E-Rate and Mercedes ISD Technology
View more presentations or Upload your own.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
National Educational Technology Plan
I would rename this plan “Educational Technology Bible”. If you’ve read this plan, then you probably feel overwhelmed with the amount of research put into this plan. According to the plan, it took over 9-months to develop this plan by ten of thousands of people including the public. What’s more impressive is that it was worked on through “collaboration” using “state-of the-art communications tools”. This is important to know because it shows a real life example of how collaboration and teamwork can accomplish great things, such as a comprehensive and well written plan (in my opinion). This plan has 5 goals in place for states, districts, the federal government and other stakeholders and most importantly provides recommendations to achieve these goals. The first goal is directed towards learning and states that “All learners will have engaging and empowering learning experiences both in and outside of school that prepare them to be active, creative, knowledgeable, and ethical participants in our globally networked society”. In respect to learning, the plan recommends four actions and most notably is the recommendation to “develop and adopt learning resources that exploit the flexibility and power of technology to reach all learners anytime and anywhere”. This is important because the plan mentions learning when students are not in school. The “on demand” approach to learning is important because of the vast opportunities it presents with no restrictions on place and time. Some examples of on demand learning include: online “collaboratories”, powerful learning applications such as musical instrument simulators or language learning tools, or augmented reality platforms and games (NETP, 2010). The second goal of the national technology plan is directed towards the improvement of assessment. This goal states, “our education system at all levels will leverage the power of technology to measure what matters and use assessment data for continuous improvement”. The plan recommends several actions to reach the goal. The most interesting approach is to “conduct research and development that explore how gaming technology, simulations, collaborative environments, and virtual worlds can be used in assessments to engage and motivate learners and to assess complex skills and performance embedded in standards”. Although this is mostly theory at this point, the plan does recommend that schools should adopt these systems “as they become validated and available” (NETP, 2010). This is very interesting considering how much time today’s learners spend playing games. The authors credit games as a form of assessing data because it is “engaging” and “provides immediate performance feedback so that players always know how they are doing” (NETP, 2010). The third goal calls for improvements in the professional development, new ways to locate best teaching practices in efforts to teach better. The goal states, “professional educators will be supported individually and in teams by technology that connects them to data, resources, expertise, and learning experiences that can empower and inspire them to provide more effective teaching for all learners”. The authors of the plan feel empathy towards teachers. They believe educators do not have the appropriate tools to do their job. In addition they feel that teachers work in “isolation” with not interaction and with other teachers or experts (NETP, 2010). The authors feel that an appropriate action to remedy this is to “design, develop, and adopt technology-based content, resources, and online learning communities that create opportunities for educators to collaborate for more effective teaching, inspire and attract new people into the profession, and encourage our best educators to continue teaching”. In respect to educator professional development, “Research shows that U.S teachers have less time in their work week for professional development” and “increasing the time for our educators to engage in professional learning will require processes that cross time and space boundaries” (NEPT, 2010). The plan wants new innovative ways for teachers to complete professional development as well as have various forms of resources available anytime for teachers that showcases best practices and the opportunity to communicate with effective colleagues and experts. The fourth goal of the plan talks about improvements to infrastructure. “All students and educators will have access to comprehensive infrastructure for learning when and where they need it.” You’ll find detailed information about programs such as E-rate, open source applications and my favorite next-generation computing such as cloud computing. The plan suggests five actions to help support the goal of infrastructure. My favorite is the recommendation to explore the “open educational resources to promote innovations and creative opportunities for all learners and accelerate the development and adoption of new open technology-based learning tools and courses”. The greatest benefit of cloud computing is that it holds the key to providing access to the same learning material and resources in and out of school, through any type of internet ready device to both students and teachers. On greater scale, it can help both academic and administrative services task be accomplished “anywhere and anytime” (NETP, 2010). The last goal of the plan tries to accomplish the following: more learning using fewer resources. The goal states, “our education system at all levels will redesign processes and structures to take advantage of the power of technology to improve learning outcomes while making more efficient use of time, money and staff”. This section of the plan calls for consideration in areas such as reorganizing teaching and learning (seat time vs competencies), extending learning time, reducing barriers to postsecondary education and moving to meaningful use. I have a major concern about the meaningful use of data. It is a very small section and if you blink you will miss it. It is a very important section especially to those who are enrolled in EDLD 5306. The authors are telling us that there is little to no information on “how technology is actually used in supporting teaching, learning, and assessment is collected and communicated systematically and only by shifting our focus to collecting data on how and when technology is used will we be able to determine the difference it makes and use that knowledge to improve learning outcomes and the productivity of our education system” (NETP, 2010). We know we need to prepare students to become collaborative, continuous and innovative learners for the 21st century. We also know that technology has revolutionized we work and play. So why then is very little has been done to track the relationship between these two? I find this a bit odd considering all the extensive research in all the other areas. I’ll leave it at that!
Source: National Educational Technology Plan 2010 or NETP 2010
http://www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/NETP-2010-final-report.pdf
Source: National Educational Technology Plan 2010 or NETP 2010
http://www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/NETP-2010-final-report.pdf
Post Web Conference Reflection
Post Web Conference Activity:
Today I participated in my second web conference and it was much smoother than the first one. What I valued most about this web conference is that many of the other class members expressed many of the same concerns I had. I felt a big relief knowing that. I feel a little overwhelmed but luckily school wont start up for another month. I think it is important to have these web conferences weekly as a way remind us about upcoming assignments. This week's the web conference really focused on the internship part of the course. Dr. Borel stressed that we need look at the handbook and all the forms that accompany it. I just called my assistant principal and he said to sign him up as a mentor, that is one more thing I can cross out from my list. I learned more about the class wiki and why I cannot access it using my yahoo or Lamar account so I'm going to email Dr. Borel my new GMail account. I read by feedback from Assignment 1 and it looks like I need work on citations and APA format. My weakest communication skill has always been writing but I am going to try my best in the upcoming weeks to turn in higher quality work.
Jose Vasquez
Today I participated in my second web conference and it was much smoother than the first one. What I valued most about this web conference is that many of the other class members expressed many of the same concerns I had. I felt a big relief knowing that. I feel a little overwhelmed but luckily school wont start up for another month. I think it is important to have these web conferences weekly as a way remind us about upcoming assignments. This week's the web conference really focused on the internship part of the course. Dr. Borel stressed that we need look at the handbook and all the forms that accompany it. I just called my assistant principal and he said to sign him up as a mentor, that is one more thing I can cross out from my list. I learned more about the class wiki and why I cannot access it using my yahoo or Lamar account so I'm going to email Dr. Borel my new GMail account. I read by feedback from Assignment 1 and it looks like I need work on citations and APA format. My weakest communication skill has always been writing but I am going to try my best in the upcoming weeks to turn in higher quality work.
Jose Vasquez
Monday, July 19, 2010
District Technology Plan Summary
After spending two days searching for our district technology plan and calling our Technology department, I finally got my hands on it.
Mercedes ISD has a very comprehensive technology plan that is headed in the right direction. The four core goals the plan outlined are:
1.Provide technology based solutions which support the instructional needs of teachers and the learning needs of students.
2.Provide technology based professional development for staff to further the effective use of technology.
3.Provide technology based solutions which support the effective and efficient administrative staff.
4.Establish and maintain a robust technology infrastructure that promotes communication and learning for students, staff and the community.
The total budget for technology (2010-2011) is $545,352 and is broken down like so:
The strategies to achieve Goal #1 include: using online applications such as Easy Tech and Learning.com to help students apply learned technology skills to everyday class work, provide integrated subject lessons, Technology integrations will be part of Campus Improvement Plan, implement student driven multimedia projects using on-line research in content areas, develop relationships with postsecondary institutions to provide additional concurrent opportunities for students to name a few.
The strategies to achieve Goal #2 include: offer just-in-time training to teachers and librarians utilizing campus technology coordinators for training, provide just-in-time training to assist teachers, librarians, and administrators that meet SBEC standards, distance learning will be used to provide staff development as appropriate.
The strategies to achieve Goal #3 include: a centralized website will provide online access to electronic documents, campuses will analyze data to set campus goals and make decisions regarding the improvement of student achievement, the district website will promote best teaching practices, staff are encouraged to assist/pursue in grant writing for further funding and pursuing collaborative grant relationships.
The strategies to achieve Goal #4 include: leverage grants and subsidies to enhance technology for students and staff, standardized web based multimedia services will be provided district-wide, and shared used of specialized technologies such as video conferencing systems, digital cameras, scanners, projection devices and digital video cameras in place on every campus in the district.
Our technology director and his secretary are in charge of coordinating the professional development opportunities and with a budget of $70,000 it seems that either our own district technology coordinators or our local Region 1 ESC will do most of the professional development. I believe that the funds allocated for professional development are not enough to teach the staff the effective use of technology. There will be a conflict with time resources since most campus technology coordinators are teachers and it would be difficult to schedule professional developments due to lack of time.
I believe there is a sufficient budget for the support of infrastructure and that not covered by special discount rates such as e-rate. A large amount of funds are allocated to achieving this goal. Last 2 years, most of the funds were spend on buying new equipment and since the renovation is about 100%, most of the funds will be directed to support the already in place robust technology infrastructure.
The process that enables Mercedes ISD to monitor the progress toward specified goals and make mid-course corrections in response to new developments and opportunities as well as assess the improved student learning include a wide array of formats. Evaluation methods include: surveys of the staff conducted yearly, informal interviews conducted once a semester, records of staff member participation in technology training, yearly inventory of hardware and software. Most importantly, in my opinion, by monitoring the process and accountability measures that evaluate the extent to which activities in the plan are effective in:
-increasing the ability of teachers to teach
-integrating technology into the curricula and instruction
-enabling students to reach challenging state academic standards
-acquiring and deploying technologies and telecommunication services
Overall the plan is very comprehensive but certain changes should be made such as allocate more funds and resources to helping teachers get more exposure and training (goal #2) on how to effectively run student-centered technology based classroom activities. I’m not saying teachers need to be technology experts but helping them become more acquainted with technology will help the district achieve goal #1 with greater ease.
To view the Mercedes ISD 2010-2011 Technology Plan please enter this URL into your browser, for some reason the add a link function did not work.
http://misdtx.schoolwires.com/13932082722333390/lib/13932082722333390/_files/MERCEDES_ISD_E-Plan_2010-2011.pdf
Mercedes ISD has a very comprehensive technology plan that is headed in the right direction. The four core goals the plan outlined are:
1.Provide technology based solutions which support the instructional needs of teachers and the learning needs of students.
2.Provide technology based professional development for staff to further the effective use of technology.
3.Provide technology based solutions which support the effective and efficient administrative staff.
4.Establish and maintain a robust technology infrastructure that promotes communication and learning for students, staff and the community.
The total budget for technology (2010-2011) is $545,352 and is broken down like so:
The strategies to achieve Goal #1 include: using online applications such as Easy Tech and Learning.com to help students apply learned technology skills to everyday class work, provide integrated subject lessons, Technology integrations will be part of Campus Improvement Plan, implement student driven multimedia projects using on-line research in content areas, develop relationships with postsecondary institutions to provide additional concurrent opportunities for students to name a few.
The strategies to achieve Goal #2 include: offer just-in-time training to teachers and librarians utilizing campus technology coordinators for training, provide just-in-time training to assist teachers, librarians, and administrators that meet SBEC standards, distance learning will be used to provide staff development as appropriate.
The strategies to achieve Goal #3 include: a centralized website will provide online access to electronic documents, campuses will analyze data to set campus goals and make decisions regarding the improvement of student achievement, the district website will promote best teaching practices, staff are encouraged to assist/pursue in grant writing for further funding and pursuing collaborative grant relationships.
The strategies to achieve Goal #4 include: leverage grants and subsidies to enhance technology for students and staff, standardized web based multimedia services will be provided district-wide, and shared used of specialized technologies such as video conferencing systems, digital cameras, scanners, projection devices and digital video cameras in place on every campus in the district.
Our technology director and his secretary are in charge of coordinating the professional development opportunities and with a budget of $70,000 it seems that either our own district technology coordinators or our local Region 1 ESC will do most of the professional development. I believe that the funds allocated for professional development are not enough to teach the staff the effective use of technology. There will be a conflict with time resources since most campus technology coordinators are teachers and it would be difficult to schedule professional developments due to lack of time.
I believe there is a sufficient budget for the support of infrastructure and that not covered by special discount rates such as e-rate. A large amount of funds are allocated to achieving this goal. Last 2 years, most of the funds were spend on buying new equipment and since the renovation is about 100%, most of the funds will be directed to support the already in place robust technology infrastructure.
The process that enables Mercedes ISD to monitor the progress toward specified goals and make mid-course corrections in response to new developments and opportunities as well as assess the improved student learning include a wide array of formats. Evaluation methods include: surveys of the staff conducted yearly, informal interviews conducted once a semester, records of staff member participation in technology training, yearly inventory of hardware and software. Most importantly, in my opinion, by monitoring the process and accountability measures that evaluate the extent to which activities in the plan are effective in:
-increasing the ability of teachers to teach
-integrating technology into the curricula and instruction
-enabling students to reach challenging state academic standards
-acquiring and deploying technologies and telecommunication services
Overall the plan is very comprehensive but certain changes should be made such as allocate more funds and resources to helping teachers get more exposure and training (goal #2) on how to effectively run student-centered technology based classroom activities. I’m not saying teachers need to be technology experts but helping them become more acquainted with technology will help the district achieve goal #1 with greater ease.
To view the Mercedes ISD 2010-2011 Technology Plan please enter this URL into your browser, for some reason the add a link function did not work.
http://misdtx.schoolwires.com/13932082722333390/lib/13932082722333390/_files/MERCEDES_ISD_E-Plan_2010-2011.pdf
Technology Assesments
Measuring performance requires that there’s a documented amount of data that you can relate to when measuring progress or even worse regression. Administrators are required to make many data-driven decisions that can affect an entire school or district. The Texas STaR chart presents a wonderful opportunity to administrators and other constituents about how a school is doing in terms of technology usage and proficiency. The results of assessments such as this can help make better-informed decisions about immediate changes that need to be made in order to meet the required goals, such as the Long-Range Plan. The assessments also serve as a valuable tool to administrators as well because they can be used to make other decisions about how resources are allocated. Most people would agree that these assessment tools are beneficial and could possibly do no harm. Could that be entirely true?
Well, lets think about how the assessment and how it turned out in my campus. My campus scores have been fairly consistent over the last 3 years. We scored “Developing Tech” in all areas except Infrastructure and Technology. This is the only area we were classified as “Advanced Tech”. The reason for this was because every single classroom was recently equipped with a brand new projector, new computers, 2 complete mobile cart labs, new printers, and other gadgets such as smart boards, tablets, document cameras and new software programs. We phased out any old Dell Optiplex GX270 (yes we still had those) and replaced them with new Dell machines. As a result, the network seemed to work faster and teachers were extremely happy to accomplish their administrative duties on a fast machine. Now shifting back to the other key areas, what caused our scores to have no improvement? One of the benefits of having this assessment is that it serves as a “rude awakening” for our campus and how it stacks up against national standards and personally it makes teachers aware of what they should be doing in the classroom to lend their part of a shared vision. I started questioning the validity of the answers provided by teachers. As a technology coordinator, I’ve had the opportunity to go into many classrooms during class time and witness different styles of teaching, classroom management and most importantly what tools the teachers is using to deliver content knowledge. I can honestly say that less than 10 percent of the teacher population at our campus actually uses technology in the classroom to direct instruction. Even worse students hardly have the opportunity to use technology to solve problems or seek new knowledge. If ever, it is used for games as a reward for finishing their work early. So does that make teacher’s liars? Well not necessarily, maybe they choose the safe answer to avoid getting into trouble or maybe they are so overwhelmed with work that they complete the survey so quickly that they don’t truly read the question. If I had to assess my school from my perspective, I’d score Teaching & Learning, Educator Preparation and Administration & Support as “Early Tech”. So yes, this assessment is causing harm to our school because it isn’t painting the right picture to make the right decisions. I’d agree that assessments for both teachers and students are great tools however if it is inaccurate it can also be hindering your ability to take action.
The assessment for students can also help teachers make better decisions about planning and delivering the curriculum. Individualized instruction is extremely important to ensure each and every single students success. Assessing the skills of students is important because NLCB states that they “must” be technology literate by the end of 8th grade. How can we say they are or not if we do not assess their skills. By knowing each students skills, we can increase the technology use with that student to help him be considered literate with technology. On the other hand, what harm can assessing a student do? One of my biggest concerns is that it can place a label on the student that perhaps is doing excellent in school and has no problem learning without technology. Could that type of label harm a student? Well that’s probably up for debate, but in my opinion it won’t be harmful to the student if we knew more about their technology skills whether or not they score high. After all we test students on just about everything else don’t we?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)