Thursday, March 17, 2011
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Web Conference March 16, 2011
With technology, there are always glitches. This week's web conference was no exception. Audio was out and I was having difficulty keeping a large screen. Without audio or cameras, it became more of a chat room. There were many participants and I had a difficult time keeping up with questions and answers. The Q & A, however, were very insiteful and I picked up a lot of information that I did not know. Information about the class was not abundant, but I picked up a lot of information about the program itself. Web conferencing can be very beneficial for a lot of reasons. Participants are all over the state and are able to come together and share information. With the participation of Dr. Cummings and other students, we can ask questions and get real time answers without leaving the home or office. This is a great tool, but could be better with smaller numbers of participant, working audio, and a better understanding of how the system works.
Friday, March 4, 2011
EDLD 5352 Blog #3 Reflection and Summary of NETP plan
The NETP plan was written as part of President Obama’s push for education reform and an attempt to place more high school graduates into institutions of higher education. This “sizable challenge” comes on the leading edge of a failing economy and lack of funding for public education nationwide. The plan calls for us to:
• Be clear about the outcomes we seek.
• Collaborate to redesign structures and processes for effectiveness, efficiency, and flexibility.
• Continually monitor and measure our performance.
• Hold ourselves accountable for progress and results every step of the way.
The NETP is presented as a model of learning that is powered by technology. It has goals and recommendations in five indispensable areas: learning, assessment, teaching, infrastructure, and productivity. As educators we must find a balance between traditional learning activities and creating engaging, relevant, and personalized learning experiences using modern technology.
With such a push in technology both locally and nationally it would make sense that leadership for both would find ways to fund it. As it is, grants are being reduced or taken away and it will be impossible to meet the goals that this plan asks us to meet. I believe that there are some people outside of education that do not understand education. If you want it done, you have to have a plan, then you have to fund it. The plan is in place and now it is time for the powers that be actually make it a priority and quit giving lip service. I think that this plan is very feasible as long as our government starts to place education before personal interests.
• Be clear about the outcomes we seek.
• Collaborate to redesign structures and processes for effectiveness, efficiency, and flexibility.
• Continually monitor and measure our performance.
• Hold ourselves accountable for progress and results every step of the way.
The NETP is presented as a model of learning that is powered by technology. It has goals and recommendations in five indispensable areas: learning, assessment, teaching, infrastructure, and productivity. As educators we must find a balance between traditional learning activities and creating engaging, relevant, and personalized learning experiences using modern technology.
With such a push in technology both locally and nationally it would make sense that leadership for both would find ways to fund it. As it is, grants are being reduced or taken away and it will be impossible to meet the goals that this plan asks us to meet. I believe that there are some people outside of education that do not understand education. If you want it done, you have to have a plan, then you have to fund it. The plan is in place and now it is time for the powers that be actually make it a priority and quit giving lip service. I think that this plan is very feasible as long as our government starts to place education before personal interests.
Thursday, March 3, 2011
EDLD 5352 Star Chart, How we should use it improve technology education on PN-G HS campus
Are we really using the STaR chart for improvement or are we just doing the status quo?
Star Chart PN-G
View more presentations from Kodipola.
EDLD 5352 Blog #2 Reflection on Progress Report for LRPT
The LRPT was put into place so that schools in the state of Texas would increase 21st century teaching skills along with improving 21st century technology skills for students. The Progress Report for the LRPT was aimed at determining the improvement schools have shown meeting recommendations of the four key sections of the 2006-2020 plan over a 2 year period from 2006-08. This progress report also encompasses interim results of two legislatively mandated programs that were executed through the 2006-2008 timeframe. These programs are the Technology Immersion Pilot (TIP) and the Texas Virtual School Network (TxVSN).
The Texas Star Chart was the tool used to determine the success of schools in meeting the LRPT goals. The data collected from these state mandated Star Charts was used to determine progress on a local and statewide level.
Although these data results did not show an overwhelming improvement by school in all Key areas, there were, more schools appearing in the Advanced Tech Key area in all four areas from year to year. One of the key reasons for this is the availability of technology. As more products become more available, the price comes down to an affordable area for schools to use them. Unfortunately, because of this, schools will never have the most up to date technology to use on their campuses. The amount of technology, though, is irrelevant if district and campus leaders do not put an emphasis on professional development and training. I believe this is why the other three key areas are and will remain stagnant in the future if this does not change. The results of this progress report are not nearly as important as the action that should be taken to remedy the situation. Vision without action is only a daydream.
The Texas Star Chart was the tool used to determine the success of schools in meeting the LRPT goals. The data collected from these state mandated Star Charts was used to determine progress on a local and statewide level.
Although these data results did not show an overwhelming improvement by school in all Key areas, there were, more schools appearing in the Advanced Tech Key area in all four areas from year to year. One of the key reasons for this is the availability of technology. As more products become more available, the price comes down to an affordable area for schools to use them. Unfortunately, because of this, schools will never have the most up to date technology to use on their campuses. The amount of technology, though, is irrelevant if district and campus leaders do not put an emphasis on professional development and training. I believe this is why the other three key areas are and will remain stagnant in the future if this does not change. The results of this progress report are not nearly as important as the action that should be taken to remedy the situation. Vision without action is only a daydream.
EDLD 5352 Blog #1 Educator Preparation and the LRPT
The Educator Preparation and Development area of the Texas Long Range Plan for Technology deals primarily with making sure educators are provided the tools and skills to become more proficient at implementing technology into the classroom. Unlike Teaching and Learning that deals directly with using the skills in class, this area would actually show them how to use these skills. Examples of this area would be professional development for technology applications, training for use of electronic tools, implementation strategy development, and teacher collaboration on how to improve technology in the classroom.
Over a two year period, my campus has not seen any improvement in this area. Campus leadership has not made a visible, dramatic push towards improvement. We have not increased professional development opportunities and therefore technology implementation has not occurred in the classroom. This trend mirrors the trend around the state. The only improvement in the state was in the Early Tech and Advanced Tech groups with decrease of 3% for Early Tech and increase of 3% for Advanced Tech. The other two categories stayed the same. This shows little to no improvement over a two year period.
It seems the trend around my local area and state is push more technology, but don’t fund it. It seems that what the state wants and what it is willing to put out there financially are two different things. They want more, but are giving less. This is a practice in futility and is frustrating for public educators.
In my opinion the only way that politicians will fund technology is if it is part of the standardized testing system. If the TAKS were taken by computer, it would save the state millions of dollars in supplies. Results could be determined quicker and schools could see what they need to improve on sooner. This would force the state and districts to integrate technology into the classroom.
Over a two year period, my campus has not seen any improvement in this area. Campus leadership has not made a visible, dramatic push towards improvement. We have not increased professional development opportunities and therefore technology implementation has not occurred in the classroom. This trend mirrors the trend around the state. The only improvement in the state was in the Early Tech and Advanced Tech groups with decrease of 3% for Early Tech and increase of 3% for Advanced Tech. The other two categories stayed the same. This shows little to no improvement over a two year period.
It seems the trend around my local area and state is push more technology, but don’t fund it. It seems that what the state wants and what it is willing to put out there financially are two different things. They want more, but are giving less. This is a practice in futility and is frustrating for public educators.
In my opinion the only way that politicians will fund technology is if it is part of the standardized testing system. If the TAKS were taken by computer, it would save the state millions of dollars in supplies. Results could be determined quicker and schools could see what they need to improve on sooner. This would force the state and districts to integrate technology into the classroom.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)