Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Technology Integration Organizational Flow Chart
Roles and Responsibilities:
• Board of Trustees – These individuals are elected or appointed members who function as a united body to oversee the activities of the district. They are responsible for establishing the operational policies of the district as well as approving employment of district personnel.
• Superintendent – The Superintendent reports directly to the Board of Trustees. She is the leader of the school district and is responsible for daily operations of the district.
• Deputy Superintendent, School Leadership and Student Support Services – Provides leadership to campus principals as well as to numerous administrative functions of the district, including communications, community programs, extracurricular programs and human resources.
• Chief Technology Officer – Governs all technology issues. He is responsible for coordinating the development and implementation of educational technology policies. Its main goal is to maximize technology's contribution to improving education within the district and support of the goals of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.
• Executive Director of Educational Technology – Holds the responsibility of implementing new technology throughout the district
• Coordinator V – Provides guidance and instruction on individual campuses as to how to integrate and disperse the new technology while also providing training and technical support.
• Technology Integration Educator – Manages the day to day technology concerns of the school. He / She is also responsible for maintaining the school’s website.
• Teachers- Teachers essentially provide input through teams and the SBDM committees as to how technology and curriculum should be integrated into the classroom culture. Teachers are also responsible for introducing new technology into the classroom.
• Campus Principal- The principle is responsible for governing the day to day operations of the school. She supports the organizational flow by ensuring that technology initiatives are implemented in the classroom. Thus, students are provided with the opportunity to utilize the newest classroom technology.
• Board of Trustees – These individuals are elected or appointed members who function as a united body to oversee the activities of the district. They are responsible for establishing the operational policies of the district as well as approving employment of district personnel.
• Superintendent – The Superintendent reports directly to the Board of Trustees. She is the leader of the school district and is responsible for daily operations of the district.
• Deputy Superintendent, School Leadership and Student Support Services – Provides leadership to campus principals as well as to numerous administrative functions of the district, including communications, community programs, extracurricular programs and human resources.
• Chief Technology Officer – Governs all technology issues. He is responsible for coordinating the development and implementation of educational technology policies. Its main goal is to maximize technology's contribution to improving education within the district and support of the goals of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.
• Executive Director of Educational Technology – Holds the responsibility of implementing new technology throughout the district
• Coordinator V – Provides guidance and instruction on individual campuses as to how to integrate and disperse the new technology while also providing training and technical support.
• Technology Integration Educator – Manages the day to day technology concerns of the school. He / She is also responsible for maintaining the school’s website.
• Teachers- Teachers essentially provide input through teams and the SBDM committees as to how technology and curriculum should be integrated into the classroom culture. Teachers are also responsible for introducing new technology into the classroom.
• Campus Principal- The principle is responsible for governing the day to day operations of the school. She supports the organizational flow by ensuring that technology initiatives are implemented in the classroom. Thus, students are provided with the opportunity to utilize the newest classroom technology.
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Teaching and Learning section of the 2006-2020 Texas Long Range Technology Plan
Teaching and Learning
I chose the Teaching and Learning section of the 2006-2020 Texas Long Range Technology Plan to review. The Progress Report shows how the necessary tools and resources for administrators, teachers, librarians, and students are being provided in order to establish 21st Century classrooms. This section of the Progress Report on the Long-Range Plan highlights the impact of technology on Teaching and Learning.
Campus STaR Chart Data and Analysis for Teaching and Learning
The Texas Campus STaR Chart produces a profile of the campus’ status toward reaching the goals of the Long-Range Plan for Technology (LRPT) and No Child Left Behind. Each of the four areas of the Texas Long Range Plan for Technologyi is assigned a profile indicator that identifies its progress. The profile indicators place a campus at one of four levels of progress: Early Tech, Developing Tech, Advanced Tech, or Target Tech.
Early Tech - Early Tech means that instruction is teacher-centered and students occasionally use software applications and/or use tutorial software for skill reinforcement.
Developing Tech - Developing Tech refers to instruction that is teacher-directed and students regularly use technology on an individual basis to access electronic information and develop communication and presentation projects.
Advanced Tech - At the Advanced Tech level of the STaR Chart in Teaching and Learning, instruction is teacher-facilitated and students work with peers and experts to evaluate information, analyze data and content in order to problem solve. Technology is integrated into foundation area TEKS, collaboration is encouraged and technology supports the development of higher-order thinking.
Target Tech - At the highest level of the STaR Chart for Teaching and Learning, the Target Tech level, the teacher serves as facilitator, mentor, and co-learner. Students have on-demand access to all appropriate digital resources and technologies to complete activities that have been seamlessly integrated into all core content areas, providing learning opportunities beyond the classroom that are not otherwise possible.
According to the progress report, most Texas campuses are improving and are moving from lower levels on the campus chart towards the Target Tech level. The majority of Texas teachers and campuses evaluate themselves as either Developing or Advanced Tech in Teaching and Learning.
The LRPT discussed districts’ trends in increasing access to important 21st Century resources such as online learning, digital content, and online professional development. A few of the ways this is being accomplished is through the following:
The Texas Virtual School Network (TxVSN), Digital content available through open-source and electronic textbooks, and the K-12 Databases provide safe, age-appropriate interfaces for elementary, middle, and high school students to engage in learning.
Distance learning opportunities have proven to be powerful tools for ensuring that students across the state have equitable access to quality education and instruction regardless of the school’s wealth, size, socioeconomic status, or geographic location.
Project Share is a new statewide system for delivering high-quality professional development to educators. It uses a collection of Web 2.0 tools and applications to provide professional development resources across the state, for personal growth, to build professional learning communities, participate in professional development courses and search for resources to be used in the classroom.
By examining the Long Range Technology Plan, I can see that Texas has a focus on ensuring that students are not just engaged learners but that they are also empowered learners. This is made evident through statewide implementation of digital content, the Texas Virtual School Networks, Project Share and other programs developed as a result of the state’s educational technology legislation.
In my opinion, there seem to be quite a few initiatives being made available but the plan should incorporate a strategy towards increasing the number and frequency of educators taking advantage of them. It is good to believe that most individuals would seek out these opportunities. However, many people are slow to move from their comfort zones. I believe there should be a structured plan to insure all educators are definitely being trained in particular areas and some system of check and balance for its usage.
I chose the Teaching and Learning section of the 2006-2020 Texas Long Range Technology Plan to review. The Progress Report shows how the necessary tools and resources for administrators, teachers, librarians, and students are being provided in order to establish 21st Century classrooms. This section of the Progress Report on the Long-Range Plan highlights the impact of technology on Teaching and Learning.
Campus STaR Chart Data and Analysis for Teaching and Learning
The Texas Campus STaR Chart produces a profile of the campus’ status toward reaching the goals of the Long-Range Plan for Technology (LRPT) and No Child Left Behind. Each of the four areas of the Texas Long Range Plan for Technologyi is assigned a profile indicator that identifies its progress. The profile indicators place a campus at one of four levels of progress: Early Tech, Developing Tech, Advanced Tech, or Target Tech.
Early Tech - Early Tech means that instruction is teacher-centered and students occasionally use software applications and/or use tutorial software for skill reinforcement.
Developing Tech - Developing Tech refers to instruction that is teacher-directed and students regularly use technology on an individual basis to access electronic information and develop communication and presentation projects.
Advanced Tech - At the Advanced Tech level of the STaR Chart in Teaching and Learning, instruction is teacher-facilitated and students work with peers and experts to evaluate information, analyze data and content in order to problem solve. Technology is integrated into foundation area TEKS, collaboration is encouraged and technology supports the development of higher-order thinking.
Target Tech - At the highest level of the STaR Chart for Teaching and Learning, the Target Tech level, the teacher serves as facilitator, mentor, and co-learner. Students have on-demand access to all appropriate digital resources and technologies to complete activities that have been seamlessly integrated into all core content areas, providing learning opportunities beyond the classroom that are not otherwise possible.
According to the progress report, most Texas campuses are improving and are moving from lower levels on the campus chart towards the Target Tech level. The majority of Texas teachers and campuses evaluate themselves as either Developing or Advanced Tech in Teaching and Learning.
The LRPT discussed districts’ trends in increasing access to important 21st Century resources such as online learning, digital content, and online professional development. A few of the ways this is being accomplished is through the following:
The Texas Virtual School Network (TxVSN), Digital content available through open-source and electronic textbooks, and the K-12 Databases provide safe, age-appropriate interfaces for elementary, middle, and high school students to engage in learning.
Distance learning opportunities have proven to be powerful tools for ensuring that students across the state have equitable access to quality education and instruction regardless of the school’s wealth, size, socioeconomic status, or geographic location.
Project Share is a new statewide system for delivering high-quality professional development to educators. It uses a collection of Web 2.0 tools and applications to provide professional development resources across the state, for personal growth, to build professional learning communities, participate in professional development courses and search for resources to be used in the classroom.
By examining the Long Range Technology Plan, I can see that Texas has a focus on ensuring that students are not just engaged learners but that they are also empowered learners. This is made evident through statewide implementation of digital content, the Texas Virtual School Networks, Project Share and other programs developed as a result of the state’s educational technology legislation.
In my opinion, there seem to be quite a few initiatives being made available but the plan should incorporate a strategy towards increasing the number and frequency of educators taking advantage of them. It is good to believe that most individuals would seek out these opportunities. However, many people are slow to move from their comfort zones. I believe there should be a structured plan to insure all educators are definitely being trained in particular areas and some system of check and balance for its usage.
Progress Report on the Long-Range Plan for Technology: Reflection #2
Federal and state law mandates that states report progress toward technology excellence. In Texas the progress of the Texas long-range plan for technology is required annually. The first progress report associated with this plan documents the State’s progress and accomplishments in meeting recommendations began in 2008. Identified in the report are the various collaborations and activities initiated by Texas public schools, regional education service centers, and the Texas Education Agency to work toward the goals outlined in the plan.
Access the Progress Report on the Long-Range Plan for Technology, 2006-2020 at http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/comm/leg_reports/2008/08pr_to_lrpt.pdf.
The article points out the need for educators to have the tools and resources to prepare students to live and learn in the 21st Century. Since technology usage is vital to survival in the 21st century. It is necessary that students not only be familiar but move toward mastering skills in this area. In this section, Educator Preparation and Development, of the progress report it documents the progress Texas is making in addressing educator expectations and preparation, certification opportunities, and state and federal professional development grants and programs.
One important element the article discusses is the statistical progress that was made while progressing from 2006 to 2008.
At the Advanced Tech level, in 2007-2008 there were 1,518 campuses compared to 1,321 campuses in 2006-2007. According to the 2007-2008 data, fewer campuses were at the Early Tech level, 406 campuses, compared to 2006-2007 when the data showed 637 campuses at the Early Tech level. Also, the 2007-2008 data shows slightly fewer campuses, 5,654, at the Developing Tech level when compared to 2006-2007 when 5,739 campuses were at that level.
In conclusion, by comparing the STaR Chart data from the 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 school years, it shows that more campuses are gradually moving from the earliest stage of technological preparation into the Developing and Advanced stages. This stage is refered to as the Developing Tech in the area of professional development content. This would mean that most teachers have completed professional development on the integration of technology specific to their content area and have been trained to use technology to increase productivity in the accomplishment of a variety of instruction and management tasks. Although advancements seem slow. It is essential to the continued evolvement of education that we continue to make more and more strides towards advancing the use of technology in education.
Access the Progress Report on the Long-Range Plan for Technology, 2006-2020 at http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/comm/leg_reports/2008/08pr_to_lrpt.pdf.
The article points out the need for educators to have the tools and resources to prepare students to live and learn in the 21st Century. Since technology usage is vital to survival in the 21st century. It is necessary that students not only be familiar but move toward mastering skills in this area. In this section, Educator Preparation and Development, of the progress report it documents the progress Texas is making in addressing educator expectations and preparation, certification opportunities, and state and federal professional development grants and programs.
One important element the article discusses is the statistical progress that was made while progressing from 2006 to 2008.
At the Advanced Tech level, in 2007-2008 there were 1,518 campuses compared to 1,321 campuses in 2006-2007. According to the 2007-2008 data, fewer campuses were at the Early Tech level, 406 campuses, compared to 2006-2007 when the data showed 637 campuses at the Early Tech level. Also, the 2007-2008 data shows slightly fewer campuses, 5,654, at the Developing Tech level when compared to 2006-2007 when 5,739 campuses were at that level.
In conclusion, by comparing the STaR Chart data from the 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 school years, it shows that more campuses are gradually moving from the earliest stage of technological preparation into the Developing and Advanced stages. This stage is refered to as the Developing Tech in the area of professional development content. This would mean that most teachers have completed professional development on the integration of technology specific to their content area and have been trained to use technology to increase productivity in the accomplishment of a variety of instruction and management tasks. Although advancements seem slow. It is essential to the continued evolvement of education that we continue to make more and more strides towards advancing the use of technology in education.
Monday, March 7, 2011
STaRChart Presentation
Summary of STaR Chart Findings
Star Chart Presentation
View more presentations from ljack2011.
The National Education Technology Plan: Reflection #3
The National Education Technology Plan outlines specific goals and levels of achievement for students and parents with respect to teaching and learning technology. Under the Obama administration, education has become an urgent priority driven by two clear goals. By 2020,
• We will raise the proportion of college graduates from where it now stands [39%] so that 60% of our population holds a 2-year or 4-year degree.
• We will close the achievement gap so that all students – regardless of race, income, or neighborhood – graduate from high school ready to succeed in college and careers. In order to reach these aggressive goals, technology and innovative approaches to learning and teaching must be set forth.
Teaching Goal: Professional educators will be supported individually and in teams by technology that connects them to data, content, resources, expertise, and learning experiences that can empower and inspire them to provide more effective teaching for all learners. This requires that we put students at the center and empower them to take control of their own learning by providing flexibility on several dimensions.
Learning: Goal: All learners will have engaging and empowering learning experiences both in and outside of school that prepare them to be active, creative, knowledgeable, and ethical participants in our globally networked society. The model asks that we focus what and how we teach to match what people need to know, how they learn, where and when they will learn, and who needs to learn.
Professional Development: Professional educators will be supported individually and in teams by technology that connects them to data, content, resources, expertise, and learning experiences that enable and inspire more effective teaching for all learners. Episodic and ineffective professional development is replaced by professional learning that is collaborative, coherent, and continuous and that blends more effective in-person courses and workshops with the expanded opportunities, immediacy, and convenience enabled by online environments full of resources and opportunities for collaboration.
Issues I noticed with the Draft Plan included the lack of accountability if the goals are not met and the proper steps to follow when students do not reach the technology proficiency level the government has set forth.
• We will raise the proportion of college graduates from where it now stands [39%] so that 60% of our population holds a 2-year or 4-year degree.
• We will close the achievement gap so that all students – regardless of race, income, or neighborhood – graduate from high school ready to succeed in college and careers. In order to reach these aggressive goals, technology and innovative approaches to learning and teaching must be set forth.
Teaching Goal: Professional educators will be supported individually and in teams by technology that connects them to data, content, resources, expertise, and learning experiences that can empower and inspire them to provide more effective teaching for all learners. This requires that we put students at the center and empower them to take control of their own learning by providing flexibility on several dimensions.
Learning: Goal: All learners will have engaging and empowering learning experiences both in and outside of school that prepare them to be active, creative, knowledgeable, and ethical participants in our globally networked society. The model asks that we focus what and how we teach to match what people need to know, how they learn, where and when they will learn, and who needs to learn.
Professional Development: Professional educators will be supported individually and in teams by technology that connects them to data, content, resources, expertise, and learning experiences that enable and inspire more effective teaching for all learners. Episodic and ineffective professional development is replaced by professional learning that is collaborative, coherent, and continuous and that blends more effective in-person courses and workshops with the expanded opportunities, immediacy, and convenience enabled by online environments full of resources and opportunities for collaboration.
Issues I noticed with the Draft Plan included the lack of accountability if the goals are not met and the proper steps to follow when students do not reach the technology proficiency level the government has set forth.
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Week 5: Reflections on Action Research
Research in action was somewhat of a new concept for me. Upon enrolling in this course, I was under the impression that this would be the usual research based class that only required us to use the standard research methods such as read and find information that you feel may be useful. Instead, this course opened my eyes to the importance of action research and how leaders can use active research to improve issues they face on campus and issues within the community. Action research is a method that allows for leaders to add knowledge to a particular topic and not just use data that has been proven by others.
Action research involves adding something new into existing data. It is a practical approach to professional inquiry in any social situation. Action research inquiry requires a systematic approach to collecting data and solving a problem. (Dana, 2009)
Action research can be viewed as a form of professional development that allows the researcher to transform knowledge into something meaningful, instead of just blindly following what the latest study seems to suggest and provides numerous benefits.
One very important component of action research is reflective writing. Reflective writing is important in active research because the goal is not to focus on what happened, but why it happened. It is to interpret how what happened connects to the past events and ideas and to develop improved practices for the future.
Creating a blog was a first for me. This method of communication allows leaders and educators to actively participate in helping improve each others action research projects. The lectures in this course were very helpful. In week 2 we were able to see interviews of practitioners who were able to use action research to improve their campuses and districts.
Action research involves adding something new into existing data. It is a practical approach to professional inquiry in any social situation. Action research inquiry requires a systematic approach to collecting data and solving a problem. (Dana, 2009)
Action research can be viewed as a form of professional development that allows the researcher to transform knowledge into something meaningful, instead of just blindly following what the latest study seems to suggest and provides numerous benefits.
One very important component of action research is reflective writing. Reflective writing is important in active research because the goal is not to focus on what happened, but why it happened. It is to interpret how what happened connects to the past events and ideas and to develop improved practices for the future.
Creating a blog was a first for me. This method of communication allows leaders and educators to actively participate in helping improve each others action research projects. The lectures in this course were very helpful. In week 2 we were able to see interviews of practitioners who were able to use action research to improve their campuses and districts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)