Week 5 Reflections

What outcomes had you envisioned for this course? Did you achieve those outcomes? Did the actual course outcomes align with those that you envisioned?

After taking the initial survey for this course, it was clear that the main area to be covered in this course was technology. Since I was already very comfortable with technology, and already knew much of what was included on the survey, I thought this was going to be an easy class. The technology related skills needed to successfully finish this class, I already possessed. I expected to have a more hands on approach to programs used in various area of curriculum assessment, instruction and analysis of collected data. Though there was some of that, especially involving the assignments involving the STaR Chart and AEIS Data, there were very few new and innovative items presented.


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?

Yes I think the collection and analysis of the data we worked on is very relevant to the work on our campus. It allows us to make informed decisions about the direction of our campus and more importantly, the direction of our instructional program, so we can maximize efficiency and performance of our students. I found that my campus lacks I the area of training and staff development for teachers. With focused thoughtful planning, I think those areas can be strengthened in a very short amount of time. The main hurdle would be getting the entire campus to buy in and understand how much these various technology tools can help increase the effectiveness of instruction and student achievement.

What outcomes did you not achieve? What prevented you from achieving them?

I achieved all of the required course requirements, but there are a few personal goals and activities I did not complete. I did want to participate in the roundtable discussions that were hosted via webcast throughout the course. Unfortunately, my school activities and concerts made it nearly impossible to attend. From blogging and chatting with other students, the overwhelming response on the webcast videoconference was lackluster at best. After hearing these reviews, I didn’t expend much energy in finding a meeting that would fit my schedule. Instead, I am working with my campus technology contact to try and setup one to participate in where the technology needed has already been tested and is working adequately.

Were you successful in carrying out the course assignments? If not, what prevented or discouraged you?

Yes I was successful, after a lot of unnecessarily repetitive responses. This was very frustrating and discouraging to me. Another aspect that made the assignments difficult was the lack of clarity and consistency in the assignment directions. We were told to “follow the rubric to earn maximum points”, yet the rubric didn’t match the assignment directions, which in some cases didn’t match the directions given in emails and overviews mailed out each week. During Week 4, one of the parts of the assignment was simply a statement. No direction or explanation as to the expected outcome. Then we were asked to respond to two other students’ work, after posting our assignment on our blog and discussion board. This was quite troubling, because I began to doubt my work and question whether I would be successful after seeing what others had created.

What did you learn from this course…about yourself, your technology and leadership skills, and your attitudes?

This course did make me think about other ways to use technology in educational endeavors. I have seen blogs, and even have friends who use them. They seem to me like a less interactive Facebook page, where the individual gets to express his or her feelings and views. I do now see how they could be a useful tool in sharing ideas with other colleagues. I do worry about use them in the public school setting with students, but as a professional development tool, I think it is a great possibility. The other thing this course has allowed me to exercise is my ability to endure disorganization and discord. Many other students are unhappy about the way this course was handled, and I would have to agree with most, if not all, of them. After some students tried to get the professors to reconsider some of the expectations and failed, I approached it from the point of getting through this course following what was in place, and hopefully giving enough feedback at the end to affect some change in this course.

What is the educational value of blogs and blogging to the 21st century learner?

I think they are a great way of sharing information, and even being able to track the evolution of a project or an idea if the blogger contributes information in a detailed and consistent manner. You would also have the ability to backtrack through the various stages of the project and see where good and bad decisions were made, so as to not repeat some mistakes and hopefully get a positive result. I don’t think that blogging will be widespread in the public school system because of a lack of control and filtering that would be required to make it a safe area for all to participate. It perhaps could be used under smaller controlled situations though.

What are the concerns of blogs and blogging in education?

I think the primary concern, as well as the biggest obstacle to widespread use of blogging is the content of the blogs. There would need to be clear guidelines set up to follow, as well as a way to enforce and ensure that those guidelines are being used. This content, if it is questionable, could be damaging to the school’s reputation and the legal issues raised by such an event.

How can you use blogging to communicate with school stakeholders?

It would be a great way to communicate with stakeholders. Perhaps a closed blog would be best, allowing the teacher or principal to post information, but closing editing access to only the account holder and those who he or she grants access to. Facebook and Twitter are two examples of communication tools that can be sent with ease. Certain emergency situations can also be shared via this avenue. Imagine a principal gets to school and there is no water, and the district decides to close school for the day. The principal has 80% of his parents following him on Twitter, and in a split second, the principal can tell 80% of his campus not to come to school. As a band director, I could use it to let parents know when the band has departed its location to head home from a game, or also to let them know when there may have been a delay in getting back.

PART 1
TECHNOLOGY ORGANIZATION CHART
School Board
- Elected by community
- Work with Superintendent on the direction of the district
Superintendent
- Manages district, following District Policy
- Works with School Board on daily issues
Director of Technology
- Oversee development of Tech Plan
- Develop AUP
- Build technology budget
- Advocate for technology
- Assess needs of tech in the district
Co-ord.-Instruction Tech
- Support campuses in classroom integration

Co-ord.-Adminis. Tech
- Oversee Admin technologies:
TANGO, Gradespeed, Eduphoria, Liquid Office
Co-ord.-Tech Training
- Plan tech in-services
- Ensure all staff have access to training
Internet/Network Specialist
- Oversee/maintain a reliable and safe internet connection for all campuses
Principal
- Support Dist. E-Plan
- Secure budget support
- Ensure teacher technology integration
Campus Tech Co-ord.
- Work w/ Principal on campus plan
- Support teachers in integration, professional development, and administrative issues
- Provide support and instruction for parents on internet safety and usage
Teacher
- Follow AUP
- Integrate tech responsibly
- Lead by example regarding internet usage and safety
Student
- Manages district, following District Policy
- Works with School Board on daily issues
Parent
- Support and encourage responsible technology usage
- Instruct children on safety
- Implement policies at home

PART 2
TECHNOLOGY ACTION PLAN
ECISD Technology Mission Statement“We are committed to enhancing the instructional delivery process with technology in all of our classrooms. The 3 Year Technology Integration Plan focuses on providing three key pieces of technology equipment to the teacher in the ECISD classroom; the laptop, the media projector, and the Interwrite Pad. We are currently aiming for at least a 5 year refreshing cycle for our laptops in the classrooms. All teachers receive training on the proper maintenance of their equipment in order to lengthen the life cycle of the equipment.” (http://www.ecisd.us, accessed Dec. 9, 2009)

Plan Goals
1. Increase the level of technology integration into the individual classroom.2. Increase the level of proficiency and awareness of the staff, in regards to instructional software and technology usage.3. Have a measureable increase in technology usage for collegial interaction and collaboration.

Technology Currently Available:
Multimedia computers
Document Cameras
Classroom Projectors
Digital Cameras
Video Recorder
DVD Burner
Interwrite Pads
· Smartboards (Limited Availability)
Current Integration of Technology:
Accelerated Reader
Voyager
V-Math
Computer Lab
Internet Access
Word / Excel / PowerPoint applications
Professional Development
Spring 2010
Technology Department creates and conducts a technology survey. The results would determine level (beginner, intermediate or advanced) of staff. District would continue to provide training on basic computer functions and programs. (Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Outlook, Gradespeed and Attendance software)
Before the end of this school year, additional trainings would be provided for beginner and intermediate users to “close the gap” on the advanced users.
Technology Department works with staff identified as “advanced” to develop trainings for beginning of 2010-11 school year. Send these teachers off to specialized trainings to allow them to become trainers when they return.

Summer 2010
Advanced trainings continue for future trainers. Certain high need areas would recive a stipend for their summer training and subsequent teaching of the professional development session.

Fall 2010
Since all teachers have laptops, they would use them during the first technology in-service to review the information used in prior trainings (Spring 2010)
Second technology in-service phase would involve the new trainers. They would lead their selected professional training session, allowing teacher the opportunity to try and use the programs they are explaining on their laptops. This will allow for immediate feedback and peer teaching as they develop and use the new programs.
Principal will implement a mandatory requirement that students turn in at least one assignment per grading period electronically. This could be done through an online teacher-managed blog, or via email. Documentation of this would be required of all teachers.

EvaluationThere are several ways to evaluate if the goals of this initiative are being met, both at the campus level as well as at the district level.
Using the survey given at the beginning, and retaking it a year later, the comparison of level advancement of staff.
Evaluate the STaR Chart results and determine if the campus/district has advanced in its ratings. Our campus ratings needed the most improvement in teacher training.
Technology Department can check the “meter” for bandwidth usage by teachers and students.
Administration must include technology and how the students are engaged during their weekly campus walk-throughs.
Campus Technology coordinator needs to walk through classrooms to see how technology is being used by the students.

STaR Chart MMS

See more presentations by aSGuest32593 | Upload your own PowerPoint presentations

Power Point Upload

I have had severe difficulty getting my PP to upload to authorstream or slideshare. It will be posed as soon as it gets "converted". It is going on 1 1/2 hours right now.

Brian

STaR Chart - Educator Preparation & Development

The Texas STaR Chart addresses the four key areas of the Texas State Long-Range Plan for Technology 2006-2020. This assignment re quires me to blog about one of the sections of my Campus' STaR Chart results. I chose the area of Educator Preparation and Development. This area includes the following: training content, educator competency, models of professional development, levels of understanding and patterns of use, professional development for online learning, and teacher access to professional development. I chose to address this area because it is an area of concern for my campus. All areas for my campus are Developing Tech, but I thought it would be higher. This particular area in 2006-2007 rated a 10, but increased to 12 the next year, and the most recent results in 2009 being 12 as well. There is little if any apparant growth in this area, I think that training for our teachers about how to use our technology in their classroom more efficiently would be beneficial, not only to this key area, but also to the area of Teaching & Learning. As teachers get more effiicient with using technology, their delivery will become better, and hopefully we will see the direct result of a focused and concentrated .




http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/comm/PartIIIEducatorPreparationandDevelopment.pdf

Pre-K Technology Applications TEKS

Students who enter the Pre-K program in our public schools have a curriculum that is expected to be taught to them that includes a technology component. The focus of the TEKS is to expose the student to the basic components of a computer and the various uses of the computer. As with all subjects, vocabulary of the computer is also an integral part of the curriculum. Then the students get to the good stuff - using the computers through the use of interactive stories and games. These stories and games can address any subject area, but can be used and delivered via the computer The Pre-K Technology TEKS lays a foundation for students to build experiences on and carry on through the upcoming grades. Technology exposure should begin as soon as they enter a formal school setting, and hopefully before. As with the TEKS in other areas of study, the State of Texas has designed the curriculum to be a spiraling of skills and concepts, to ensure mastery of the objectives.

Texas Long Range Plan, Wk 1 Part 3

As a teacher of 17 years, I thought that I was pretty current on trends and requirements for teachers. I was wrong. I didn’t know the state has been working on technology initiatives for over 20 years, and have never heard about Phase I, II or III of the Texas Long Range Plan. I have known that technology was always a focus for our school to promote and sustain development in these areas. No one formally ever mentioned this plan to our staff. I assure you they will now.

Most school age kids already use technology. Most have a better phone than I do, and some have more skills in computers than I do. This is why it is so crucial for the staff to address the use of technology. Not only do we need to address the tools and tricks of the technology, we also need to be sure to address the safety and legal issues concerning technology and copyright issues.

As mentioned in my earlier blog, I found that I have not been implementing technology effectively into my individual curriculum. As a district, we are doing well toward that end, but I as an individual am not. The district has access to the internet in all classrooms, as well as offices. The number of computers still needs to be advanced, but there is access by any one, and never with a line to get access. Working closely with our campus technology representative will help ensure that we continue to advance toward a more digital relationship with our students.

Tech Assessments, Week 1, Part 2

This blog is in response to the two surveys completed as part of week 1 of my Instructional Leadership class. We were to take two surveys – the Texas Technology Applications Inventory and the SEDTA survey for teachers. The first of the surveys dealt primarily with the individual teachers’ preparedness for technology, while the second dealt with the teacher and school’s integration of the technology into their respective class room.

The results of the Texas Inventory was as follows:
Foundations domain – 17 yes/1 no
Information Acquisition domain – 9 yes/1 no
Solving Problems domain – 13 yes/5 no
Communication domain – 7 yes/5 no

This didn’t really surprise me because technology is something I enjoy and try to integrate into my classroom as much as possible. These results do not surprise me and are about what I expected.

The results I did not expect came from the SEDTA survey. I did expect the district to do as well on my survey as they did, but the area that concerned me was the minimal impact that my class is having on the digital education of my students. Since I value technology as I do, I am concerned at my lack of integration into my class. Yes my class is a performance based class, and no amount of technology will ever be able to replace the tactile experience of playing an instrument, but there are areas where technology can be implemented and developed in my students. This will be an area of personal development that I will focus on in the coming months, so that at the beginning of next year, I will be able to take this survey and fare better.

Texas Technology Applications Inventory
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/technology/techapp/assess/teksurv.pdf

SEDTA survey for teachers
http://www.setda-peti.org/tools.html

Introduction

I am a band director in the Rio Grande Valley. I have been teaching for 17 years. I have finally begun to work on my masters degree, and am eager to finish. Check here for my assignment postings for my Instructional Leadership class.