Creating an action plan for integrating technology was exciting to me. Technology is grossly underused in education due to lack of resources including the time to explore and understand what is available and how it applies to education. Prioritizing technology by including it in national, state, district and campus levels is an essential move toward technology integration. The success of our students in the global society hinges on their ability to adapt to the available technology.
My action plan focuses on a year-long, multi-level plan to incorporate current and emerging technology into the school framework. I believe that success of the program requires support from all involved including the Board of Trustees and the students.
I would appreciate your comments about the plan. Just copy and paste this link to your browser. If you don't have a Google account, you may have to sign up. It is worth it.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1a-iRWlmVNqKGudfNXLXoGYkDubsKm_WFUBfZWT8DI84/edit?hl=en##
Sunday, March 20, 2011
Sunday, March 6, 2011
Reaching for the STaR Chart
E-Rate is administered by the USAC under the direction of the FCC. The program is designed to provide all schools with equal opportunity to have Internet access and telecommunications on their campus. Each year, the district applies for funding which is based on poverty rate and urban or rural status. The funding ranges from 20% - 90%.
The district is responsible for providing end-user equipment such as computers and phones. The must provide software and professional staff development along with any additional elements to utilize connectivity.
CCISD has adopted its Clear Vision to address the needs as stated in NCLB. The goals include a comprehensive program that focuses on dependable 24/7 networking allowing students, teachers, and parents to access information, anytime/anywhere.
According the 2009-2010 STaR Chart data, Brookside Intermediate School has received a rating of Advanced or Target Tech in the four areas addressed in the survey. The data indicated three areas of improvement for Brookside. These areas include: patterns of classroom use, TA TEKS implementation, and online learning. In addition, the data showed a rating of 2 on EP6 related to the capabilities of educators with online learning. These will be our areas of focus for staff development in 20010-2011.
Bulldogs have what it takes to reach the STaRs!
The district is responsible for providing end-user equipment such as computers and phones. The must provide software and professional staff development along with any additional elements to utilize connectivity.
CCISD has adopted its Clear Vision to address the needs as stated in NCLB. The goals include a comprehensive program that focuses on dependable 24/7 networking allowing students, teachers, and parents to access information, anytime/anywhere.
According the 2009-2010 STaR Chart data, Brookside Intermediate School has received a rating of Advanced or Target Tech in the four areas addressed in the survey. The data indicated three areas of improvement for Brookside. These areas include: patterns of classroom use, TA TEKS implementation, and online learning. In addition, the data showed a rating of 2 on EP6 related to the capabilities of educators with online learning. These will be our areas of focus for staff development in 20010-2011.
Bulldogs have what it takes to reach the STaRs!
Reaching for the STaR Chart
View more presentations from jveile.
Saturday, March 5, 2011
NETP Review
The face of learning is changing with the digital age. Students are exposed to a wider variety of information sources and expected to learn using those sources. Education in the United States has the responsibility to provide learning opportunities that meet the needs of the individual students. Sit and get is no longer acceptable and teachers need training to make the necessary paradigm shift.
The National Education Technology Plan 2010 (NETP, 2010) addresses five areas of focus: learning, assessment, teaching, infrastructure, and productivity. Each area plays a supporting role in the success of education.
According to the NETP, learners in today’s world look for engagement and empowerment in their learning. They are driven by interactivity and the ability to make their own choices about their learning. Collaboration allows them to interact with peers; technology allows the peers to be from across the globe. The NETP addresses the need for teachers to be trained to facilitate this type of learning. Teacher education programs and well-planned staff development provide teachers a basis for developing and implementing lessons that guide the students into the global society and expand the classroom outside of the four walls. Universal Design for Learning as stated in NETP encompasses the idea of “…providing fair opportunities for learning.” (NETP, 2010, p. 18) The fairness is addressed by the nation’s commitment to supporting the infrastructure. If the technology is available, the students will use it.
As a result, the look of student productivity takes on a new light changing from same presentation, same assignment, and same pace for each student to an individualized, collaborative, diverse view of education. The National Plan provides a strong case for restructuring with the funding caveat. It is well stated, research-based and thorough.
Office of Educational Technology, . (2010, March 05). Transforming american education: learning powered by technology. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/NETP-2010-final-report.pdf
The National Education Technology Plan 2010 (NETP, 2010) addresses five areas of focus: learning, assessment, teaching, infrastructure, and productivity. Each area plays a supporting role in the success of education.
According to the NETP, learners in today’s world look for engagement and empowerment in their learning. They are driven by interactivity and the ability to make their own choices about their learning. Collaboration allows them to interact with peers; technology allows the peers to be from across the globe. The NETP addresses the need for teachers to be trained to facilitate this type of learning. Teacher education programs and well-planned staff development provide teachers a basis for developing and implementing lessons that guide the students into the global society and expand the classroom outside of the four walls. Universal Design for Learning as stated in NETP encompasses the idea of “…providing fair opportunities for learning.” (NETP, 2010, p. 18) The fairness is addressed by the nation’s commitment to supporting the infrastructure. If the technology is available, the students will use it.
As a result, the look of student productivity takes on a new light changing from same presentation, same assignment, and same pace for each student to an individualized, collaborative, diverse view of education. The National Plan provides a strong case for restructuring with the funding caveat. It is well stated, research-based and thorough.
Office of Educational Technology, . (2010, March 05). Transforming american education: learning powered by technology. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/NETP-2010-final-report.pdf
Texas Long Range Technology Plan
What is the importance of a Long Range Technology Plan LRTP) for the state of Texas? To address this question, the committee has developed a vision for technology education in the Texas Classroom. The vision goes beyond the student and includes all constituents in plan to prepare students for success in the global society. This involves extending learning and communication outside of the school building. In order to accomplish this task, the state of Texas has created a living document to address and readdress the challenges of meeting the vision.
Before reading the plan, I understood that the plan existed and was the basis for resources allocation to the area of technology staff development, hardware and infrastructure. I did not understand the amount of detail presented and was pleasantly surprised by what I read.
For several years, the word has been that staff members would have to prove proficiency in a variety of technology areas. In providing technology training, I understood the breadth of the skill requirements and saw how they directly related to the student TA TEKS. That began 7 years ago and in our district today, curriculum documents are beginning to reflect the inclusion of TA TEKS through integration and not in isolation. Through quality staff development, teachers are less fearful of attempting to incorporate technology. The LRPT focuses on teachers understanding the TA TEKS and new teacher training programs are addressing the skills necessary to implement them. Additionally, staff development is infused with technology use and resources are allocated to supporting reliable infrastructure and equipment.
The plan speaks to the learner being engaged in individualized, real-world learning experiences. I believe that we may get there by 2020, but are definitely not there today. The educators are continually being supported through staff development, collaboration, and freedom to experiment with new technologies. Leaders are beginning to see the need to create and secure adequate support for the teachers. Because of the trust that is being built, teachers are more willing to teach outside of the box and try new ways to improve student engagement. Lastly, infrastructure has been supported through national and state funding to ensure that the technology is available when needed by all involved.
All of this ground work leads to the mission of providing students experiences necessary to become 21st Century Learners now. The LRTP provides data from the NetDay Speak Up survey of 2005. This survey reinforced that students view technology as a way to improve their own learning, reduce mistakes and make work easier. The LRTP addresses four specific areas of focus and provides objectives for six groups of constituents. The focus areas included:
• Teaching and Learning
• Educator Preparation and Development
• Leadership, Administration and Instructional Support
• Infrastructure for Technology
Each area had its own vision and each area had objectives. The plan makes recommendations to the more obvious state, regional, and local education agencies. I was impressed with the inclusion of the recommendations for Texas Higher Education as upcoming teachers must be prepared to teach the 21st Century Learner and can act as models for their experienced teacher peers. It was the last group mentioned that surprised me the most. The recommendations for the parents, communities, and private sector really gave validity to the efforts of education and the need for support from all individuals and groups involved in the lives of the students.
My hope for the future is to be the modeling administrator who maintains an updated knowledge base of current and emerging tools that will support 21st Century Learning. I look for the continued support of national, state and local resources that will allow me to model and lead in the area of technology.
Neeley, S., Scott, R., Barnes, S., Jackson, S., & Givens, A. Texas State Board of Education, Texas Education Agency. (2006). Texas long range technology plan 2006-2020. Austin, TX: Texas Education Association.
Before reading the plan, I understood that the plan existed and was the basis for resources allocation to the area of technology staff development, hardware and infrastructure. I did not understand the amount of detail presented and was pleasantly surprised by what I read.
For several years, the word has been that staff members would have to prove proficiency in a variety of technology areas. In providing technology training, I understood the breadth of the skill requirements and saw how they directly related to the student TA TEKS. That began 7 years ago and in our district today, curriculum documents are beginning to reflect the inclusion of TA TEKS through integration and not in isolation. Through quality staff development, teachers are less fearful of attempting to incorporate technology. The LRPT focuses on teachers understanding the TA TEKS and new teacher training programs are addressing the skills necessary to implement them. Additionally, staff development is infused with technology use and resources are allocated to supporting reliable infrastructure and equipment.
The plan speaks to the learner being engaged in individualized, real-world learning experiences. I believe that we may get there by 2020, but are definitely not there today. The educators are continually being supported through staff development, collaboration, and freedom to experiment with new technologies. Leaders are beginning to see the need to create and secure adequate support for the teachers. Because of the trust that is being built, teachers are more willing to teach outside of the box and try new ways to improve student engagement. Lastly, infrastructure has been supported through national and state funding to ensure that the technology is available when needed by all involved.
All of this ground work leads to the mission of providing students experiences necessary to become 21st Century Learners now. The LRTP provides data from the NetDay Speak Up survey of 2005. This survey reinforced that students view technology as a way to improve their own learning, reduce mistakes and make work easier. The LRTP addresses four specific areas of focus and provides objectives for six groups of constituents. The focus areas included:
• Teaching and Learning
• Educator Preparation and Development
• Leadership, Administration and Instructional Support
• Infrastructure for Technology
Each area had its own vision and each area had objectives. The plan makes recommendations to the more obvious state, regional, and local education agencies. I was impressed with the inclusion of the recommendations for Texas Higher Education as upcoming teachers must be prepared to teach the 21st Century Learner and can act as models for their experienced teacher peers. It was the last group mentioned that surprised me the most. The recommendations for the parents, communities, and private sector really gave validity to the efforts of education and the need for support from all individuals and groups involved in the lives of the students.
My hope for the future is to be the modeling administrator who maintains an updated knowledge base of current and emerging tools that will support 21st Century Learning. I look for the continued support of national, state and local resources that will allow me to model and lead in the area of technology.
Neeley, S., Scott, R., Barnes, S., Jackson, S., & Givens, A. Texas State Board of Education, Texas Education Agency. (2006). Texas long range technology plan 2006-2020. Austin, TX: Texas Education Association.
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
What the Teacher Leaders Need
Mark Prensky(2011) discusses that technology adoption comes in stages beginning with dabbling. This stage is where many teachers and administrators reside. It is slightly out of the comfort zone, but not too threatening. So how does an administrator move past the barriers to begin using technology the new way? Change is a process that is resisted by most and requires risk and possible failure. Teachers resist the change because “…shifting certainly initially means more work and pressure on educators, who already feel overburdened.” (Prensky, 2011, p. 2)
The question becomes how do we as at a national or state level promote the use of technology and keep our students competitive in the global society? One way to begin is by requiring the leaders, administrators and teachers, to prove their skills. The state can impose an expectation or test, but the district needs to provide the necessary training necessary to facilitate change. My own personal experience with imposing technology requirements proved enlightening. All staff members in the district were required to create a portfolio of original technology documents that included skills listed in the TA TEKS. As the Technology Integration Specialist, I took the staff kicking and screaming through the process of learning a multitude of skills. It was painful and the result was phenomenal. Teachers began using technology tools they had shunned prior to the requirement. The beneficiaries were the students who are now using technology to “…investigate, analyze, communicate, and connect.” (Boss and Krauss, 2007, p. 22) On the downside, there were teachers who left the profession because of the required assessment.
One issue that has surfaced many times is that students will be unsafe given the ability to use global tools such as texting and Internet. From the administrative standpoint, students will use the tools as witnessed through Facebook related conflict that begins outside of school and surfaces during the school day. A positive outcome of assessing administrators is the heightened awareness of the importance of Internet safety curriculum. Students will benefit from being good global citizens and those students who break the rules are subject to the consequences.
Technology assessment is time consuming and expensive; therefore the training must include a practical application of the skills. Administrators must be aware of technology available for use and must offer support for teachers who try and succeed or fail using technology. When the teachers feel supported, they will move outside of the lecture box and allow students the opportunity to use technology. State testing, covering the required content, and discipline problems will begin to take care of themselves as students engage in learning.
Boss, S., & Krauss, J. (2007). Real projects in a digital world. Principal Leadership, 8(4), 22-26.
Prensky, M. (2008). Adopt and adapt: Shaping tech for the classroom. Edutopia:The George Lucas Educational Foundation.
The question becomes how do we as at a national or state level promote the use of technology and keep our students competitive in the global society? One way to begin is by requiring the leaders, administrators and teachers, to prove their skills. The state can impose an expectation or test, but the district needs to provide the necessary training necessary to facilitate change. My own personal experience with imposing technology requirements proved enlightening. All staff members in the district were required to create a portfolio of original technology documents that included skills listed in the TA TEKS. As the Technology Integration Specialist, I took the staff kicking and screaming through the process of learning a multitude of skills. It was painful and the result was phenomenal. Teachers began using technology tools they had shunned prior to the requirement. The beneficiaries were the students who are now using technology to “…investigate, analyze, communicate, and connect.” (Boss and Krauss, 2007, p. 22) On the downside, there were teachers who left the profession because of the required assessment.
One issue that has surfaced many times is that students will be unsafe given the ability to use global tools such as texting and Internet. From the administrative standpoint, students will use the tools as witnessed through Facebook related conflict that begins outside of school and surfaces during the school day. A positive outcome of assessing administrators is the heightened awareness of the importance of Internet safety curriculum. Students will benefit from being good global citizens and those students who break the rules are subject to the consequences.
Technology assessment is time consuming and expensive; therefore the training must include a practical application of the skills. Administrators must be aware of technology available for use and must offer support for teachers who try and succeed or fail using technology. When the teachers feel supported, they will move outside of the lecture box and allow students the opportunity to use technology. State testing, covering the required content, and discipline problems will begin to take care of themselves as students engage in learning.
Boss, S., & Krauss, J. (2007). Real projects in a digital world. Principal Leadership, 8(4), 22-26.
Prensky, M. (2008). Adopt and adapt: Shaping tech for the classroom. Edutopia:The George Lucas Educational Foundation.
Sunday, February 27, 2011
Web Conference for 5352
My mind is whirling around how to convince my principal to start using video conferencing. We will need to explore the options available and then begin training our teachers on how to use the program. My hope is to spark an interest in our teachers to consider a weekly tutorial via web conference to assist students with understanding concepts.
Participation in the week 1 blog was very beneficial. I would have appreciated a designated time to ask question about the course work and a separate time for questions about manipulating the course. I lost focus and am afraid I may have missed helpful information that was shared verbally. I want to thank Dr. Abernathy for coming on early to address the eager beavers.
I have experienced other web conference software that had a whiteboard component. It would be a great way to share information on commonly asked questions that could then be posted and reduce redundancy on the chat entries.
Participation in the week 1 blog was very beneficial. I would have appreciated a designated time to ask question about the course work and a separate time for questions about manipulating the course. I lost focus and am afraid I may have missed helpful information that was shared verbally. I want to thank Dr. Abernathy for coming on early to address the eager beavers.
I have experienced other web conference software that had a whiteboard component. It would be a great way to share information on commonly asked questions that could then be posted and reduce redundancy on the chat entries.
Leadership, Administration and Instructional Support
Leadership, Administration and Instructional Support is one of four areas listed in the Texas Long Range Plan. The success or failure of preparing the 21st Century Learner depends on how these key pesonnel promote techology use. It is necessary to cultivate a shared vision and to promote its integration by supporting the change required to make it happen.
The three year trend in this area as reported on the STaR Chart indicates that the local level has moved from an Advanced rating in 2007-2008 to a Target rating in both 2008-09 and 2009-10. The state level has also improved with the rating moving from Developing to Advanced Tech. State averages rose from 45.5% in 2007-08 to 55% in 2009-10.
The local STaR results show that our campus feels the leadership has a vision and supports it. There is time to plan for the use of technolgy with collaboration and communication as a focus. Technical support is provide to the highest classification. On-line learning is encouraged and available. Finally, budget is set aside to support technology. State statisticts show that 55% of the campus’ responding to the STaR Chart feel that: they are at an advanced level in this area, there is a campus plan that is board approved and supported by superintendent, with one technical support staff to 500 computers, and a full- time district technology director. There is also a technology allotment, e-Rate, competitive grants and local funding. According to the Speak Up 2009 Report Release, administrators are beginning to shift their focus on online learning from professional development for teachers to online classes for students.
It is my recommendation that to maintain the current high ratings in this area of the Texas Technology Plan, the leaders, administrators and instructional support must continue to support teachers and assure them that the technology will be available and functioning when needed. This will require funding designated for replacement and maintanence of the current equipment. It will mean continuing to provide on-going scheduled and just-in-time training to teachers.
Project Tomorrow. (2009, March 24). Selected national findings. Retrieved from http://www.tomorrow.org/docs/SU08_selected_national_findings_complete.pdf.
The three year trend in this area as reported on the STaR Chart indicates that the local level has moved from an Advanced rating in 2007-2008 to a Target rating in both 2008-09 and 2009-10. The state level has also improved with the rating moving from Developing to Advanced Tech. State averages rose from 45.5% in 2007-08 to 55% in 2009-10.
The local STaR results show that our campus feels the leadership has a vision and supports it. There is time to plan for the use of technolgy with collaboration and communication as a focus. Technical support is provide to the highest classification. On-line learning is encouraged and available. Finally, budget is set aside to support technology. State statisticts show that 55% of the campus’ responding to the STaR Chart feel that: they are at an advanced level in this area, there is a campus plan that is board approved and supported by superintendent, with one technical support staff to 500 computers, and a full- time district technology director. There is also a technology allotment, e-Rate, competitive grants and local funding. According to the Speak Up 2009 Report Release, administrators are beginning to shift their focus on online learning from professional development for teachers to online classes for students.
It is my recommendation that to maintain the current high ratings in this area of the Texas Technology Plan, the leaders, administrators and instructional support must continue to support teachers and assure them that the technology will be available and functioning when needed. This will require funding designated for replacement and maintanence of the current equipment. It will mean continuing to provide on-going scheduled and just-in-time training to teachers.
Project Tomorrow. (2009, March 24). Selected national findings. Retrieved from http://www.tomorrow.org/docs/SU08_selected_national_findings_complete.pdf.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)