To be quite honest, this class was not what I had envisioned when I was first registered. I expected the outcomes of this class to be more aligned with what it means to be an instructional leader. I expected to gain knowledge of how to be effective through observations, how to lead academic teams and how to effectively lead an academic department. Upon reading the syllabus, my vision of what the class was going to be changed dramatically. It became quickly obvious that the class focus was to teach aspiring administrators the importance of ensuring that we are integrating technology, while also helping our teachers, as well as ourselves, become “digital citizens.” Indeed, I learned a lot about the nature of the 21st century learner and how to effectively provide professional development for teachers, so they understand the needs of the 21st century learner. I feel that this course has taught me valuable information about my strengths and weaknesses as a technological instructional leader. In addition, this class has provided me with tools to not only be an effective technology leader on my campus, but also an effective 21st communicator.
The one skill that was not a surprise was using multiple data sources to drive instruction. This concept, not a new one to me, was reinforced significantly. Students and education have changed. Teachers no longer find themselves in a position to be the giver of knowledge. Instead they find themselves to be facilitators of learning. Due to these changes, teachers must learn how to effectively use and plan according to what their data is telling them. From day to day lesson planning, to accommodating for small group instruction teachers must learn to effectively use data to drive their instruction. In addition, administrators must learn to effectively use a variety of data sources. For administrators, using data such as AEIS data and STaR chart data prove to be invaluable in planning for professional development. With this class, through looking at trend data from the STaR chart, it became quite apparent that my campus must do more to increase competency in the “Teaching and Learning” domain of the Long Range Plan for Technology.
This area also happens to be one of difficulty for me as an administrator, really the only set back I feel I had in this course. Our district has a separate technology department which serves all campuses. The way technology is set up; it seems to run parallel to campus administration rather than coordinating and collaborating. In addition, the overriding thinking for most of the technology facilitators is that they “own” the technology. Most are unwilling to help or not easy to approach as resources. The results are sometimes frustrating, since state and local expectations require students, teachers, and administrators to regularly access and implement technology. If our resources are unavailable due to equipment issues or lack of training, implementation fails. The collaboration between the campus technology facilitator, administration and teachers must improve.
However, not all areas of implementation are experiencing setbacks. Blogging is a tool that shows great potential for providing another means to effectively communicate with peers and as a means for communication for the 21st century learner. A skill unknown to me before quickly became an exciting new tool that will be used in the future to keep teachers and parents informed about upcoming events. I envision this as a tool that will be used to keep parents quickly and accurately informed about the exciting things that are going on in the classroom. Blogs are updated quickly and allow me to collaborate with other administrators quickly and efficiently. The applications of blogging extend far beyond the administrative offices. Teachers can use the space to share ideas of lesson planning and collaborate with others outside of their school buildings and outside of their districts. Students can use blogs to communicate with teachers or reflect on the days lessons.
The overriding concern I find with using blogs is ensuring students’ safety, a problem that is faced when using any number of technological advances. Encouraging students to use blogs can open the door to many issues such as posting personal information, pictures, etc. We must ensure that students are properly trained to avoid the dangers that exist when using any number of technological tools. Ensuring that students are not using other students’ blogs to engage in cyber bullying has to become a priority when teaching student how to use this tool. Cyber bullying is rapidly become a growing issue with the increased use (by students) of text messaging, social networking and blogs.
For the most part, this course taught me quite a bit about the importance of a component of instructional leadership that most are scared to talk about, technology. For most administrators, this seems to be an intimidating area because most have a fear of the negative aspects that technology brings. Intimidating or not, the nature of the learner has changed. Administrators must not only recognize that times have changed, but plan for the implementation of technology, on a regular basis, in the classroom. The assignments in the course successfully provided me with a new understanding on how the topic of technology, must be one that is a priority for myself and my staff. To be quite honest, technology is not a weakness of mine and therefore, while the assignments proved to be challenging at times, I felt that I completed them successfully and learned a lot in the process.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Friday, December 11, 2009
Action Planning and Evaluation
Action Plan
A comprehensive professional development plan, centered on technology, must be developed for this campus’ faculty and staff. As observed in week 3, students are reporting that they are seeing integrated technology only once or twice during the week. Students are also seeing a limited number of technological implements being used in class (desktop computers and calculators were reported being used more often. Changes need to occur. This training, as Jennifer Dermody pointed out, must be relevant and up-to-date and focus on the Teaching and Learning aspect, our weakest area of the STaR chart (Jennifer Dermody, personal communication, November 30, 2009). According to our Campus Improvement Plan (which is identical to our District Improvement Plan), our counselors, teachers, technology facilitators and our administration, are ultimately responsible for implementing the bulk of the technology action plan points. In turn most the professional development must focus on these groups.
Since, from experience, most of the administrators and counselors on this campus do not have the knowledge and skills needed to successfully implement a comprehensive professional development plan, training will need to be provided on Eduphoria (data analysis and gathering tool for the district). Collaboration with Instructional Service, our Technology department and our very own technology facilitator will be integral in ensuring that the comprehensive plan is successful.
When leading into any professional development, it is important to share data with the faculty. The initial professional development would center on having the faculty look at data from the STaR chart and information from the Campus and District Improvement Plans. The importance of looking at data helps to solidify the purpose of the succeeding professional development. The session would allow for collaboration amongst the staff. Groups of individuals would present their findings in a general session after having time to meet in smaller groups.
The overall vision of the proposed decision making will be to increase knowledge and skills utilizing and integrating technology in the classroom. In addition, his training will be in line with what the campus and district expectations are in accordance with the respective improvement plans. Although some direct instruction will be necessary, the hope is to have as much differentiated and learner-centered professional development as possible. As Dr. Abernathy said we must have less “sit and get” (K. Abernathy, interview, November 30, 2009). Three main areas of focus for professional development will be addressed during before school in-service and throughout the school year. A fourth area will provide information to the district’s decision makers on the benefits of allowing our students to use their technology devices in the classroom.
The first area of training will focus on having the staff trained on the use of Aware and Forethought, two data gathering sources on our district’s Eduphoria software. This training, which will be mandatory, will be differentiated. For those who are truly beginners, an administrator and the technology facilitator will lead this faculty in a step-by-step training on the ends and outs of the Eduphoria. During this time, these faculty members will be utilizing the program to access and gather data for multiple, fictional students. Additionally during this training, they will be shown how to access Response to Intervention data by using the Aware function of Eduphoria. Those that have background information on how to use the software will be asked to mentor and teach those that are struggling with accessing and gathering data. This portion will be more open-ended, for those that already know but need a refresher or for those that just want to sharpen their skills. Engaging in this type of professional development satisfies a portion of the District and Campus Improvement Plans, where the campus and district will “begin to train teachers on the usage of the Eduphoria program.”
The second area of training will be a continuation of practices already in place. Throughout the year and scheduled by our technology facilitator, teachers will have the opportunity to learn new skills or sharpen skills they have. Teacher will have the opportunity to learn about blogging and podcasting. In addition, trainings will be offered to learn a variety of software applications such as I-Movie and Inspiration. Trainings will be offered, with collaboration with academic departments, for department-specific implements such as the science department’s probe ware. Broader implements such as the “clicker” system will also be included in these trainings. This training will be come-and-go, but will be recommended that teachers attend at least two during the course of the year. To encourage participation, trainings will be offered during planning times throughout the year. Like the first professional development, there will be beginning, intermediate and advanced trainings offered.
The third area of training will occur throughout the year as well. This area will provide for opportunities for teachers to “collaborate and mentor each other in using technology as a tool for high level student learning. Throughout the year, it will be required that teachers are utilizing at least part of their departmental time to be developing technology embedded lessons. Instructional Technology facilitators and Instructional Technology facilitators will be asked to be available during this time to help in the modeling and planning of technology embedded lessons. In doing this type of training, the campus will be addressing the CIP goal of “providing opportunities for teachers to collaborate and mentor each other in using technology as a tool for high level student learning.”
Times have changed. Students have changed. The fourth area will focus on current practices within the district. Students, through interviews in week three, reported to having a variety of technological devices with them that would help engage them in their learning that they are not allowed to use due to district policy not allowing them to do so. They feel that they are being “handcuffed” to their digital world by current usage policies. Providing a session to the board and the superintendant, and sharing the findings from student surveys and current research, could go a long way in helping the district schools reach the “Target Tech” area. This session would have current administrators, students and teacher presenting. By allowing students to utilize their own technology, the district could potentially find “smarter ways to use the money that we have” (S. Jenkins, interview, November 30, 2009).
Evaluation
The evaluation process of the action plan is just as important as the actual plan itself. It provides the necessary data to show whether or not progress has been made during the implementation phase of the action plan. The proposed evaluation plan will call for reflection (on the part of administrators and faculty), competency matrices, surveys, analysis of STaR chart data and analysis of snapshot data.
One of the primary sources of data that will be used to evaluate progress made on the action plan will be reflection. This district uses a portfolio as a means of evaluation (PDAS is not used). One of the most important pieces of the portfolios is the reflective practice that occurs in conjunction with it. For the purposes of this action plan, teachers and administrators will be expected to reflect on the methods used for implementation of the action plan. This qualitative data will provide feedback on what went well with the implementation of the action plan and what did not go so well. Reflective questions will also be asked for suggestions for improvement to the action plan.
The second source of evaluation will come from analysis of a technology competency matrix given to teachers. This matrix will ask that teachers, at the beginning of the year, decide the level of knowledge they have on a variety of technology areas. These areas will range from implementation of technology-embedded lessons to the usage of a variety of technological implements to knowledge of the Technology TEKS. In addition, there will be items about the use of Eduphoria for gathering and analysis of student data. These areas are some of the primary areas that need to be addressed, according to week three’s report, for the Teaching and Learning domain of the Long-Range Technology Plan. Periodically during the year, preferably during district-mandated portfolio conferences, teachers will be asked to revisit their competency matrices to determine if growth has occurred. At the end of the year the competency matrix will be collected. The data that this will produce will provide information on how the teachers view their progress in meeting the goals of the action plan and progress in becoming so called “digital citizens” (C. Cummins, interview, November 30, 2009).
The third source of data will be a survey that will be given to a random sampling of student and teachers. The survey will focus on asking students and teachers the extent to which they see technology being implemented in their classrooms. They will be asked what types of technological implements they see being used, how often they use technology in the classroom, and how they are using technology in the classroom. These types of questions, using a Likert scale, will provide valuable quantitative data for the administrators to look at when evaluating progress towards the action plan. Additional qualitative questions will be asked to determine if students and teachers thought that the technology actually enhanced and enriched educational experiences. These questions will also provide feedback on how well that the students liked (or did not like) the technology integration. Analysis of the data will hopefully show that technology within the school has the “mobility” factor that Cummins referred to in the roundtable interview (C. Cummins, interview, November 30, 2009). Additional surveys will be given to teachers to evaluate the sessions offered to them regarding the trainings made available throughout the year. These evaluations will provide data that will allow for the improvement of these trainings.
Analysis of STaR chart will be another source of evaluation for the progression of the action plan. For this campus, focusing on the Teaching and Learning quadrant will be integral. This area, as noted in weeks two and three, has been consistently the lowest for this campus. Analyzing this data will show whether or not we have moved from the “Developing Tech” area to the “Advanced Tech” area.
The data produced from district “Snapshots” will also be used as a monitoring tool for the progression of the action plan. “Snapshots,” are an informal observation method, utilized by administrators, to determine whether or not research based strategies (use of High Yield Strategies, Levels of Questioning, etc.) and effective use of technology are happening in classrooms. Analysis of this data will provide more quantitative data to determine the extent to which technology is being integrated into the classroom. It is possible to manipulate this data to show which grade levels or departments are using technology and which are not. This information will prove valuable as the campus develops collaboration and mentoring (geared towards technology) opportunities for teachers to engage in. Much like the portfolio process, teachers will be given reflective questions about trends they see within their “snapshot” data.
Integrating technology into the classrooms and ensuring that our students are 21st century thinkers has to be a priority. Implementing the proposed action plan is only a portion of what needs to be done. Evaluating and adjusting the plan to ensure future learning opportunities is just as critical. As noted by Dr. Abernathy “the world has changed and our students have changed” (K. Abernathy, interview, November 30, 2009). As administrators, we have to ensure that we are constantly evaluating where we are and what needs to be done to stay ahead of the game and reach the “Target Tech” area in all areas.
A comprehensive professional development plan, centered on technology, must be developed for this campus’ faculty and staff. As observed in week 3, students are reporting that they are seeing integrated technology only once or twice during the week. Students are also seeing a limited number of technological implements being used in class (desktop computers and calculators were reported being used more often. Changes need to occur. This training, as Jennifer Dermody pointed out, must be relevant and up-to-date and focus on the Teaching and Learning aspect, our weakest area of the STaR chart (Jennifer Dermody, personal communication, November 30, 2009). According to our Campus Improvement Plan (which is identical to our District Improvement Plan), our counselors, teachers, technology facilitators and our administration, are ultimately responsible for implementing the bulk of the technology action plan points. In turn most the professional development must focus on these groups.
Since, from experience, most of the administrators and counselors on this campus do not have the knowledge and skills needed to successfully implement a comprehensive professional development plan, training will need to be provided on Eduphoria (data analysis and gathering tool for the district). Collaboration with Instructional Service, our Technology department and our very own technology facilitator will be integral in ensuring that the comprehensive plan is successful.
When leading into any professional development, it is important to share data with the faculty. The initial professional development would center on having the faculty look at data from the STaR chart and information from the Campus and District Improvement Plans. The importance of looking at data helps to solidify the purpose of the succeeding professional development. The session would allow for collaboration amongst the staff. Groups of individuals would present their findings in a general session after having time to meet in smaller groups.
The overall vision of the proposed decision making will be to increase knowledge and skills utilizing and integrating technology in the classroom. In addition, his training will be in line with what the campus and district expectations are in accordance with the respective improvement plans. Although some direct instruction will be necessary, the hope is to have as much differentiated and learner-centered professional development as possible. As Dr. Abernathy said we must have less “sit and get” (K. Abernathy, interview, November 30, 2009). Three main areas of focus for professional development will be addressed during before school in-service and throughout the school year. A fourth area will provide information to the district’s decision makers on the benefits of allowing our students to use their technology devices in the classroom.
The first area of training will focus on having the staff trained on the use of Aware and Forethought, two data gathering sources on our district’s Eduphoria software. This training, which will be mandatory, will be differentiated. For those who are truly beginners, an administrator and the technology facilitator will lead this faculty in a step-by-step training on the ends and outs of the Eduphoria. During this time, these faculty members will be utilizing the program to access and gather data for multiple, fictional students. Additionally during this training, they will be shown how to access Response to Intervention data by using the Aware function of Eduphoria. Those that have background information on how to use the software will be asked to mentor and teach those that are struggling with accessing and gathering data. This portion will be more open-ended, for those that already know but need a refresher or for those that just want to sharpen their skills. Engaging in this type of professional development satisfies a portion of the District and Campus Improvement Plans, where the campus and district will “begin to train teachers on the usage of the Eduphoria program.”
The second area of training will be a continuation of practices already in place. Throughout the year and scheduled by our technology facilitator, teachers will have the opportunity to learn new skills or sharpen skills they have. Teacher will have the opportunity to learn about blogging and podcasting. In addition, trainings will be offered to learn a variety of software applications such as I-Movie and Inspiration. Trainings will be offered, with collaboration with academic departments, for department-specific implements such as the science department’s probe ware. Broader implements such as the “clicker” system will also be included in these trainings. This training will be come-and-go, but will be recommended that teachers attend at least two during the course of the year. To encourage participation, trainings will be offered during planning times throughout the year. Like the first professional development, there will be beginning, intermediate and advanced trainings offered.
The third area of training will occur throughout the year as well. This area will provide for opportunities for teachers to “collaborate and mentor each other in using technology as a tool for high level student learning. Throughout the year, it will be required that teachers are utilizing at least part of their departmental time to be developing technology embedded lessons. Instructional Technology facilitators and Instructional Technology facilitators will be asked to be available during this time to help in the modeling and planning of technology embedded lessons. In doing this type of training, the campus will be addressing the CIP goal of “providing opportunities for teachers to collaborate and mentor each other in using technology as a tool for high level student learning.”
Times have changed. Students have changed. The fourth area will focus on current practices within the district. Students, through interviews in week three, reported to having a variety of technological devices with them that would help engage them in their learning that they are not allowed to use due to district policy not allowing them to do so. They feel that they are being “handcuffed” to their digital world by current usage policies. Providing a session to the board and the superintendant, and sharing the findings from student surveys and current research, could go a long way in helping the district schools reach the “Target Tech” area. This session would have current administrators, students and teacher presenting. By allowing students to utilize their own technology, the district could potentially find “smarter ways to use the money that we have” (S. Jenkins, interview, November 30, 2009).
Evaluation
The evaluation process of the action plan is just as important as the actual plan itself. It provides the necessary data to show whether or not progress has been made during the implementation phase of the action plan. The proposed evaluation plan will call for reflection (on the part of administrators and faculty), competency matrices, surveys, analysis of STaR chart data and analysis of snapshot data.
One of the primary sources of data that will be used to evaluate progress made on the action plan will be reflection. This district uses a portfolio as a means of evaluation (PDAS is not used). One of the most important pieces of the portfolios is the reflective practice that occurs in conjunction with it. For the purposes of this action plan, teachers and administrators will be expected to reflect on the methods used for implementation of the action plan. This qualitative data will provide feedback on what went well with the implementation of the action plan and what did not go so well. Reflective questions will also be asked for suggestions for improvement to the action plan.
The second source of evaluation will come from analysis of a technology competency matrix given to teachers. This matrix will ask that teachers, at the beginning of the year, decide the level of knowledge they have on a variety of technology areas. These areas will range from implementation of technology-embedded lessons to the usage of a variety of technological implements to knowledge of the Technology TEKS. In addition, there will be items about the use of Eduphoria for gathering and analysis of student data. These areas are some of the primary areas that need to be addressed, according to week three’s report, for the Teaching and Learning domain of the Long-Range Technology Plan. Periodically during the year, preferably during district-mandated portfolio conferences, teachers will be asked to revisit their competency matrices to determine if growth has occurred. At the end of the year the competency matrix will be collected. The data that this will produce will provide information on how the teachers view their progress in meeting the goals of the action plan and progress in becoming so called “digital citizens” (C. Cummins, interview, November 30, 2009).
The third source of data will be a survey that will be given to a random sampling of student and teachers. The survey will focus on asking students and teachers the extent to which they see technology being implemented in their classrooms. They will be asked what types of technological implements they see being used, how often they use technology in the classroom, and how they are using technology in the classroom. These types of questions, using a Likert scale, will provide valuable quantitative data for the administrators to look at when evaluating progress towards the action plan. Additional qualitative questions will be asked to determine if students and teachers thought that the technology actually enhanced and enriched educational experiences. These questions will also provide feedback on how well that the students liked (or did not like) the technology integration. Analysis of the data will hopefully show that technology within the school has the “mobility” factor that Cummins referred to in the roundtable interview (C. Cummins, interview, November 30, 2009). Additional surveys will be given to teachers to evaluate the sessions offered to them regarding the trainings made available throughout the year. These evaluations will provide data that will allow for the improvement of these trainings.
Analysis of STaR chart will be another source of evaluation for the progression of the action plan. For this campus, focusing on the Teaching and Learning quadrant will be integral. This area, as noted in weeks two and three, has been consistently the lowest for this campus. Analyzing this data will show whether or not we have moved from the “Developing Tech” area to the “Advanced Tech” area.
The data produced from district “Snapshots” will also be used as a monitoring tool for the progression of the action plan. “Snapshots,” are an informal observation method, utilized by administrators, to determine whether or not research based strategies (use of High Yield Strategies, Levels of Questioning, etc.) and effective use of technology are happening in classrooms. Analysis of this data will provide more quantitative data to determine the extent to which technology is being integrated into the classroom. It is possible to manipulate this data to show which grade levels or departments are using technology and which are not. This information will prove valuable as the campus develops collaboration and mentoring (geared towards technology) opportunities for teachers to engage in. Much like the portfolio process, teachers will be given reflective questions about trends they see within their “snapshot” data.
Integrating technology into the classrooms and ensuring that our students are 21st century thinkers has to be a priority. Implementing the proposed action plan is only a portion of what needs to be done. Evaluating and adjusting the plan to ensure future learning opportunities is just as critical. As noted by Dr. Abernathy “the world has changed and our students have changed” (K. Abernathy, interview, November 30, 2009). As administrators, we have to ensure that we are constantly evaluating where we are and what needs to be done to stay ahead of the game and reach the “Target Tech” area in all areas.
Technology Organization Chart and the Role of the Principal
Instructional Services Executive Directors
Nancy Tarvin
Todd Washburn
Expand the alignment and deployment of a guaranteed and viable curriculum for the integration of technology K-12.
Director of Accountability and System Measures
Sarah Martinez
Work with Technology Information Systems to create a system where teachers can access relevant historical data on students.
Director of State Assessment
Debbie Sommer
Work with Technology Information Systems to create a system where teachers can access relevant historical data on students.
Coordinator for District Assessment
Jerry Barbero
Work with Technology Information Systems to create a system where teachers can access relevant historical data on students.
Executive Director of Technology
Scott Monroe
Expand the alignment and deployment of a guaranteed and viable curriculum for the integration of technology K-12.
Coordinator for Instructional Technology
Tracy Nolen
Expand the alignment and deployment of a guaranteed and viable curriculum for the integration of technology K-12.
Principal
Sylvia Flannery
•Students solve real-world problems through the use of technology as seen through classroom snapshots. (TL1)
•Enhance student and teacher learning by promoting technology training. (TL3)
•Identify and promote with staff the LISD curricular technology embedded lessons. (TL4)
•Provide opportunities for teachers to collaborate and mentor each other in using technology as a tool for high level student learning. (EP1)
•Develop an improvement process for supporting and providing a variety of professional development. (EP2)
•Identify and promote teachers learning the SBEC Technology Applications Standards through the use of the Technology Resource Integration Matrix. (EP3)
•Develop a campus leadership team to articulate and support the vision for campus technology improvement. (L2/L3)
•Develop expectations for the integration of email and campus/teacher websites as communication and collaboration tools. (L4)
Technology Facilitator
Elias Rodriguez
•Students solve real-world problems through the use of technology as seen through classroom snapshots. (TL1)
•Enhance student and teacher learning by promoting technology training. (TL3)
•Identify and promote with staff the LISD curricular technology embedded lessons. (TL4)
•Provide opportunities for teachers to collaborate and mentor each other in using technology as a tool for high level student learning. (EP1)
•Develop an improvement process for supporting and providing a variety of professional development. (EP2)
•Identify and promote teachers learning the SBEC Technology Applications Standards through the use of the Technology Resource Integration Matrix. (EP3)
•Develop a campus leadership team to articulate and support the vision for campus technology improvement. (L2/L3)
•Develop expectations for the integration of email and campus/teacher websites as communication and collaboration tools. (L4)
Counselors
Scott Roberts
Rhonda Sautter
Cynthia McQuairt
•Students solve real-world problems through the use of technology as seen through classroom snapshots. (TL1)
•Enhance student and teacher learning by promoting technology training. (TL3)
•Identify and promote with staff the LISD curricular technology embedded lessons. (TL4)
•Provide opportunities for teachers to collaborate and mentor each other in using technology as a tool for high level student learning. (EP1)
•Identify and promote teachers learning the SBEC Technology Applications Standards through the use of the Technology Resource Integration Matrix. (EP3)
•Develop a campus leadership team to articulate and support the vision for campus technology improvement. (L2/L3)
•Develop expectations for the integration of email and campus/teacher websites as communication and collaboration tools. (L4)
Teachers
All teachers on the campus
•Students solve real-world problems through the use of technology as seen through classroom snapshots. (TL1)
•Identify and promote with staff the LISD curricular technology embedded lessons. (TL4)
•Provide opportunities for teachers to collaborate and mentor each other in using technology as a tool for high level student learning. (EP1)
•Identify and promote teachers learning the SBEC Technology Applications Standards through the use of the Technology Resource Integration Matrix. (EP3)
The principal holds a critical role in ensuring that the roles and responsiblities, to be carried out by various personnel, are implemented according to our District Improvement Plan and Campus Improvement Plan. Ultimately responsible for improving all target areas in the Long-Range Technology Plan, the principal must ensure that necessary professional development is occuring to ensure that our teachers are becoming “digital citizens” (C. Cummins, interview, November 30, 2009). In addition to providing and ensuring that the parties named in the CIP are collaborating with one another to ensure that the technology plans are implemented. In addition, the principal should act as liason between the campus and central office. In doing so the principal passes on what necessary trainings are needed and when they occur. In addition the principal is responsible for creating the agendas and evaluation systems for the required training. Oveall, the principal should be responsible for ensuring that all levels are held accountable to their portion of the action plan.
Nancy Tarvin
Todd Washburn
Expand the alignment and deployment of a guaranteed and viable curriculum for the integration of technology K-12.
Director of Accountability and System Measures
Sarah Martinez
Work with Technology Information Systems to create a system where teachers can access relevant historical data on students.
Director of State Assessment
Debbie Sommer
Work with Technology Information Systems to create a system where teachers can access relevant historical data on students.
Coordinator for District Assessment
Jerry Barbero
Work with Technology Information Systems to create a system where teachers can access relevant historical data on students.
Executive Director of Technology
Scott Monroe
Expand the alignment and deployment of a guaranteed and viable curriculum for the integration of technology K-12.
Coordinator for Instructional Technology
Tracy Nolen
Expand the alignment and deployment of a guaranteed and viable curriculum for the integration of technology K-12.
Principal
Sylvia Flannery
•Students solve real-world problems through the use of technology as seen through classroom snapshots. (TL1)
•Enhance student and teacher learning by promoting technology training. (TL3)
•Identify and promote with staff the LISD curricular technology embedded lessons. (TL4)
•Provide opportunities for teachers to collaborate and mentor each other in using technology as a tool for high level student learning. (EP1)
•Develop an improvement process for supporting and providing a variety of professional development. (EP2)
•Identify and promote teachers learning the SBEC Technology Applications Standards through the use of the Technology Resource Integration Matrix. (EP3)
•Develop a campus leadership team to articulate and support the vision for campus technology improvement. (L2/L3)
•Develop expectations for the integration of email and campus/teacher websites as communication and collaboration tools. (L4)
Technology Facilitator
Elias Rodriguez
•Students solve real-world problems through the use of technology as seen through classroom snapshots. (TL1)
•Enhance student and teacher learning by promoting technology training. (TL3)
•Identify and promote with staff the LISD curricular technology embedded lessons. (TL4)
•Provide opportunities for teachers to collaborate and mentor each other in using technology as a tool for high level student learning. (EP1)
•Develop an improvement process for supporting and providing a variety of professional development. (EP2)
•Identify and promote teachers learning the SBEC Technology Applications Standards through the use of the Technology Resource Integration Matrix. (EP3)
•Develop a campus leadership team to articulate and support the vision for campus technology improvement. (L2/L3)
•Develop expectations for the integration of email and campus/teacher websites as communication and collaboration tools. (L4)
Counselors
Scott Roberts
Rhonda Sautter
Cynthia McQuairt
•Students solve real-world problems through the use of technology as seen through classroom snapshots. (TL1)
•Enhance student and teacher learning by promoting technology training. (TL3)
•Identify and promote with staff the LISD curricular technology embedded lessons. (TL4)
•Provide opportunities for teachers to collaborate and mentor each other in using technology as a tool for high level student learning. (EP1)
•Identify and promote teachers learning the SBEC Technology Applications Standards through the use of the Technology Resource Integration Matrix. (EP3)
•Develop a campus leadership team to articulate and support the vision for campus technology improvement. (L2/L3)
•Develop expectations for the integration of email and campus/teacher websites as communication and collaboration tools. (L4)
Teachers
All teachers on the campus
•Students solve real-world problems through the use of technology as seen through classroom snapshots. (TL1)
•Identify and promote with staff the LISD curricular technology embedded lessons. (TL4)
•Provide opportunities for teachers to collaborate and mentor each other in using technology as a tool for high level student learning. (EP1)
•Identify and promote teachers learning the SBEC Technology Applications Standards through the use of the Technology Resource Integration Matrix. (EP3)
The principal holds a critical role in ensuring that the roles and responsiblities, to be carried out by various personnel, are implemented according to our District Improvement Plan and Campus Improvement Plan. Ultimately responsible for improving all target areas in the Long-Range Technology Plan, the principal must ensure that necessary professional development is occuring to ensure that our teachers are becoming “digital citizens” (C. Cummins, interview, November 30, 2009). In addition to providing and ensuring that the parties named in the CIP are collaborating with one another to ensure that the technology plans are implemented. In addition, the principal should act as liason between the campus and central office. In doing so the principal passes on what necessary trainings are needed and when they occur. In addition the principal is responsible for creating the agendas and evaluation systems for the required training. Oveall, the principal should be responsible for ensuring that all levels are held accountable to their portion of the action plan.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
What does the STaR chart say about Wiley?
This is my slideshow presentation for the Texas STaR chart and its implications for Wiley Middle school. The presentation gives a brief overview of what the STaR Chart is. In addition, campus and state data is given. Strengths and weaknesses are followed by recommendations for improvement.
Texas S Ta R Chart
View more presentations from Chris Simpson.
Web Conferencing
I had my first experience with Web conferencing today. What a great experience. I can see where this tool could be used to expand the walls of the school experience. I could see applications for this for collaborative meetings with others from other campuses. More importantly, I could see this tool being used by students. Setting up interviews with students in foreign countries, collaborating with other students beyond the 8 hours school day are just a couple of uses I see students using this tool for.
That is just the tip of the iceberg. The applications for this, I see, transcend beyond the classroom. As a lifelong learner, it is important for me to be continually looking to improve upon my trade. This tool will allow for me to learn from others all over the state, nation and the world. For me, this type of tool is much more efficient than blogging or email. So much gets lost in translation when you type. Having face-to-face interactions is much more powerful and I feel you can get a lot more out of it.
That is just the tip of the iceberg. The applications for this, I see, transcend beyond the classroom. As a lifelong learner, it is important for me to be continually looking to improve upon my trade. This tool will allow for me to learn from others all over the state, nation and the world. For me, this type of tool is much more efficient than blogging or email. So much gets lost in translation when you type. Having face-to-face interactions is much more powerful and I feel you can get a lot more out of it.
Teaching and Learning: A Focus for our Students
Technology has become the focal point of the “21st century learner.” With the national education scene changing rapidly, states and districts must “step up to the plate,” and begin preparing our students for a new wave of life long learning. Across the nation, technology is quickly overtaking the traditional schooling techniques. Progress is being made on the local, state and national levels, but it is not enough. It is time for educators to step up and begin to focus their efforts on preparing our students for their futures. In particular, I feel that educators need to focus on the “Teaching and Learning” portion of Texas Long-Range Plan for Technology. This area focuses on learning for all students in preparation for the 21st century. It includes areas for students to collaboratively learn and expand their classroom beyond the walls of the traditional school. Teachers are encouraged to engage their students in distance learning opportunities and begin serving as more of a facilitator of learning, rather than the sole source of information.
According to the Campus Statewide summary for 2008, this area is one of the weaker areas. Only 26.4% of the schools are classified as either Advanced Tech or Target Tech. Most of the schools, 69.7%, are in the Developing Tech area. The goal, keep in mind, is that by 2020 the majority of schools are in the Target Tech area. This trend holds true for my school as well. According to STaR chart data from the past three years, this has consistently been the lowest area for our campus. Each year has gotten better, but this area has yet to even reach the Advanced Tech stage.
My recommendations for this area are quite simple. The focus of anything we do in education is on student learning. Currently our campus, according to 2008-2009 data, has received an Advanced Tech rating for three of the four areas. We have the infrastructure, our teachers are getting the necessary staff development, and our administration is providing the necessary supports. It is time for teachers to putting into practice the knowledge they are gaining from all of the other supports. I feel that asking teachers to include technological strategies in at the very least one lesson a unit could help tremendously in improving this area. In addition, making data, such as STaR chart data, more available to our teachers, will help them see where improvement is needed.
According to the Campus Statewide summary for 2008, this area is one of the weaker areas. Only 26.4% of the schools are classified as either Advanced Tech or Target Tech. Most of the schools, 69.7%, are in the Developing Tech area. The goal, keep in mind, is that by 2020 the majority of schools are in the Target Tech area. This trend holds true for my school as well. According to STaR chart data from the past three years, this has consistently been the lowest area for our campus. Each year has gotten better, but this area has yet to even reach the Advanced Tech stage.
My recommendations for this area are quite simple. The focus of anything we do in education is on student learning. Currently our campus, according to 2008-2009 data, has received an Advanced Tech rating for three of the four areas. We have the infrastructure, our teachers are getting the necessary staff development, and our administration is providing the necessary supports. It is time for teachers to putting into practice the knowledge they are gaining from all of the other supports. I feel that asking teachers to include technological strategies in at the very least one lesson a unit could help tremendously in improving this area. In addition, making data, such as STaR chart data, more available to our teachers, will help them see where improvement is needed.
Friday, November 27, 2009
Spiraling Curriculum and the Pre-K TEKS
The Technology Application (TA) domain for Prekindergarten children is one of the 10 skill domains that preschool-aged children are expected to have mastered when they reach kindergarten. The TA domain is broken down into five “End of Prekindergarten Year Outcomes.” The first outcome (X.A.1) describes that a child will be able to run and navigate through age-appropriate software that “enhance the development of appropriate concepts.” The second outcome (X.A.2) describes that a child should be able to identify and properly utilize various input devices such as a keyboard and a mouse. A child, for the third outcome (X.A.3), should be able to use “voice/sound recorders and touch screens. The fourth outcome (X.A.4) dictates that a preschool child should be able to use a variety of software applications that allow them to create products and express themselves. The fifth and final outcome (X.A.5), states that the child is able to recognize, not necessarily find, that information is able to be found utilizing various technological devices. Each of these outcomes contains 1-2 examples of expected children’s behaviors, and examples of instructional strategies that can be used to reach the end of the year outcomes.
These outcomes set the framework for the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) that children are expected to learn throughout their educational career. Each outcome mirrors the foundations, information acquisition, problem solving or communication TEK. These outcomes begin the spiraling or scaffolding that occurs within the TA domain of the TEKS, whereby each level builds upon the previous and prepares students for the next set of TEKS. For example, by the end of preschool, children are expected to, according to (X.A.2), use and name various input devices. For the K-2 TEKS, in particular the Foundations 2A, in addition to being able to name various input devices, students are expected to be able to use each one for the purpose of data entry. Reinforcing this set of TEKS, in third through fifth grade (2A), children are expected to use the same list of input devices for data entry. In middle school and high school students, not only are students expected to use various input devices, but they are expected to demonstrate proficiency in doing so.
These outcomes set the framework for the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) that children are expected to learn throughout their educational career. Each outcome mirrors the foundations, information acquisition, problem solving or communication TEK. These outcomes begin the spiraling or scaffolding that occurs within the TA domain of the TEKS, whereby each level builds upon the previous and prepares students for the next set of TEKS. For example, by the end of preschool, children are expected to, according to (X.A.2), use and name various input devices. For the K-2 TEKS, in particular the Foundations 2A, in addition to being able to name various input devices, students are expected to be able to use each one for the purpose of data entry. Reinforcing this set of TEKS, in third through fifth grade (2A), children are expected to use the same list of input devices for data entry. In middle school and high school students, not only are students expected to use various input devices, but they are expected to demonstrate proficiency in doing so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
