Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Texas Long Range Plan - Infrastructure for Technology
Potentially the most important area of the Texas Long Range Plan is Key Area IV: Infrastructure for Technology. Essentially, this area encompasses all funding, availability, accessibility and connectivity, and just about every single aspect that deals with the full integration of technology in a 21st Century Learning Environment.
Although I felt previously that this area was the most important of the Texas Long Range Plan, I know feel more than ever it has taken on increased importance, especially considering the state of school finance in Texas. In reviewing the plan, I feel the single most important area associated with Infrastructure is funding. Funding remains the single most important element to ensure that the plan can be fully followed and have the potential for achieving the ultimate goal: ensuring that all K-12 students in Texas have access to technology rich learning environments.
Over the past few years, local districts, such as Cy-Fair ISD, have had to cut numerous dollars from their individual District budgets, specifically on the order of over 50 million dollars in the past 3 years. Although all efforts are made at the District level to not cut services that are going to have a direct negative impact on students, it is unavoidable that eventually these cuts will affect the learning environment.
Although the state requires a specific WADA funding amount to be dedicated to technology spending, with increased costs of numerous technology items, as well as larger class sizes and an aging set of technology, as well as many other general operating items that exhaust any excess funds, it has become extremely difficult for Districts to provide everything that schools need to stay technologically advanced.
The State is aware of the funding deficiencies, and even under its own strain due to school finance, as the amount of dedicated technology funding was reduced in 05-06 from the previous level of $30 per student to $27.14. Although this doesn’t appear like a “large drop”, consider a district of 100,000 students that would have a net loss of dedicated funds in the amount of $276,000! With districts operating with budget shortfalls, funds do not exist to make up this deficiency. This is made even more difficult by the loss of dollars that came from the Telecommunications Infrastructure Fund. As stated in the Texas Long Range Plan, Districts are now funded by the State at levels consistent with those seen in 1990; equally funding for a 20th Century environment in the 21st Century.
Nationally, funding and adequate infrastructure is also a growing problem. The National Education Technology Plan 2004 discusses innovative technology funding; however, it doesn’t designate any more funding dollars to State Education other than those already being received as part of No Child Left Behind or current federal dollars. Essentially, it states what many States/Districts are already doing to increase the amount of technology resources available for learners.
The solution is simple in terms of what needs to be done in order to improve the area; increase funding! The problem is, how we increase funding with the limited dollars we currently are allocated, and without taking funds away from other programs. It is a complex issue that I think will involve districts potentially looking at increasing taxes in order to fund technology if the State doesn’t address the lack of funding. Likewise, I think you will see an increase in grant applications for technology funding from Districts, and potentially, increasing advertising options for businesses on district technology items as a measure to raise funds.
Although I felt previously that this area was the most important of the Texas Long Range Plan, I know feel more than ever it has taken on increased importance, especially considering the state of school finance in Texas. In reviewing the plan, I feel the single most important area associated with Infrastructure is funding. Funding remains the single most important element to ensure that the plan can be fully followed and have the potential for achieving the ultimate goal: ensuring that all K-12 students in Texas have access to technology rich learning environments.
Over the past few years, local districts, such as Cy-Fair ISD, have had to cut numerous dollars from their individual District budgets, specifically on the order of over 50 million dollars in the past 3 years. Although all efforts are made at the District level to not cut services that are going to have a direct negative impact on students, it is unavoidable that eventually these cuts will affect the learning environment.
Although the state requires a specific WADA funding amount to be dedicated to technology spending, with increased costs of numerous technology items, as well as larger class sizes and an aging set of technology, as well as many other general operating items that exhaust any excess funds, it has become extremely difficult for Districts to provide everything that schools need to stay technologically advanced.
The State is aware of the funding deficiencies, and even under its own strain due to school finance, as the amount of dedicated technology funding was reduced in 05-06 from the previous level of $30 per student to $27.14. Although this doesn’t appear like a “large drop”, consider a district of 100,000 students that would have a net loss of dedicated funds in the amount of $276,000! With districts operating with budget shortfalls, funds do not exist to make up this deficiency. This is made even more difficult by the loss of dollars that came from the Telecommunications Infrastructure Fund. As stated in the Texas Long Range Plan, Districts are now funded by the State at levels consistent with those seen in 1990; equally funding for a 20th Century environment in the 21st Century.
Nationally, funding and adequate infrastructure is also a growing problem. The National Education Technology Plan 2004 discusses innovative technology funding; however, it doesn’t designate any more funding dollars to State Education other than those already being received as part of No Child Left Behind or current federal dollars. Essentially, it states what many States/Districts are already doing to increase the amount of technology resources available for learners.
The solution is simple in terms of what needs to be done in order to improve the area; increase funding! The problem is, how we increase funding with the limited dollars we currently are allocated, and without taking funds away from other programs. It is a complex issue that I think will involve districts potentially looking at increasing taxes in order to fund technology if the State doesn’t address the lack of funding. Likewise, I think you will see an increase in grant applications for technology funding from Districts, and potentially, increasing advertising options for businesses on district technology items as a measure to raise funds.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Pre-K Technology Applications TEKS/Curriculum
Essentially, the Pre-K Technology Applications TEKS are designed to provide foundation for Pre-K students so that they may develop a greater understanding of the usefulness and functions of technology. Pre-K students are introduced to very basic elements, mostly associated with using a computer at a very early age, with the general understanding that they will continue to be exposed to these same elements substantially throughout the education process. These elements include understanding simple vocabulary and ibeing able to correctly identify parts of the computer, i.e. mouse, keyboard, monitor, etc.
Pre-K students are given the opportunity to interact with the computer by using various software that is age-level appropriate, allowing them to interact with the technology and enjoy the opportunity to apply their learning. The key of this is to allow them positive experiences with technology where they can gain a better understanding on which they can build increased knowledge and understanding in the future. All this is done in a very relaxed and stress free environment which allows students the opportunity to continue building on their previous knowledge and apply the basic skills achieved at each level to become more technologically proficient.
Spiraling and Scaffolding Curriculum
To simplify, technically in a spiraling curriculum students are not in a situation where they have to master specific content immediately, as they will have numerous experiences with it over time, and each time they get an increased amount of exposure to the concept. Through repetitive exposure at increased levels, we then expect students to gain a mastery of all the dynamics associated with the content. As an example, in mathematics, we expose Kindergarten and 1st grade students to some very general and basic algebraic concepts, i.e. what is on one side of an equation equals what is on the other side of an equation. Then we introduce them to a missing part, i.e. 5 + _ = 6. In a spiraling curriculum, if a Kindergarten or First Grade students does not show "mastery" of this concept, we do not let it reflect negatively on the curriculum and get overly stressed, as we know that they will see this again at different levels throughout the education process and have numerous opportunities to master it.
To clarify scaffolding, is essentailly saying we are building on prior knowledge to continue moving forward. Some examples would be with our ESL students, as we utilize what they do know in order to get them to understand a new concept, or in teaching a soccer player the process of kicking a football, i.e. they have prior knowledge of how to kick a soccer ball an we utilize those skills to help us be successful in a new area, football.
Since the Technology Application TEKS are built utilizing a Dynamic/Spiraling Curriculum, it allows students to reflect on previous knowledge and to have numerous opportunities to show mastery of concepts associated with the use of technology. An example of this would be students enrolled in grades 3-5 are afforded opportunities to experience a large amount of media, electronic information, data and manipulate various input devices, with the ultimate goal of students getting experience working with a variety of sources. Students were exposed to some of these same experiences in grades K-2, as outlined in the TEKS, and as they move on to Middle School and beyond, they are expected to show proficiency in utilizing these sources.
Pre-K students are given the opportunity to interact with the computer by using various software that is age-level appropriate, allowing them to interact with the technology and enjoy the opportunity to apply their learning. The key of this is to allow them positive experiences with technology where they can gain a better understanding on which they can build increased knowledge and understanding in the future. All this is done in a very relaxed and stress free environment which allows students the opportunity to continue building on their previous knowledge and apply the basic skills achieved at each level to become more technologically proficient.
Spiraling and Scaffolding Curriculum
To simplify, technically in a spiraling curriculum students are not in a situation where they have to master specific content immediately, as they will have numerous experiences with it over time, and each time they get an increased amount of exposure to the concept. Through repetitive exposure at increased levels, we then expect students to gain a mastery of all the dynamics associated with the content. As an example, in mathematics, we expose Kindergarten and 1st grade students to some very general and basic algebraic concepts, i.e. what is on one side of an equation equals what is on the other side of an equation. Then we introduce them to a missing part, i.e. 5 + _ = 6. In a spiraling curriculum, if a Kindergarten or First Grade students does not show "mastery" of this concept, we do not let it reflect negatively on the curriculum and get overly stressed, as we know that they will see this again at different levels throughout the education process and have numerous opportunities to master it.
To clarify scaffolding, is essentailly saying we are building on prior knowledge to continue moving forward. Some examples would be with our ESL students, as we utilize what they do know in order to get them to understand a new concept, or in teaching a soccer player the process of kicking a football, i.e. they have prior knowledge of how to kick a soccer ball an we utilize those skills to help us be successful in a new area, football.
Since the Technology Application TEKS are built utilizing a Dynamic/Spiraling Curriculum, it allows students to reflect on previous knowledge and to have numerous opportunities to show mastery of concepts associated with the use of technology. An example of this would be students enrolled in grades 3-5 are afforded opportunities to experience a large amount of media, electronic information, data and manipulate various input devices, with the ultimate goal of students getting experience working with a variety of sources. Students were exposed to some of these same experiences in grades K-2, as outlined in the TEKS, and as they move on to Middle School and beyond, they are expected to show proficiency in utilizing these sources.
Long Range Plan Analysis Review
Much of this information included items I was already aware that we were supposed to be doing, but I was not aware that it was so in depth and detailed. Additionally, I was pleased to note that our campus/district is currently doing a good job of meeting the needs of the long range plan and utilizing the data obtained for the STAR Charts to assist in meeting the goals of the Long Range Plan on a broader scale.
After reviewing the Long Range Plan, I realized that although I feel relatively technologically proficient, there is still much for me to learn, and continue learning, in order to fully meet the goals of the plan. Reflecting, I believe the most important areas of the plan for me to focus on as an instructional leader are:
* As teachers, we can no longer view ourselves as the sole source of all knowledge in the classroom and expect students to function well in a teacher centered environment. As teachers, we need to view ourselves as instructional leaders who are there to facilitate, mentor and serve as a co-learner in the 21st Century classroom environment. In doing this, we need to understand that technology is a valuable resource that needs to be used early and often to make instruction more engaging and purposeful for all learners.
* It is increasingly important to understand that a strong infrastructure with adequate funding for technology is earmarked each year to continue the trend of promoting a technology rich learning community. Likewise, we need to ensure that adequate professional development opportunities are available for all faculty and staff, to allow them to fully understand the elements of technology and realize all the benefits associated with incorporation into the classroom.
* On a personal level, I need to continue my own professional growth in incorporating the use of technology and modelt his practice as a future instructional leader.
As an Educational Administrator, I want to be certain to keep the importance of full integration of technology as a focus, and provide opportunities for professional growth, staff exploration and learning and allow faculty and staff to be involved as stakeholders in locating and applying for grants that can allow us to further increase resources available at our campus.
After reviewing the Long Range Plan, I realized that although I feel relatively technologically proficient, there is still much for me to learn, and continue learning, in order to fully meet the goals of the plan. Reflecting, I believe the most important areas of the plan for me to focus on as an instructional leader are:
* As teachers, we can no longer view ourselves as the sole source of all knowledge in the classroom and expect students to function well in a teacher centered environment. As teachers, we need to view ourselves as instructional leaders who are there to facilitate, mentor and serve as a co-learner in the 21st Century classroom environment. In doing this, we need to understand that technology is a valuable resource that needs to be used early and often to make instruction more engaging and purposeful for all learners.
* It is increasingly important to understand that a strong infrastructure with adequate funding for technology is earmarked each year to continue the trend of promoting a technology rich learning community. Likewise, we need to ensure that adequate professional development opportunities are available for all faculty and staff, to allow them to fully understand the elements of technology and realize all the benefits associated with incorporation into the classroom.
* On a personal level, I need to continue my own professional growth in incorporating the use of technology and modelt his practice as a future instructional leader.
As an Educational Administrator, I want to be certain to keep the importance of full integration of technology as a focus, and provide opportunities for professional growth, staff exploration and learning and allow faculty and staff to be involved as stakeholders in locating and applying for grants that can allow us to further increase resources available at our campus.
Response and Reflection, Technology Assessments
In reviewing the assessments pertaining to technology, I was pleased by the outcomes of each and the overall view that I seem to exhibit a strong degree of technological proficiency. On the Technology Applications Inventory I showed strong results in all of the 4 categories, with 2 of the categories grading in at an 88% or higher yes response rate, 1 category coming in at 83% and the lowest segment scoring in with 75% positive response.
Of the 4 areas, the one with the highest percentage of comfort was that of Information Acquisition, with Foundations, Problem Solving and Communications coming in 2nd through 4th respectively.
I was a little surprised to see the area I scored lowest in was Communication, as I feel that I utilize technology greatly in order to effectively communicate with students, parents and faculty and staff members. However, upon further review, the areas that I marked "no" in were more directly associated with my personal use of differing layouts, rubrics for evaluation and utilizing planners, calendars etc., elements that I currently don’t put much emphasis on.
I was pleased to see that all scores showed a strong use of technology and a familiarity with each area.In reviewing the SEDTA survey, I was again pleased with the overall result of the survey and my ability to show successful use of technology on a personal and professional level. I selected the "teacher" version of the survey, and in reviewing, noted these aspects below of technology being incorporated on a daily basis, as all of these are currently going on at our campus and require extensive use/understanding of technology:
-US History Laptop Project-all 11th grade students have a laptop checked out to them
-Computers on Wheels-a class set of 30 laptops all connected wirelessly to a printer
-Lesson Plans posted electronically and all must show integration and application of technology
-Ceiling mounted projectors in all non-portable classrooms that are connected to the desktop
-Airliners and Smartboards checked out to each department for use in the classroom
-Physical Education PDA project-incorporating PDA's in the PE environment for recording data
-Lobo Academy-a series of technology based professional development opportunities offered weekly during each semester
-Campus Improvement Plan-specific targets for incorporating technology in the classroom
-Campus Star Chart-outlining technological readiness of all faculty and staff in the building and an analysis tool in reaching the 2020 requirements
-LOTI
-COGNOS Training
-Heart Rate Monitors and Fitness Center with connectivity and analysis software
-EKG testing offered to all athletes on campus
-Internet access points in all classrooms and wireless student access throughout the building
-New computers on cycle where no computer in the building is ever in use that would be older than 3 years, which keeps technology up to date.
All of these contribute greatly to tremendous technology use by faculty, staff and specifically students and create a rich learning environment where the use of technology is seen as paramount in the education process.
If I had to pick an area where I would like to improve personally, that may also enhance the learning environment, it would have to be in the ability to integrate analog and digital technology together, in order to mix the "old" with the "new", as well as incorporating more virtual reality elements and simulations for students to immerse themselves in the content.
To close, I feel my overall results on the assessments and surveys were positive based on our districts commitment to utilize all funding sources to support increased use of technology. Our District continually is looking for ways to include technology funding for the schools, whether it be through bonds, donations or grants. I was pleased with the outcome of both assessments, and have a greater appreciation as a faculty member in regards to the variety of technology we have available to assist us in creating the best learning environment possible for our students. The assessments certainly made me fully aware of all the resources we are fortunate to have available in our District!
Of the 4 areas, the one with the highest percentage of comfort was that of Information Acquisition, with Foundations, Problem Solving and Communications coming in 2nd through 4th respectively.
I was a little surprised to see the area I scored lowest in was Communication, as I feel that I utilize technology greatly in order to effectively communicate with students, parents and faculty and staff members. However, upon further review, the areas that I marked "no" in were more directly associated with my personal use of differing layouts, rubrics for evaluation and utilizing planners, calendars etc., elements that I currently don’t put much emphasis on.
I was pleased to see that all scores showed a strong use of technology and a familiarity with each area.In reviewing the SEDTA survey, I was again pleased with the overall result of the survey and my ability to show successful use of technology on a personal and professional level. I selected the "teacher" version of the survey, and in reviewing, noted these aspects below of technology being incorporated on a daily basis, as all of these are currently going on at our campus and require extensive use/understanding of technology:
-US History Laptop Project-all 11th grade students have a laptop checked out to them
-Computers on Wheels-a class set of 30 laptops all connected wirelessly to a printer
-Lesson Plans posted electronically and all must show integration and application of technology
-Ceiling mounted projectors in all non-portable classrooms that are connected to the desktop
-Airliners and Smartboards checked out to each department for use in the classroom
-Physical Education PDA project-incorporating PDA's in the PE environment for recording data
-Lobo Academy-a series of technology based professional development opportunities offered weekly during each semester
-Campus Improvement Plan-specific targets for incorporating technology in the classroom
-Campus Star Chart-outlining technological readiness of all faculty and staff in the building and an analysis tool in reaching the 2020 requirements
-LOTI
-COGNOS Training
-Heart Rate Monitors and Fitness Center with connectivity and analysis software
-EKG testing offered to all athletes on campus
-Internet access points in all classrooms and wireless student access throughout the building
-New computers on cycle where no computer in the building is ever in use that would be older than 3 years, which keeps technology up to date.
All of these contribute greatly to tremendous technology use by faculty, staff and specifically students and create a rich learning environment where the use of technology is seen as paramount in the education process.
If I had to pick an area where I would like to improve personally, that may also enhance the learning environment, it would have to be in the ability to integrate analog and digital technology together, in order to mix the "old" with the "new", as well as incorporating more virtual reality elements and simulations for students to immerse themselves in the content.
To close, I feel my overall results on the assessments and surveys were positive based on our districts commitment to utilize all funding sources to support increased use of technology. Our District continually is looking for ways to include technology funding for the schools, whether it be through bonds, donations or grants. I was pleased with the outcome of both assessments, and have a greater appreciation as a faculty member in regards to the variety of technology we have available to assist us in creating the best learning environment possible for our students. The assessments certainly made me fully aware of all the resources we are fortunate to have available in our District!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)