When I first saw the title of this course, Instructional Leadership, I envisioned a course which dealt with the role of the principal as an instructional leader in the school and thought that it would deal with the implementation of best practices and the development of an instructional “vision” for the school through day to day relationships with staff, teacher assessments, community relations, budgetary concerns and possibly the recruitment of new teachers. In essence, I expected it to be very similar in content to the Instructional Leadership Development course that I had recently completed. Once I had read the syllabus, however, and looked at the other course materials, I realized that this course would handle a completely different area – instructional technology and the importance of this in administrator preparation these days. In short, the outcomes I had envisioned for the course did not align with the actual course because this was a different area of instructional leadership than I had expected and as a result, the outcomes I envisioned were completely different to the ones outlined in the course syllabus. Having said that, it is important to note that the true outcomes of the course cover an important and innovatory area of education that is developing daily, and as such it is very forward-thinking of the course professors to provide such a unique experience. Many of the required readings stress the importance of teacher education courses keeping abreast of new developments; in the same way it is important that courses which prepare administrators also move with the times and prepare their students to be successful in the real educational world in which they will eventually work, especially if they are to remain relevant and meet the changing needs to today’s students.
It is important for all educational administrators to understand the importance of technology, technological applications and web 2.0 tools in today’s schools since these are the tools of the future. The course covered many important aspects of this subject that are often overlooked or not stressed enough in the classroom, such as cyber ethics and internet safety. Some of these are “new” problems that are developing as we begin to use technology more and more, such as the need to educate students about the dangers lurking out there on the internet and the need for a common sense approach to this sort of activity; others are old problems in new packages, for example, cyber ethics; behaving ethically with the work of others has always been a part of education, but the ease of access to information on the internet has created a whole new set of dilemmas. If an administrator is to lead by example, it is important that they have worked with web 2.0 tools and experienced the problems that all teachers experience when they first begin to work with technology, and are confident to demonstrate what they know. This course provided the sort of hands-on experience necessary to develop these skills and to begin to explore areas that we may have shied away from in the past. For this reason, all outcomes are relevant to the work that we all currently do in schools and also to the work we aspire to do in the future. I believe that we all teach to help students to achieve more than they believe they can achieve, so anything that increases student achievement (such as understanding the needs of digital learners and learning new skills to meet these needs) has to be relevant to what we are trying to achieve.
I believe that I achieved all the outcomes of the course and successfully completed all the required assignments. This does not mean to say that I found them all equally easy to achieve, or that I was equally as successful in all of them, but the important thing was that I had the experience of learning, and of being a learner as this helps you see the problems from all perspectives. I think, as teachers and administrators, the thing that prevents us from achieving many objectives with technology is fear of the unknown and fear that we will lose control over the situation because, by its very nature, technology can be so unpredictable. Learning to handle this uncertainty and unpredictability is the key to appearing confident with technology and achieving everything that we want to, and need to, in this area. Some of the assignments on this course filled me with dread and fear because they were in unknown territories, such as blogging, for example. However, part of the measure of my success is that I was able to overcome these fears and achieve what was required of me to fulfill the requirements of the course.
The most important thing I learned from this course is that it is important for us all to be able to view the world from the student’s perspective. Technology is important in the lives of all our students and this is an area that we have often overlooked; but to be successful we must be flexible and adapt with the needs of our students and meet them where they can be most successful. Blogging is a large part of our future and it has many positive aspects; it gives all students a voice and encourages them to explore the world around them. From a teacher’s perspective, my biggest worry about blogs is that they may put students in a dangerous situation if they do not understand the dangers that are out there for the unwary. For this reason, educating students about internet safety should be top of the priority list as we embark on this new era in education.
Blogging opens the airwaves for discussion and creates channels for communication with school stakeholders that were hitherto unheard of. In the past, only the confident, educated parents had a voice in the school, but opening up a blog for school stakeholders could encourage the less confident parents to become involved since it is often easier to write what you are thinking than it is to ask in a face-to-face meeting. At the same time, it allows everybody to have a say even if they work strange hours and would not normally be available for school meetings. For this reason, blogging is an important communication tool in the education world because it opens the doors of the school to all people 24 hours a day.
Friday, December 18, 2009
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Week 4 Assignment
Part I
Title Responsibility
Board of Trustees The School Board, or Board of Trustees, is the school district's policy-making body and also the official representative of the people for all public education within the district. As such, all policies and decisions must be brought before them for approval before they can be implemented. They review the recommendations of the Superintendent with regard to staffing, budget expenditures, and planning. With regard to technology, they have approved the district’s long range plan for technology and accepted the recommendations of the Superintendent and the Technology Review Committee to implement wide-ranging changes with regard to technology so that the school district will meet the goals laid out in the district’s Long-Range Plan for Technology.
Superintendent The Superintendent works closely with school board, the Technology Review Committee and other district personnel to identify district needs and develop plans and budgets to meet the identified needs. He also oversees the development of the District Improvement Plan and the Campus Improvement Plans to ensure that goals are aligned with district policy. He presents these plans to the Board of Trustees for approval.
Chief Information Officer The Chief Information Officer oversees the various departments related to technology (including Instructional Technology) to implement policies and plans developed by the Technology Review Committee and approved by the Board of Trustees. Works closely with the Superintendent and other district personnel to identify technology needs and develop solutions for consideration by the Technology Review Committee. Reports directly to the Superintendent.
Area Assistant Superintendents The three Area Assistant Superintendents are responsible for 2 high schools each and all of their respective feeder schools. These interface between the Superintendent and the principals and are involved in all decisions that will affect the running of the campuses. Report directly to the Superintendent. Oversee the implementation of technology at the campus level.
Technology Review Committee District committee that meets regularly to develop, review and improve plans for the implementation of technology in the district. Makes recommendations for implementation and improvement of district services related to technology. Responsible for compiling the district’s Long-Range Plan for Technology. This committee includes personnel form the Technology department, principals, teachers, and community members.
Director of Technical Operations Responsible for all district hardware, maintenance of the servers and online security within the district. Reports to the Chief Information Officer.
Director of Instructional Technology Responsible for the integration of technology into instruction. Works closely with the Executive Director of teaching and Learning and the district Specialists and Officers to integrate instructional software and other technology into the curriculum. Reports to the Chief Information Officer.
Executive Director of Teaching & Learning Works closely with the Superintendent, Area Assistant Superintendents, Director of Instructional Technology, Director of Professional Learning, Specialists and Officers to develop best practices and update curriculum, including the implementation of technology. Reports directly to the Superintendent.
Director of Professional Learning Responsible for providing quality professional development opportunities to support the district goal of integrating technology into instruction. Works closely with Teaching and Learning and other district personnel to identify needs and plan for improvement. Reports to the Executive Director of Teaching & Learning.
Instructional Core Teams All specialists and district officers sit on an Instructional Core Team and work with the Technology Integration Specialists on identifying needs in core areas and developing plans to meet these needs by identifying technology applications and developing best practices for the integration of technology into instruction. Teams meet weekly and also undergo weekly technology trainings in Web 2.0 tools.
District Curriculum Specialists Responsible for integrating technology into the district curriculum and working with teachers to develop model lessons and best practices for the integration of technology into classroom instruction. Report to the Executive Director for Teaching and Learning.
Technology Integration Specialists Responsible for assisting campus personnel with the integration of instructional technology. Provide training as required for teachers and students on the use of Web 2.0 tools and the integration of technology applications into classroom instruction. Report to Director of Instructional Technology.
Campus Principals Responsible for creating a campus vision with regard to the integration of technology. Oversees the SBDM committee and works with them to develop and implement the Campus Improvement Plan. Evaluates instruction and implementation of technology at the instructional level, and works with faculty and staff to ensure and monitor best practices, integration and effective use of technology. The principal also identifies campus needs for professional development and schedules campus professional development opportunities as required. Works closely with Area Assistant Superintendents to implement district directives and plans to meet the goals of the district’s Long-Range Plan for Technology, including reviewing data from the Campus STaR Chart and planning for improvement.
Campus SBDM Committee Collaborates with the Principal to develop the Campus Improvement Plan and monitor implementation of the plan. Assess progress in achieving district and campus goals.
Department Chairs Work closely with campus administration to implement campus goals and communicate with teachers and staff. Model best practices and assist teachers with the implementation of Web 2.0 tools and the integration of technology into classroom instruction.
Teachers Attend professional development on the integration of technology into classroom instruction and the use of web 2.0 tools. Integrate technology into classroom instruction on a regular basis with the assistance of district Technology Integration Specialists. Complete annual STaR chart and identify own professional development needs.
Part II
My school district has recently embarked on a new era of technology integration. Previously blocked sites and applications have been opened up for student use and all specialists and officers at the district level are required to serve on one of four Instructional Core Teams established with the purpose of reviewing current technology use and applications in each of the four core subject areas (Math, Science, English Language Arts and Social Studies) and collaborating on the promotion and integration of new technology applications into the curriculum and instruction in all areas of the district’s curriculum. These goals are reflected in the district’s Long Range Technology Plan 2009-2012, the District Improvement Plan, and the Campus Improvement Plan at each of the district’s 52 campuses. There is a strong emphasis within the district on working to integrate technology applications into classroom instruction in order to meet the needs of the 56,800 students within the district, and therefore the goals of the Texas Long Range Plan for Technology. The goals and objectives laid out in the district’s Long Range Technology Plan (and echoed in the District Improvement Plan and the Campus Improvement Plans) are aligned with “the Katy ISD District Improvement Plan, the District facility plan, the Texas Long Range Plan for Technology, the National Education Technology Plan, the No Child Left Behind, and Erate strategies and objectives respectively” (page 3 of the Katy ISD Long Range Plan for Technology). The ultimate goal of technology integration in the district is to “support the teaching and learning for all children and to increase technology's impact on student achievement” (page 3). In order to achieve this, the district has developed an intensive program of professional development in order to prepare teachers to meet these goals.
Within the district, professional development focuses on the development of the skills necessary to use Web 2.0 tools and the subsequent integration of these tools and other technology applications in order to enhance learning and instruction in all district classrooms. Technology Integration Specialists work to assist teachers with integration in the classroom once they have undergone training on the use of the Web 2.0 tools.
The district’s Long-Range Technology Plan, the District Improvement Plan and the Campus Improvement Plan all address the need to improving the level of technology integration into classroom instruction in order to improve ratings on the campus STaR chart. information, the Texas Long Range Plan and to develop a survey for teachers to determine specific needs, concerns and professional development avenues on campus. Once the survey is completed by the staff we will review the data and develop specific plans to move forward with just in time learning needs for our staff and a support system for staff to share information and support one another in their areas of expertise. For instance one teacher on staff has worked closely with Microsoft in the development of their products. Another staff member is associated with another the makers of Compass Learning. We also have the benefit of having an Instructional Technology Facilitator to assist with students and technology. We also have an Instructional Coach to provide support for teachers. Many other staff members have expertise, or have great integrated lessons that may be shared. Determining this specific information will be one goal of the committee.
The district’s Long Range Technology Plan was developed in consultation with the 44 strong Technology Planning Committee following intensive examination of the data provided by AEIS, AYP, the Texas STaR chart, and other data gathering software including the ADM and TIA databases. To inform decision-making, data is gathered and disaggregated at both the district and the campus level to inform decisions regarding technology, professional development and the development of the District Improvement Plan and each Campus Improvement plan. The data from AEIS, AYP, ADM and TIA is also reviewed by personnel trained to recognize gaps in student achievement and this is used to identify specific objectives which will be targeted for improvement. All campus data is distributed to the SBDM team members at each campus and so that specific campus goals can be identified in consultation with the campus principal and included in the Campus Improvement Plan. Each campus also uses the results from the Texas Teacher STaR Chart to identify specific needs at their campus, looking always at the current data in comparison to the previous three years Texas Campus STaR Chart data so that trends and areas of concern can be identified and also so that evidence for success can be found.
Major areas of professional development for teachers and district personnel focus on:
• the use of SMARTBoards in class to improve and enhance instruction
• training in the use of SMART software to develop instructional units
• the use of wikis for communication and to create products, turn in, and comment on assignments
• the use of Glogster (a digital poster) to present information
• the use of eInstruction Response Pads to review material and/or assess learning
• the use of Xtranormal, Edublog, VoiceThread, myWebspiration, Voki, Wordle, Podcasting, and other tools to present, learn, or assess material in various ways that reach the digital learner
• introduction of Web 2.0 tools for instruction
• Consolidation of previous technology applications such as Microsoft Word, PowerPoint and Excel.
Professional development opportunities have always been freely available for all district personnel on Microsoft Office applications, such as Word, Excel, and Power Point, as well as Adobe applications and the student management software that is used in the district, but this year teachers, campus, and district personnel are able to request training on technology tools ‘on demand’. This has made a big difference to the teachers as they are able to get help when they need it most and the training is tailored to meet the needs of the teacher and if necessary, his or her students.
Part III
Evaluation and monitoring of this is achieved through the weekly meetings of the Instructional Core Teams, feedback from the Technology Integration Specialists based on data they are compiling, data from the Campus STaR charts and evidence collected by the principals and assistant principals at each campus who are responsible for monitoring instruction. Success of the professional development sessions will be assessed through evaluation forms and data on the subsequent implementation of technology applications and Web 2.0 tools into classroom instruction by attendees. Once data has been reviewed, recommendations will be made to each campus’s SBDM team and also the Technology Review Committee so that campus and district goals can be adjusted to meet the identified needs so that progress can be made towards the goals of the Campus Improvement Plans, District Improvement Plan, and the district’s Long Range Plan for Technology.
Title Responsibility
Board of Trustees The School Board, or Board of Trustees, is the school district's policy-making body and also the official representative of the people for all public education within the district. As such, all policies and decisions must be brought before them for approval before they can be implemented. They review the recommendations of the Superintendent with regard to staffing, budget expenditures, and planning. With regard to technology, they have approved the district’s long range plan for technology and accepted the recommendations of the Superintendent and the Technology Review Committee to implement wide-ranging changes with regard to technology so that the school district will meet the goals laid out in the district’s Long-Range Plan for Technology.
Superintendent The Superintendent works closely with school board, the Technology Review Committee and other district personnel to identify district needs and develop plans and budgets to meet the identified needs. He also oversees the development of the District Improvement Plan and the Campus Improvement Plans to ensure that goals are aligned with district policy. He presents these plans to the Board of Trustees for approval.
Chief Information Officer The Chief Information Officer oversees the various departments related to technology (including Instructional Technology) to implement policies and plans developed by the Technology Review Committee and approved by the Board of Trustees. Works closely with the Superintendent and other district personnel to identify technology needs and develop solutions for consideration by the Technology Review Committee. Reports directly to the Superintendent.
Area Assistant Superintendents The three Area Assistant Superintendents are responsible for 2 high schools each and all of their respective feeder schools. These interface between the Superintendent and the principals and are involved in all decisions that will affect the running of the campuses. Report directly to the Superintendent. Oversee the implementation of technology at the campus level.
Technology Review Committee District committee that meets regularly to develop, review and improve plans for the implementation of technology in the district. Makes recommendations for implementation and improvement of district services related to technology. Responsible for compiling the district’s Long-Range Plan for Technology. This committee includes personnel form the Technology department, principals, teachers, and community members.
Director of Technical Operations Responsible for all district hardware, maintenance of the servers and online security within the district. Reports to the Chief Information Officer.
Director of Instructional Technology Responsible for the integration of technology into instruction. Works closely with the Executive Director of teaching and Learning and the district Specialists and Officers to integrate instructional software and other technology into the curriculum. Reports to the Chief Information Officer.
Executive Director of Teaching & Learning Works closely with the Superintendent, Area Assistant Superintendents, Director of Instructional Technology, Director of Professional Learning, Specialists and Officers to develop best practices and update curriculum, including the implementation of technology. Reports directly to the Superintendent.
Director of Professional Learning Responsible for providing quality professional development opportunities to support the district goal of integrating technology into instruction. Works closely with Teaching and Learning and other district personnel to identify needs and plan for improvement. Reports to the Executive Director of Teaching & Learning.
Instructional Core Teams All specialists and district officers sit on an Instructional Core Team and work with the Technology Integration Specialists on identifying needs in core areas and developing plans to meet these needs by identifying technology applications and developing best practices for the integration of technology into instruction. Teams meet weekly and also undergo weekly technology trainings in Web 2.0 tools.
District Curriculum Specialists Responsible for integrating technology into the district curriculum and working with teachers to develop model lessons and best practices for the integration of technology into classroom instruction. Report to the Executive Director for Teaching and Learning.
Technology Integration Specialists Responsible for assisting campus personnel with the integration of instructional technology. Provide training as required for teachers and students on the use of Web 2.0 tools and the integration of technology applications into classroom instruction. Report to Director of Instructional Technology.
Campus Principals Responsible for creating a campus vision with regard to the integration of technology. Oversees the SBDM committee and works with them to develop and implement the Campus Improvement Plan. Evaluates instruction and implementation of technology at the instructional level, and works with faculty and staff to ensure and monitor best practices, integration and effective use of technology. The principal also identifies campus needs for professional development and schedules campus professional development opportunities as required. Works closely with Area Assistant Superintendents to implement district directives and plans to meet the goals of the district’s Long-Range Plan for Technology, including reviewing data from the Campus STaR Chart and planning for improvement.
Campus SBDM Committee Collaborates with the Principal to develop the Campus Improvement Plan and monitor implementation of the plan. Assess progress in achieving district and campus goals.
Department Chairs Work closely with campus administration to implement campus goals and communicate with teachers and staff. Model best practices and assist teachers with the implementation of Web 2.0 tools and the integration of technology into classroom instruction.
Teachers Attend professional development on the integration of technology into classroom instruction and the use of web 2.0 tools. Integrate technology into classroom instruction on a regular basis with the assistance of district Technology Integration Specialists. Complete annual STaR chart and identify own professional development needs.
Part II
My school district has recently embarked on a new era of technology integration. Previously blocked sites and applications have been opened up for student use and all specialists and officers at the district level are required to serve on one of four Instructional Core Teams established with the purpose of reviewing current technology use and applications in each of the four core subject areas (Math, Science, English Language Arts and Social Studies) and collaborating on the promotion and integration of new technology applications into the curriculum and instruction in all areas of the district’s curriculum. These goals are reflected in the district’s Long Range Technology Plan 2009-2012, the District Improvement Plan, and the Campus Improvement Plan at each of the district’s 52 campuses. There is a strong emphasis within the district on working to integrate technology applications into classroom instruction in order to meet the needs of the 56,800 students within the district, and therefore the goals of the Texas Long Range Plan for Technology. The goals and objectives laid out in the district’s Long Range Technology Plan (and echoed in the District Improvement Plan and the Campus Improvement Plans) are aligned with “the Katy ISD District Improvement Plan, the District facility plan, the Texas Long Range Plan for Technology, the National Education Technology Plan, the No Child Left Behind, and Erate strategies and objectives respectively” (page 3 of the Katy ISD Long Range Plan for Technology). The ultimate goal of technology integration in the district is to “support the teaching and learning for all children and to increase technology's impact on student achievement” (page 3). In order to achieve this, the district has developed an intensive program of professional development in order to prepare teachers to meet these goals.
Within the district, professional development focuses on the development of the skills necessary to use Web 2.0 tools and the subsequent integration of these tools and other technology applications in order to enhance learning and instruction in all district classrooms. Technology Integration Specialists work to assist teachers with integration in the classroom once they have undergone training on the use of the Web 2.0 tools.
The district’s Long-Range Technology Plan, the District Improvement Plan and the Campus Improvement Plan all address the need to improving the level of technology integration into classroom instruction in order to improve ratings on the campus STaR chart. information, the Texas Long Range Plan and to develop a survey for teachers to determine specific needs, concerns and professional development avenues on campus. Once the survey is completed by the staff we will review the data and develop specific plans to move forward with just in time learning needs for our staff and a support system for staff to share information and support one another in their areas of expertise. For instance one teacher on staff has worked closely with Microsoft in the development of their products. Another staff member is associated with another the makers of Compass Learning. We also have the benefit of having an Instructional Technology Facilitator to assist with students and technology. We also have an Instructional Coach to provide support for teachers. Many other staff members have expertise, or have great integrated lessons that may be shared. Determining this specific information will be one goal of the committee.
The district’s Long Range Technology Plan was developed in consultation with the 44 strong Technology Planning Committee following intensive examination of the data provided by AEIS, AYP, the Texas STaR chart, and other data gathering software including the ADM and TIA databases. To inform decision-making, data is gathered and disaggregated at both the district and the campus level to inform decisions regarding technology, professional development and the development of the District Improvement Plan and each Campus Improvement plan. The data from AEIS, AYP, ADM and TIA is also reviewed by personnel trained to recognize gaps in student achievement and this is used to identify specific objectives which will be targeted for improvement. All campus data is distributed to the SBDM team members at each campus and so that specific campus goals can be identified in consultation with the campus principal and included in the Campus Improvement Plan. Each campus also uses the results from the Texas Teacher STaR Chart to identify specific needs at their campus, looking always at the current data in comparison to the previous three years Texas Campus STaR Chart data so that trends and areas of concern can be identified and also so that evidence for success can be found.
Major areas of professional development for teachers and district personnel focus on:
• the use of SMARTBoards in class to improve and enhance instruction
• training in the use of SMART software to develop instructional units
• the use of wikis for communication and to create products, turn in, and comment on assignments
• the use of Glogster (a digital poster) to present information
• the use of eInstruction Response Pads to review material and/or assess learning
• the use of Xtranormal, Edublog, VoiceThread, myWebspiration, Voki, Wordle, Podcasting, and other tools to present, learn, or assess material in various ways that reach the digital learner
• introduction of Web 2.0 tools for instruction
• Consolidation of previous technology applications such as Microsoft Word, PowerPoint and Excel.
Professional development opportunities have always been freely available for all district personnel on Microsoft Office applications, such as Word, Excel, and Power Point, as well as Adobe applications and the student management software that is used in the district, but this year teachers, campus, and district personnel are able to request training on technology tools ‘on demand’. This has made a big difference to the teachers as they are able to get help when they need it most and the training is tailored to meet the needs of the teacher and if necessary, his or her students.
Part III
Evaluation and monitoring of this is achieved through the weekly meetings of the Instructional Core Teams, feedback from the Technology Integration Specialists based on data they are compiling, data from the Campus STaR charts and evidence collected by the principals and assistant principals at each campus who are responsible for monitoring instruction. Success of the professional development sessions will be assessed through evaluation forms and data on the subsequent implementation of technology applications and Web 2.0 tools into classroom instruction by attendees. Once data has been reviewed, recommendations will be made to each campus’s SBDM team and also the Technology Review Committee so that campus and district goals can be adjusted to meet the identified needs so that progress can be made towards the goals of the Campus Improvement Plans, District Improvement Plan, and the district’s Long Range Plan for Technology.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Texas STaR Chart Discussion: Teaching & Learning
The Texas Campus STaR Chart is a tool that is designed to be used in helping campuses plan for the implementation, planning, budgeting and evaluation of technology projects. With the development of the global economy and the explosion of the internet, the use of technology has become a “hot topic” in education and something that the state of Texas cannot ignore, if it wants its students to confidently take their place as global citizens. The area of the Texas STaR Chart I would like to focus on is Teaching & Learning as I feel this is the area that is the most difficult to implement and improve since it relies not only on the educators at the campus who are required to integrate technology and, in particular web 2.0 tools, into their instruction, but also on the district and campus administration officials to provide sufficient support, training and infrastructure to make this job feasible. Without a district vision, the efforts of the educator will be lost as many aspects of this area cannot be achieved by educators alone. The Teaching and Learning area of the chart focuses on learning for all students in preparation for the 21st century and demands that students learn collaboratively, not only within their classroom but with their peers across the globe. Educators are required to connect their students with other classes, engage their students in distance learning opportunities, and guide them as a facilitator of learning as they develop into accomplished lifelong learners with abilities that transcend the banal confines of a classroom.
According to the Campus Statewide summary for 2008, Teaching and Learning is one of the weaker areas for most schools. The majority of schools (69.7%) fall into Developing Tech range and only 26.4% of all Texas schools are classified as either Advanced Tech or Target Tech. This is the case for my school, which has remained static in this area for the last three years. As aspiring administrators, we need to take note of this because we can only improve in this area if we provide training for teachers not only in technological applications but also in the methodology required to implement technology into every aspect of the curriculum on a regular basis.
According to the Campus Statewide summary for 2008, Teaching and Learning is one of the weaker areas for most schools. The majority of schools (69.7%) fall into Developing Tech range and only 26.4% of all Texas schools are classified as either Advanced Tech or Target Tech. This is the case for my school, which has remained static in this area for the last three years. As aspiring administrators, we need to take note of this because we can only improve in this area if we provide training for teachers not only in technological applications but also in the methodology required to implement technology into every aspect of the curriculum on a regular basis.
Pre-K Technology Applications TEKS
Prekindergarten children in Texas are expected to have mastered ten skill domains so they will be ready to begin Kindergarten. The ten skill domains are:
I. Social and Emotional Development
II. Language and Communication
III. Emergent Literacy Reading
IV. Emergent Literacy Writing
V. Mathematics
VI. Science
VII. Social Studies
VIII. Fine Arts
IX. Physical Development
X. Technology
The tenth skill domain is the Technology Application domain and this is broken down into five smaller skill areas called the “End of Prekindergarten Year Outcomes.” These are designed to help prekindergarten students to develop their ability to acquire information, solve problems, and communicate with others. Each skill area has associated child behaviors and suggested instructional strategies to help prekindergarten students master the skills. The first end of prekindergarten year outcome (X.A.1) relates to the use of software programs to “enhance the development of appropriate concepts.” The second end of prekindergarten year outcome (X.A.2) relates to the use of computer input devices and describes how a student should be able to identify and use various input devices such as a keyboard and a mouse. The third end of prekindergarten year (X.A.3) relates to the use of voice and sound recorders and touch screens, including the use of CDs to play music. The fourth end of prekindergarten year outcome (X.A.4) requires students to be able to use a variety of software applications in order to create products and express ideas. The fifth and final end of prekindergarten outcome (X.A.5) requires students to recognize that information can be found through the use of a variety of technological devices. In addition, students are expected to have regular access to computers and related software/technology so that they can engage in age‐appropriate, and challenging tasks that will extend their knowledge of technology, enrich their content learning and improve their technological skills in preparation for future years. These skills and requirements are in line with the Long Range Plan for Technology, and the Texas vision to provide technological experiences that are critical to the development of 21st century skills for all students. The prekindergarten TEKS for technology form a basis for the knowledge and skills all students must develop by the end of eighth grade, and which will continue to be developed throughout the student’s educational career.
I. Social and Emotional Development
II. Language and Communication
III. Emergent Literacy Reading
IV. Emergent Literacy Writing
V. Mathematics
VI. Science
VII. Social Studies
VIII. Fine Arts
IX. Physical Development
X. Technology
The tenth skill domain is the Technology Application domain and this is broken down into five smaller skill areas called the “End of Prekindergarten Year Outcomes.” These are designed to help prekindergarten students to develop their ability to acquire information, solve problems, and communicate with others. Each skill area has associated child behaviors and suggested instructional strategies to help prekindergarten students master the skills. The first end of prekindergarten year outcome (X.A.1) relates to the use of software programs to “enhance the development of appropriate concepts.” The second end of prekindergarten year outcome (X.A.2) relates to the use of computer input devices and describes how a student should be able to identify and use various input devices such as a keyboard and a mouse. The third end of prekindergarten year (X.A.3) relates to the use of voice and sound recorders and touch screens, including the use of CDs to play music. The fourth end of prekindergarten year outcome (X.A.4) requires students to be able to use a variety of software applications in order to create products and express ideas. The fifth and final end of prekindergarten outcome (X.A.5) requires students to recognize that information can be found through the use of a variety of technological devices. In addition, students are expected to have regular access to computers and related software/technology so that they can engage in age‐appropriate, and challenging tasks that will extend their knowledge of technology, enrich their content learning and improve their technological skills in preparation for future years. These skills and requirements are in line with the Long Range Plan for Technology, and the Texas vision to provide technological experiences that are critical to the development of 21st century skills for all students. The prekindergarten TEKS for technology form a basis for the knowledge and skills all students must develop by the end of eighth grade, and which will continue to be developed throughout the student’s educational career.
The Long Range Plan for Technology (LRPT)
The Long Range Plan for Technology (LRPT) is a very comprehensive document which sets out the goals and responsibilities for all who have a stake in education, be they an educational entity, such as the Texas Education Agency (TEA) or the State Board for Educator Certification (SBEC), an educator, a student, or a parent. It provides a vision of how the state of Texas will meet the challenge of the 21st century, and in particular how we will prepare our students to be successful in and meet the demands of the global economy as it continues to develop. The LRPT provides a timeline for the state to achieve its technological goals. The timeline is broken down into three phases: the first phase runs from 2006 to 2010; the second phase runs from 2011 to 2015 and the final phase runs from 2016 to 2020. Phase I lays the foundations for change and puts forth a framework for the other two phases, although the requirements and expectations for Phase II will be further developed as we move through the plan.
The document is sub-divided into sections, each one dealing with a different aspect of education and technology. As well as outlining a vision for where we need to be by 2010, it also provides information and data on the need for change, as well as giving a picture of the 21st century learner and the needs of educators (and the responsibilities of those who train them) if they are going to be in a position to meet the goals of the LRPT.
The document is sub-divided into sections, each one dealing with a different aspect of education and technology. As well as outlining a vision for where we need to be by 2010, it also provides information and data on the need for change, as well as giving a picture of the 21st century learner and the needs of educators (and the responsibilities of those who train them) if they are going to be in a position to meet the goals of the LRPT.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Reflections on the Technology Assessments
The first thing that struck me as I completed these assessments is how little I really know about technology and the expectations my district has for students and their technology use. The first assessment (Technology Applications Inventory) was easier for me to complete than the SETDA survey since it applied to my own knowledge. It revealed that I had a good basic knowledge in the Foundations area (I answered more than half of the 18 questions with yes), was middle of the road in the Information Acquisition area (answering half of the 10 questions with yes and half with no), but inadequate in the Solving Problems and Communication areas (each time answering only a third of the questions with yes). This surprised me a little as I thought I was probably more adept with technology than this assessment revealed. I clearly have a lot to learn and to be quite frank, I find the process overwhelming.
I found the SETDA survey very difficult to complete. As I am no longer in the classroom, the questions on the teacher survey did not apply to me, so I chose the District survey. However, there were many areas where I was not clear on district policy and expectations for student. I looked up the district policy on technology and still had many questions related to this. This is something I will have to pursue with the director of technology so that I can build up a better picture of what my district really expects.
These are effective tools to assess the state of things with regard to technology. It helped me realize how much I have to learn in this area. I think I will repeat the assessments at the end of this course to see if I fare any better. Hopefully, this course will help me grow professionally in the area of technology applications and policy.
I found the SETDA survey very difficult to complete. As I am no longer in the classroom, the questions on the teacher survey did not apply to me, so I chose the District survey. However, there were many areas where I was not clear on district policy and expectations for student. I looked up the district policy on technology and still had many questions related to this. This is something I will have to pursue with the director of technology so that I can build up a better picture of what my district really expects.
These are effective tools to assess the state of things with regard to technology. It helped me realize how much I have to learn in this area. I think I will repeat the assessments at the end of this course to see if I fare any better. Hopefully, this course will help me grow professionally in the area of technology applications and policy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)