Course Reflections
Before I began the course, I was not sure if the program would be a good fit for me because I am not a public school teacher. Because I was allowed into the program, I assumed that the assignments would not necessarily be centered around public school activities. I had hoped to learn about new software and equipment and the Web 2.0 tools that I had been hearing about. As I began to review the syllabus and course materials, I was a bit overwhelmed. Most of the terms and school acronyms were unfamiliar to me. I thought right away that I would have to enlist the help of my wife, a public school teacher, and her school friends just to understand the terminology. I hoped that after completing this first course that I would have a better understanding of how technology is used in public schools and how I could use this new knowledge to benefit my adult students in the fire academy. After completing the course, I feel more comfortable with the terminology, and can converse with colleagues about subjects such as TEKS, Texas Long-Range Plan for Technology, ISTE, and NETS – all of which were completely foreign to me before taking the course. To some extent, the course did fulfill some of my expectations. I was thrilled to add some technology tools to my toolbox, i.e., creating blogs, wikis and word clouds.
I was already familiar with online environments from my experience as an instructor with the fire academy. We use a blended learning environment with Moodle online weekly assignments and bi-monthly hands-on skills classes. The Epic courseware that Lamar uses has given me some ideas about course design that I can use to make our Moodle courses more user friendly and effective. After the first two weeks, I realized that each week’s materials and assignments followed a standard format and that, for the most part, I could anticipate the types of assignments and the amount of time that I would need to spend to complete them. The coursework itself, in spite of being geared toward public schools, is helping me to prepare more engaging activities for my own students. For example, I plan to introduce wikis to help make the fire academy assignments more interactive between the students. In my experience with just this one class, I can already see how interacting with my classmates will help me to learn more than just from the course material itself.
Although the outcomes that I had expected prior to beginning the course were not fully realized, I do feel that the outcomes were aligned with the course goals as described in Ms. Borel’s introductory message. I do understand how the TEKS provide a framework for integrating technology into curriculum, and how the components of the Texas Long-Range Plan for Technology help to create a shared vision for improving student achievement. From the lectures and readings, I have a better grasp of the challenges that educators face as we work to create learning experiences for students that prepare them for living and working in the 21st century. Having almost completed this course, I understand that the outcomes I had expected to achieve will be realized throughout the course of the entire program. There is simply a lot of material that I have not been exposed to that I am sure we will cover along the way.
For the most part, I was successful with completing all of the assignments. Initially, I found it difficult to navigate the courseware in order to find the most up-to-date instructions for the assignments. I learned very quickly that it is important to read the announcements because there could be changes to assignments and/or due dates. For example, I missed participating in a web conference because the date was changed, and I did not read the announcement until the day that the web conference was originally scheduled. Also, I found that the “To Do List” published in the courseware did not reflect all of the required assignments. An example is that web conferences are not listed in the “To Do List”. It would be more helpful if all required work was listed in one place, but I now know how important it is to check announcements, read any overviews provided, and participate in all web conferences, if possible. Participation in web conferences was, and will continue to be, difficult because of my obligations with the fire department. As an executive staff member of the city, I am required to be present at all city council meetings. As an emergency responder, it is often difficult to adhere to structured schedules. I will make every attempt to read any conference reflections from other students’ blog posts if I am unable to participate in a conference.
I learned that while adept at many technology tasks, I am really a digital immigrant. The technology skills that my students have naturally are skills that I have had to learn and develop. The idea of using a telephone to look up information and collaborate with others, as well as to communicate verbally, was completely foreign to me in my youth. For today’s students who have grown up with cell phones and computers, this is a natural progression that requires little more than learning a few new button clicks. I realize that in order to be an effective educator, I must embrace the students’ electronic “buddies” and use them as educational tools, rather than ban them from the classroom. I also realize that I can be a technology leader and not have all of the answers. I can learn from my students, and I need to constantly stay current on the latest technologies and their classroom applications. I will do this by subscribing to technology journals, attending workshops and conferences such as service center training and TCEA, and observing other teachers and instructional technologists as opportunities arise.
Saturday, September 24, 2011
Sunday, September 4, 2011
National Educational Technology Plan
The National Educational Technology Plan (NETP) executive summary describes the plan as being driven by two clear goals. They are to raise the proportion of college graduates from the current 41% to 60% by the year 2020, and to close the achievement gap so that all students graduate from high school ready to succeed in college and careers.
The plan urges our education system to be clear about the outcomes we seek; collaborate to redesign structures and processes for effectiveness, efficiency, and flexibility; to continually monitor and measure our performance, and to hold ourselves accountable for progress and results every step of the way.
The NETP presents goals and recommendations in five essential areas: learning, assessment, teaching, infrastructure, and productivity. The plan stresses the importance of the development of standards and assessments that measure 21st-century competencies and expertise in all content areas, and the use of data to drive continuous improvement. The plan further urges states and local public education institutions to act now to ensure equitable access to learning experiences for all students, especially low-income, minority students, students with disabilities, and English Language Learners.
I found that Temple’s District Technology plan provides strategies that address the same goals and recommendations outlined in the NETP.
My concern is that, except for the areas requiring verification for E-Rate funding, technology competencies for teachers are not evaluated routinely, and student mastery of the technology TEKS are not routinely tested at all grade levels. In order for this to happen, there would have to be a mandate, which likely could not be funded in the near future.
The plan urges our education system to be clear about the outcomes we seek; collaborate to redesign structures and processes for effectiveness, efficiency, and flexibility; to continually monitor and measure our performance, and to hold ourselves accountable for progress and results every step of the way.
The NETP presents goals and recommendations in five essential areas: learning, assessment, teaching, infrastructure, and productivity. The plan stresses the importance of the development of standards and assessments that measure 21st-century competencies and expertise in all content areas, and the use of data to drive continuous improvement. The plan further urges states and local public education institutions to act now to ensure equitable access to learning experiences for all students, especially low-income, minority students, students with disabilities, and English Language Learners.
I found that Temple’s District Technology plan provides strategies that address the same goals and recommendations outlined in the NETP.
My concern is that, except for the areas requiring verification for E-Rate funding, technology competencies for teachers are not evaluated routinely, and student mastery of the technology TEKS are not routinely tested at all grade levels. In order for this to happen, there would have to be a mandate, which likely could not be funded in the near future.
Web Conference Reflection
I learned a lot from the most recent web conference and enjoyed meeting and interacting with my fellow students. In this week’s conference I actually got my web cam and sound to work. It is interesting to use this technology to communicate and share ideas. I am still adjusting to the time delay in the audio and video during the conference. The ability to type questions helps a lot when there are so many people on the conference at the same time. It was comforting to learn that I was not the only non-public school teacher in the program.
Ms. Borel again made note of the importance of reading the weekly overviews as they contain the most up to date information on the week’s assignments. She explained in some detail the expectations of the internship program. I know that there are 150 hours of the internship program that are course-based and embedded in the program. I will need an additional 150 hours of field based activities to complete my internship. I specifically asked about my internship since I am not a public school teacher. Ms. Borel assured me we would find an appropriate mentor for my internship. I have since found a district instructional technologist at Temple Independent School District that has agreed to be my mentor. I will complete the mentor letter and agreement next week.
We went over the requirements to have a GMAIL account to set up our blogs. I did email my GMAIL address to Ms. Borel and Sarah. It was also emphasized that I need to purchase my Tk20 account.
I am looking forward to learning more about blogging and other technology tools to enhance my ability to reach my students.
I look forward to the next web conference. I think it is important to have the personal interaction with the instructor and my fellow students.
Temple ISD District Technology Plan Summary
Temple ISD has a total of 16 campuses with a total student enrollment of 9,041 students. The district is identified as 86% economically disadvantaged. The district’s technology expenditures for the plan covering 2011 through 2014 is $7,615,975.93 divided as follows:
Teaching and Learning - $2,971.868.04
Educator Preparation and Development - $1,168,500.00
Leadership, Administration, and Support - $1,005,603.12
Infrastructure for Technology - $2,470,004.77
The technology expenditure per pupil is $842.38. One hundred percent of campuses and classrooms have direct connections to the internet. All campuses are required to complete the STaR Chart.
The Technology Planning Committee is composed of members of the Curriculum and Instruction Team, Campus Technology Liaisons, District Instructional Technology Specialists, Parent Advisory Committee, and Community Advisory Committee.
The district’s mission statement is “to prepare students to be life-long learners who are productive in 21st century college and work life. The district’s goals include providing kid-friendly, clean, and safe schools and facilities; providing opportunities for all students to succeed and belong; providing collaboration and communication; acting as a unified team of shareholders to ensure student engagement and learning; and ensuring cost-effectiveness in providing high quality programs.
The district conducted a needs assessment which used a variety of instruments to determine its needs, including Campus STaR Charts, SBEC Teacher Technology Competency Self-Assessments, analysis of instrastructure, hardware, and software. In summary, student needs were identified as the need for consistent and equitable access to technology resources, including instruction in technology-integrated curriculum, network connectivity, software, and hardware. Teacher needs included professional development and support in technology skill development, technology resources including network connectivity, software, and hardware, and accountability for integrating technology into their curriculum. Administrator needs were professional development and support for the effective use of technology and support of the teachers and students, resources to make technology an integral part of administrative and instructional systems, and accountability for providing teachers time to learn how to integrate technology into their classrooms.
The technology plan goals support the district’s mission statement and goals, and address the needs assessments in the areas of: professional development for teachers, administrators, and staff that supports student learning, data-based decision making, and communication; providing and supporting the technology necessary to facilitate the learning process; providing and supporting high quality equipment and infrastructure that is educationally sound and cost effective; and use of a comprehensive planning and monitoring process to ensure that the technology used in the district is adequate, cost effective, and in compliance with federal and state regulations.
Objectives supporting Goal 1, relating to technology professional development, included annual new teacher technology training; annual update training in software and hardware for all teachers, funding and support for attending state and national technology conferences such as TCEA, NECC, and TXDLA; advanced training for instructional technology specialists and liaisons; advanced training for administrators through Boot Camp; district-wide technology course offerings; required professional development for state-mandated initiatives such as internet safety and cyberbullying; and use of the district’s self-assessment tool.
Objectives supporting Goal 2, relating to support of the curriculum prescribed by the Technology Applications TEKS, included use of state resources such as Learning.com along with locally developed curriculum; providing the necessary resources for integration; use of Eduphoria’s Aware to manage assessments; developing and maintaining scope and sequence, curriculum resources, and lesson plans using Eduphoria’s Forethought; use of Eduphoria’s PDAS evaluation instrument to monitor teacher performance; use of Skyward’s online services for student attendance and grading; maintaining software licensing for instruction, productivity, and data management; providing and supporting online courses; providing software and services for credit recovery; providing software and services for English Language Learners and their families; provide online database and instructional programs with 24/7 access; maintaining a parent portal; utilizing video conferencing units; expanding library digital services; and providing a content management system for district, campus, and teacher websites.
Objectives supporting Goal 3, relating to infrastructure and equipment, include replacement of computers and printers at campuses on a four-year rotation; pursuit of grant opportunities; providing safe and secure broadband access; full implantation of wireless overlay across the district; upgrading the phone system; maintaining network and server software; implementation of file/e-mail archiving to meet records retention requirements; and providing content filtering processes that comply with the Child Internet Protection Act.
Objectives support Goal 4, relating to the planning and monitoring to ensure effective use of technology in the district, include use of campus liaisons to ensure technology integration; support of district goals with appropriate technology solutions; involvement of all stakeholders in the planning and monitoring process; requirement for all teachers, librarians, and principals to complete STaR charts; following e-rate compliance procedures for all e-rate funded services and equipment; and maintaining and updating the district technology plan.
For budget year 2011, $3,323,328 was allotted for technology, with $1,345,673coming from e-rate funds. E-rate funds covered expenses in the areas of telecommunications, internet access, and equipment. The district’s general funds covered materials and supplies, maintenance, and staff development.
The district provides professional development “exchange days” for teachers to attend technology professional development on their own time after school or during the summer break. These hours are exchanged for time off during the Thanksgiving holidays. The technology budget provides for three full-time instructional technology specialists, and campus liaisons who are teachers. The liaisons conduct one after-school workshop per month and serve as technology resources for teachers on their campuses. The instructional technology specialists conduct workshops and model best practices in classrooms with the students and teachers.
Saturday, September 3, 2011
Technology Assessments
Rapid advances in technology are putting new demands on educators and students (ISTE, 2011). The International Society for Technology in Education has developed technology proficiency standards for students and teachers. The standards, called NETS provide a framework for educators to use as they transition schools from Industrial Age to Digital Age places of learning (ISTE, 2011).
The NETS standards identify critical digital citizenship and higher-order thinking skills including the ability to demonstrate creativity and innovation, communicate and collaborate, conduct research and use information, solve problems and make decisions, and use technology effectively and productively. In Texas, the state also identifies technology standards for students through the TEKS. These standards include six strands covering the same concepts as the NETS standards.
The NETS standards also specify standards and performance indicators for teachers. They include the ability to facilitate and inspire student learning and creativity, design and develop digital age learning experiences and assessments, model digital age work, promote and model digital citizenship and responsibility, and engage in professional growth and leadership.
It is impossible to evaluate how well these standards are being met without some form of assessment for both teachers and students.
In order for teachers to educate and assist students in the effective uses of technology, teachers must be proficient themselves. Assessing teachers’ technology skills has the benefit of identifying areas where professional development may be necessary. It can also identify top performers who are capable of delivering professional development and modeling for other teachers. On the down side, there are many excellent teachers who are digital immigrants. They may already feel that they are struggling to catch up with technology, and they could be resistant to the idea of mandatory technology assessments which, theoretically, could threaten their jobs. It is also unfair to deliver high stakes testing to teachers in cases where the district and/or campus may have provided insufficient staff training, equipment, and planning.
For students, it would be very beneficial to have a standardized test that measures how well students are learning the prescribed TEKS and also how well the results compare with students in other campuses and/or districts. The results of such tests would pinpoint students’ technology challenges, identify best teaching strategies (Learning.com, 2011) and would help with planning courses and schedules. Currently, 8th graders in Texas are required to take a technology literacy assessment, however, districts are able to decide what instrument to use for the assessment and the results are not tied to any accountability measures.
As is the case with teachers, it is also not fair to deliver high stakes testing to students in cases where the district has not provided sufficient training and/or has not made equipment available to students in appropriate numbers.
ISTE. (2011). Standards. In International Society for Technology in Education. Retrieved September 2, 2011, from http://www.iste.org/standards/nets-for-teachers.aspx.
Learning.com. 2011. In Tech Literacy Assessment. Retrieved September 3, 2011, from http://www.learning.com/techliteracy-assessment/.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)