To complete this assignment I met with my principal to discuss the Maturity Model Benchmark Survey. After explaining what it was and its purpose, he was very certain we would be at an integrated or intelligent level in most categories. It didn't take long to realize this wasn't going to be the case.
I was glad I was able to discuss this with him for several reasons. The most basic being there were certain areas I really needed some help knowing the answers, and technology use varies among staff members, and he might have a better perception of building wide use. It was also very interesting to see him so confident at the outset and realize there were certain areas that still need growth. Looking at the survey with two people showed how interpretation could really skew results. If you gave a survey to every staff member I really wonder how consistent the results would be. There were several ways of looking at parts of the rubric, and people's perspectives are so different. This turned out to be the case between just the two of us. There were never great differences, and we were able to come to a consensus fairly easily.
One of the the most surprising results of the survey was that the curricular filter was the area with the overall lowest scoring. There were no emergent scores in this area but there were also no intelligent scores. Most of the scores landed in the islands category. This indicates that many components are in place at the district and building level in terms of access, infrastructure, and technologies. There are still improvements that can be made but overall we are being supported well. Now it is up to all teachers to embrace technology, educate themselves, and utilize it to its fullest extent to support 21st century skills and the curriculum.
Survey
Demographics and Summary
Wednesday, July 31, 2013
Wednesday, July 17, 2013
EDTECH 501: Technology Use Planning Overview
What is Technology Use Planning?
A technology use plan is similar to a map. Identifying locations on that map is fairly simple. Planning on how to get to that location is a little more complicated. There are many different ways you could reach your destination. Do you want to fly, drive, or possibly go by boat. One method may be faster, another more interesting with sights to see, and another may be more leisurely allowing you to chat with others along the way. Maybe budget comes in to play and only one way is affordable. One way is not always definitively better than another. No matter how you go you will get there! With a technology use plan there are also many options. What most people think of is how do we get there, in other words, what technology do we need. There isn't always one answer and budget will come in to play. The goal of the plan is similar to the destination. The goal is not the technology or how we get there. The goal is "a vision that is aimed toward improving learning"(Sibley & Kimball, 1997). Included in the plan should be the systems that will support it along with the technology that will help achieve it.
The technology plan is like our state standards. It is a large goal that is broken down into smaller pieces of expectations and outcomes. However, unlike standards a plan includes the tools we will use to achieve the goal. Again, the tools don't just include the technology but the methods of implementation and the support needed to achieve success.. I included this picture from the CDE standard web page as an illustration of the bigger goals of the standards and possibly of a technology plan.
See, J. (1992) Developing effective technology plans. The Computing Teacher, 19(8). Retrieved from http://www.nctp.com/html/john_see.cfm
A technology use plan is similar to a map. Identifying locations on that map is fairly simple. Planning on how to get to that location is a little more complicated. There are many different ways you could reach your destination. Do you want to fly, drive, or possibly go by boat. One method may be faster, another more interesting with sights to see, and another may be more leisurely allowing you to chat with others along the way. Maybe budget comes in to play and only one way is affordable. One way is not always definitively better than another. No matter how you go you will get there! With a technology use plan there are also many options. What most people think of is how do we get there, in other words, what technology do we need. There isn't always one answer and budget will come in to play. The goal of the plan is similar to the destination. The goal is not the technology or how we get there. The goal is "a vision that is aimed toward improving learning"(Sibley & Kimball, 1997). Included in the plan should be the systems that will support it along with the technology that will help achieve it.
The technology plan is like our state standards. It is a large goal that is broken down into smaller pieces of expectations and outcomes. However, unlike standards a plan includes the tools we will use to achieve the goal. Again, the tools don't just include the technology but the methods of implementation and the support needed to achieve success.. I included this picture from the CDE standard web page as an illustration of the bigger goals of the standards and possibly of a technology plan.
National Education Technology Plan 2010
How is this plan like making dinner? Seems like a strange question but there is a connection. Many people make a plan for dinner. When they leave for work they know what they will need, have taken something out to defrost, and maybe made a grocery list. They have a plan. The National Education Technology Plan 2010 is not that kind of plan. The scope of this plan would be like planning all your meals for a year.
It is still a usable plan and very user friendly. It is very easy to read yet thought provoking. It is something that all teachers should read, and I plan on making it available to people in my building. Because of it length and broad goals it is not something easily transferred into some sort of check list to be marked as progress is made. This is more of the big picture and goal of where we are headed. Anyone taking part in creating a technology use plan should first be required to read this document. It can be used to set the focus for the more specific building plans.
Developing Effective Technology Plans
Short Term not Long Term
This article authored by John See seems dichotomous on occasion. He discusses the importance of having a short technology use plan due to rapidly changing technologies. In the next paragraph he touts the importance of looking at "output" not "input." It is more important to plan for student outcome than just the tools they will be using. He continues to say that when you concentrate on the outcomes the specific technologies used are not as important -"if you can drive a Ford you can drive a Chevy." If this is true, which I believe it is than I think it is also true that if you can drive a new Ford you could also drive an old Ford.
This goes against his idea of only having a short technology use plan. If the "input" is not the key factor having a longer plan is feasible. No school has the funding to keep totally current with technology. I think it is very possible to write a plan that is longer term without being completely explicit in the exact technology that would be part of the plan. See does address this when he mentions revising a plan on a yearly basis in order to determine if the technology choices made previously continue to be the most efficient and cost effective. Furthermore, tools such as the Horizon Report 2012 K-2 Edition can guide planners in looking into future trends and determining the direction their plan may need to go on a long term basis. When he mentions the need for staff development another dichotomy arises. He states that "Technology plans that are not tied to long term staff development are destined for failure....Technology staff development must address these issues... awareness, application, integration and refinement, in a long-term systematic manner." Twice he mentions long term. It would be difficult to plan for staff development long term in a short term technology use plan.
While I agree with many things See mentions I do feel that a longer term plan is important. With the scope of the National Education Technology Plan 2010 and the predictions provided by the Horizon Report 2012 K-2 Edition, planning for technology use can be effective long term. Would long term mean 10 years? No, but it could look at things from 3 to 5 years in the future. But as See said, it would be important to revisit the plan every year and make any adjustments needed in terms of specific technology needs.
Integration of Technology into the Curriculum
As a second grade teacher I had some conflicting opinions with his ideas on not using technology to teach technology. His point about embedding technology use into all subject areas is important. However, with the younger students we spend a good deal of time teaching specific skills they need to do any and all of their work effectively and properly. We do teach handwriting so that when they write you can read it. Sometimes this needs to be done in isolation. We work hard to increase their literacy skills. When we do this we need to read in isolation. We can't always jump into reading content material and we need to look at all parts of reading such as phonics. We spend a great portion of the year still teaching the students how to learn to read so that they can then start reading to learn.
We will need to practice some keyboarding, practice how to navigate a website, how to save projects, how to use certain programs, and even just how to log on. This is hard to do without using technology. After acquiring these skills it is very rewarding to set the kids free with more independent project-based learning activities.
Focus on Applications, Not Technology?
Examining state standards and the NETP 2010 is a perfect transition to the statement above by John See.
Standards do not focus on specific skills, they focus on the application of skills as shown in the picture above. The NETP 2010 in its defining of broad ideas such as learning, assessment, teaching, infrastructure, and productivity doesn't mention specific steps or specific technologies in order to achieve success. They leave that up to individual sites to determine based on their student population, needs, and budgets. They help us picture what the destination will look like instead of directing how everyone will get there.
Technology Use Planning Experience
I have to be honest and say that I have virtually no experience in this area. We do have a technology committee that consists of the tech coordinator, the principal, teachers, and community members. Unfortunately, the plans they make have never really been presented to the staff beyond that we can find it in such and such a place on the server. It has never been discussed with staff personally. Besides this, the staff is asked yearly through email or a survey if there is something we want to acquire. There definitely has not been an emphasis on application. After searching for and finding our plan, there is some mention of application, professional development, and holding teachers accountable for making changes. Unfortunately, I don't think there as been any real articulation of what the plan consists of and the responsibility of the staff to meet its goals.
References
Kimball, C. & Sibley, P.H.R. (1997) Technology planning: The good, the bad and the ugly. Retrieved from http://www2.edmin.com/news/library/index.cfm?function=showLibraryDetail&library_id=16See, J. (1992) Developing effective technology plans. The Computing Teacher, 19(8). Retrieved from http://www.nctp.com/html/john_see.cfm
Thursday, July 11, 2013
EDTECH 501: Digital Divide/Digital Inequality
I have to admit that I had never spent much time really thinking about the subject of the digital divide. Since my school has a high number of free and reduced kids but also as a fair amount of middle class families, the difference in situations has always been very noticeable.Our school has spent the last several years focusing on wellness which includes helping with breakfast, snacks, and having food available for weekends. Now that we have many programs in place I think it is time to spend effort on focusing on digital inequality.
Reading these reports brought to light that the divide is much deeper than just technology. The awareness gained from the reading is invaluable. Unfortunately, many of these issues are ones we cannot focus on as educators. Many of those issues are left up to administrative policies and budgets. The National Education Technology Plan 2010 approaches issues from an angle that is completely within our reach and control as a teacher. I find myself looking at things again from the perspective of what changes I can make if I was the only one involved. The NETP report does the same. Using technology to engage learners, personalize education, improve assessment and data collection in order to drive instruction, connect teachers to other teachers to collaborate, and focus on less time in seats and more time actively learning are all things I can do. By improving the methods and approaches to teaching we can provide digital equality while the students are in school and hopefully improve their chances of reducing inequality as they become integral members of society.
I included a link to my thread if you want to view in a bigger screen. I also experimented with increasing the size of the embedded video. It looks kind of funny but it's easier to see.
Voice Thread
Reading these reports brought to light that the divide is much deeper than just technology. The awareness gained from the reading is invaluable. Unfortunately, many of these issues are ones we cannot focus on as educators. Many of those issues are left up to administrative policies and budgets. The National Education Technology Plan 2010 approaches issues from an angle that is completely within our reach and control as a teacher. I find myself looking at things again from the perspective of what changes I can make if I was the only one involved. The NETP report does the same. Using technology to engage learners, personalize education, improve assessment and data collection in order to drive instruction, connect teachers to other teachers to collaborate, and focus on less time in seats and more time actively learning are all things I can do. By improving the methods and approaches to teaching we can provide digital equality while the students are in school and hopefully improve their chances of reducing inequality as they become integral members of society.
I included a link to my thread if you want to view in a bigger screen. I also experimented with increasing the size of the embedded video. It looks kind of funny but it's easier to see.
Voice Thread
Thursday, July 4, 2013
EDTECH 501: EDTECH Challenges
Preface
I would like to apologize in advance for this post being so long. I feel the need to preface this with some explanation of my animation choice and why the video does not quite follow the directions.
When choosing the animation program I investigated the free versions first. I don't want to jump in to an expenditure haphazardly, and I am always looking at the tool from the perspective of usability with my students. Free is always better when it comes to being able to use it with students. Powtoon was the first I tried out. I just jumped in a started creating. I like its usability expect for the voice. It all has to be done in one shot which is hard or you have to go out of the program and create music and voice separately which is what I ended up doing. I also looked into Muvizu and couldn't believe how amazing it is. It would be difficult for my kids to use because of all the choices. They would also get carried away with the process and lose point of the task at hand. That's one reason I did not chose it. I was afraid I wouldn't be able to stop and my 3 minute video would take weeks.
I ended up with Powtoon partly because I had already invested a fair amount of time just in playing with it. The problem is that my video is a little bit more of a presentation than a conversation explaining how I plan to overcome or solve the challenge. Between the learning log and the video I hope I am covering all parts of the assignment even though they may look a little different.
Learning Log
The idea of educators all discussing technology and predicting its future in education is fascinating. The Horizon Report is a wonderful tool for educators to turn to when deciding their next steps in the classroom. It was a very valuable read and tied right back into the Definition of Educational Technology(AECT).
I decided to concentrate on challenge number 5. This is the challenge of bringing more real life experiences into the classroom. While the discussion of this challenge focused more on the upper grade levels with the mention of student retention, future education and careers, it is still pertinent to primary grades. The start of a child's school career is what often shapes their attitudes towards education. If a love of learning can be instilled alongside the basic skills needed, finishing and continuing their learning is more likely.
The mention of student engagement and the use of project-based learning practices is what really drew me to this challenge. So often as teachers we find ourselves presented with a new reading, math, or social studies curriculum and the materials the district purchases. While these may be great tools to use, we are often told to follow them or just fall into that routine ourselves. I left my classroom this summer with two goals in my mind. How can I keep my students even more actively engaged? How can I connect their learning more to the real world? This is the same as aforementioned challenge.
My personal solution to this challenge is to talk less and facilitate more by using more project-based learning activities. As a primary teacher we focus so much on those very basic skills that provide the foundation of all their future learning that sometimes the skills seem almost too simple to tie into real life. Also at this age the students are still learning to read more than they are reading to learn. However, to keep students engaged, provide opportunities for cooperative learning and teaching, and show students why they are learning what they are learning, many effective project-based learning activities can be developed for younger students. Technology can be incorporated in these units in many different ways, but one reason I chose this challenge is because it is pertinent even if technology is not being included.
On a school-wide level, what might be some solutions with teachers too hesitant to veer away from following the manual, creating units that provide connections, and using technology to tie the students to the world? In our building our grade level teams work closely together. I think this is the first avenue to take. Our principal has taken steps to provide more PE time for our students and in the process has created more planning time for all teachers. We could use this time to collaborate on the planning of projects and sharing technology that coordinated with it.
We also have collaboration days built into the school year when each grade level could present an example of what they had done with their teams and one piece of technology they had used. Not only is this a great way of sharing ideas and finding out what works or doesn't work for other teachers, it provides vertical articulation. It is very valuable to learn what the grades lower than yourself have done and used in order to build on it. It is also useful to know what my students will be doing so I can prepare them. If their is no continuity kids will just be exposed to bits and pieces of learning and technology with no follow through in upcoming years.
We are also fortunate to have 4 half days of time to spend with our building technology coordinator. During these times we can learn tech tips, build lessons together, or brainstorm.
Another building goal of ours is creating a positive classroom environment and culture based on one of the 5 Dimensions of Teaching and Learning. We will be focusing on this goal during monthly professional development meetings. We will be meeting with our grades levels and administration to develop ideas specific to our own situations that will address this. This presents another opportunity to discuss ideas to achieve a positive supportive environment that makes all students feel safe and free to challenge themselves as learners whether it is pursuing an individual interest or working on a project with others. Changing the notion of idle, well behaved, quiet students as the perfect classroom environment that some teachers still strive for to an environment where children feel free to explore, question, pursue, talk to others and utilize any tools at almost any time in the room would be a huge step in the right direction.
My animated video shows the problems of keeping things status quo and one possible example of how things could look different.
I would like to apologize in advance for this post being so long. I feel the need to preface this with some explanation of my animation choice and why the video does not quite follow the directions.
When choosing the animation program I investigated the free versions first. I don't want to jump in to an expenditure haphazardly, and I am always looking at the tool from the perspective of usability with my students. Free is always better when it comes to being able to use it with students. Powtoon was the first I tried out. I just jumped in a started creating. I like its usability expect for the voice. It all has to be done in one shot which is hard or you have to go out of the program and create music and voice separately which is what I ended up doing. I also looked into Muvizu and couldn't believe how amazing it is. It would be difficult for my kids to use because of all the choices. They would also get carried away with the process and lose point of the task at hand. That's one reason I did not chose it. I was afraid I wouldn't be able to stop and my 3 minute video would take weeks.
I ended up with Powtoon partly because I had already invested a fair amount of time just in playing with it. The problem is that my video is a little bit more of a presentation than a conversation explaining how I plan to overcome or solve the challenge. Between the learning log and the video I hope I am covering all parts of the assignment even though they may look a little different.
Learning Log
The idea of educators all discussing technology and predicting its future in education is fascinating. The Horizon Report is a wonderful tool for educators to turn to when deciding their next steps in the classroom. It was a very valuable read and tied right back into the Definition of Educational Technology(AECT).
I decided to concentrate on challenge number 5. This is the challenge of bringing more real life experiences into the classroom. While the discussion of this challenge focused more on the upper grade levels with the mention of student retention, future education and careers, it is still pertinent to primary grades. The start of a child's school career is what often shapes their attitudes towards education. If a love of learning can be instilled alongside the basic skills needed, finishing and continuing their learning is more likely.
The mention of student engagement and the use of project-based learning practices is what really drew me to this challenge. So often as teachers we find ourselves presented with a new reading, math, or social studies curriculum and the materials the district purchases. While these may be great tools to use, we are often told to follow them or just fall into that routine ourselves. I left my classroom this summer with two goals in my mind. How can I keep my students even more actively engaged? How can I connect their learning more to the real world? This is the same as aforementioned challenge.
My personal solution to this challenge is to talk less and facilitate more by using more project-based learning activities. As a primary teacher we focus so much on those very basic skills that provide the foundation of all their future learning that sometimes the skills seem almost too simple to tie into real life. Also at this age the students are still learning to read more than they are reading to learn. However, to keep students engaged, provide opportunities for cooperative learning and teaching, and show students why they are learning what they are learning, many effective project-based learning activities can be developed for younger students. Technology can be incorporated in these units in many different ways, but one reason I chose this challenge is because it is pertinent even if technology is not being included.
On a school-wide level, what might be some solutions with teachers too hesitant to veer away from following the manual, creating units that provide connections, and using technology to tie the students to the world? In our building our grade level teams work closely together. I think this is the first avenue to take. Our principal has taken steps to provide more PE time for our students and in the process has created more planning time for all teachers. We could use this time to collaborate on the planning of projects and sharing technology that coordinated with it.
We also have collaboration days built into the school year when each grade level could present an example of what they had done with their teams and one piece of technology they had used. Not only is this a great way of sharing ideas and finding out what works or doesn't work for other teachers, it provides vertical articulation. It is very valuable to learn what the grades lower than yourself have done and used in order to build on it. It is also useful to know what my students will be doing so I can prepare them. If their is no continuity kids will just be exposed to bits and pieces of learning and technology with no follow through in upcoming years.
We are also fortunate to have 4 half days of time to spend with our building technology coordinator. During these times we can learn tech tips, build lessons together, or brainstorm.
Another building goal of ours is creating a positive classroom environment and culture based on one of the 5 Dimensions of Teaching and Learning. We will be focusing on this goal during monthly professional development meetings. We will be meeting with our grades levels and administration to develop ideas specific to our own situations that will address this. This presents another opportunity to discuss ideas to achieve a positive supportive environment that makes all students feel safe and free to challenge themselves as learners whether it is pursuing an individual interest or working on a project with others. Changing the notion of idle, well behaved, quiet students as the perfect classroom environment that some teachers still strive for to an environment where children feel free to explore, question, pursue, talk to others and utilize any tools at almost any time in the room would be a huge step in the right direction.
My animated video shows the problems of keeping things status quo and one possible example of how things could look different.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)