology in their classes. Teachers not seen using the technology available will have opportunity for specialized, enhanced instruction regarding equipment and software available to them but with which they might be struggling. These teachers will also be paired with a mentor teacher who can help them gain confidence in using the technology available.
Once the teachers are “trained” – within the first 6 weeks of school - the focus will shift to the student. Teachers will be required to take their students to the computer lab at least one hour per week for instruction, guided practice, and independent work. Project based assignments will be the focus for this period of time. Teachers will also have to include detailed instruction in their lesson plan as to how students will be using technology available. Internet based research projects will be an active, integral part to the teacher’s plans. Teachers will be given in-school time to prepare lessons, share lessons, and practice lessons that show active student participation with technology. Teaching teams will meet on a weekly basis to share instructional strategies and ideas. Principals will participate in these meetings on a rotating basis throughout the year.
Another part of this plan will be on the part of the students. A survey will be developed for students to complete that will ask them questions about their personal computer skills, including programs they are familiar with. The survey will also ask specific questions about their past experience with technology in the classroom setting. The survey will be conducted three times during the year; on the first week of school; one mid-year in January; the final survey conducted the last month of the school year. Survey results will be kept in “teacher groups”. Measurable progress must be shown by each teach in regards to the survey. Teachers whose students do not show measurable progress, will be required to attend further technology trainings during the summer.
Content Areas
Focus on basic skills and higher level thinking skills.
Encourage lifelong learning.
Provide connections between real world applications and lessons in the classroom.
Provide opportunities to apply skills learned.
Challenge and engage all learners.
Offer opportunities for smaller groups and individualized instruction.
Incorporate technology as an integral part of learning.
Technology Currently Available:
o Multimedia computers
o Televisions with AverKey
o Document Cameras
o InFocus Projectors
o Digital Cameras
o Video Recorder
o DVD Burner
o CPS Chalkboards
o Wireless Mouse
Current Integration of Technology:
Accelerated Reader & Math
Math Facts in a Flash
Study Island
Computer Lab
Internet Access
Brain Pop
PowerPoint/Word processing applications
Based on the research in Week 3’s assignment, one of the major focuses of my action plan is to get technology into the hands of our students. As you can see from the information above, Sorters Mill Elementary has technology available; it is just not being used actively with students in the classroom in a collaborative manner.
The first step in meeting this objective is to train the teachers to use the technology equipment available. They have to be comfortable enough with the equipment, software, and applications in order for them to even consider letting their students use it themselves. In-depth, on-going, regular, consistent trainings will be held throughout the summer months in order to have teacher ready for the first day of class. Teachers will be allowed time during the week to meet during the school day to collaborate on ideas and ways they use technology in their classroom. The focus at the beginning is on the teacher; he/she must be confident in their own abilities in regards to their use of technology. Principals will conduct walk-throughs of all teacher’s classrooms on a regular basis in order that teachers can be observed using technology in their classes. Teachers not seen using the technology available will have opportunity for specialized, enhanced instruction regarding equipment and software available to them but with which they might be struggling. These teachers will also be paired with a mentor teacher who can help them gain confidence in using the technology available.
Once the teachers are “trained” – within the first 6 weeks of school - the focus will shift to the student. Teachers will be required to take their students to the computer lab at least one hour per week for instruction, guided practice, and independent work. Project based assignments will be the focus for this period of time. Teachers will also have to include detailed instruction in their lesson plan as to how students will be using technology available. Internet based research projects will be an active, integral part to the teacher’s plans. Teachers will be given in-school time to prepare lessons, share lessons, and practice lessons that show active student participation with technology. Teaching teams will meet on a weekly basis to share instructional strategies and ideas. Principals will participate in these meetings on a rotating basis throughout the year.
Another part of this plan will be on the part of the students. A survey will be developed for students to complete that will ask them questions about their personal computer skills, including programs they are familiar with. The survey will also ask specific questions about their past experience with technology in the classroom setting. The survey will be conducted three times during the year; on the first week of school; one mid-year in January; the final survey conducted the last month of the school year. Survey results will be kept in “teacher groups”. Measurable progress must be shown by each teach in regards to the survey. Teachers whose students do not show measurable progress, will be required to attend further technology trainings during the summer.
Saturday, December 5, 2009
Week 3 Instructional Leadership Report
In looking at the Sorters Mill Elementary Campus Improvement Plan for the year 2009-2010, I see many instances where technology has influenced campus curriculum and instructional development. To begin with, four of our campus objectives are that at least 90% of all students will pass the math, reading, writing, and science portion of the spring 2010 TAKS test. A recurring strategy that is listed in the CIP that is intended to help meet that objective is the utilization of an online program called Study Island. Study Island is a TAKS objectives based program that is broken into four content areas: reading, writing, math, and science. Our campus has committed itself to this program for all students in the second through fifth grade. By beginning this program in the second grade, a grade that is not TAKS tested, it is building a foundation that will enable our campus to meet these 90% goals (Sorters Mill, n.d.).
The New Caney Independent School District’s Technology Plan has specific provisions that relate directly to each campus. As stated in the District Technology Plan (n.d.), “Each school will annually submit a technology plan as part of their school development plan. This technology plan should support the improvement goals for their school. The plan will correlate to the district policies and key for TEKS and budget”. This is directly in line with the Sorters Mill CIP objective that directly affects technology by stating, “Sorters Mill Elementary will foster the use of technology as an effective tool for instruction and classroom management, thereby enabling students to be successful in an increasingly technological world” (Sorters Mill, n.d.). There are many strategies listed that include the following: implementation of Accelerated Reader and Accelerated Math, targeting students using Headsprout Reading Lab, implementation of E-instruction and Quizdom into the classroom, the purchase of software programs for pre-kindergarten and kindergarten curriculum, and having opportunities for district training providing technology instruction. All of these encompass grade pre-k through fifth, which I feel shows a continued strand of technology use throughout the curriculum (New Caney, n.d.).
New Caney ISD is making great strides aligning itself with the Long Rang Plan for Technology. This is self evident as you study both the District Technology Plan and the Sorters Mill Elementary Campus Improvement Plan. I just happen to be the technology facilitator for Sorters Mill elementary, so I have the advantage of seeing this on a daily basis. One of the key observations I have made regarding my school district is in it fight to preserve the technology applications teaching position at each of the eight elementary campuses. While many districts around us have chosen to delete this teaching position, our district has worked faithfully to keep it. This shows that our district is committed to getting technology instruction into the hands of our students. At my campus, each class, grades kindergarten through fifth, rotates into the computer lab one day a week. All of these students are guaranteed 30-55 minutes of technology instruction on a weekly basis with a one-to-one student-computer ratio. In addition to that, my campus has an additional computer lab that teachers may use to give further instruction and enrichment. Students have access to the Internet and a variety of software programs that would enhance their learning. The ability for our school to do this aligns our technology plan with that of the Long Range Plan for Technology when they state, “All learners have access to relevant technologies, tools, resources, and services for individualized instruction” (Long Range Plan for Technology, 2006).
Technology is being used to deliver and enrich instruction in many ways on the campus of Sorters Mill Elementary. As the campus technology coordinator, one of my assigned tasks is in tracking the inventory and use of technology equipment that is purchased. I know which teacher has checked out which piece of equipment, how long he/she has it checked out, and as I go about my daily business, I can see first hand how the technology is being used in instructions.
Recently, I was fortunate to catch one of our 4th grade teachers simultaneously using multiple pieces of technology equipment. This teacher, I should say, is very proficient in technology, and she is willing to try new things. She has been innovative in setting her classroom up in a manner that would accommodate transient equipment in the least-intrusive way. I continually use her as an example in staff developments that I do as someone who has it all together. The day I was able to view first hand her use of technology was the day she called my classroom asking if there was an extra CPS Chalkboard available (she already had one checked out). Curious about what she planned, I took the chalkboard to her room. What I saw was overwhelming. She had given the first CPS Chalkboard to one student, and after we quickly connected the second one, she gave it to a second student. Working with simple Algebraic statements, both students were “competing” to see who could solve the equation first – both using the CPS Chalkboard at the same time while their progress was broadcast onto the screen via an InFocus Projector. When both students were not successful in solving the equation, this teacher switched from using the projector to using her document camera for a review of how to solve the problem. She then switched back to the CPS Chalkboard/projector combination and let teams of students work together to solve the equation. Besides the fact that there was actually active, engaged learning taking place, the students were ecstatic about being able to use the CPS Chalkboard themselves.
As identified in a report submitted by Morris Fuselier, Associate Superintendent for Administrative Services, to the New Caney ISD school board in April 2009, technology integration is an ongoing process. According to the report, the following examples of integration were given in regards to the 2008-2009 school years:
· In January of 2009, all campuses were given the opportunity to participate in live streaming of the presidential inauguration over the Internet. Locations were set up on each campus to allow for large audience viewing of the event. “This allowed our students to actually be a part of this history-making event as it was occurring rather than watching the event after it was finished.”
· Discovery Education enrollment for teachers has increased in the district. Teachers are allowed to download short video segments that are used to augment their instruction. 1092 downloads were done in the month of March.
· All second and fifth grade students participate in a Technology Applications benchmark at the end of the school year.
· All sixth grade students complete a keyboarding assessment at the end of each school year.
· Eighth grade students at one of our middle schools participated in the second year Technology Literacy Pilot Program through TEA. The results of these assessments are part of the NCLB Title IId report that is submitted at the end of the school year.
· Free summer technology programs are offered to students in grades 4-8. Programs include exposure to robotics, video production, webpage design, computer animation, pod-casting, geocaching, and desktop publishing.
(Board Book, n.d.)
Morris Fuselier’s report to the school board also presents information regarding staff development. According to Fuselier, the Instructional Technology Division of the Department of Technology has offered 122 technology trainings in various formats during the months of November through March of 2008-2009. There were 1030 participants who completed the trainings, representing a total of 2757 completed technology training hours. The following is a breakdown of the training offerings:
§ Web Ex Training 5
§ Distance Learning Opportunities 40
§ Hands on Training 75
§ Seminar/Conference 2
(Board Book, n.d.)
Also according to Fuselier’s board report, during the summer of 2009, there were 22 technology staff development opportunities. He stated that “the majority of our course offerings will focus on technology integration.” Topics covered during these summer staff developments include the following: Student Response Systems, Geocaching, Pod casting, Digital Storytelling, Webpage Design, Electronic Chalkboards, Online Reference Databases, Open Office, Easy Quality Assessments, and Scantron utilization (Board Book, n.d.). Jeannie Reed, Instructional Technology Coordinator/Trainer for New Caney ISD offered the following statistics in regards to the summer staff developments previously listed: There were a total of 2181 hours of technology training taken by 387 NCISD employees during that summer; 392.5 hours were devoted to distance learning; 28.5 hours were devoted to online training sessions; 1671.5 hours were devoted to general technology training (Reed, 2009). As you can see, New Caney ISD is committed to ongoing teacher training in the area of technology use in their classrooms.
Since I actually teach a technology applications course, I do not feel that my representation of technology use in my classroom is an item of discussion. I am fortunate enough to have one-to-one computing available. I have an InFocus projector 24/7; I have access to digital cameras on a daily basis, and I use a CPS Chalkboard on a regular basis. I have worked to bring in outside items for my students to use. One that most intrigued the students was a flexible keyboard. While most students quickly tire of doing basic keyboard drills, when given the opportunity to use this flexible keyboard while doing them, it was a challenge to get them to stop when it was time to quit. We have used digital cameras in my classroom so that we could edit them in a photo editing software program. Students were expected to take their pictures and upload them to their computer. We had great fun and success in this activity. Using the Internet is not a challenge as I have 24/7 access – as recommended in the Long Range Plan for Technology.
To broaden my search for how technology is being used in the classroom, I interviewed two teachers. Sandra Lee, a 5th grade science teacher and a member of the Site-Based Decision Making committee at Sorters Mill Elementary, discussed with me how she utilizes technology in her classroom. She has daily access to a document camera as well as an InFocus projector. She uses the Internet based web-site Brain Pop and Power Point presentations to teach and reinforce science concepts. She states that she also uses the SRA Snapshots program to teach and reinforce concepts.
One of her main concerns in regards to student access to technology is based on her student’s limited use of technology in her classroom. The main reason for this is that there are only 3 computers in the classroom for her students to use. This does not align with the Long-Range plan for technology in respect of schools having one-to-one computer-student ratios. Most of her student’s work on the Internet does involve the group process where teams work together to research various science topics. On the whole, she feels that her students are successful in using the Internet as a research tool, and they are able to apply what they learn from it to the classroom instruction. Mrs. Lee’s hope is that as the years go by, more technology equipment will be able to be purchased so that more students can individually utilize them. Cindy Cummings, during the round table interview posted in the Instructional Leadership online course, mentioned that it is becoming more and more important that today’s administrators be “innovative in finding funding to supply technology” in the classroom (Jenkins, 2009). This would obviously help in this situation where the demand for technology certainly exceeds the supply.
Vicky Siega, a 2nd grade dual language teacher at the same school, also discussed with me how technology is used in her classroom. On a personal note, and as the campus technology coordinator, I can attest to the desire that Mrs. Siega has to learn technology, use it actively in her classroom, and get it into the hands of her students. She states that she regularly uses the website Thinkmath to play math games with her students after introducing a new math concept. She has just recently gotten a document camera as well as an InFocus projector, and she is adequately learning how to use them with instruction. She utilizes Discovery Education (United Streaming) to show student more detailed information as it relates to her science lessons. She is very excited about utilizing Math in a Flash – a part of Renaissance Learning – with her students. She says that this program is an excellent way for students to work independently on the computer and still apply math concepts covered during the class. She also says that a benefit of this is that both she and the student receive immediate feedback in regards to their work. Mrs. Siega is in the process of utilizing Study Island – and Internet based TAKS program – more in her classroom. Using the E-Instruction “clickers” in large group instruction allows her to monitor her student understanding of an objective on the spot. Mrs. Siega also utilizes the one student lab on our campus by regularly scheduling blocks of time for her entire class to use. She incorporates individualized instruction with group instruction as she teaches concepts to her students. Dr. Kay Abernathy, in the round-table discussion for Lamar, states that teacher learn to be innovative in their teaching (Jenkins, 2009). Mrs. Siega is a prime example in this innovative teaching. She is using the resources she has to the best of her ability; she is willing to learn how to use new pieces of technology equipment, and she remains focused on student learning.
I spoke with a group of eighteen 5th grade students asking them their opinions about the technology equipment they use at Sorters Mill Elementary. The first obstacle in my discussion was the fact that we had to discuss what “technology” actually was. Their initial thought was it was when they came to my computer applications class one time a week. To them, simply using a computer for word process or spreadsheet applications was “technology”. Once we clarified all that the term encompassed, they were more open with their responses. To begin with, many of them stated that they felt that there were simply not enough “things” for them to do with technology. Many of them stated that it was the teachers who ended up using the technology and that rarely, if ever, did they get the opportunity to use it for themselves. I asked them about things they liked that they saw their teachers using. Their overwhelming accolade was for a CPS Chalkboard, which is basically a wireless, pencil-mouse on a tablet. This pencil/tablet allows the teacher to be mobile in the classroom while still being able to control the application on her computer. Since all these student have ever seen was a traditional mouse, the idea that a pencil could do the same thing as a mouse, was a concept that really peeked their curiosity.
When asked how technology has improved their learning and academic performance, they referred to one specific teacher who utilizes the Study Island Internet based program for TAKS instructions This teacher encourages the students to use this by offering incentives for the end of the year. Study Island is broken down into the different TAKS objectives; in this case, the math objectives. Students can individualize their work by personally selecting the objective they would like to cover. This teacher also gives “blanket” assignments of objectives to her class as a whole. There is a deadline for the students to follow, so they must complete the work before it comes. Email is also opened between the student and teacher in Study Island. This teacher sends personalized instructions and encouragement to each student, and in turn, each student is able to respond to her. If they are having difficulties with an objective and they don’t feel comfortable addressing it in person, they have the avenue of e-mail to communicate with their teacher.
References
Board Book. (n.d.) Retrieved December 1, 2009 from Board Book Website: http://www.boardbook.org/apps/bbv2/temp/55E9ABF5-BFF6-190B-A4A6A15D01F364E6.pdf.
Jenkins, S., Abernathy, K. and Cummings, C. (2009). Interview Part 1-4. EDLD 5352 Instructional Leadership. Lamar University.
Lee, S. (personal communication, December 1, 2009).
Long-Range Plan for Technology, 2006-2020. (n.d.). Retrieved November 27, 2009 from TEA website at: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/technology/etac.
New Caney Independent School District Technology Plan. (n.d.). Retrieved November 30, 2009 from Department of Technology Website: http://www2.newcaneyisd.org/tech/index.htm.
Reed, J. (personal communication, December 2, 2009).
Siega, V. (personal communication, December 2, 2009).
Sorters Mill Elementary Campus Improvement Plan 2009-2010. (n.d.). Retrieved November 30, 2009 from Sorters Mill Elementary Website: http://www2.newcaneyisd.org/sortersmillelementary/pdf/Sorters%20Mill%20Campus%20Plan%2009-10.pdf.
The New Caney Independent School District’s Technology Plan has specific provisions that relate directly to each campus. As stated in the District Technology Plan (n.d.), “Each school will annually submit a technology plan as part of their school development plan. This technology plan should support the improvement goals for their school. The plan will correlate to the district policies and key for TEKS and budget”. This is directly in line with the Sorters Mill CIP objective that directly affects technology by stating, “Sorters Mill Elementary will foster the use of technology as an effective tool for instruction and classroom management, thereby enabling students to be successful in an increasingly technological world” (Sorters Mill, n.d.). There are many strategies listed that include the following: implementation of Accelerated Reader and Accelerated Math, targeting students using Headsprout Reading Lab, implementation of E-instruction and Quizdom into the classroom, the purchase of software programs for pre-kindergarten and kindergarten curriculum, and having opportunities for district training providing technology instruction. All of these encompass grade pre-k through fifth, which I feel shows a continued strand of technology use throughout the curriculum (New Caney, n.d.).
New Caney ISD is making great strides aligning itself with the Long Rang Plan for Technology. This is self evident as you study both the District Technology Plan and the Sorters Mill Elementary Campus Improvement Plan. I just happen to be the technology facilitator for Sorters Mill elementary, so I have the advantage of seeing this on a daily basis. One of the key observations I have made regarding my school district is in it fight to preserve the technology applications teaching position at each of the eight elementary campuses. While many districts around us have chosen to delete this teaching position, our district has worked faithfully to keep it. This shows that our district is committed to getting technology instruction into the hands of our students. At my campus, each class, grades kindergarten through fifth, rotates into the computer lab one day a week. All of these students are guaranteed 30-55 minutes of technology instruction on a weekly basis with a one-to-one student-computer ratio. In addition to that, my campus has an additional computer lab that teachers may use to give further instruction and enrichment. Students have access to the Internet and a variety of software programs that would enhance their learning. The ability for our school to do this aligns our technology plan with that of the Long Range Plan for Technology when they state, “All learners have access to relevant technologies, tools, resources, and services for individualized instruction” (Long Range Plan for Technology, 2006).
Technology is being used to deliver and enrich instruction in many ways on the campus of Sorters Mill Elementary. As the campus technology coordinator, one of my assigned tasks is in tracking the inventory and use of technology equipment that is purchased. I know which teacher has checked out which piece of equipment, how long he/she has it checked out, and as I go about my daily business, I can see first hand how the technology is being used in instructions.
Recently, I was fortunate to catch one of our 4th grade teachers simultaneously using multiple pieces of technology equipment. This teacher, I should say, is very proficient in technology, and she is willing to try new things. She has been innovative in setting her classroom up in a manner that would accommodate transient equipment in the least-intrusive way. I continually use her as an example in staff developments that I do as someone who has it all together. The day I was able to view first hand her use of technology was the day she called my classroom asking if there was an extra CPS Chalkboard available (she already had one checked out). Curious about what she planned, I took the chalkboard to her room. What I saw was overwhelming. She had given the first CPS Chalkboard to one student, and after we quickly connected the second one, she gave it to a second student. Working with simple Algebraic statements, both students were “competing” to see who could solve the equation first – both using the CPS Chalkboard at the same time while their progress was broadcast onto the screen via an InFocus Projector. When both students were not successful in solving the equation, this teacher switched from using the projector to using her document camera for a review of how to solve the problem. She then switched back to the CPS Chalkboard/projector combination and let teams of students work together to solve the equation. Besides the fact that there was actually active, engaged learning taking place, the students were ecstatic about being able to use the CPS Chalkboard themselves.
As identified in a report submitted by Morris Fuselier, Associate Superintendent for Administrative Services, to the New Caney ISD school board in April 2009, technology integration is an ongoing process. According to the report, the following examples of integration were given in regards to the 2008-2009 school years:
· In January of 2009, all campuses were given the opportunity to participate in live streaming of the presidential inauguration over the Internet. Locations were set up on each campus to allow for large audience viewing of the event. “This allowed our students to actually be a part of this history-making event as it was occurring rather than watching the event after it was finished.”
· Discovery Education enrollment for teachers has increased in the district. Teachers are allowed to download short video segments that are used to augment their instruction. 1092 downloads were done in the month of March.
· All second and fifth grade students participate in a Technology Applications benchmark at the end of the school year.
· All sixth grade students complete a keyboarding assessment at the end of each school year.
· Eighth grade students at one of our middle schools participated in the second year Technology Literacy Pilot Program through TEA. The results of these assessments are part of the NCLB Title IId report that is submitted at the end of the school year.
· Free summer technology programs are offered to students in grades 4-8. Programs include exposure to robotics, video production, webpage design, computer animation, pod-casting, geocaching, and desktop publishing.
(Board Book, n.d.)
Morris Fuselier’s report to the school board also presents information regarding staff development. According to Fuselier, the Instructional Technology Division of the Department of Technology has offered 122 technology trainings in various formats during the months of November through March of 2008-2009. There were 1030 participants who completed the trainings, representing a total of 2757 completed technology training hours. The following is a breakdown of the training offerings:
§ Web Ex Training 5
§ Distance Learning Opportunities 40
§ Hands on Training 75
§ Seminar/Conference 2
(Board Book, n.d.)
Also according to Fuselier’s board report, during the summer of 2009, there were 22 technology staff development opportunities. He stated that “the majority of our course offerings will focus on technology integration.” Topics covered during these summer staff developments include the following: Student Response Systems, Geocaching, Pod casting, Digital Storytelling, Webpage Design, Electronic Chalkboards, Online Reference Databases, Open Office, Easy Quality Assessments, and Scantron utilization (Board Book, n.d.). Jeannie Reed, Instructional Technology Coordinator/Trainer for New Caney ISD offered the following statistics in regards to the summer staff developments previously listed: There were a total of 2181 hours of technology training taken by 387 NCISD employees during that summer; 392.5 hours were devoted to distance learning; 28.5 hours were devoted to online training sessions; 1671.5 hours were devoted to general technology training (Reed, 2009). As you can see, New Caney ISD is committed to ongoing teacher training in the area of technology use in their classrooms.
Since I actually teach a technology applications course, I do not feel that my representation of technology use in my classroom is an item of discussion. I am fortunate enough to have one-to-one computing available. I have an InFocus projector 24/7; I have access to digital cameras on a daily basis, and I use a CPS Chalkboard on a regular basis. I have worked to bring in outside items for my students to use. One that most intrigued the students was a flexible keyboard. While most students quickly tire of doing basic keyboard drills, when given the opportunity to use this flexible keyboard while doing them, it was a challenge to get them to stop when it was time to quit. We have used digital cameras in my classroom so that we could edit them in a photo editing software program. Students were expected to take their pictures and upload them to their computer. We had great fun and success in this activity. Using the Internet is not a challenge as I have 24/7 access – as recommended in the Long Range Plan for Technology.
To broaden my search for how technology is being used in the classroom, I interviewed two teachers. Sandra Lee, a 5th grade science teacher and a member of the Site-Based Decision Making committee at Sorters Mill Elementary, discussed with me how she utilizes technology in her classroom. She has daily access to a document camera as well as an InFocus projector. She uses the Internet based web-site Brain Pop and Power Point presentations to teach and reinforce science concepts. She states that she also uses the SRA Snapshots program to teach and reinforce concepts.
One of her main concerns in regards to student access to technology is based on her student’s limited use of technology in her classroom. The main reason for this is that there are only 3 computers in the classroom for her students to use. This does not align with the Long-Range plan for technology in respect of schools having one-to-one computer-student ratios. Most of her student’s work on the Internet does involve the group process where teams work together to research various science topics. On the whole, she feels that her students are successful in using the Internet as a research tool, and they are able to apply what they learn from it to the classroom instruction. Mrs. Lee’s hope is that as the years go by, more technology equipment will be able to be purchased so that more students can individually utilize them. Cindy Cummings, during the round table interview posted in the Instructional Leadership online course, mentioned that it is becoming more and more important that today’s administrators be “innovative in finding funding to supply technology” in the classroom (Jenkins, 2009). This would obviously help in this situation where the demand for technology certainly exceeds the supply.
Vicky Siega, a 2nd grade dual language teacher at the same school, also discussed with me how technology is used in her classroom. On a personal note, and as the campus technology coordinator, I can attest to the desire that Mrs. Siega has to learn technology, use it actively in her classroom, and get it into the hands of her students. She states that she regularly uses the website Thinkmath to play math games with her students after introducing a new math concept. She has just recently gotten a document camera as well as an InFocus projector, and she is adequately learning how to use them with instruction. She utilizes Discovery Education (United Streaming) to show student more detailed information as it relates to her science lessons. She is very excited about utilizing Math in a Flash – a part of Renaissance Learning – with her students. She says that this program is an excellent way for students to work independently on the computer and still apply math concepts covered during the class. She also says that a benefit of this is that both she and the student receive immediate feedback in regards to their work. Mrs. Siega is in the process of utilizing Study Island – and Internet based TAKS program – more in her classroom. Using the E-Instruction “clickers” in large group instruction allows her to monitor her student understanding of an objective on the spot. Mrs. Siega also utilizes the one student lab on our campus by regularly scheduling blocks of time for her entire class to use. She incorporates individualized instruction with group instruction as she teaches concepts to her students. Dr. Kay Abernathy, in the round-table discussion for Lamar, states that teacher learn to be innovative in their teaching (Jenkins, 2009). Mrs. Siega is a prime example in this innovative teaching. She is using the resources she has to the best of her ability; she is willing to learn how to use new pieces of technology equipment, and she remains focused on student learning.
I spoke with a group of eighteen 5th grade students asking them their opinions about the technology equipment they use at Sorters Mill Elementary. The first obstacle in my discussion was the fact that we had to discuss what “technology” actually was. Their initial thought was it was when they came to my computer applications class one time a week. To them, simply using a computer for word process or spreadsheet applications was “technology”. Once we clarified all that the term encompassed, they were more open with their responses. To begin with, many of them stated that they felt that there were simply not enough “things” for them to do with technology. Many of them stated that it was the teachers who ended up using the technology and that rarely, if ever, did they get the opportunity to use it for themselves. I asked them about things they liked that they saw their teachers using. Their overwhelming accolade was for a CPS Chalkboard, which is basically a wireless, pencil-mouse on a tablet. This pencil/tablet allows the teacher to be mobile in the classroom while still being able to control the application on her computer. Since all these student have ever seen was a traditional mouse, the idea that a pencil could do the same thing as a mouse, was a concept that really peeked their curiosity.
When asked how technology has improved their learning and academic performance, they referred to one specific teacher who utilizes the Study Island Internet based program for TAKS instructions This teacher encourages the students to use this by offering incentives for the end of the year. Study Island is broken down into the different TAKS objectives; in this case, the math objectives. Students can individualize their work by personally selecting the objective they would like to cover. This teacher also gives “blanket” assignments of objectives to her class as a whole. There is a deadline for the students to follow, so they must complete the work before it comes. Email is also opened between the student and teacher in Study Island. This teacher sends personalized instructions and encouragement to each student, and in turn, each student is able to respond to her. If they are having difficulties with an objective and they don’t feel comfortable addressing it in person, they have the avenue of e-mail to communicate with their teacher.
References
Board Book. (n.d.) Retrieved December 1, 2009 from Board Book Website: http://www.boardbook.org/apps/bbv2/temp/55E9ABF5-BFF6-190B-A4A6A15D01F364E6.pdf.
Jenkins, S., Abernathy, K. and Cummings, C. (2009). Interview Part 1-4. EDLD 5352 Instructional Leadership. Lamar University.
Lee, S. (personal communication, December 1, 2009).
Long-Range Plan for Technology, 2006-2020. (n.d.). Retrieved November 27, 2009 from TEA website at: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/technology/etac.
New Caney Independent School District Technology Plan. (n.d.). Retrieved November 30, 2009 from Department of Technology Website: http://www2.newcaneyisd.org/tech/index.htm.
Reed, J. (personal communication, December 2, 2009).
Siega, V. (personal communication, December 2, 2009).
Sorters Mill Elementary Campus Improvement Plan 2009-2010. (n.d.). Retrieved November 30, 2009 from Sorters Mill Elementary Website: http://www2.newcaneyisd.org/sortersmillelementary/pdf/Sorters%20Mill%20Campus%20Plan%2009-10.pdf.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Star Chart Results - Sorters Mill
Check out this SlideShare Presentation:
Star Chart
View more presentations from Sheri BOnsal.
Teaching & Learning - STaR Chart and Long Range Plan for Technology
Since Teaching and Learning is one of my campus’s areas in which growth is needed, I will focus my opinion on it. As outlined in the Texas Campus School Technology and Readiness (STaR) Chart provided by TEA, patterns of classroom use, frequency/design of instructional setting using digital content, content area connections, TEKS implementation, student mastery of TEKS, and outline learning are the areas in which schools are rated. These ratings range from early tech, developing tech, advanced tech, and target tech.
The intent of the Long Range Plan for Technology in this area is that teachers will use technology to engage students in their own learning process. In order to do this, teachers must be more on target with their use of technology. To begin with, more teachers need to create and use on-line web-based lessons with their students. Letting the student navigate through pre-designed web-sites is a way for them to be in control of their learning content. As it is now, most teachers use online materials for themselves and adapt it to use in their classroom. The teacher is the navigator and sole user of technology, which is not the true intent of effective utilization of technology in the classroom.
In regards to the implementation of Technology Application TEKS, I feel that many teachers are not fully aware of what is entailed in them. As my campus’ STaR Chart manager, I had many teachers call me asking what they should mark for that section of the chart. I didn’t reveal any information to them; I just told them to mark their response based on what they personally know and do. Needless to say, my campus ended up with a “2” rating. They claim to be aware of the Technology Applications TEKS, yet they do not consistently use the TEKS in their content area and grade level.
One of many limitations to being a new campus is the lack of technology equipment available for all teachers to use. With this in mind, I can understand how our campus rated as Developing Tech in the category of “Frequency/Design of Instructional Setting Using Digital Content”. There are just too many limitations on the use of technology when the technology is not present. Our teachers do not have regular access to equipment; therefore, they are not able to incorporate it into their daily lessons and activities.
As far as improving this area, I feel that my campus is well on its way. Our campus received approximately $60,000 in the Date Grant (stimulus money). I would estimate that 90% of that is going straight to purchasing technology – both equipment and software – to be used in every classroom on our campus. Because of this, I feel that we will be on target for next year’s STaR Chart in this area.
The intent of the Long Range Plan for Technology in this area is that teachers will use technology to engage students in their own learning process. In order to do this, teachers must be more on target with their use of technology. To begin with, more teachers need to create and use on-line web-based lessons with their students. Letting the student navigate through pre-designed web-sites is a way for them to be in control of their learning content. As it is now, most teachers use online materials for themselves and adapt it to use in their classroom. The teacher is the navigator and sole user of technology, which is not the true intent of effective utilization of technology in the classroom.
In regards to the implementation of Technology Application TEKS, I feel that many teachers are not fully aware of what is entailed in them. As my campus’ STaR Chart manager, I had many teachers call me asking what they should mark for that section of the chart. I didn’t reveal any information to them; I just told them to mark their response based on what they personally know and do. Needless to say, my campus ended up with a “2” rating. They claim to be aware of the Technology Applications TEKS, yet they do not consistently use the TEKS in their content area and grade level.
One of many limitations to being a new campus is the lack of technology equipment available for all teachers to use. With this in mind, I can understand how our campus rated as Developing Tech in the category of “Frequency/Design of Instructional Setting Using Digital Content”. There are just too many limitations on the use of technology when the technology is not present. Our teachers do not have regular access to equipment; therefore, they are not able to incorporate it into their daily lessons and activities.
As far as improving this area, I feel that my campus is well on its way. Our campus received approximately $60,000 in the Date Grant (stimulus money). I would estimate that 90% of that is going straight to purchasing technology – both equipment and software – to be used in every classroom on our campus. Because of this, I feel that we will be on target for next year’s STaR Chart in this area.
Monday, November 23, 2009
PreKindergarten Technology Applications
According to the Texas Prekindergarten Technology Application Guidelines, students are expected to do the following by the end of the school year:
* Open and navigate through software programs
* Use a varitey of input devices
* Operate sound/voice recorders
* Operate touch screens
* Use software to create and express own ideas
* Recognize that information is accessible through technology.
I agree that these skills will set a foundation of learning for future technology use; however, I do not think these skills can realistically be taught. For one, this age group has not mastered their hand/eye coordination skills. They are still trying to figure out how to hold a crayola correctly. To see them struggle with the motion of a mouse on a computer screen and then try to add a single or even double click to the mix, this can only bring frustration on both the student and teacher's part. I know! I teach kindergarten students basic computer skills. We spend the first half of the school year just learning HOW to use a mouse - - learning the correlation of their movements to the movement of the pointer on their screen. Single clicks are mastered rather easily, but when the double click is introduced, you would not believe the number of desktop shortcuts that either get deleted or moved into another application folder on the desktop. Frustrating as it can be for the teacher, it does create some humorous situation when it come time to clean up desktops and try to find these lost files.
I do agree with the examples of instructional strategies given in that they involve a lot of teacher modeling. Just seeing someong use technology sparks an interest - especially with this age level. My kindergarten students are the most eager to learn "computers" when they come to my class. The soak up everything and want to do everything I do on my computers. I do realize that many of the skills these prekindergarten students can be exposed to are not always "computer related". Simple Leap Frog learning programs and equpment will give this age group appropriate technology exposure, and they do meet the objectives stated in the Prekindergarted Technology Application standards.
* Open and navigate through software programs
* Use a varitey of input devices
* Operate sound/voice recorders
* Operate touch screens
* Use software to create and express own ideas
* Recognize that information is accessible through technology.
I agree that these skills will set a foundation of learning for future technology use; however, I do not think these skills can realistically be taught. For one, this age group has not mastered their hand/eye coordination skills. They are still trying to figure out how to hold a crayola correctly. To see them struggle with the motion of a mouse on a computer screen and then try to add a single or even double click to the mix, this can only bring frustration on both the student and teacher's part. I know! I teach kindergarten students basic computer skills. We spend the first half of the school year just learning HOW to use a mouse - - learning the correlation of their movements to the movement of the pointer on their screen. Single clicks are mastered rather easily, but when the double click is introduced, you would not believe the number of desktop shortcuts that either get deleted or moved into another application folder on the desktop. Frustrating as it can be for the teacher, it does create some humorous situation when it come time to clean up desktops and try to find these lost files.
I do agree with the examples of instructional strategies given in that they involve a lot of teacher modeling. Just seeing someong use technology sparks an interest - especially with this age level. My kindergarten students are the most eager to learn "computers" when they come to my class. The soak up everything and want to do everything I do on my computers. I do realize that many of the skills these prekindergarten students can be exposed to are not always "computer related". Simple Leap Frog learning programs and equpment will give this age group appropriate technology exposure, and they do meet the objectives stated in the Prekindergarted Technology Application standards.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Unattainable Technology?
My response to the Long-Range Plan for Technology, 2006-2020
Call me the proverbial cynic, but I honestly do not see how the state of Texas can possible meet the standards set forth in their long range plan. It would be totally awesome if they could, and I applaud their effort, but as stated throughout the document, technology is changing so rapidly that it there is absolutely no way for Texas educators to stay abreast of all of the changes. Sure, the timeline is by the year 2020, but by the time a school district finally acquires new technology, it will become outdated and even obsolete. Financially, school districts and the state of Texas cannot keep up with the fast progress of change.
It is overwhelming to think about what the children of our future are going to have to be able to d0 - things that we as adults never even dreamed possible. I think of one of those futuristic movies that shows how technology has finally out-done itself, where there is nothing new to develop or create. Technology has become a saturated field, and society is worn out because there are no new developments. I then think about how, when technology fails, society is going to have to revert back to the “old ways” of conducting business. Those are the skills that need to be taught. Technology is just the icing on the cake to make the tasks easier; forgetting the basic of “how to” cannot be ignored.
Now, do not think that I am anti-technology. Quite the contrary. As my campus’s only technology instructor, I constantly strive to get other teachers to use technology in their classroom. I see that students thrive when they have it in their hands; I see them engaged in instruction; I see them learning independently by using technology. As an instructional leader, I am limited by what funding is available. At my current school, a school that is only 3 years old, we have had to start from scratch to build an inventory of a variety of technology equipment. With a budget of $4000 a year and 40 teachers, it will take us many, many years to be able to outfit their classrooms with equipment needed to meet this long range plan. Even with the stimulus fund given to schools during this school year, we are still not even close to being on the same technology-playing field as other elementary schools in our district. While other elementary campuses currently have InFocus projectors, 3-4 student computers, document cameras, Smart boards, etc., in each and every teacher’s classroom, my campus is just now able to purchase enough projectors for each classroom. Next year, we will be able to purchase three or four new document cameras; the following year, maybe three or four more. As you can see, it will take many years for us to have the technology available for teachers to use in their instruction. By the time we get the basics, there will be new and different items to purchase; thus starting the cycle all over again. Unless the state of Texas helps with funding, there is no way for technology to be equally available to all students in Texas schools.
Call me the proverbial cynic, but I honestly do not see how the state of Texas can possible meet the standards set forth in their long range plan. It would be totally awesome if they could, and I applaud their effort, but as stated throughout the document, technology is changing so rapidly that it there is absolutely no way for Texas educators to stay abreast of all of the changes. Sure, the timeline is by the year 2020, but by the time a school district finally acquires new technology, it will become outdated and even obsolete. Financially, school districts and the state of Texas cannot keep up with the fast progress of change.
It is overwhelming to think about what the children of our future are going to have to be able to d0 - things that we as adults never even dreamed possible. I think of one of those futuristic movies that shows how technology has finally out-done itself, where there is nothing new to develop or create. Technology has become a saturated field, and society is worn out because there are no new developments. I then think about how, when technology fails, society is going to have to revert back to the “old ways” of conducting business. Those are the skills that need to be taught. Technology is just the icing on the cake to make the tasks easier; forgetting the basic of “how to” cannot be ignored.
Now, do not think that I am anti-technology. Quite the contrary. As my campus’s only technology instructor, I constantly strive to get other teachers to use technology in their classroom. I see that students thrive when they have it in their hands; I see them engaged in instruction; I see them learning independently by using technology. As an instructional leader, I am limited by what funding is available. At my current school, a school that is only 3 years old, we have had to start from scratch to build an inventory of a variety of technology equipment. With a budget of $4000 a year and 40 teachers, it will take us many, many years to be able to outfit their classrooms with equipment needed to meet this long range plan. Even with the stimulus fund given to schools during this school year, we are still not even close to being on the same technology-playing field as other elementary schools in our district. While other elementary campuses currently have InFocus projectors, 3-4 student computers, document cameras, Smart boards, etc., in each and every teacher’s classroom, my campus is just now able to purchase enough projectors for each classroom. Next year, we will be able to purchase three or four new document cameras; the following year, maybe three or four more. As you can see, it will take many years for us to have the technology available for teachers to use in their instruction. By the time we get the basics, there will be new and different items to purchase; thus starting the cycle all over again. Unless the state of Texas helps with funding, there is no way for technology to be equally available to all students in Texas schools.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
