Textbook+Reading+Reflections


 * Reflections on Technology Facilitator Standard I: Technology Operations and Concepts **

TF/TL Standard I addresses Technology Operations and Concepts. This standard explains the basic needs of effective educators to have general knowledge of today’s technology including identifying various hardware and basic computer components, being familiar with common features and functions of operating systems, applying basic troubleshooting techniques, selecting and using the correct software for specific tasks, practicing proper care and maintenance of technology, understanding common internet features and communication tools, and having knowledge of basic networking and infrastructure. I can see why this is the first standard, because it outlines “the basics” of what teachers should know to educate the 21st Century Learner. The standards and research are quick to point out that training teachers on these skills should not be done in “isolation”, but that “current best practices in technology facilitation and leadership integrate technology operations and concepts with professional development related to teaching and learning”(p 23). In other words, if teachers are expected to integrate technology into their classrooms to engage students in retaining and transferring knowledge, then professional development should be conducted in the same manner. This rationale is difficult to argue with, for sure.

In addition to identifying basic technical skills needed for today’s educators, Standard I also differentiates the roles of technology facilitators and leaders. After reading this chapter, I have a better understanding of the differences. Technology facilitators work directly with teachers by modeling and assisting them in integrating technology into their classrooms. Facilitators may help design lessons or activities, assist teachers during actual implementation, or model appropriate strategies for technology use. Leaders, however, usually research and evaluate the strategies being used, conduct professional development on current and new technology operations. I like to think of it as a school—the facilitators are the teachers actually doing the teaching and working directly with the learners while the leaders are more like administrators who research best practices, disseminate the information to the facilitators to use with the teachers, and provide support.

I have been to many workshops and trainings that pertain to operations and concepts from Microsoft Office, to Eduphoria, to basic grade book and attendance training. I have helped fellow teachers (both new and veteran) to learn Gradespeed, how to use the production center via the internet, use a common drive to save collaborative documents, and how to setup and maintain a website for a total of 2 hours (probably more) towards my internship. Most of my experience in receiving professional development, however, has been with isolated use of technology, where teachers are just shown the basic “ins and outs” of some new technology. The best training I have attended has been on the Classroom Performance System (or clickers) where they actually modeled using the technology through integration of an actual lesson. Oddly enough, teachers were engaged and learning—just like their students should be!!

Citations:

Williamson, J. & Redish, T. (2009). //Technology facilitation and leadership standards: What every K-12 leader should know and be able to do//. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education


 * Reflections on Technology Facilitator Standard II: Planning and Designing Learning Environments and Experiences **

Standard II identified in the ISTE’s Technology Facilitation and Leadership Standards addresses Planning and Designing Learning Environments and Experiences. Facilitators and Leaders must aid teachers in creating classrooms that use technology to “solve problems or create original products” which “aid students in constructing meaning and demonstrate learning” (p 33). Often this is not easy to do and requires teachers to “engage in sophisticated planning and design processes” (p 34). Teachers need a lot of support from technology facilitators and leaders to accomplish this task.

Outlined in this chapter are the different levels of technology implementation from 0 (non-use) to 6 (refinement). Teachers may fall into any of the categories along this spectrum and facilitators need to be aware of their current level in order to help them integrate technology into their classrooms. The most common issue is that teachers may know a considerable amount about technology, but are unsure how to implement it in the classroom to improve student learning. I feel I am in this category. It is difficult to spend a lot of time developing authentic activities integrating technology, especially when the lessons must meet course standards and teach students technical skills simultaneously. If teachers are not given support, time, and resources to develop this kind of instruction, change will be inconsistent and slow. Technology leaders must help teachers change the way they teach—which is extremely difficult because it “challenges teachers’ long-standing beliefs about teaching and learning” (p 38).

The following guiding principles are used to help facilitators aid teachers in designing engaging and appropriate technology-rich lessons: specify the types of learning experiences students should have, model the types of technology teachers should use, train teachers in the same manner in which they will be teaching the technology, show teachers a process for designing such activities, provide sound research-based rationale that improves student learning, link the technology to the curriculum, understand where teachers are in the spectrum of technology integration and help facilitate that change, and provide time for teachers to reflect and revise their processes and lessons. Leaders and facilitators must “facilitate” the change that needs to happen for teachers to shift from designing teacher-centered strategies to planning learner-centered activities. Their role it to act as learning coaches and mentors to help teachers make this inevitable transition.

During this master’s program, I have worked with other teachers and even made efforts myself to implement more technology into my classroom by using clicker systems, computer labs, and classroom computers and the internet. I have worked collaboratively and independently to construct lessons using and teaching technology skills such as Microsoft Excel, PowerPoint, Word, and search tools on the internet for a total of 4 hours towards my internship. Using technology is not so difficult, but learning how to integrate technology with the curriculum and design truly interesting activities which keep students engaged, teach the content standards, and teach them technology skills is very difficult. I think instructional facilitators must make time and set up meetings with collaborative teams instead of waiting for teachers to call them. Change is not an easy process and won’t happen for some unless they are forced to do it. I question why facilitators and technology leaders in my district don't take a more proactive role in changing the way teachers teach and use technology in their classroom. Implementation must be supported and facilitated, but absolutely mandatory for teachers to be effective in reaching the needs of the 21st Century Learner.

Citations:

Williamson, J. & Redish, T. (2009). //Technology facilitation and leadership standards: What every K-12 leader should know and be able to do//. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.


 * Reflections on Technology Facilitator Standard III: Teaching, Learning, and the Curriculum **

Standard III identified in the ISTE’s Technology Facilitation and Leadership Standards (Williamson and Redish, 2009) addresses Teaching, Learning, and the Curriculum. While Standard II focuses on facilitators assisting teachers to plan learning experiences, Standard III suggest ways technology facilitators and leaders can influence the curriculum.

In the wake of an exponential technology boom, students are more “plugged in” to what is happening in the digital world, and schools are lagging far behind in teaching relevant and technology-oriented concepts to prepare students for college and the workplace. The education system must rewrite outdated curriculum to reflect the needs of our changing society to include more instruction using web 2.0 technologies, web-based tools, and online learning environments. Students crave this type of instruction and “need engaging, media-rich learning experiences to maximize their learning potential” (p 59). Further, students prefer school settings which call for “one-to-one, ubiquitous computing environments that are simple, fast, interactive, and wireless” (p 59).

Giant steps have already been taken towards writing curriculum that addresses the needs of the 21st Century Learners. The K-12 curricula at all levels is already shifting towards “performance standards designed to elicit higher-order thinking, creativity, problem-solving, and deeper understanding of content” (p 61). In addition, the National Educational Technology Standards for Students were updated in 2007 and are now used or referenced in 48 states. In fact, the new NETS•S “focus more on what students must be able to do with technology rather than on the tools themselves—a revision that should facilitate, the integration of student technology standards into core academic areas” (p 61).

Although changes are being made, more needs to be done to implement technology effectively into the curricula. Districts must align their curricula to technology standards and use grade-specific benchmarks and assessments. Instructional resources in the form of hardware and software may also be needed as well as professional development and ongoing learning opportunities for educators. Technology facilitators can use strategies such as modeling or providing in-class coaching to help teachers implement the tools needed to reach our digital learners.

Throughout the course, I have designed lessons that implemented technology into my instruction and shown my fellow colleagues how to use it. I have done activities that are designed to teach students technology skills such as conducting web searches, using a spreadsheet, using a blog, submitting assignments online, using PowerPoint, and Microsoft Word. I have also worked with our district facilitators to learn how to operate the Classroom Performance System to administer tests, get immediate feedback, or do quick Assessments for Learning. I feel I have made great strides as an educator in implementing technology into my classroom over the last two years. I have always used and shown students how to perform operations on the graphing calculator, but have definitely broadened my horizons during the course of this master’s program. The only question that I still have is “Why are some districts not doing all they can to make sure they are meeting the needs of our 21st Century Students?”

Citations:

Williamson, J. & Redish, T. (2009). //Technology facilitation and leadership standards: What every K-12 leader should know and be able to do//. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.


 * Reflections on Technology Facilitator Standard IV: Assessment and Evaluation **

Standard IV from the ISTE’s Technology Facilitation and Leadership Standards addresses the areas of assessment and evaluation. Technology facilitators and leaders must be able to design and help implement ways to assess student learning in core areas as well as technology-related skills, through the use of technology. They must also be able to analyze and evaluate various technology used for education and determined its effectiveness in the classroom. Facilitators and leaders must be able to show teachers how to collect, organize, and analyze data using current technology tools in order to maximize the tool’s effectiveness.

In the last couple of years, I have had experience with all of the performance indicators listed in this standard. The first performance indicator is //Assessing Student Learning//. This year, our school received Classroom Performance Systems (one for every two math teachers) and I have used them quite extensively for formative and summative evaluations, and for general feedback. For example, I have used them for oral surveys to determine student’s effort and study time on a test. It takes a little bit to set it up at the beginning of the year, but once you have your classes set up, the rest is easy. The students are assigned a clicker number and you can see their individual responses without exposing their identity to the rest of the class. A bar graph can even be created directly after a question is asked to show the results to the class. I have also used CPS to administer formative assessments such as tests and final exams. The students don’t even have to get the clicker until he done taking the test. Then, they can just go through and put their answers in. It’s immediately graded!!! No more grading tests by hand or using the Scantron machine. I also learned how to run reports from the software to analyze the data for better information about why certain questions were missed. The students know immediately what their grade is before even leaving the class. Then, when I pass the tests back, we can go over the answers as a class and see what kind of mistakes are being made, which question was missed the most, and discuss possible reasons for why it was missed.

The second performance indicator related to standard IV is //Collecting, Analyzing, and Reporting Data.// Not only have I done this with the clickers (it does all of that for you), but I have also given students a survey after a technology-rich lesson involving laptops, their online textbook and other resources, and working in collaborative groups. I survey students about the lesson (what they liked, didn’t like, what did they learned, etc.), organized and analyzed the data, and presented it back to them. Students love to see their actual responses quoted for all to see and used by the teacher. It’s like.”Hey, my opinion does matter and my teacher really does care about what we think.” To give students a voice in strategies that affect their learning is important to all of us—students and teachers alike.

The third performance indicator under this standard is //Evaluating Technologies for Effective Use.// I feel like I am constantly doing this in my classroom with the document cameras, the clicker systems, or any other technology we try out in class. I have shared with current facilitators the pros and cons of working with different technological tools.

One of the questions I do have about the CPS is how to run a report that just shows a student’s name, the number of the problem, and their answer. To have all of this information on one page would be great. I have looked for the report, but can’t seem to find it. Also, I would like to know how to turn off the clickers without having to end the program first, so that students can power down their clickers as they turn in their assessments.

As I was reading this chapter, one thing did puzzle me about this standard. Interestingly, although the No Child Left Behind act created nearly 10 years ago requires all students to be technology literate by the time they finish the eighth grade, the legislature and educators have still not developed a consistent way to assess this. Several countries have created and implemented a national test for assessing technology literacy in K-12 schools, some even through core academic subjects. So….why haven’t we?

Citations:

Williamson, J. & Redish, T. (2009). //Technology facilitation and leadership standards: What every K-12 leader should know and be able to do //. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education