Educational Leadership: An Anachronism's View

Research Action Plan

2010-07-30T07:22:00.001-07:00

The goals of this action research project are:

To improve the performance of economically disadvantaged students on the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS)
To facilitate economically disadvantaged students in developing the skills necessary to become successful learners
To encourage teachers to reflect on their attitudes concerning the efficacy of medications and interventions for economically disadvantaged students

Research Action Plan

ACTION STEPS	PERSON RESPONSIBLE	TIMELINE START/STOP	NEEDED RESOURCES	EVALUATION
Obtain approval for campus research project	Building principal, Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum	January of the school year preceding the study	Research proposal, action plan time line	Approval to conduct research
Recruit and obtain background checks community volunteers, create database of volunteers	Local community faith based and service organizations	January as soon as research proposal is approved	Volunteer criminal background check forms, volunteer guideline packets	Volunteer database created
Obtain approval for monthly professional learning community meetings during instructional time and substitutes	Building principal	January of the school year preceding the study	Research proposal, action plan time line	Approval for meeting dates
Solicit teachers for participation in research project	Building principal/assistant principal Teacher conducting research	May of the school year preceding the study	Copies of research proposal	At least two teachers will be recruited to participate
Obtain approval for 12 hrs summer in-service hours for participating teachers	Building principal/assistant principal Teacher conducting research	May of the school year preceding the study	Copies of research proposal	Approval for in-service from curriculum director
12 hrs summer in-service hours for participating teachers (Needs of under-resourced learners, professional learning communities, and working with community volunteers)	Teacher conducting research Service center specialist Participating teachers	Summer preceding research year	A Frame work for Understanding Poverty (Payne, 1995) Under-resourced Learners: 8 Strategies to Boost Student Achievement (Payne, 2008)	In-service feedback/ reflection forms
Monthly learning community meetings	Teacher conducting research Participating teachers	Begin August tear of study/ end May year of study	Eduphoria! School Objects: Aware^TM(2004) data disaggregation software (Disaggregation of student bench mark data, and TAKS results)	TAKS data improvement for economically disadvantaged students
Disaggregation of data from research study	Teacher conducting research Participating teachers	May, after results from TAKS released	Eduphoria! School Objects: Aware^TM(2004) data disaggregation software	TAKS data improvement for economically disadvantaged students
Presentation of research project results	Teacher conducting research Participating teachers	August in-service prior to year subsequent of study	Data disaggregation presentation from study	TAKS data improvement for economically disadvantaged students

Tool 7.1 Action Planning Template (Harris, Edmonson, & Combs, 2010, p. 85)

Research Proposal

2010-07-26T15:32:00.000-07:00

I began as an educator 20 years ago. I came into education from a middle class family where education was not only expected of me, it was made a priority for me. I had a tremendous exposure to a plethora of world cultures and was taught to appreciate the value each had to offer. I attended an extremely culturally diverse high school of 1500 students. However, it was not until I began working as a high school athletic trainer that I truly became aware of the diversity that exists in the households in which many students live. I became aware of the reality of the culture of poverty, as described by Payne (1995), five years ago while teaching in a high school of 300 students in a small North Florida rural community. I had a unique experience weekly to travel to some of the homes of our most economically disadvantaged students. I was subsequently hired at a suburban Texas high school experiencing an unprecedented increase in economically disadvantaged students. Professional development for the district focused on attempting to change the campus culture and pedagogical methodologies aimed at improving the performance of these students from the culture of poverty.

Payne (1995) recognizes distinct difference between the cultures of the affluent, middle class, and economically disadvantaged. She asserts that students from any one class seeking an education in the culture of another class would face challenges and difficulties due to the cultural differences inherent within the classes. Epstein (National Network of Partnership Schools, 2009) lists several benefits of community involvement or mentoring on student performance: increased skill in communicating with adults, increased learning of skills that receive tutoring, awareness of careers and educational options for the future, connects the student to the community, provides students with needed resources for learning, and awareness of skills, talents, occupations, and contributions of volunteers. Increased academic performance, increased self esteem, increased motivation, and decreased discipline incidences are cited by Ferrara & Ferrara (2005) as benefits of stake holder involvement and interventions in schools.

I propose a project researching the effects of research based classroom interventions on the performance of economically disadvantaged students on the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) test compared to the results for the same grade level and test for previous years.. Preferably, I would like to use a teacher from each of the core subjects committed to learning for all to form a professional learning community centered around the improving the performance of economically disadvantaged students. The professional learning community would use the books A Frame work for Understanding Poverty (Payne, 1995) and Under-resourced Learners: 8 Strategies to Boost Student Achievement (Payne, 2008). The learning community will also be involved in seeking out research based interventions from other sources. I feel certain that I can find at least one teacher from each core subject to participate. If I cannot find a teacher from each of the core subjects, participation by two teachers in their classrooms should yield adequate qualitative and quantitative data from which to draw conclusions.

It is my expectation for the interventions to demonstrate an increase in student performance on TAKS. The climate and culture of our campus is mixed in its approach to dealing with economically disadvantaged students. Some teachers feel that interventions and modifications for economically disadvantaged students enable them to perform at a lower level of rigor. They hold these ideas in the belief that the interventions are ethically wrong as they violate a sense of equity among the students. Other teachers recognize the culture of poverty and seek to use the interventions and modifications to scaffold the students into the mainstream learning culture of the campus. I understand that I cannot change the actions or ideas of another person. I am fully aware that the probability of convincing some of these teachers to change their minds is at zero. It is my desire that the skepticism of some of those towards the center of the two poles on the issue of interventions and modifications for economically disadvantaged classroom students will diminish as a result of this research. Perhaps they will then feel comfortable within their own sense of educational equity to begin applying some of the interventions suggested in the literature for the economically disadvantaged students in their classrooms. .

References

Ferrara, M. & Ferrara, P. (2005). Parents as partners: Raising awareness as a teacher preparation program. The Clearing House, 79(2), 77.

National Network of Partnership Schools. (2009). Epstein’s six types of involvement. In Epstein, J.L., Salinas, K. C., Sanders, M.G., & Simon, B. S.
(1997). School and community partnerships: Your handbook in action. Thousand Oaks, CA:Corwin Press Retrieved May 28, 2010, from:
http://www.cpirc.org/vertical/Sites/%7B95025A21-DD4C-45C2-AE37-D35CA63B7AD9%7D/uploads/%7B1310DD65-F94A-457D-A680-9EE824084458%7D.PDF

Payne, R. (1995). A framework for understanding poverty. Highlands, TX: aha! Process, Inc.

Payne, R. (2008) Under-resourced learners: 8 strategies to boost student achievement. Highlands, TX: aha! Process, Inc.

Action Research: You can Lead a Horse to Water but You Can't Make Him Drink

2010-07-20T20:26:00.000-07:00

The purpose of the school is to educate all students. All of the functions of the school should be focused on maximizing learning for all students to the fullest extent of their inherent potential. When considering all the areas that avail themselves to campus based action research, they all eventually affect the learning of the students.

When I rode and trained horses for the public, I was once chastised by an older, more experienced horse training mentor for worrying too much about "why" a horse behaved or responded in a certain manner instead of simply getting on them to fix them. He told me to quit worrying about why and focus my energy and resources on changing those things. He was attempting to impress upon me the importance of not making excuses for the behaviors and work towards changing them. The same man taught me the key to riding and training horses is through "feel" or two -way communication between every part of the horse and rider. A stream of constant data feed back and reassessment that allows the rider to answer the why question at the root of the problem. He was telling me that what appears to be the problem and solution cannot be determined until I get up on the horse and research closely what is actually occurring through the data about the horses body movements collected via "feel". In the end, it can all be boiled down to a cue and a response relationship between the horse and rider based upon "feel". The rider can give a cue, modifying its intensity, duration, and location in order to receive a response. In the end, no matter how skilled the horseman, how strong the cue or how sweet the reward the response is entirely the horse's decision. You cannot make an 1100 pound animal do what is dead set on not doing, no matter how simple the task.

It is important to remember that as an administrator, I cannot change the actions or attitudes of another person. I can initiate, research, issue suggestion, issue directive, threaten, document, and beg. The final decision of action and implementation is ultimately in the hands of the teacher or student. Action research should not focus so much on controlling, directing, or changing the behavior of teachers and students. It should focus on understanding why behavior exists in the manner it does. Then the focus then becomes how to best use the knowledge gained to influence the change desired. The best purpose for action research in initiating change in behavior is convincing the horse it is their own idea to drink from the pond to which you have led them.

i

Action Research & Principal Inquiry: The Scientific Method Meets the Art of Teaching

2010-07-14T10:40:00.000-07:00

     The connotation of the word research brings to mind images of a bleary eyed academic holed up in the stacks of a university library pouring over bound versions of journals. It also bring to mind endless sets of data and tables related by statistical analysis and other mathematical manipulations akin to voo-doo in the mind of the educational practitioner. Traditional research paradigms typically seek to either effect a change in educational methodology or to study a particular relationship within the educational environment. It tends to view the education practitioner as either a device to facilitate the change in question or as a subject of study. In essence, traditional research views the education practitioner as either a beaker or a lab rat, not a scientist. This traditional research is generally conducted by researchers far removed from the daily practices of education and student contact. Any or all of these factors may serve to sour the educational practitioner to the idea of research as a necessity and effective tool for change in education.
   The action research paradigm places the educational professional in the role of researcher. The beaker becomes the scientist. Like traditional research, it involves the basic steps of the scientific method learned by students throughout their school career: identify a problem or question, research the problem or question, propose a hypothesis (educated guess) or possible action plan based on the research, implement the plan (experiment), monitor the results (collect and analyze the data), evaluate (draw conclusions), and reflect on the outcomes (report the findings). The difference is that it occurs within the educational setting and the researcher/ educator is a part of it. The the beaker, lab rat and scientist are essentially one in action research. Interestingly , the concept of action research is a part of every good teacher's lesson cycle. He or she presents the material, checks for student understanding, then reteaches if necessary. When students have difficulty grasping concepts, the artisan teacher strives to find the most effective way to relate it to the students. Classroom artisans intrinsically understand that if learning does not occur, neither has teaching. They change their approach until learning occurs.
Reflection is a key component of action research. In traditional research, publication of results allows for other researchers to learn from and scrutinize the results. Reflection allows the education practitioner/ researcher to do the same, but with a focus on personal professional development. Reflection in physics refers to waves bouncing off of an object back towards their source. Refraction is the change in wave direction as a wave passes through a medium such as a lens. Perhaps the term professional refraction is better suited to action research than reflection. Professional refraction, if you will indulge me, serves as an agent of change for the future actions and ideas of the professional as they pass through the lens of the current action research process and its outcomes.
Professional refraction can be accomplish via many mediums. A daily journal housed in a spiral notebook is an effective low cost method. The smart person learns from his or her mistakes, the truly smart person learns from the mistakes of others. In light of this axiom, would also not be true that the truly wise educator would seek to favorably alter their actions based on refractions from the lenses other educators research? This idea of group refraction lends itself to the use of blogs and on-line resources. Blogging and social media groups provide quick and easy access to the refractions of other professionals. They can also create virtual learning communities of professionals, These professional, who may be thousands of miles apart and would not have otherwise ever met, can now effectively engage in, and reap the benefit of group learning with a minimal amount of effort.
   Learning the cognitive fundamentals of teaching or leadership can be challenging but is an obtainable goal. Obtaining and possessing the knowledge does not make one effective in its implementation. The is because the nature of education and people make each situation unique. A rigid unadaptable flow chart or trouble shooting manual is not an effective problem solving tool in the educational setting.The art of teaching and educational leadership occurs when one learns the nuances of applying the knowledge. This art of application can only occur as a result of modifying and adapting practices based upon the past applications of the knowledge, professional refraction.

References

Dana, N. F. (2009). Leading with passion and knowledge: The principal as action researcher. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Harris, S., Edmonson, S., & Combs, J. (2010). Examining what we do to improve our schools: 8 steps from action to analysis. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.

Martin, G., Wright, W., Danzig, A., Flanary, R., & Brown, F. (2005). School leader internship: Developing monitoring and evaluating your leadership experience (2nd ed). Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.

Ringler, M. C. (2007). Action research an effective instructional leadership skill for future public school leaders. American Association of School Administrators Journal of Scholarship & Practice, 7(1), 27-43.

21st Century Schools

2010-01-28T13:42:00.001-08:00

21^st Century Schools

A response to the blog : “Teach Paperless”

21 Things that will Become Obsolete by 20202

I agree that many things will change over the course of the next decade. I do not feel that all of the changes will be affected to the degree that the author does. The obsolescence of grade levels, home work, and the end of parent conferences are some items mentioned by the author that I do not feel are going to change as much as the author feels that they will. The increase of apathy among the incoming students towards anything that is not exactly what they want to do does not change simply because technology is involved. Parents want to know why students have home work. They want to know why they can not learn it in the eight hours they are here. I do not think that twenty four hour access to schooling will change that fact.

On of the biggest trends in higher education is on line classes. Professors realize and advise students that an incredible level of self discipline is required to succeed in this setting. Students today are of the generation that is the first to have every thing centered on them and their happiness. Simply implementing technology does not change this fact.

I have spoken to and questioned students about the changing scope of education and technology. The upper level students are excited and eager for the changes. The average to below average students could care less. This is the same trend for success using block scheduling, project based learning, and countless other initiatives. The high students will succeed regardless of the pedagogical method employed. Those average and at the low end of average are going to fight no matter what we do.

There has been research to suggest that teachers who have a one to four computer to student ratio in there classrooms are more apt to integrate technology regularly than if they access to a one to one ratio lab. The reasons cited are ease of access and preparation. the lab setting requires an additional level of planning over and above what is needed to incorporate group technology use already present in the classroom. In order to increase the level of technology integration at Lumberton High School, teachers need access to the technology without having to retrieve or schedule it with someone. There also needs to exist enough of it so that teachers of the same subject and grade do not have to alternate A/B block cycles. They need to be able to use the technology on the same days.

The computer on wheels were cutting edge when placed into use. They have diminished effectiveness due to time required to log on when used by a class. They would be ideal if this issue could be rectified. I consider them to be the same as a desk top lab. They still require scheduling by the teacher. If for some reason things do not work then the teacher is required to "punt" for her lesson. If students are absent or have extra time accomodations, the computers may be in another teacher's room. There needs to be some sort of daily student access point in each teacher's class room.

A revision to our acceptable use policy needs to be considered. Our filter settings block many legitimate cites needed by students. Sending a request for review of the cite blocking can take up to three days of instruction time on the block schedule even if their is a 24 hour turn around on the request. the current trends in liturature and the State Long Range Plan are for student on-line collaboration with others across the state, nation, and globe. If a teacher were to create on-line multi media content for students, they would not be able to access it during school hours on school computers.

There is going to have to be a major paradigm shift in order for the standardized test to loose effectiveness. I also do not see the school lunch going away due to federal funding. I think that we have to be careful that we do not fall victim to the Jetson’s Paradox when predicting changes in education. After all, I am still waiting for my jet car.

Reflection

2009-12-16T19:33:00.000-08:00

EDLD 5352 Reflection

I envisioned this course covering issues of increasing student performance through varying methods designed to increase student engagement. I did not expect the course to cover the use of technology solely. I was interested to find that the state had put so much effort into the Long Range Plan for Technology. I was also interesting to see that the initiative to increase the integration of technology into the curriculum extends to the nation level and legislature. If the goal of the course was to impart the significance of technology integration in instruction and its legal implications, then I those objectives were met.

I found many of the claims of the professors and authors intriguing regarding the use of technology in the high school classroom. I feel that many if not all of the ideas and benefits presented throughout the course for the use of technology had great merit and validity. However, I do feel that some major issues were not discussed. What is a teacher supposed to do with a student in her technology laden class instruction that does not have clearance to have access to the internet while at school? What is a teacher supposed to do when a student has their privileges revoked during the middle of an assignment due to violation of an acceptable use policy? What about students with modifications allowing for extended time that do not have access at home? These practical issues are a few of the stumbling blocks to technology based instruction. I think that before we sell out we need to consider these issues carefully.

The biggest overlooked issue is student motivation. All of the initiatives discussed are wonderful; however, I feel their effectiveness is limited to the top 10% to 20% of the students. These are the students who are highly motivated. My discussions with students in conjunction with this course revealed that students are not motivated to learn just because technology is involved. They do use technology and embrace it. It is no different than getting them to read Shakespeare. I can be like pulling teeth; however, they will put their entire life on hold to read the Twilight series. Students that I spoke to replied that they would have no motivation to read a teachers blog unless it directly affected their grades. If students will not log on to get the answers to the home work problems, why would they log onto a teachers blog unless it was mandatory? If it is made mandatory, what is the teacher to do about those students who do not have access outside of school? Most districts’ filter settings do not allow teachers access to blog sites, let alone the students.

Blogging as a tool for parent communication has a great deal of merit. I feel the reality is that the parent who would be up to date on information are the only ones who would use the service. It is a corollary to many of the same student issues. Many districts already have policy documents on line. It is surprising to me the parents who will tell you during a conference that they have not read them. My district has an on line grade reporting system. The percentage of parents not involved in the program but on line is staggering. The benefits and draw backs of blogging are the same as that for any other method of mass information dissemination. If it is up to the public to retrieve the information there is a great percentage who will simply not participate. They will continue to blame the district and its personnel for what ever trouble has occurred due to their lack of participation.

There were some good ideas put fort during this course. I do feel that many were extremely unrealistic for the high school class room. I feel that the fact that the idea of personal accountability is lost on the majority of students and parents today has been totally overlooked. We are dealing with a generation of students who has been brought up to believe that life is about them. Most believe that if they are not successful or caught in the wrong that it is someone else’s fault. To attempt to monitor a class of advanced junior and senior students using smart phones and open internet access would be a night mare. I would not even want to imagine what it would be like in a class of average and at risk freshmen. Weighing the en loco parentis duty to protect student from the possible outcome of bad acts committed by others and themselves against the possible benefits of to learning, I have to choose protection. Until there is a method to monitor what is occurring on line in real time, many of these proposals will have to wait. I might suggest that some real time spent working in today’s regular classrooms over the course of a semester might bring some of these expectations into a more real light.

I did not have cognitive trouble completing the assignments. I felt that some were pedantic and included a great deal of busy work. I question the use of some of the articles. When new technology hits the store shelves it is already outdated. Reading articles discussing specific technologies that are more than a year old do not convey the most recent information. I feel that writing reflections on articles that are descriptions of document management software is simply busy work. If scholarly articles are assigned then I feel that reflection, quotes, or discussion is appropriate. Reading an article about some product to maintain web links is interesting and helpful, but hardly warrants a students’ time to cite and post discussions. As administrators we do not have to be experts in the most current technology. It would detract from our other duties to attempt such a monumental task. We need to understand technology’s importance and implications to education and not stand in its way on our campuses.

This course has given me a great deal of insight to technology in education. I feel that I am better qualified to lead in its use on my campus as a teacher and administrator. As a result of this course, I have volunteered to serve on our campus technology committee.

Campus Technology Plan

2009-12-12T15:08:00.000-08:00

Campus Technology Plan
Our district has a 30 % economically disadvantaged student subpopulation. This subpopulation has a 66% passing rate on the Grade 10 Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) for science compared to the state average of 65%. It has a 74% passing rate on the Grade 11 Science TAKS compare to the state average of 81%.
Based on informal interviews with students, administrators, technology specialist and teachers, it is apparent that the majority of technology use on the campus by teachers in the class room is to present teacher directed lessons. The majority of student technology use is to prepare formal papers or visual effects for class presentations. There is currently little or no student centered technology based learning, on-line collaboration with students from schools across the country, or technology driven problem solving critical thinking projects in the nontechnology based classes.
The major reasons cited included: the network filter settings, the amount of computers available for class room use, the time required to log on to computers via the wireless lap top labs, and the scope and sequence pacing requirements of the district curriculum guides.
An action plan to improve these areas would be expected to increase the teachers’ perception of technology use. This should increase teacher use of technology based student directed learning in the classroom. This increase should improve the amount of student engagement by meeting the individualized needs of learners.

The action plan includes:
• A student to computer ratio of at least one computer per every two students in a science class
• Each class room has a set of appropriate Vernier probes for the subject matter taught
• Teachers use at least 40% of class room instruction time for hands on labs using the probe ware system
• A comprehensive teacher professional development program on technology use in the class room, cyber safety and cyber ethics.
• Implementation of technology based problem solving lessons that are student centered
• A softening of the district filtering parameters to allow for teacher and student access to blog sites, video conferencing, and educational games
• The ability for teachers to create podcasts and students to access them while at school
• Implementation of a program to allow supervised access by students to district computers after school and on the weekends

The action plan above in conjunction with the professional development outlined previously will be implemented by the stake holders throughout the district as outlined on the District Organizational Chart for Technology Implementation.

Professional Development Planning for Technology Based Student Centered Learning

2009-12-12T15:07:00.000-08:00

Professional Development Planning for Technology Based Student Centered Learning
Based upon interviews with students, teachers, technology personnel, and teachers, the primary uses of technology in our classrooms by our teachers are for administrative purposes and the presentation of teacher center lessons. Students report that their primary use of technology across the nontechnology oriented curriculum is for the preparation of reports and class presentations. Our Students report that they are directed to engage in technology based creative problem solving in their nontechnology based class perhaps one a year at the most in any of their classes as a whole.
Our Academic Excellence Indicator Systems (AEIS) data shows that we need to improve the performance of our economically disadvantaged subpopulation Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) in Science for Grades 10 and 11. We have a 74% passing rate compared to the state average of 81% on the Grade 11 Science TAKS. We have a 66% passing rate compared to the state average 65% on the Grade 10 Science TAKS.
Our ideal situation for technology integration is to ultimately provide computers in every class room available for student use in at least a one computer per two student ratio. The purpose of this is to create a paradigm shift in the instructional use of technology across the curriculum. It is our desire to move from teacher centered instruction using technology as a means of presentation delivery to technology based student centered and discovery style learning. In the science classroom, this can be accomplished using the Vernier probe system that the district already owns, the CBI lab systems, interactive modules already available on the internet for public use, interactive tutors and lab simulations available from the text book publishers, and CD-Rom versions of the text book provided by the publishers.
Our overall goal for student performance in the economically disadvantaged student populations is to improve our performance on both the Grade 10 and Grade 11 Science TAKS by 15% over the next two years. We also want to improve our Average Daily Attendance (ADA) in this subpopulation for Grades 9 through Grade 12. The following goals and professional development activities for the Science Department should assist in reaching those campus goals.

Science Department Goals:

All science classes will engage in labs involving hands on and technology based activities which will begin by encompassing ten percent of the total instruction and increase yearly by ten percent to 40% of the total instruction at the end of four years.

Assessment of this goal will be accomplished by:
• Evaluation of teacher’s lesson plans
• Assessment of documentation of regular administrator classroom walk throughs already being performed

Activity 1:

Teachers will attend a two day professional development session facilitated by a representative from the Vernier Corporation on the use of the probes and their capabilities. During this session, teachers will preview and perform labs that are provided with the lab ware equipment that pertain to their specific subjects. The Vernier Corporation provides this service for free due to the fact that the district has purchased the equipment. This could be accomplished during the summer allowing the teachers who participate to receive the necessary two days summer professional development required by the district.

Activity 2:

Physics and physical science teachers will use the one day professional development session to preview and perform labs that accompany the CBI equipment which the district already owns.

Activity 3:

Teachers will use the one day session to preview the lab simulations and interactive tutors that accompany the adopted text book for their class.

The majority of teacher classroom use of technology across the curriculum is centered on presentation of material in teacher centered lessons. The following goals and professional development activities are to help improve TAKS scores across the curriculum and grade levels, improve ADA, and move our AYP towards the state goal of 100% in the year 2014.

Goal 1:

Instruction in classes across the curriculum and grades will provide ten percent of all instructional time for technology based student centered and directed learning. This will increase by ten percent yearly over the next four years until a 40% of instructional time is used in this manner.

Goal 2:

Classes across the curriculum and grades will assign one technology based student problem solving activity project for a test grade each semester. This will increase to one each nine weeks in the following year.

Assessment of these goals will be accomplished by:
• Evaluation of teacher’s lesson plans
• Assessment of documentation of regular administrator classroom walk throughs already being performed

Activity 1:

Teachers will be provided subs and meet by grade levels and departments one day every nine weeks to create webliographies and rubrics for technology based student directed learning.

Activity 2:

All teachers will receive training in internet safety and cyber ethics. A focus will be placed on this and the curriculum will be presented to the students at the beginning of the year during their home room classes. Teachers will be expected to re-teach these concepts on a regular basis.

Activity 3:

Teachers will receive training in the use of web cams for video messaging. The session will include ideas for collaboration activities with students in schools from other districts across the country.

Activity 4:

Instruct the teachers in ways to effectively use the on line drop box already provided by the district for student journaling and assignment submission.

District Organizational Flow Chart for Technology Implementation

2009-12-12T15:06:00.000-08:00

District Organizational Flow Chart for Technology Implementation

School Board:

It is the responsibility of the School Board to:
• Secure funding to support the annual budget
• Approve as policy the annual budget for technology use
• Approve as policy the official District Acceptable Use Policy
• Approve as policy the long range technology plans for the district
• Support and encourage the increased use of technology in all areas of education and instruction

Superintendent/Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum:

It is the responsibility of the Superintendent and the Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum to:
• Propose changes to the annual budget for needed increases in technology spending in response to the most recent Academic Excellence Indicator System (AEIS) data
• Remain up to date with current updates to the State Long Range Plan for Technology and insure that all stake holders are aware of any changes to the plan
• Annually review the district School Technology and Readiness (STaR) chart data
• Annually review the district Academic Excellence Indicator System (AEIS) data
• Annually review the Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS) data
• Approve recommendations from the District Technology Coordinator for changes and improvements to technology policy implementation based on the STaR chart, AEIS report, and PEIMS data
• Provide input into the District Acceptable Use Policy
• Present the District Acceptable Use Policy to the School Board for approval
• Support and encourage the increased use of technology in all areas of education and instruction

District Technology Coordinator:
It is the responsibility of the District Technology Coordinator to:
• Remain up to date with current updates to the State Long Range Plan for Technology and insure that all stake holders are aware of any changes to the plan
• Annually review district STaR chart data, PEIMS data, and the AEIS report
• Oversee the collection and dissemination of PEIMS data
• Lead in the development of long range technology plans for the district
• Seek to secure federal and state funding for technology spending within the district
• Develop district master technology budget based on needs assessment and state data sources
• Present the district master technology budget to District Superintendent for School Board approval as policy
• Oversee planning and implementation of technology related professional development
• Provide input into the District Acceptable Use Policy
• Support and encourage the increased use of technology in all areas of education and instruction

District Technology Master Technician:
It is the responsibility of the Master Technician to:
• Participate in planning and provide consultation for technology infra structure projects within the district
• Prepare all hardware prior to placement on the campuses
• Install hardware at the campus sites
• Change location of hardware at the campus sites
• Install software on individual units at the campus sites
• Trouble shoot technology hardware and software problems at the individual sites
• Perform needed repairs and regular preventative maintenance on all hardware throughout the district
• Consult with the District Technology Coordinator on needed changes to the district master technology budget for infrastructure, maintenance, and repair
• Provide input into the District Acceptable Use Policy
• Provide input into the long range technology plans for the district
• Support and encourage the increased use of technology in all areas of education and instruction

District Network Manager:
It is the responsibility of the Network Manager to:
• Maintain the server for the district
• Oversee the network filter settings for the district as defined in the District Acceptable Use Policy
• Provide input into the District Acceptable Use Policy
• Provide input into the long range technology plans for the district
• Monitor the appropriate use of the district network for educational and instructional purposes by administrators, faculty, staff, and students according to the District Acceptable Use Policy
• Support and encourage the increased use of technology in all areas of education and instruction

Building Principal:
It is the responsibility of the Building Principal to:
• Annually review the campus STaR Chart, AEIS data, and PEIMS data
• Insure the proper recording of PEIMS data Remain up to date with current updates on the State Long Range Plan for Technology
• Provide input into the long range technology plans for the district
• Remain up to date with current updates to the State Long Range Plan for Technology
• Actively lead-out in encouraging the use of technology for student centered and driven learning and instruction in all areas of the curriculum
• Find the funding needed within the campus budget to facilitate the effective increases used of technology and learner centered and directed instruction across the curriculum
• Plan and implement appropriate professional development for faculty in the area of technology
• Inspect and monitor the amount of use and method of said use of technology across the curriculum
• Strictly enforce the District Acceptable Use Policy for all faculty, staff, and students
• Provide input into the District Acceptable Use Policy
• Provide input into the long range technology plans for the district

Campus Technology Specialist:

It is the responsibility of the Campus Technology Specialist to:
• Assist in the collection of campus data through curriculum benchmark assessments and the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills Test
• Troubleshoot hardware and software problems on the campus
• Lead in technology oriented professional development for the campus
• Review hardware, software and web based software for possible implementation in the curriculum
• Remain up to date with current updates to the State Long Range Plan for Technology
• Provide input into the long range technology plans for the district
• Assist in tracking the use of technology and method of said use across the curriculum
• Suggest improvements for the campus technology plan
• Assist in the Strict enforcement of the District Acceptable Use Policy for all faculty, staff, and students Provide input into the District Acceptable Use Policy
• Assist teachers in demonstrating the use of technology in the class room to students as needed
• Assist the Building Principal in any technology related area

Instructional Technology Use at Lumberton High School

2009-12-05T18:56:00.001-08:00

Instructional Technology Use at Lumberton High School
We use various data collection tools including the Texas Academic Excellence Indicator System (AEIS), Annually Yearly Progress (AYP) report, and the School Technology and Readiness (STaR) report for the district and campus. The AEIS report provides the district with data to compare our district and campus to the state average. We are able to use this data to observe the performance of grade levels and sub-populations over the span of several years. The data allows us to track the money spent on each sub-population and how they performed on state assessments. AYP data shows us how our campus performance compares with guidelines established by the Federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Law. STaR chart data allows the district to track the progress of each campus according to the State Long Range Plan for Technology. The chart tracks the progress of each campus in four areas: Teaching and Learning, Educator Preparation, Administration and Support, and Infrastructure. The AEIS, AYP, and STaR Chart data are used by the district to track where money is spent and evaluate the effectiveness of the programs for which it is used. The district is currently using this accumulation of data to establish a strategic plan for technology three year plan. We currently have a one year plan and are composing three, five, and ten year plans.

Technology on our campus is used by teachers for instructional enrichment. Teachers use information gained from the internet to supplement lessons. This information includes lecture notes, diagrams, and podcasts. The majority of technology use in the classroom is still to facilitate teacher directed learning. The majority of technology in the classroom is used as a more expensive alternative to the overhead projector. Every class room has a computer and data projector for teacher use in it. We do offer quite a few technology courses including: Business Communication, Web Mastering, Digital Graphics, and Broadcast Journalism. The Pharmacy Technician program at our school is taught using a combination of traditional and on line instruction. We have a distance learning opportunities in conjunction with Lamar University that involve real time video conferencing technology between the professor and the students. Our district is currently experimenting with the use of the Kindle reader from Amazon for students with various reading difficulties. There is a method to down load teacher generated material onto them. Our district uses the Read 180 curriculum and Aims Web Math as part of our Response Towards Intervention (RTI) program. Both of these have a great deal of student technology use incorporated into them.

The administrative arena is perhaps the greatest area of daily classroom technology use. Our district does all attendance, grades, and lesson planning on line. We also have Virtual Student Information (VSI) available. This allows parents on-line access to their students’ grades in real time. We also employ a program that allows for teachers to have access to their students’ standardized assessment data on-line.

Each core subject department has a portable lap top lab and there are one or two extra available in the technology department. Our math classes all have a class set of graphing calculators with the ability for the teacher to project their calculator screen onto a screen for student view. Many of our math classes have smart board technology in them. Our district offers a Productivity Training Seminar. Teachers who complete the initial seminar are issued a lap top computer and have a wider access to the internet via the school filter. Teachers may opt to take additional training to receive additional technology in their classrooms. The additional technology includes: elmos, smart boards, and classroom sets of digital quiz answer buzzers for class review and assessment.

Technology is a large component of our Site Based Decision Making Committee (SBDMC). Much of the technology purchased has been as a result of action taken by the SBDMC. The SBDMC has also set instructional technology use as a focus for professional development on campus. We have begun using a program called “Turn-It In” to combat plagiarism in our classes. Each teacher within our district is expected to maintain a webpage through the district “School Center” program. The district has also instituted the use of “PD-360”, an on-line service delivering professional development to teachers 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Our Science Department has a wide range of Vernier sensors that interface with the laptop computers for real time collection of data by the students.

I visited with two groups of students for this assignment as recommended by the professors of the course. I visited with the students from one of our Pharmacy Technology classes and our Health Science Technology II class. There were thirty students in the two groups combined. I asked the students about the amount of time that they use technology in student directed learning during the course of their regular nontechnology based courses. Their response was overwhelmingly unanimous. They report less than twice a year over all. That may only include one course a year. The students report that they primarily use technology for the preparation of reports and projects using word processing and Power Point software. When questioned about how often the students are asked to use the digital drop-box provided for teachers some responded only once during the course of their education. That was for an upper level physics course. If the student did not have that teacher, they had never used it.

I asked the students how they would respond to a project based student learning activity. I explained that it would give them the topic and the learning objectives and they would be responsible for using the internet to learn the material with instructor facilitation and guidance. The students enrolled in upper level course responded positively, while those in regular level course had mixed response. The biggest concern among the regular level students was that there would be a great number of students who simply relied upon on member of the group to complete the project. A great number of the student expressed an interest in a move away from teacher centered learning scenarios, but expressed that they would be more confident with guidance from the teacher about specifics either through One-Note or a teacher’s web page. When I asked the students haw many would visit a teacher’s blog, the overwhelming response was only if it directly affected their grade. The students were extremely interested in a learning activity that involved collaboration with students in other areas of the country as specified in the State Long Range Plan for Technology. This is currently not a viable option as students do not have access to school email or any messaging systems.

Students reported a wide range of technology use outside of school. All of the students in both groups of students reported having internet access at home. They were all users of cell phones, text messaging, and social networking. Many used the internet for gaming with friends, downloading music and movies, and shopping. Only a few reported using it to seek additional information about school related topics unless directed to do so by a teacher. I asked the students what were the biggest hindrances to technology use at school for learning. They responded that when using the lap tops that connectivity is an issue in many classroom as well as adequate outlets for power. They also responded that it takes too long to get logged on to one. It may take up to five minutes for a student in a class of 21 to get logged on. The biggest obstacle given by the students is the school fire wall. The Pharmacy Technician on-line site has learning games associated with it that cannot be accessed due to the filter identifying them as games. Many on-line news articles are blocked from major news sources due to the filter identifying the coverage as hate speech. This has proven an obstacle for the preparation of our Current Events team. Students overall report a tremendous amount of frustration while attempting on-line research at school due to the filters. The school does have several on-line data bases that it subscribes to, but as for the most recent information, it may be difficult for students and teachers to access.

Teachers’ comments about the obstacles to technology use in the class are similar to those of the students. Teachers express the same frustrations with attempting to access information through the school’s filters. Teachers also express that it is difficult to schedule use of the labs around the demands of the pacing of curriculum scope and sequence. There is also the issue of professional development for some of the technology. Teachers new to the district often must use their own time to learn to use some of the technologies specific to their departments. One of the biggest concerns of teachers regarding technology at school is how it will affect their work load outside of the classroom. Many executives are experiencing the inability to escape their jobs even while on vacation as a result of the technology boom and continuous connectivity. Our students involved in distance learning do not have access to email while at school to communicate with their professors or class cohorts. They must copy their assignments to the site proctors jump drive, and then she submits them via her school email address. The majority of those interviewed agree that the next steps for the improvement of instructional technology use in the classroom are a one to one computer ratio and a lessening of the district filtering restrictions. These are perceived to be the major barriers to effective instructional technology use for student directed learning.

2009-11-27T09:12:00.001-08:00

Tehnology in Education: STaR Chart

See more presentations by lazyheartqh | Upload your own PowerPoint presentations

EDLD 5352 Week 2: Star Chart Report

2009-11-26T09:58:00.000-08:00

My district and campus have invested heavily in the area of technology. The amount of resources invested in equipment, software, time, and professional development has been quite extensive. The goal on the part of the district has been to shift the emphasis from teacher-directed to student directed learning. We have several mobile computer labs with wireless internet access in each classroom and our library has eleven computers with internet access available for student use. Our district administration is striving to move teachers into the current trends in education via technology.

Despite the great amount of resources invested in technology on the part of my district and the entire state, the use of technology for student-directed learning remains in the Developing Tech stage according to the 2007-2008 STaR Chart. My district along with 69.7% of schools across the state is in the Developing Stage in the area of Teaching and Learning (Texas Education Agency, 2009). This area assesses the frequency of technology use in all areas of the curriculum, the method of its use, and whether or not the Technology TEKS are integrated in classes across the curriculum or addressed solely in technology related classes.

Our results appear to correlate with national trends. Becker (2001) states that after computer classes, business classes are the most frequent users of technology. Nationally, only one out of six science teachers, one out of eight social studies teachers, and one out of nine math teachers report frequent computer use during their class for student-directed learning.

One reason may be due to the number of computers available full time in the classrooms. According to Becker (2001) teachers with five to eight computer located in their class rooms were twice as likely to use computers in class as those with one to four but access to a computer lab with fifteen to twenty computers. The reason may be due to the complications involved with attempting to schedule use of the lab.

Districts seeking to increase the level of technology based student-directed learning may serve themselves better by placing computers in classrooms as opposed to creating more labs. This does seem counter intuitive at first. It does reflect my experience as a classroom teacher. Given the curriculum and instructional requirements on teachers due to accountability and high stakes testing, there does not exist a great deal of discretionary time in class or planning. Having even enough computers in the classroom to allow students to work in groups of four would ease the complications associated with student-directed computer use a great deal.

Becker, H. J., (April, 2001). How are teachers using computers in the classroom?.Presented at the 2001 Meetings of Educational Research, New Orleans, LA. Retrieved from http://www.crito.uci.edu/tlc/FINDINGS/special3/

Texas Education Agency, (2009). School technology and readiness. Retrieved from http://starchart.esc12.net/

Technology Application TEKS

2009-11-21T15:25:00.000-08:00

The Pre-K Technology TEKS lay the foundation for the Technology Application TEKS throughout the Elementary and Middle School. They are not divided into domains but they deal with the fundamental skills that students will need to be successful in mastering the TEKS in the following grades. They focus on the Fundamental Domain by expecting the student to start and end programs correctly while using various data entry devices. They also address the Information Acquisition Domain by having the student follow basic directions for operating programs, listening to and interacting with stories on-line and developing vocabulary from various software packages and styles.

The Technology Application TEKS spiral in their progression of skill development. Students are afforded the opportunity to encounter, master, and enrich the same skills at various grade levels. Beginning at the Pre-K level, students are expected to use various input devices and technical terminology. This Foundation Domain strand follows through to the Eighth Grade. At each level, the schema from the previous level is built upon to increase the student’s knowledge from existing knowledge. Students are expected to be able to choose the most appropriate soft ware platform to manage data and tasks across the grade levels also.

Spiraling of the curriculum allows the student to develop proficiency and metacognition over time in a skill through repeated exposure to it. This assimilation of knowledge allows for the student to draw upon past knowledge for comparison when encountering new skills and schema. The benefit is a greater permanence of learning and retention.

The Texas Long-Range Plan for Technology, 2006-2010

2009-11-21T15:21:00.000-08:00

I had no idea that the state of Texas had invested such an enormous amount of effort and resources into technology for education. It is interesting to note the amount of research and data that has gone into the Long-Range Technology Plan. The state has a clear vision of enabling all students regardless of economic background, geographic location, or disability to access the technologies necessary to be successful in the 21st century.

The Plan goes beyond simply laying out a set of benchmarks and expecting a district to accomplish them. It lays out recommended actions for each level of the education hierarchy from The Texas Education Agency (TEA) to the parents and community. These actions are needed to successfully implement the Plan. The Plan further recommends greater funding from the TEA for per student technology spending.

The Plan speaks a great deal about the value of distance learning for teachers and students. It also seeks to allow students access to educational technologies twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. The Plan recognizes the need for ongoing professional development for teachers that focuses on practical classroom applications of technology.

It will be important for me to model life time learning in the area of technology as a campus instructional leader. The emergence of technological developments must be embraced by the education community in order for students to maximize their proficiency in using them. My goal as a campus leader is to maximize every student’s ability to contribute and compete in the 21st century. This can only be accomplished if they master current technology.

Requisite Technology Skills Assessment

2009-11-21T13:48:00.000-08:00

I scored extremely low on the Technology Applications inventory. I could not meet enough of the Grade Eight Technology Application TEKS to pass any reasonable test on them. I am a member of the generation that witnessed the first desk top computers. Ironically, we now have calculators that process faster and do more than those first desk top machines. I remember the first E-mail and Internet connections that I ever experienced. These were both as an adult working in the education field. My access to computers and technology has only expanded within the last seven or eight years. I have only owned my own personal computer with Internet access within the last two years.

I am able to work with Microsoft Word to a limited extent. I am literate in using e-mail and school network communications. I am able to maintain and update my web site from our district home page. I make available all of my lecture slides and project assignment sheets online. I also post links to sites that will assist my students with concepts in class. I am not afraid of technology, I just have an extremely limited experience in using it. When you join that with the fact that the current technology is already outdated once it reaches the consumer, I have a great deal of catching up to do. The areas in which I would most benefit from professional development include multimedia applications and course ware management for on-line learning.

I am a high school science teacher and I encourage my students to use technology when ever possible in learning. I seek to use technology in the course of my instruction. Our district has a great deal of technology available for both student and teacher use.There is little or no data collected to determine its use and impact on the curriculum or student engagement.Our students spend less than thirty minutes a week on average engaged in technology use as a part of the general curriculum. Computers are used extensively with our Read 180 program and AIMS WEB Math labs. The area that we are weakest in is the ability for students to collaborate on-line due to filtering limitations.

As a future instructional leader, the most important thing that I can do is to not stand in the way of progress. I must be open to and encourage the wise implementation of emerging technologies in the class room. I must not allow my own lack of skills to limit those of the generation of leaders to follow.