Since all EDLD 5352 Week 2 posts were submitted prior to the clarification on the message board about setting up a separate EDLD 5352 tab, all 4 posts from March 2011 are to be included as the 4 posts needed for EDLD 5352 Instructional Leadership - Technology.
In the future, posts for EDLD 5352 will be included on that page.
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
A review of the draft: "National Educational Technology Plan: Transforming American Education: Learning Powered by Technology"
The "National Educational Technology Plan: Transforming American Education: Learning Powered by Technology" document intends to provide states with goals and recommendations to improve and expand technology integration for the purpose of higher educational achievement nation-wide.
To achieve this purpose, the document begins with an "Executive Summary" in which two very lofty goals are presented with the intention of being realized by 2020:
"- We will raise the proportion of college graduates from where it now stands [39%] so that 60% of our population holds a 2-year or 4-year degree.
- We will close the achievement gap so that all students - regardless of race, income, or neighborhood - graduate from high school ready to succeed in college and careers." (2010, pg. v)
At first glance, these goals sound ideal, but as the document goes on to discuss (and as my concerns would include), these goals do not consider the projected loss of revenue and increase in student population. Furthermore, and specifically for Texas, the population is expected to shift significantly towards a more Hispanically dominant population.
In additional to these challenging, over-arching goals, this plan sets goals for learning, teaching, and professional development. With regards to learning, the goal is that all learners will have the opportunity to engage in learning experiences in and outside of the classroom that will prepare them to adequately interact within our "globally networked society". (pg. 9) The plan draws a comparison between traditional teaching using textbooks and a teacher-centered classroom and students of today with technology filled lives. This plan desires to merge the education system with the new, technologically advance needs and experiences of our students.
With regards to teaching, the plan indicates that teaching methods have also changes dramatically in respond to the addition of technology in mainstream society. It is a goal of the plan to support educators, both individually and in teams, so they are empowered to provide more effective teaching and learning opportunities through more enriched learning experiences. The plan desires to build collaboration and problem solving thereby reducing the current state of isolation in teaching.
All of these goals (support, collaboration, and problem solving teaching methods) can be made possible through effective professional development. As the plan points out, technology is an "enabler" but "educators still must teach". (pg. 44) This merger requires support to modify current teaching styles in favor of a methodology which naturally and systematically utilizes technology as a teaching medium. That support must be varied (much like teaching styles must vary upon the needs of the students) for teachers with different experiences and backgrounds. Younger teachers may have more exposure and experience with technology and less experience with teaching while more seasoned teachers have less technology familiarity but more teaching experience. Professional development should be provided to enhance the strengths and build the weaknesses of all these teachers so that the best possible education can be provided to students.
To achieve this purpose, the document begins with an "Executive Summary" in which two very lofty goals are presented with the intention of being realized by 2020:
"- We will raise the proportion of college graduates from where it now stands [39%] so that 60% of our population holds a 2-year or 4-year degree.
- We will close the achievement gap so that all students - regardless of race, income, or neighborhood - graduate from high school ready to succeed in college and careers." (2010, pg. v)
At first glance, these goals sound ideal, but as the document goes on to discuss (and as my concerns would include), these goals do not consider the projected loss of revenue and increase in student population. Furthermore, and specifically for Texas, the population is expected to shift significantly towards a more Hispanically dominant population.
In additional to these challenging, over-arching goals, this plan sets goals for learning, teaching, and professional development. With regards to learning, the goal is that all learners will have the opportunity to engage in learning experiences in and outside of the classroom that will prepare them to adequately interact within our "globally networked society". (pg. 9) The plan draws a comparison between traditional teaching using textbooks and a teacher-centered classroom and students of today with technology filled lives. This plan desires to merge the education system with the new, technologically advance needs and experiences of our students.
With regards to teaching, the plan indicates that teaching methods have also changes dramatically in respond to the addition of technology in mainstream society. It is a goal of the plan to support educators, both individually and in teams, so they are empowered to provide more effective teaching and learning opportunities through more enriched learning experiences. The plan desires to build collaboration and problem solving thereby reducing the current state of isolation in teaching.
All of these goals (support, collaboration, and problem solving teaching methods) can be made possible through effective professional development. As the plan points out, technology is an "enabler" but "educators still must teach". (pg. 44) This merger requires support to modify current teaching styles in favor of a methodology which naturally and systematically utilizes technology as a teaching medium. That support must be varied (much like teaching styles must vary upon the needs of the students) for teachers with different experiences and backgrounds. Younger teachers may have more exposure and experience with technology and less experience with teaching while more seasoned teachers have less technology familiarity but more teaching experience. Professional development should be provided to enhance the strengths and build the weaknesses of all these teachers so that the best possible education can be provided to students.
Progress Report on the Long-Range Plan for Technology, 2006-2020
The purpose of the original Long-Range Plan for Technology, 2006-2020 was to guide the implementation and integration of technology across Texas in four different areas: Teaching and Learning; Educator Preparation and Development; Leadership, Administration, and Instructional Support; and Infrastructure for Technology.
The purpose of the progress report submitted in 2008 (only two years after the development of the original plan) is to identify progress and changes made since the implementation of the plan.
According to the progress report, students of all ages and grades are actively using computers for education purposes including playing educational games, finding information on the internet, working on projects, taking tests, and other activities. The variety and extent of technology is increasing, even just in the short time (2 years) between the original implementation of the Long Range Plan and the progress report. (2008, pg. 3-8)
Furthermore, differences are easily being seen between high implementation schools and low implementation schools. According to the progress report, districts and schools with higher technology immersion enjoyed more effective leadership, strong buy-in and commitment to technology implementation, enhanced teamwork, greater support for teachers from the principal, parents, and the community, among other benefits. (pg. 16) Students enjoyed greater access to technology (typically one-to-one access to laptops), greater variety of assignment formats, higher level of engagement, schoolwork was more fun and interesting, and students became more organized, efficient, and responsible. (pg. 17)
In reviewing data specifically from the STaR Chart, state-wide data shows an increase in technology proficiency in the area of Teaching and Learning. From 2006-7 to 2007-8, Early Tech scores decreased, Developing Tech scores decreased, and Advance Tech scores increased - showing a move to a higher level of proficiency. (pg. 39) Similarly, in the area of Educator Preparation and Development, Easy Tech scores decreased while Developing Tech and Advance Tech scores increased. (pg. 101) In the area of Leadership, Administration, and Instructional Support, already low Easy Tech scores decreased even further, Developing Tech decreased while Advance Tech and Target Tech scores increased. (pg. 118) The final component, Infrastructure for Technology, saw results nearly identical in trend to the previous area - Early Tech and Developing Tech decreased while Advanced Tech and Target Tech increased. (pg. 131)
All of the charts and data presented in this progress report indicate an overall improvement in the level of technology proficiency and integration in Texas districts, campuses, and classrooms - as was the goal of the Long Range Technology Plan.
The purpose of the progress report submitted in 2008 (only two years after the development of the original plan) is to identify progress and changes made since the implementation of the plan.
According to the progress report, students of all ages and grades are actively using computers for education purposes including playing educational games, finding information on the internet, working on projects, taking tests, and other activities. The variety and extent of technology is increasing, even just in the short time (2 years) between the original implementation of the Long Range Plan and the progress report. (2008, pg. 3-8)
Furthermore, differences are easily being seen between high implementation schools and low implementation schools. According to the progress report, districts and schools with higher technology immersion enjoyed more effective leadership, strong buy-in and commitment to technology implementation, enhanced teamwork, greater support for teachers from the principal, parents, and the community, among other benefits. (pg. 16) Students enjoyed greater access to technology (typically one-to-one access to laptops), greater variety of assignment formats, higher level of engagement, schoolwork was more fun and interesting, and students became more organized, efficient, and responsible. (pg. 17)
In reviewing data specifically from the STaR Chart, state-wide data shows an increase in technology proficiency in the area of Teaching and Learning. From 2006-7 to 2007-8, Early Tech scores decreased, Developing Tech scores decreased, and Advance Tech scores increased - showing a move to a higher level of proficiency. (pg. 39) Similarly, in the area of Educator Preparation and Development, Easy Tech scores decreased while Developing Tech and Advance Tech scores increased. (pg. 101) In the area of Leadership, Administration, and Instructional Support, already low Easy Tech scores decreased even further, Developing Tech decreased while Advance Tech and Target Tech scores increased. (pg. 118) The final component, Infrastructure for Technology, saw results nearly identical in trend to the previous area - Early Tech and Developing Tech decreased while Advanced Tech and Target Tech increased. (pg. 131)
All of the charts and data presented in this progress report indicate an overall improvement in the level of technology proficiency and integration in Texas districts, campuses, and classrooms - as was the goal of the Long Range Technology Plan.
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Teaching and Learning
The Texas Long Range Plan for Technology, 2006-2020
Teaching and Learning
The introduction of technology into the classroom provides an equalizing factor for students across the state of Texas. Technology brings the opportunity for distance learning and virtual learning regardless of student population, location, or background. With this onset of technology, schools will be responsible for providing access to relevant technologies, use appropriate and research-based strategies to use the technologies for application in real-world problems and situations, and provide opportunities for additional communication.
Across the state and according to the 2007-8 data, 69.7% of campuses are performing at a "developing tech" stage with regards to Teaching and Learning. An additional 25.5% of campuses are at "advanced tech" and the remaining less than five percent are split between "early tech" (3.9%) and "target tech" (.9%).
My campus, Castleberry Elementary, scored a 14 which put it just barely in the "developing tech" category as opposed to the previous years where we had scored in the "advance tech" category with a 16 (2008-9) and a 15 (2007-8).
I chose to review this area of the Texas Long Range Plan because it is the area that my district is scoring the lowest in and therefore is the most personally relevant area of need for me to address.
According to the state summary, "developing tech" refers to Teaching and Learning that is primarily teacher-directed and students use technology to access information and develop basic projects. Technology TEKS are met, but the full of advantage of technology integration is not realized. To progress my campus to "advanced tech" again as it once was, I would suggest technology projects that encourage and necessitate peer interaction. Technology should be planned to solve problems and have real-world application instead of simply teaching the program. Application is the key component missing that will push our campus to a higher rating on the Teaching and Learning component of the STaR Chart.
Teaching and Learning
The introduction of technology into the classroom provides an equalizing factor for students across the state of Texas. Technology brings the opportunity for distance learning and virtual learning regardless of student population, location, or background. With this onset of technology, schools will be responsible for providing access to relevant technologies, use appropriate and research-based strategies to use the technologies for application in real-world problems and situations, and provide opportunities for additional communication.
Across the state and according to the 2007-8 data, 69.7% of campuses are performing at a "developing tech" stage with regards to Teaching and Learning. An additional 25.5% of campuses are at "advanced tech" and the remaining less than five percent are split between "early tech" (3.9%) and "target tech" (.9%).
My campus, Castleberry Elementary, scored a 14 which put it just barely in the "developing tech" category as opposed to the previous years where we had scored in the "advance tech" category with a 16 (2008-9) and a 15 (2007-8).
I chose to review this area of the Texas Long Range Plan because it is the area that my district is scoring the lowest in and therefore is the most personally relevant area of need for me to address.
According to the state summary, "developing tech" refers to Teaching and Learning that is primarily teacher-directed and students use technology to access information and develop basic projects. Technology TEKS are met, but the full of advantage of technology integration is not realized. To progress my campus to "advanced tech" again as it once was, I would suggest technology projects that encourage and necessitate peer interaction. Technology should be planned to solve problems and have real-world application instead of simply teaching the program. Application is the key component missing that will push our campus to a higher rating on the Teaching and Learning component of the STaR Chart.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)