Week Four Assignments
Between Technology and Teacher Effectiveness: Professional Development
Joan Cunningham
Article Review #4
The article, Between Technology and Teacher Effectiveness: Professional Development, the author Joan Cunnigham stresses that in order for technology to enhance students abilities to become life-long learners, the most important factor in student success and achievement is the quality of the teacher. Cunningham states, "While technology advances hold the promise of improved learning instruction, technology-focused professional development for teachers is critical if technology is truly to be used to promote learning for all students." According to Cunningham, the most successful schools have long-term plans for professional development - a major component of technology implementation. As many can concur, the article highlights the ineffectiveness of "flash in the pan" or one-time technology trainings or inservices. Successful professional development guides teachers (no matter where they start) on a continuum from novice to complete integrator through investment and commitment from a district point of view. As teachers learn the technology, Cunningham argues that they should be receiving both hands-on experiences and support from tech-savvy peers.
Like many of the resources provided for technology integration, this article reinforces the need for professional development opportunities to fall within the overall vision or scope of a technology integration/implementation plan. It is through the teachers that students are engaged in learning opportunities, and the teachers should be supported with administrative leadership. According to Cunningham, district administrative leadership directly affects teacher effectiveness, which in turn affects student learning. Teachers should be supported in the changes that technology brings, and act as facilitators and mentors to the development 21st century learning skills. Cunningham goes on to state, "Successful districts look for opportunities on a daily and weekly basis for developing technology skills in staff, whether it is team planning time, team teaching, staff meetings — any and all opportunities for information to be shared and for staff to challenge each other to the next level." The consistency of the trainings helps foster a technology "culture," which provides teachers with a comfortable atmosphere to teach and an effective environment for students to engage in student-centered activities and project-based learning. Cunningham also reiterates that there is a constant need for teachers to collaborate and work together to achieve these new learning goals, and therefore, teachers should be allowed time within the school day to work on collaborative projects or learn from their peers.
In an example school district, teachers collaborated on a team called the A-TEAM (Adaptive Technology Enhancing Academics through Modifications). These teachers received training on various technology integration programs and provided support and training to other teachers in their building levels. Additional roles of this group included development of curricular resources throughout the district, resource allocation, and specialized teams that made decisions on technology purchased and/or used in the school district. The A-TEAM was successful in providing valuable resources to the teachers, taking away some of the stresses that come with curriculum adaptation and technology implementation.
Cunningham ends the article reiterating the importance of teachers. She states, "Teachers are the link — the variable and the hope — that tie the promise to reality. A comprehensive professional development program that is technology-focused can make or break the effort — more than any other single factor. Teachers are the backbone of any school system, and teacher salaries the most significant line item in the overall budget. Investing in their "professionalization" is pivotal to enriching the learning experience of students, in the short term, and for the long term — preparing them to become productive members of society."
Personally, I completely agree with Cunningham's assessment of the need for professional development for successful technology integration. As I stated on our Technology Planning Committee, there are teachers all over the spectrum, and they ultimately provide the link between technology and student learning. No matter how much money a district spends on Smartboards, new computers, or new software programs, without professional development, these technologies will not meet their true objective - to provide students with the skills to be life-long learners. While all the resources we have looked at throughout this course invest some time in discussing professional development, I have found that districts seem to "talk the talk" and not "walk the walk" in regards to technology training and professional development. While districts probably mention staff development within their technology plans, how many of these districts are making active strides to actualize their plans. While our district has created some technology staff development programs like the Summer Tech Academy and optional inservices, there is still a long way to go before all of our teachers make it to the "integration" end of the continuum. This is a complicated subject because it is difficult to meet the varying needs of several different teachers (much like it is in classroom full of students with varying abilities); however, the key to success is having a long-term visions/goal for staff development. One that has objectives, tasks, and assessments that will guide staff along the continuum to eventual successful integration.
Cunningham, J. (2003, July 1). Between technology and teacher effectiveness: Professional development. techLearning, Retrieved October 5, 2007, from http://www.techlearning.com/showArticle.php?articleID=10810511
Educational Leadership and Planning for Technology
Chapter Four: Technology in Educational Administration
Summary/Review
The fourth chapter of Educational Leadership and Planning for Technology discusses how technology has found its place within the schools, just as it has in businesses - for administrative tasks. Picciano states that there are three broad categories of administrative applications including a) databases to manage data and information, b) electronic spreadsheets that manage and manipulate numerical data, and c) office automation to manage text and communications. According to Picciano, schools have made significant strides over the last five decades to take all paper-based data and improve it by making it into electronic information systems.
The most important of the administrative applications is the database management systems. Databases allow schools to collect, verify, update, and report a wide range of data in a short period of time. Picciano states that all school districts, regardless of their level of operation, should have development, improvement, and upgrading their database management system as a priority with the growing wave of technology. Databases can be used to manage any information. In schools, database programs are used to record and manage financial information (budget, payroll, purchasing, etc.), curriculum and course information (course master, history, scheduling, grades, etc.), personnel information (course assignments, evaluations, scholarly activities), facilities (building inventory, supplies inventory, equipment inventory, etc.), and most importantly, student information (transcripts, attendance, grades, test scores, and schedules). While Picciano discusses the importance of all of these databases, the most important part of data collection involves student information because it contributes to many tasks outside the school. For instance, student attendance (recorded into a database) determines how much funding a school gets; therefore, it needs to be accurate at all times. Secondly, the success of students outside of the school (in college particularly) relies heavily on accurate data collection and storage of the GPA, test scores, and grades throughout high school. With student data always updating and changing, it is important to have a strong database management system in place within the school districts.
The second administrative application is electronic spreadsheets that manage and manipulate numerical data. Picciano asserts that information in the electronic spreadsheets should come directly from or correspond with the database managements system that has been placed in schools. Whereas when administrative technology was first introduced and spreadsheets were used to record data, spreadsheets have now found the place as an indispensable tool for planning and modeling. Oftentimes, information is downloaded into an electronic spreadsheet to provide budget proposals, salary schedules, and other summaries of data. Picciano states that electronic spreadsheets excel in providing "what if" scenarios in a logical and easy to follow format (with graphic representations). Just like databases, electronic spreadsheets can be utilized to show student data (enrollment projections, grade analysis, test score analysis), personnel data (salary projections, retirement projections, sick leave analysis), facilities data (space summaries, construction costs), financial data (budget projections, cash flow analysis), and curriculum/course data (course grade analysis, course requirements analysis). Spreadsheets are important in the presentation and manipulation of all these forms of data.
The final administrative application is office automation, which is used on a regular basis by teachers and administrators. From its original role of word processing, office automation has grown with the invention of the Internet to include desktop publishing, electronic mail, voice mail and databases. Picciano goes on to discuss the various uses for office automation, providing a detailed description of how each program can be used in the school environment. Like the other two administrative applications, office automation can be used in all the "breakdown" categories including student (home correspondence, newsletters, notices), personnel (action forms, meeting notices, appointments), facilities (inventory reports, word order processing), financial (budget request forms, billing, etc.), and curriculum/course (curriculum, meeting agendas, meeting minutes). There is no question that these are all in place somewhere, if not everywhere, in schools at this point.
In addition to the top three, Picciano provides a list of five specialized administrative applications: 1) portals - like ERIC and LEXIS/NEXIS, 2) Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) and Statistical Analysis System (SAS) for statistical analysis of data, 3) test-scoring equipment and software, 4) automatic telephone calling systems, computer equipment, and stored voice message equipment, and 5) computer applications for energy management. All of these programs, like the top three, provide even more support to teachers, administrators, and support staff in running an efficient and productive school.
Being a younger teacher, I have not been in a school district where these administrative applications were not already in place. When I entered the School District of Milton three years ago, they were introducing their new online database management system, Skyward, and changing over all the phones throughout the district to include more automated voice messaging systems. Additionally throughout school, I learned how to implement the use of database programs and office automation into my daily obligations, so I did not go through the abrupt change that many other teachers in my school district went through. Currently, we are piloting the Skyward Family Access program that allows parents to access student grades at home. While I had no problem volunteering, other teachers in my school were hesitant because they had not even mastered the use of Skyward as a gradebook. I am a big supporter of using these administrative applications in a school environment, because it makes it much easier to manage the enormous amount of varying data within a school day, month, or year. It will be interesting to see what the future holds for these programs.
Picciano, Anthony G. (2006). Educational leadership and planning for technology. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Evaluating Administrative Software
Administrative Side of Course Management Systems
Evaluation of Web-based Course Management Software from Faculty and Student User-Centered Perspectives
The following model is used to evaluate web-based course management software. The majority of the evaluation is looking at the web-based course management software from an administrative point of view; therefore, I found it to be very relevant to the assignment. With more and more schools looking at creating online learning environments and providing more opportunities for students to view their courses online, it is important to not only look at the features, but also look at how it can be supported. Below are the categories and evaluation criteria for each category. Both faculty and students rated the importance of the various course management features on a 6-point scale (1- indicating the feature was of very little importance to web-enabled curriculum and 6- indicating the feature was very important or a "must have"). To conserve space, I separated the criteria by commas versus line breaks!
General Features
Static toolbar, Table of Contents, Customized "look and feel" (colors, icons, logos, etc.), Automated glossary tool, Automated link to course material content, Automated indexing tool, Search tool for course material, Student can make private annotations of course material, Integrated Calendar tool, Can support foreign languages, Instructor can define groups of students (Can assign specific material to individuals or groups, Collaborative work area for group, Group presentation area), Individual presentation area/homepage, Student file upload capability/instructor comments, Conforms to Instructional Management System (IMS) specifications, Conforms to World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) specifications, Other
Authoring Features
Does not require knowledge of HTML, Allows Java applets, Requires plug-ins, Has drag and drop authoring features, Allows Macromedia files, Allows FrontPage files, Allows links to custom developed pages, allows custom graphics, Other
Course Management Features
Class list can be entered one student at a time or uploaded as a file, Class list can be uploaded as a file, Class lists can be presented, saved, and printed using Excel, Online student manual, Online instructor manual, Course can be downloaded for safekeeping, Courses can easily be moved from one server to another, Directory upload capability from desktop, Student tracking features (Can track how often student accesses pages, Can track when student accesses pages, Can track time spent on each page), Other
Communication Features
One to one course email, One to many course email, Searchable asynchronous discussion, Logged synchronous discussion, Virtual field trips within discussion pages, Shared whiteboard, Adaptable for desktop video-teleconferencing
Grading Features
Student access to progress data available, Ability to add offline grades, Grade statistics and/or histograms, Instructor comments available with grade, Scores can be emailed to instructor, Scores can be stored on server, Scores can be exported into Excel, Other
Quizzing Features
Quizzes automatically graded and entered into gradebook, Allows for the following automatically graded question types (True/False - Multiple Choice, Fill in the Blank, List Matching, Essay Questions, Imagemaps, Short Answer), Questions can have multiple correct answers, Can use a mixture of question types on a single quiz, One question at-a-time testing capability, Question file upload capability, Customized feedback, Redirect path dependent on question answers, Timed quizzes, Delivered on-line on a predetermined time and day, Supports graphics files adjacent to quiz question, Supports both tutorial and real exam scenarios, Random assignment of questions to exams, Allows weighting of questions so students get equal quizzes, Other
Server/Operating Systems Compatibility
Unix, NT, Macintosh, Solaris, Linux, Other
The above evaluation is very thorough in evaluating the various features of the course management system. Some of the important features that are important for effective use in the schools include the ability to upload class lists from existing databases and spreadsheets and the ability to upload/download files with smooth transitions. From an administrative standpoint, this evaluation provides answers to several technical questions that would need to be answered before implementing the course management systems such as the server/operating systems compatibility and whether or not the information could be moved from one server to another (a common problem when technology is being upgraded and updated from year to year). The evaluation criteria for the course features (grading, quizzing, communication, and general features) allows teachers to assess how much time they will need to spend in developing online curriculum, creating online assessment, managing course communication, and recording grades for the course. Therefore, I believe this is a thorough evaluation that will provide keen insights into which course management system is right for the schools. If I were to use this evaluation, the only feature that I would change would be how the features were rated. I think an initial survey of teachers and students could include rating the importance of the features, but there should be some type of record of whether the course management systems have the feature or not. Therefore, a second evaluation should be done to record a) if the feature is available or not and b) if the feature is not available, how important the feature is the overall success the course management system. Overall...I would use this evaluation (with the slight modifications) to evaluate a course management system.
Halloran, M. (2001, November). Evaluation of web-based course management software from faculty and student user-centered perspectives . Retrieved October 6, 2007, from United States Air Force Academy Web site: www.usafa.af.mil/df/iita/IITAPubs/Evaluation%20of%20Course%20Management%20Webforpdf.pdf
Evaluation of District Technology Plan
School District of Milton Technology Plan
The School District of Milton's Comprehensive Information Technology Plan directly follows the criteria of the Information and Technology Plan Review Approval Form. The introduction discusses relevant research done by the district planning committee and district technology team.
Milton's mission is as follows: "Our mission is to provide all members of the Milton Learning Community with the tools, access, and resources necessary to become lifelong learners who function as effective citizens in a 21st century global society. The Comprehensive Educational Technology Plan will provide the guiding principles for the mission programming." The vision is separated into two parts: a vision for students and staff and a vision for leadership and support system. Both visions relate technology integration to 21st century skills and real world applications. The mission and vision align with the district's overall strategic plan.
After the background information, the plan discusses the 2006 enGauge needs assessment survey and an assessment of the progress made in 2004-2007 Technology Plan. The plan analyzes the success and shortcomings of the previous plan in sections entitled, Objectives Achieved, Objectives Postponed or Delayed and Why, and Objectives To Be Continued or Modified. Overall, much of the goals were achieved from the previous plan or continued into the new plan. One of the highlights was the addition of the Skyward administrative software with an extension in to the new plan with the Family Access portion.
The goals for the 2007-2010 Information Technology Plan for the School District of Milton were organized into four areas identified by the DPI which could be directly correlated to the enGauge six indicators for effective use of technology for learning: Educator Proficiency, Effective Teaching and Learning Practices, Access to Information Resources and Learning Tools, and Systems Support and Leadership. While Student Proficiency is not directly addressed in the categories for the plan, some of the objectives within the other four categories apply to technology attitudes and proficiency levels of students. With the school district's new technology initiatives gearing more towards student learning (like the addition of Moodle), there should be a separate category and objectives for this plan.
The remainder of the plan includes goals, objectives, and a table of the various specifics of each objective. The tables include the following: detailed activities to achieve objectives, leadership/groups responsible, resources needed (software/hardware/professional development/human resources), time frame (beginning and end), and measures for success. The goals and objectives fall heavily on the library media and technology staff updating their hardware, software, and support systems with some goals for staff development and increased student and staff connections to the global community and emerging technologies that improve instruction.
After reviewing the plan in its entirety, I would say that it meets all of the standards addressed on the Technology Approval Form and also makes some great strides in forwarding administration, support staff, teacher, and student's movement into the 21st century global community. As stated earlier, there should be a separate section for student proficiency rather than having some student objectives fall under the four main goal categories. Student learning and proficiency in information literacy and technology is just as, if not more important than educator proficiency or systems support and leadership. Being that there was not a student representative in the technology planning, it is no surprise that this may have been overshadowed by technology goals. Improvements could include adding a student representative to the future planning committee, creating a section for student proficiency, and possibly balancing the goals achieved by library media and technology staff with goals/objectives achieved by students and staff within the district.
Week Three Assignments
Technology Integration Podcast
Consumers or Producers?
Jim Lengel - Hunter College School of Education
Podcast/Article Review #3
The podcast, Consumers or Producers? by Jim Lengel expands upon an assertion made by Richard Jenkins of MIT. Jenkins stated that today's young people have an "expectation to participate." He goes on to state that "it's a desire to be part of the world and to be taken seriously on their own terms, to be not just a consumer of culture, but also a producer of culture." Lengel notes that students in our schools today have changed from passive consumers (watching television, listening to the radio, and playing video games) to successful producers (composing music, capturing video, and publishing opinions). He emphasizes the need for teachers to understand "how our students produce their own media, and then figure out how to exploit this production process into our curriculum."
Within the past few years, students have been exposed to many programs and software tools that make it easy for them to produce their own media products. Programs noted in Lengel's podcast include GarageBand and Audacity to compose music and to create podcasts and iMovie or Moviemaker to produce video presentations. Lengel also states that students have added these programs to their already growing repertoire of PowerPoint presentations, Word documents, and emails. While the productions were once printed off and handed in to a teacher, the channels of distribution have also changed. Students now post their ideas to websites, carry them on memory sticks (flash drives), communicate them using Instant Messenger or iPods. Lengel asserts that these methos are "faster, easier, less expensive, use less paper, and are more appropriate to the form and content of their messages."
While podcast discusses the various methods of distribution in greater detail, its main objective is to not ignore these changes. Too often do school ban one or more of these methods of production and distribution because they are ignorant of their capabilities and are hesitant to use a form of technology that students may know more about than teachers. Lengel argues that teachers should not ignore the phenomenon of students as content producers, but rather embrace it and incorporate student production as a curriculum requirement. Some suggestions posed by Lengel include assigning a Hamlet's soliloquy as a podcast, creating a video with maps and photos of troop movements, narrating animation of a caterpillar's metamorphosis into a butterfly, or creating original music and lyrics for a character in a storybook. This idea lends itself to the enGauge category of High Productivity. Creating student-centered projects, where students determine the means by which they will create a project and the final product, will not only provide students with the opportunity to explore new methods of media production, but also teach them the proper uses for the new software programs. Rather than posting a video of tea bag rockets on YouTube, students could post a PSA on the dangers of drinking and driving during Homecoming week. The possibilities are endless if a teacher chooses to embrace technology versus ignore or ban it.
This podcast reiterates the fact that the longer teachers, administrators, and school districts ignore or ban these new waves of technology, the more students are going to rebel and use the methods in unproductive ways. For example, my high school has Apple computers equipped with Garageband, iMovie, and even email for all the students. However, the technology department has created strict rules that do not allow students to use any of these programs outside of classroom assignments. Students who are caught writing emails or using GarageBand to compose music in their study halls are kicked off the computers completely for two weeks. While I understand that students should have limits to what they should be using the technology for, I find it ironic that the technology department offers the technology only to ban it from student use two seconds later. Therefore, the technology is not being used by students in the spare time (during study halls or lunch) and the technology is left unused. It is a teacher's responsibility then to create curriculum that teaches students how to properly use these programs and to utilize them in their curriculum on a regular basis. Technology should be embraced, not ignored or banned, and yet again, teachers need to take the active role in embracing the technology and making time to integrate the technology into their existing curriculum.
Lengel, J. (2007, September 5). [Podcast] Consumers or producers?. Teaching with Technology Podcast. Retrieved September 30, 2007, from http://powertolearn.typepad.com/teaching_with_technology/2007/09/consumers-or-pr.html
Week Two Assignments
Educational Leadership and Planning for Technology
Chapter Three: Technology, Learning, and Equity Issues
Summary/Review
The third chapter of Educational Leadership and Planning for Technology discusses the growing debate on how beneficial technology integration is for the varying student body, while highlighting the importance of taking several factors (including gender issues, minority issues, and socioeconomic issues) into account when seeking to create a technology-enriched environment for the school. Picciano begins by stating that Lewis Perelman's statement that "teachers could be replaced with computers" is unjustified because teaching and learning involves complex communication that cannot be "replaced" with technology. Rather, technology should supplement and enrich curriculum in the classroom. Picciano asserts that Integrated Learning Systems (ILSs), or computer managed instruction, should not replace curriculum entirely, but it should be utilized at the right time, in the right amount, to the entire population of students.
A portion of this chapter discusses the need to start technology integration early. Picciano states that there is 33% more computer equipment in high schools and middles schools than in elementary schools, largely due to the fact that the upper levels have more computer science courses and require more development of career skills like typing, programming, etc. The chapter highlights the fact that administrators and teachers should look at "technology readiness" when making decisions for technology integration in elementary schools. For instance, they should look at cognitive development, finger dexterity, hand-eye coordination, computer instructions, and technology integration in the content areas. Administrators and technology coordinators should be evaluating the software made available to students while teachers encourage students to use technology in the classroom and find proper placement for technology within their existing curriculum. Picciano also discusses the importance of assistive technology (voice input/output programs, etc.) in helping special education students. Technology, when integration is carefully planned, can work as an asset to younger students as well as older students needing assistive help.
The remainder of this chapter points out that technology cannot be effectively integrated into existing curriculum without taking into consideration gender, minority, and socioeconomic issues. First, Picciano asserts that while there are inconsistent data results comparing male/female performance using computers, there is a gender difference in the attitudes towards technology. Women primarily use technology as a productive tool, while males tend to "play around" with technology more. Stereotypical views have affected females attitudes towards computer interest, computer confidence, and overall use of technology - in one case, showing that only 15% of students taking the AP Computer Science exam were females. Picciano states that schools need to overcome these attitudanl problems by: 1) requiring students to take certain technology courses (as a way to bridge the gap and increase the number of females taking technology courses), 2) expand technology use in math and science areas, 3) integrate technology into the regular education classes, 4) educate parents and staff about their gender stereotypes (to ensure that they are not reinforced by adults in the students lives), and 4) establish positive role models for students. Secondly, Picciano looks at the differences between minority issues in technology use. He states that the three main factors to consider are access, student performance, and level of software use. While white students have more access to computers in their homes and schools and use the computer to enhance their higher-order thinking skills, minority students have less access to computers at home and in schools and use the computer for more drill-and-practice activities. Administration and teachers should take surveys of how many students have computer access at home and try not to isolate groups by providing opportunities for all students. The final issue, similar to that of race, is the socioeconomic status that establishes a "digital divide." While the digital divide is narrowing with programs like the laptop per student program implemented in some states or in-school computer labs being open beyond the school day, administrators and teachers need to consider all of these factors when taking strides to effectively integrated technology and technology use into their daily lessons.
Essentially, this chapter states that effective technology integration comes with balance. There needs to be a balance between technology-enriched and traditional lessons. There needs to be a balance between technology use by middle school and high school students and elementary students. There needs to be a balance between technology use of females and males. There needs to be a balance between technology offered for white students and minority students. There needs to be a balance between technology access for students of higher socioeconomic status and lower socioeconomic status. To establish this balance, teachers, administrators and technology coordinators need to evaluate the software chosen for the schools, educate parents and staff about these "dividing issues," and learn how to provide equal opportunities for all students.
Personally, I see some of these issues come up with the simplest of assignments. Although a large percentage of my students have a computer at home (with Internet access and a printer), there are several students that are lacking one of these elements. When assigning a typed essay, I need to evaluate how much computer lab time I need to reserve for my students (trying to balance the time allotted for students that do not have a computer with those who "prefer" to use their home computer to type, email, and/or print off their essays). When we look at expanding technology integration in schools like using Moodle or a classroom wiki for several assignments throughout the week, there are several factors to consider besides, "Does this technology enrich my lesson or not?" We need to look beyond having technology and integrating technology just for the sake of saying that we have it or are using it, and make sure that it benefits students in the long run. This comes with careful technology planning, not just a "quick transfer" of a PowerPoint presentation to a podcast.
Picciano, Anthony G. (2006). Educational leadership and planning for technology. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Great review!!! - Summary and perspective are refreshing - Louis
Technology Planning Podcast
Tim Wilson Interviews Dr. Anderson
Podcast/Article Review #2
The podcast, Tech Planning Podcast: Podcaster Time Wilson interviews Dr. Anderson, asking probing questions about technology planning and leadership, touches on several issues that have surfaced from discussions about effective technology plans, technology planning, and overall leadership. Dr. Larry Anderson, founding member and director of the National Center for Technology Planning, answers several questions including how to transition from having a technology plan as a document (which he calls the "noun" technology plan) to a technology plan as a practice (which he calls the "verb" technology plan).
Dr. Anderson begins his podcast by describing several elements that are needed to have an effective comprehensive technology plan. Two items that he discusses is the concept of leadership development and community involvment/teambuilding. Dr. Anderson highlights the role of the teacher in the technology planning process because he/she is the link between the administrators and the students. He/she will also the person utilizing the plan and making it into an actualized process. Dr. Anderson asserts that teachers need to take a new leadership role in the technology planning process, and the teachers that are going to be the optimal choice for these roles are teachers that a) have a vested interest in technology integration and b) are able to marry their old lessons with what is outlined in the technology plan. Therefore, these teachers do not have to reinvent the wheel, but they need to be active participants in the planning process and be willing to give the plan "wings". The second aspect that needs to be considered a priority in the tech planning process is community involvement and teambuilding. Community resources should be identified and teachers should take an active role in seeking out parent and student involvement in the process. Dr. Anderson states that when people begin asking the question, "How do we manage individual responsibilities?" that is when people are ready for progress and change.
Mr. Wilson asks Dr. Anderson the following question that has been at the forefront of the debate over whether or not state-mandated plans have influence on advancement in student learning: "How does a school district take a state-mandated document and make it into something that will work?" Dr. Anderson states that a format made by another entity (outside the school district) will never provide the best plan for the school. To make it valuable, technology planning committees should choose 3-10 items that they want to accomplish or would like to see accomplished within the next three years. He then states that the committee should look for volunteers that would "take on the opportunity and champion it to success." He says that semantics are important - making technology integration an "opportunity" versus a "task" that will be "championed" versus "accomplished." Later, Dr. Anderson highlights the key members of a committee including teachers (from all levels of the school district: elementary to high school), community members, parent members, student members, and administration. He states that principals should choose members of their staff that would best represent the school and superintendents should always have the final say in "signing off" on a team. He highlights the importance of having the highest member of the team (the superintendent) involved and invested in making the technology plans successful. This investment could include providing inservice time, more resources, etc.
The final part of the discussion that resonates most with teachers is the language involved in the plan. In most cases, technology plans include little language about the classroom, curriculum and student learning and focus the majority of the time/space on discussing the amount of equipment, bandwith, etc. Dr. Anderson states, after reviewing over 1,000 technology plans in his lifetime, that plans that focus on the technology equipment and amount of technology provided are not embracing the benefits of having an effective and comprehensive technology plan. Using, what he calls, "technospeak" is just a nail in the coffin. Schools that have effective technology plans focus on visionary aspects of technology like how the students will benefit from technology down the road. Good technology plans discuss teaching philosophies, how students, parents, and the communities will be involved, and how they plan to adapt to changes that will occur in the three-five year period.
On a personal note, I was able to participate with our school's technology planning last year. As I have stated earlier, I found it frustrating as the only teacher on the committee when the technology coordinator spent the majority of the plan talking about all of the technology that was "available" or would be "available" because of the technology team's hardwork. While I strongly believe that our technology department thinks about the future of education, our technology coordinator is missing a key piece of the pie - integration in the classroom. Thus far, we have received new computers and opened an entirely new computer lab, have purchased programs like Read 180 and Safari Montage, and have access for all teachers to use iWeb and Moodle to create interactive and technology centered classrooms, but there has been little progress made in getting teachers to utilize the technology. Only teachers that actively seek out the information are supplied with instruction to utilize the technology in their classroom and those teachers are few and far between. Personally, I think that our technology department needs to make more active strides in providing staff development and training opportunities along with making the information readily available to teachers. What is the benefit of having the technology if it is not being used in the classroom? As a teacher that does seek out ways to integrate technology into the classroom, I also need to take the leadership role that Dr. Anderson was referring to, in the hopes of appealing to other teachers. The key to the success of technology in the classroom relies heavily on the teacher and there should be more focus on getting teachers the information and resources they need to utilize technology in advancing student learning and achievement.
Wilson, Tim (2005, August 26). [Podcast] Tech planning podcast: Podcaster Tim Wilson interviews Dr. Anderson, asking probing questions about technology planning and leadership. Savvy Technologist Podcast. Retrieved September 22, 2007, from http://support.hopkins.k12.mn.us/STP-LarryAnderson.mp3
Week One Assignments
Educational Leadership and Planning for Technology
Chapter One: Introduction to Technology and Planning
Summary/Review
The first chapter of Educational Leadership and Planning for Technology highlights the fact that technology, to be successful, should be integrated into the main functions of schools, while providing insights into the reasons why technological integration has not been as successful or as smooth of a transition in education as it has in the business world. Picciano asserts that in the 20th century technology centered around print media whereas in the 21st century, electronic media has reached the forefront. Yet, electronic media has met some resistance from educators who have expressed reservations about its implementation into schools. Picciano states that this resistence can be attributed to several factors from educators' personal computer use to lack of careful planning.
One of the factors contributing to education being behind business in technology integration and implementation is teacher's individual use of technology. Teachers who use technology on their own believe that it enhances learning; however teachers who were trained before 1990 have not had technology as a routine part of their education and therefore do not know how to utilize it as a teaching tool. While technology use for administrative duties like attendance and grade-keeping has transitioned well into the schools, technology use for instructional purposes needs additional help through the staff development, curricular integration technology plans, and facilitating ongoing maintenance of hardware and software programs. Picciano emphasizes the need for "total integration," which includes approved technology plans and evaluation/feedback from all areas. Top-down implementation only brings more resistance to change whereas gathering feedback from the people using the technologies and integrating them into their classroom provides an atmosphere willing to grow. Picciano states that the systems approach of input, process, and output helps highlight this interrelationship.
Personally, I have found some of this resistance to technology in my school, particularly within my English Department. Currently, we have nine members of our department, four of which are veteran teachers that are resistant to technology use (two of which do not want to use the gradebook program that is now mandatory this year). The other members of the department are younger teachers who have gone through their educational schooling with technology as a prominent figure. The divide within the department sets "old school" versus "new school", which ultimately affects our students education. When I began my masters program, I enthusically began sharing information on blogs, wikis, and other Web 2.0 technologies with my department only to find resistance. Fortunately, our administration (including our Director of Curriculum and Instruction) is making positive steps in providing staff development trainings in technology. Hopefully, teachers will see the benefits of technology integration and make the necessary steps to learn the technologies for themselves.
Picciano, Anthony G. (2006). Educational leadership and planning for technology. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Educational Leadership and Planning for Technology
Chapter Two: Basic Concepts of Planning
Summary/Review
The second chapter of Educational Leadership and Planning for Technology focuses on evaluating the social and rational models used in educational and technology planning, while discussing the varying needs in evaluating administrative and instructional applications. Picciano begins by asserting that the common social system model is not the most efficient approach for large complex organizations like education. With so many people having personal expectations, goals, and objectives, the social system model does not allow for people to see the "big picture."
Picciano outlines the four major elements of a successful educational planning model including: comprehensiveness, collaboration, commitment, and continuity. People involved in the technology plan should have a good view of the school and what they want to accomplish. Additionally, they should know the needs of the various individuals within the environment (some of which will be very specific) and also have a comprehensive list of the goals and objectives. Collaboration among administrators, specialists, teachers, and support staff bring knowledge, expertise, and experience to the planning process - allowing for different perspectives and an overall more thorough outlook. Commitment must come after the technology plan has been finalized. People should commit to implementing the plans, formulating and meeting goals and objectives, and evaluating the progress in the end. Continuity stems from the idea that education is always continuous and never-ending. In order to show students how to live and function in society, goals and objectives should always continue to adapt to those changes. Picciano also states that one of the most important aspects of the social process model is to use external environmental scanning that involves the community, state, and society in establishing and developing goals for the school and developing contacts with the community.
While Picciano addresses the hesitation and resistance to testing and evaluation (something which students and teachers deem as unjustified pressure to perform), he states that it is important to establish evaluation criteria that is a) appropriate for the goals and b) if instructionally administered, takes into consideration several forms of evaluation. He states that good planning helps minimize risks by establishing basic evaluation criteria that defines, designs, develops, and disseminates technology in small stages when it is instructionally administered.
Picciano goes on to discuss themes behind applying administrative and instructional applications. Administrative application themes include: 1) developing/improving information resources, 2) providing/improving new administrative services, and 3) improving/increasing administrative productivity and efficiency. Planning for these applications (usually database management software) would most often come from a central level such as the school district level and expand to the various schools within the district. Instructional application themes include: 1) preparing students to participate in a technology-oriented society, 2) enhancing/improving learning using technology tools, 3) enhancing/improving teaching using technology tools, and 4) providing technology-based curricula for students with an interest in technology. The first and second instructional themes require development of specific courses in addition to technology integrated courses. The third instructional theme requires staff development and evaluation/feedback from staff, and the fourth instructional theme requires the addition of elective courses and/or vocational programs. Most instructional applications should be planned for at a building or district level with careful consideration of having members of on the planning committee that have expertise within the field. Teachers, grade-level coordinators, and department chairs would be ideal to create the initial proposals being that they will be the ones to implement the plan in their classrooms, grades, or departments.
Personally, I have had experience in writing a technology plan for our school district last year. Our technology planning team included the technology coordinator, lead library media specialist, director of curriculum and instruction, and me (an English teacher/Instructional Technology masters student). Honestly, I would have liked the administrative members of the team to have focused more on staff development and instructional application administration. Several of our technology goals and objectives focused on the hardware/software updates versus how we could get technology into our classrooms. Overall, it was an eye-opening experience because it exposed me to the differences between personal objectives given the various roles in the district. The technology coordinator wanted to show how our school district was making strides to introduce new technology, our library media specialists wanted to highlight the various online resources that we've obtained, the director of curriculum and instruction wanted to focus on standards, and I wanted to focus on practical application within the classroom starting with more staff development. This "seconds" Picciano's assertion that it is extremely important to gain as many perspectives as possible in creating the initial plan so there are less "bumps in the road" when it comes to implementation.
Picciano, Anthony G. (2006). Educational leadership and planning for technology. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Needs Assessment Evaluation
enGauge Online Assessment
Although this program has a subscription fee, I found that it is one of the most comprehensive technology needs assessments provided online. One of the main reasons I found this program beneficial is because it has several different assessment geared towards various members of a school district including educator, district administrator, building administator, district technology coordinator, building technology coordinator, board member, community member, student, and parent. This needs assessment reaches several of the members that Picciano highlighted as good members to gain feeback from in the technology planning process. In each specific survey, the enGauge assessments looks at different connections with technology. For the Educator survey, the assessment includes alignment to the vision, learning environment, range of use, relevance, proficiency with technology, digital age equity, access, systems and leadership, and shared vision. The questions are rather simple and the answers are standard for each question which makes it easy to complete for a thorough evaluation.
Our school district used the enGauge survey for our needs assessment before writing our technology plan. The enGauge assessment provided valuable information about the technology knowledge and levels of our teachers and students and helped us create a plan that would better meet the needs and fill in the gaps.
Learning Point Associates, (2004). enGauge Online Assessment. Retrieved September 16, 2007, from North Central Regional Educational Laboratory Web site: http://www.ncrel.org/engauge/assess/assess.htm
Needs Assessment Evaluation
MCCSC Technology Skills, Interests, and Needs
Although the format of this assessment could use some work, the assessment provided by the Monroe County Community School Corporation is another thorough needs assessment. As stated on their website, the purpose of the assessment was 1) to determine professional development interests and needs, 2) to develop a descriptive summary of technology skills and usage, 3) to identify a cadre of individuals willing to share skills and techniques with colleagues, and 4) to inventory the type and level of technology in use both at work and at home. One of the benefits to this assessment is that it provides options for a range of technology levels. For instance, it asks if one can browse the World Wide Web (a beginner skill) and also asks if one can use formulas in a database (an advanced skill). Some of the options could be adapted and updated based on the needs of the specific school, being that different school districts/schools value different uses of technology and may not see the benefit in including some of the options available. I also like how the assessment asks for feedback on training times and formats. Giving educators options always gives them ownership in what they are doing.
Our school district has been looking at ways to provide additional staff development opportunities for technology integration. This summer, our district held a Summer Tech Academy for teachers interested in learning more about technology and how to integrate it into their classrooms. (Our superintendent took the course and was able to create a Moodle site. She was so proud!) Before the Summer Tech Academy was created, each teacher in our district filled out a needs assessment similar to this one in order to give the instructors feedback on teachers' technology skills going into the training and provide information on what teachers deemed important to learn. Overall, the Summer Tech Academy proved to be a beneficial experience and they are looking at having one each summer. Additionally, they are also using feedback from the summer academy to provide information and resources to teachers who could not attend but expressed interest in their surveys.
Monroe County Community School Corporation, (1996). MCCSC Technology SIN Assessment. Retrieved September 16, 2007, from Monroe County Community School Corporation Web site: http://www.mccsc.edu/survey.html
Harvard Graduate School of Education
Change Leadership Group
Webpage/Article Review #1
The Change Leadership Group (CLG) at the Harvard Graduate School of Education was created in 1999 with a five-year grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The group focused on collaborating with leadership teams of school districts, helping them develop organizational and developmental systems to address issues with student performance. Their belief is that students should develop higher levels of intellectual and social skills for life-long learning. The CLG uses a systematic approach to improving education. Their mission statement is that they want to a) create and gather knowledge to support sustained systematic changes in K-12 public education that results in improved learning for all students, b) help school and district leaders create "Leadership Practice Communities" to strengthen local capacity for change, and c) share key finding with a diverse group of educational leaders.
The website provides a case study from West Clermont, Ohio School District which enlisted the help the Change Leadership Group to generate and facilitate discussions within the school district as to why students were achieving at lower levels. The leadership team promoted hard discussions amongst the staff and community. They utilized the CLG's 7 Disciplines Diagnostic which includes: 1) Urgency for improvement around real data, 2) a shared vision of good teaching, 3) meeting content and processes focused on good instruction, 4) a shared vision of results, 5) effective supervision, 6) professional development, and 7) diagnostic data with accountable collaboration. Within five years, students moved from testing 46% of students at developmental reading levels to 86% of students (including special education students) testing at or above developmental reading levels.
The Change Leadership Group also outlines other strategies and philosophies for influential change. First, they follow the 3 Continua - expressing the need to be organized to create necessary "energy" for change, generate leadership throughout the system, and produce new knowledge for solving problems. The CLG teaches districts to move from being reactive, compliant, and isolated to having focus and purpose where educators are highly engaged and willing to collaborate. Secondly, the CLG emphasize the 4 C's of transformative change including: context, conditions, competencies, and culture. They state that "successful at-scale change — changes that ultimately transform teaching and learning for all students — requires building shared urgency around a recognized problem, developing a collective vision of success, and enacting your improvement strategies."
The website has several resources for administrators and educators looking to improve their schools. The Change Leadership Group also has a book that looks beneficial for learning more about implementing change within a school district. The book is entitled, Change Leadership: A Practical Guide to Transforming Our Schools.
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has made excellent strides in facilitating influential changes in our public schools and the Change Leadership Group is one such success story. Through the use of the resources provided on the website and the knowledge gained from the articles and theories, administrators and educators to utilize the 7 Disciplines Diagnostic, 3 Continua, and 4 C's to implement changes within their own school district. The Change Leadership Group website reinforces the assertions made in both the book and the articles that we researched in our group - showing that change takes time, careful planning, and enthusiastic teachers, administrators, and staff.
On a personal note, I have been working on implementing changes in my English Department. Over the course of the past three years (the time I have been in the school district) we have had several faculty changes. Currently, we have only three members of the department who have been in the district for more than five years, one member who has been in the district for exactly five years, and the rest who have only a few years of experience both teaching and being the district. Conflicts have occurred throughout the past two years because we had poor leadership at a department level. Now, I have taken over the role of department chair and I have had the daunting task of "reuniting" our department members under a new philosophy. Some members of the group, specifically our veteran members, needed to move from being reactive and isolated from the rest of the group, and as the new leader of the department, I focused on giving the changes a focus and purpose versus just throwing ideas out in discussions. Through the focused goals, we have come together as a department and teachers are more willing to collaborate with one another on curriculum changes, new technology implementations, and overall teaching goals. It has been a challenge; however, these articles have reinforced my conviction to successfully lead our department in making progressive improvements before we are forced to make reactive changes.
Harvard Graduate School of Education, (2004). Change Leadership Group. Retrieved September 16, 2007, from Harvard Graduate School of Education Web site: http://www.gse.harvard.edu/clg/index.html
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.