Needs
1. Analysis of current levels of teacher technology usage and capabilities
2. Promethean board training and usage of Promethean Planet.com
3. Training on the creation and utilization of project-based units of instruction.
4. Training on using Wikis to promote student collaboration.
5. Training on using blogs to replace current lesson planning software.
Person(s) Responsible
1.Principal – Tammy Jones
1.Campus Technology Integrationist – Debbie McGraw
2.Tech. Int.- Debbie McGraw
2.Department heads
3. Director of Curriculum and Instruction – Judy Terry
3. Principal – Tammy Jones
4. Tech. Int. - Debbie McGraw
5. Tech. Int. - Debbie McGraw
Professional Development
1. Disaggregation of StaR chart data for JHS
2. Promethean training to be done by department at weekly department meetings.
3. 2 days of professional development before start of 11-12 school year. Teachers will receive training on creating TAKS-aligned units that allow students to “create knowledge.”
4. Training, to begin concurrently with project-based curriculum training, to be led by Debbie McGraw and any teachers currently using Wikis.
5. Training will take place during the 2 staff development days following graduation. Training will be conducted by Debbie McGraw.
Sunday, March 20, 2011
Sunday, March 6, 2011
Transforming American Education: Learning Powered by Technology
The National Educational Technology Plan was released in March 2010 to serve as a guide and model for state educational agencies to set or adapt their standards. An important facet of this plan is the implementation of Universal Design for Learning. UDL is a system of principles and guidelines designed to make content and learning equally accessable to all students. By designing curriculum with UDL guidelines and using communicative technology, we will be able to meet the needs of students who may not have equal access to the content, such as low-income students, English language learners, and learners with disabilities. By using the "always on" nature of the internet, all learners will have 24 hour access to content to be learned.
The National Educational Technology Plan makes important suggestions to thate educational agencies, including:
*Revise, create, and adopt standards and learning objectives for all content areas that reflect 21st century expertise and the power of technology to improve learning.
*Use advances in the learning sciences and technology to enhance STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics)learning and develop, adopt, and evaluate new methodologies with the potential to enable all learners to excell in STEM.
*Design, develop, and adopt technology-based content, resources, and online learning communities that create opportunities for educators to collaborate for more effective teaching, inspire and attract new people into the profession, and encourage our best educators to continue teaching.
*Provide pre-service and in-service educators with preparation and professional learning experiences powered by technology that close the gap between students’ and educators’ fluencies with technology and promote and enable technology use in ways that improve learning, assessment, and instructional practices.
Because most teachers are digital immigrants, it is very important to provide teachers with professional learning experiences that bring the teachers' fluency with technology closer to that of the students. When this report is boiled down, we as teachers are called to do two things: 1.) teach our students problem solving skills using collaborative and communicative technology and 2.) Assess these problem solving skills in collaborative, performance based projects that utilize all available content and communication with peers and experts within the fields of study.
If we can get this accomplished, secondary schools will produce students that are autonomous and marketable. However, we must get away from the high-stakes objective measurements that drive our lives currently.
The National Educational Technology Plan was released in March 2010 to serve as a guide and model for state educational agencies to set or adapt their standards. An important facet of this plan is the implementation of Universal Design for Learning. UDL is a system of principles and guidelines designed to make content and learning equally accessable to all students. By designing curriculum with UDL guidelines and using communicative technology, we will be able to meet the needs of students who may not have equal access to the content, such as low-income students, English language learners, and learners with disabilities. By using the "always on" nature of the internet, all learners will have 24 hour access to content to be learned.
The National Educational Technology Plan makes important suggestions to thate educational agencies, including:
*Revise, create, and adopt standards and learning objectives for all content areas that reflect 21st century expertise and the power of technology to improve learning.
*Use advances in the learning sciences and technology to enhance STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics)learning and develop, adopt, and evaluate new methodologies with the potential to enable all learners to excell in STEM.
*Design, develop, and adopt technology-based content, resources, and online learning communities that create opportunities for educators to collaborate for more effective teaching, inspire and attract new people into the profession, and encourage our best educators to continue teaching.
*Provide pre-service and in-service educators with preparation and professional learning experiences powered by technology that close the gap between students’ and educators’ fluencies with technology and promote and enable technology use in ways that improve learning, assessment, and instructional practices.
Because most teachers are digital immigrants, it is very important to provide teachers with professional learning experiences that bring the teachers' fluency with technology closer to that of the students. When this report is boiled down, we as teachers are called to do two things: 1.) teach our students problem solving skills using collaborative and communicative technology and 2.) Assess these problem solving skills in collaborative, performance based projects that utilize all available content and communication with peers and experts within the fields of study.
If we can get this accomplished, secondary schools will produce students that are autonomous and marketable. However, we must get away from the high-stakes objective measurements that drive our lives currently.
The State of Technology in Texas 2010
The Texas Education Agency's Progress Report on the Long-Range Plan for Technology suggests that, as of 2010, students in Texas are making substantial progress in toward the goals set by the State Board of Education. Three grant programs have been especially beneficial in making the students in Texas more "technological."
The Technology Immersion Pilot, of TIP, provided selected schools with laptops for every student, staff development for the teachers, tech support, and online summative and formative assessments to monitor progress. The TIP program had positive results. In 2009, middle school students in Texas had closed the achievement gap with the national average to less than 2% on technology application assessments. What makes this program stand out and actually work, is the provision for staff development for the teachers in the selected schools. While providing all students with laptops is an excellent move, it is imperative to teach the "digital immigtants" how to integrate the technology into daily lessons and projects.
Vision 2020 grants also provided schools with laptops for each student, and teacher, but also focused on the utilization of Web 2.0 tools, such as podcasts, to inhance instruction. I was fortunate to work at a Vision 2020 school in which we created 10 podcasts per year and attached them to our blog, located on the school district website. The problem is that we did not know why we were doing this - it was not explained sufficiently. Many teachers, especially the older individuals, became frustrated, and in isolated cases angry, because no one understood the goal and barely understood the possible benefits. Having read the progress report, it all makes sense to me now. I very much wish I had access to the to the podcasts I created.
Embedded within the Vision 2020 was the creation of the Virtual School Pilot, which allowed students to take online TEK-aligned classes for credit, and allowed Texas teachers to collaborate and submit course content for the virtual school program. Dual credit courses, among other offerings, could be taken by students of participating school districts. It is my goal to access the TxVSN to hopefully integrate some of that material into the courses I teach.
Progress in Texas is obviously being made. However, there is one fundamental problem: many teachers, like me, do not know enough to reach the Advanced tech level. I need more staff development to be able to use Web 2.0 tools to make my classes more in line with Long-Range Plan. I also need staff development to help me align this "new" way of teaching with the TEKS that are in place currently.
The Technology Immersion Pilot, of TIP, provided selected schools with laptops for every student, staff development for the teachers, tech support, and online summative and formative assessments to monitor progress. The TIP program had positive results. In 2009, middle school students in Texas had closed the achievement gap with the national average to less than 2% on technology application assessments. What makes this program stand out and actually work, is the provision for staff development for the teachers in the selected schools. While providing all students with laptops is an excellent move, it is imperative to teach the "digital immigtants" how to integrate the technology into daily lessons and projects.
Vision 2020 grants also provided schools with laptops for each student, and teacher, but also focused on the utilization of Web 2.0 tools, such as podcasts, to inhance instruction. I was fortunate to work at a Vision 2020 school in which we created 10 podcasts per year and attached them to our blog, located on the school district website. The problem is that we did not know why we were doing this - it was not explained sufficiently. Many teachers, especially the older individuals, became frustrated, and in isolated cases angry, because no one understood the goal and barely understood the possible benefits. Having read the progress report, it all makes sense to me now. I very much wish I had access to the to the podcasts I created.
Embedded within the Vision 2020 was the creation of the Virtual School Pilot, which allowed students to take online TEK-aligned classes for credit, and allowed Texas teachers to collaborate and submit course content for the virtual school program. Dual credit courses, among other offerings, could be taken by students of participating school districts. It is my goal to access the TxVSN to hopefully integrate some of that material into the courses I teach.
Progress in Texas is obviously being made. However, there is one fundamental problem: many teachers, like me, do not know enough to reach the Advanced tech level. I need more staff development to be able to use Web 2.0 tools to make my classes more in line with Long-Range Plan. I also need staff development to help me align this "new" way of teaching with the TEKS that are in place currently.
Saturday, March 5, 2011
Legislators Apparently do not see Vision 2020
All learners:
• have access to relevant technologies,
tools, resources and services for
individualized instruction 24 hours a
day/7 days a week.
• use information and communication
technologies to collaborate, construct
knowledge and provide solutions to realworld
problems and situations that are
encountered.
• use research-based strategies in all
subject areas to improve academic
achievement.
• communicate effectively in a variety of
formats for diverse audiences.
These goals are located in the "Teaching and Learning" section of the State Board of Education's Texas Long-Range Plan for Technology 2006-2010. Here in 2011, we are not quite there. The first item expects all students have access to receive individualized instruction at all times. However, that is not the case where I teach. Many students do not have access to internet at home. They do not even have computers. While at school, the Freshman class was given 1 laptop per student, but we do not have 1 to 1 access for the upperclassmen. The second goal requires the use of information and communication technologies for collaboration and knowledge construction. Again, a small minority of our students have access to utilize wikis or any other collaborative technology. Finally, Phase 1 of the Vision 2020 plan allows for an increase of $50 per student to the Technology Allotment from the Telecommunications Infrastructure fund.
The Texas Legislature, in its never-ending desire to get re-elected, has once again not followed through with funding for schools. With no state budget in place, it is remarkably difficult for districts to make financial plans regarding the purchasing of technology. As of the 2007-2008 school year, the per-student allotment for technology was $27. The original legislation called for the allotment to start at $30 and increase by $5 per year until it reached $50. However, the State Board of Education estimates that it would actually take $123 per student to reach the Advanced tech level. According to the SBOE's report, the technology allotment funding was eliminated by the legislature in 2003.
Local districts have little ability to bring in money. We are at the mercy of the legislature and federal government with regards to how much money we can spend on educational technology. SBOE's goals for Phase 1 are admirable, and I'd like nothing more than to say we've all reached the Advanced tech level. But until the legislature supports this report with funded legislation, we will not get there.
• have access to relevant technologies,
tools, resources and services for
individualized instruction 24 hours a
day/7 days a week.
• use information and communication
technologies to collaborate, construct
knowledge and provide solutions to realworld
problems and situations that are
encountered.
• use research-based strategies in all
subject areas to improve academic
achievement.
• communicate effectively in a variety of
formats for diverse audiences.
These goals are located in the "Teaching and Learning" section of the State Board of Education's Texas Long-Range Plan for Technology 2006-2010. Here in 2011, we are not quite there. The first item expects all students have access to receive individualized instruction at all times. However, that is not the case where I teach. Many students do not have access to internet at home. They do not even have computers. While at school, the Freshman class was given 1 laptop per student, but we do not have 1 to 1 access for the upperclassmen. The second goal requires the use of information and communication technologies for collaboration and knowledge construction. Again, a small minority of our students have access to utilize wikis or any other collaborative technology. Finally, Phase 1 of the Vision 2020 plan allows for an increase of $50 per student to the Technology Allotment from the Telecommunications Infrastructure fund.
The Texas Legislature, in its never-ending desire to get re-elected, has once again not followed through with funding for schools. With no state budget in place, it is remarkably difficult for districts to make financial plans regarding the purchasing of technology. As of the 2007-2008 school year, the per-student allotment for technology was $27. The original legislation called for the allotment to start at $30 and increase by $5 per year until it reached $50. However, the State Board of Education estimates that it would actually take $123 per student to reach the Advanced tech level. According to the SBOE's report, the technology allotment funding was eliminated by the legislature in 2003.
Local districts have little ability to bring in money. We are at the mercy of the legislature and federal government with regards to how much money we can spend on educational technology. SBOE's goals for Phase 1 are admirable, and I'd like nothing more than to say we've all reached the Advanced tech level. But until the legislature supports this report with funded legislation, we will not get there.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)