EDLD 5363 Web Conference Reflections




Web Conference Week 2
I was not able to attend the web conferences live during week 2 but I did listen to the recordings. This course is one that has me very concerned. It requires that we join a group and design and produce a video public service announcement. Throughout my experiences in the Educational Technology Leadership program, I have been a part of several group projects, and all of them have resulted in very good outcomes. This I am not so sure about.
Some of my concerns were allayed after listening to this week's web conference. Dr. Abernathy told the class that to stress about the project was a waste of energy. At least as long as we follow the rubric. The grading is not about the quality of the end project but whether we go through the process of collaborating with our peers to produce something. We are to follow the rubric to ensure that we have satisfied those requirements. By taking the pressure off to produce a video when many of us have little to no experience was extremely reassuring. The goal of the project is to introduce us to video making via distance collaboration. I am still not sure how well my group will do, but I am relieved to know that we will not be graded based on producing the highest quality of video making.



Web Conference Week 4
This week's web conference was mainly to make sure we are on track with the group work. As with many of these web conferences, I am relieved to learn that other people have the same worries as I. It seems that so many students are concerned with the large projects of the program in addition to the smaller class projects. This week a couple students asked questions about the internship projects and the action research activities. Those are such big projects and, really are the culmination of our experiences. Furthermore, they are to be a model of how we should work whether we are taking graduate courses or not. Action research should be a part of our everyday activities. The world does not remain in one place; neither does education. There are so many changes in research and practice that if a teacher does not keep up with the changes by reading and doing at the minimum informal research, that teacher is less likely to be an effective teacher for long.



Web Conference Week 5
I am now beginning the last week of my second-to-last course of the Lamar University Masters of Educational Technology Leadership program. I am conflicted. On the one hand, I am relieved to be one course away from completing the program. On the other, I am really nervous about having my work for the last 18 months or so judged. Again in this web conference, Dr. Abernathy helped allay many of those concerns. There were questions about the major works of the program. I know that I have quite a bit of work to do to have all my documentation completed prior to my last course but I will be ready.
As for the work of this course, I was a little confused about what needed to be submitted last week. Dr. Abernathy explained what needs to be submitted and again, told us to simply follow the rubrics. This illustrates to me how important rubrics are for teaching. I can use rubrics to help allay the fears of my students. Most people have some level of fear of change. My students are no exception to that. To help them get over that fear, I have been introducing the idea of rubrics to them. So far, some are responding positively but I still have a few to convince. Once they discover how much easier rubrics make completing assignments the way the teacher wants them, the more comfortable they will be with them. My goal is to make rubrics the routine for all my students.

Web Conference 16.6.11

In this week's web conference, Dr. Mixon discussed who must submit assignments to TK20 and who has been grandfathered out. Basically, I am required to submit assignments to TK20. This has caused me some distress. I am a bit confused how to submit or where within TK20 to submit. I am going to have to contact Dr. Huang for further counseling.
Dr. Mixon also clarified some questions other members of the class had concerning the assignments, specifically the professional development part of the assignment. I am glad to have been present to hear the answer to those questions. These web conferences, though time consuming and sometimes tedious are very helpful. I know that I have missed a lot of pertinent information by not attending past web conferences.
There were many questions by educational administration students concerning the ILD training requirement. Many needed to find where to take the course and how much it will cost. From what I can see, the cost may run anywhere from $140 to $800. When the time comes for me to take the ILD, I will definitely seek out the $145 course.
All in all, I am in a point of my studies that I am lagging behind. I have had a lot at work begin to build up and it is having an affect on my studies. Listening to Dr. Mixon explain all the aspects of the program is helpful. He is very positive as he explains everything. He just said that the average length of stay for a principal is 3.2 years. Wow! I know that being an administrator is stressful, but I had no idea that turnover was that great. There is a ton of pressure and I can see where the duties and responsibilities could daunting and get out of hand. I will keep that in mind as I move forward in the program. He just said that in the next 4 years 33% of school administrators in the South, Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma and Texas, will retire. That means plenty of opportunity for those of who put in the work and stick with the program here at Lamar University. What an exciting time to be in the Educational Technology Leadership program. Dr. Mixon says that those of us in this program at this time are on "the cutting edge" in school administration.
I will end my ramblings at this time. I do look forward to participating in the next web conference next week.

Course Reflections

      

I envisioned outcomes of learning an overview of what is expected of me throughout the next 18 months of the Educational Technology Leadership Masters program. I also expected to learn some new tools that I would be able to take back to my campus with me. Both those expectations came to fruition. I now have a better idea of what I will be doing over the next 18 months and I do have a few more new tools that I have taken back to my school and have implemented. What I learned in addition to these two items are my leadership style, learning style, and through an assessment of my technology skills, I found that I am more proficient than I had previously imagined. These outcomes are some of the stated outcomes. However, there were several other outcomes listed that I also achieved. Such as learning the nature of 21st Century learners and the difference between today's students and my fellow classmates from my generation. All in all, the class met my expectations as I have learned so much. I know I will continue to learn more in the weeks and months to come.

The outcomes I achieved through this course are relevant to the work I do in my school. Our students are mostly those students who seldom, if ever, stayed in a traditional classroom setting. Instead, they are now in an separated from their families and society in an educational setting that is different that is non-traditional. These kids have disengaged not only from school, but many have disengaged from their futures and lives. The outcomes listed in the course syllabus and those which we have studied over the past five weeks are extremely relevant to what I do on a daily basis. Most of our teachers are retire-rehire teachers. They are "digital immigrants" with a very thick accent, as Marc Prensky would say (2001, pg. 3). I know that part of my job is to help these teachers transition from the old way of teaching and learning to a more modern way. This course has given me more tools to use to help the teachers make that transition.

I do not believe there are any outcomes that I did not achieve in at least some part. There are some in which I should improve my skill and level of confidence. Among those, examining and analyzing data resources to make technology decisions. Also, while I have gained insight into leadership skills needed to move my school toward integrating technology into more classrooms. The reason for not improving as I would like is due in part to the depth of information available and time needed to properly examine it. I have little experience examining and analyzing data. I have not developed the confidence needed to properly make sound decisions based on some of the data. With more practice, as I will get in the next year or so, I believe I will become more confident with research data and analyzing it. I will also gain more confidence with leading and being a good model for my fellow teachers so they become more comfortable teaching with technology.

I successfully carried out all my assignments. I did become a little discouraged at times because there is quite a bit of work in this course. I also had never completed a curriculum vitae before this class. It was something I was not comfortable doing since I tend to be introverted and do not really like to reflect in an open forum. I guess that is my digital immigrant accent showing itself. The nature of posting any writing on a public media such as wikis and blogs is also outside my comfort zone. Writing in general is an activity that I usually do not share with anyone. To put it up on the World Wide Web took a lot of opening up of myself and exposing what I've done, or how much I have done. I have become, obviously, more comfortable with posting on blogs and wikis. Since beginning this course, I have started two wikis and have plans to start a blog when I a little time.

           

When the course began, I felt pretty comfortable about my technology skills as long as the issue was within my comfort zone. I was not comfortable about myself as a leader which also affected my attitude toward my leadership skills. I did not view myself as a leader. Now I do see myself in a leadership role in my school, though I am still not comfortable with it completely. I know which leadership skills I need to improve on such as being able to confront people in a constructive manner as soon as possible. I also have realized in a new way how important modeling can be for both training and leading. I need to walk the technology walk as well as talk it. I need to make the time to follow up on new skills teachers may have recently learned or when they need the support to start a new project of which they are not comfortable. As far as technology skills, I learned that there are tools on the internet that are easy and can be very helpful in the classroom. An example is Wordle. I had never done a Wordle before, so when we did one and I found how easy it was. My attitude has changed in that I have become more open to trying new tools and in that I see how important it to make time to spend with teachers so they become more comfortable with technology.

References

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants: Part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6.

Web Conference 2/28/11 Reflection

This week's web conference  discussed several key aspects concerning the Educational Technology Leadership course work and the internship requirements. This program is an 18 month program covering 36 hours of course work. The outcome of the program will be eligibility to complete the state's technology certification exam and/or the TExES Principal Certification exam and a Masters of Educational Technology Leadership degree.  The internship program will cover 33 Technology Facilitation standards from ISTE and 38 standards from the TExES Principal Certification program. The 18 months will be the culmination of 150 course embedded assignment hours and 150 field based hours. The final course will require a final assignment in which we will reflect on the program and courses taken and write a summative final report. I am looking forward to this challenge and know that upon completion I will be prepared for work in administration or continuing my teaching career in the Technology Applications classroom/lab. Even though I am really intimidated by the huge amount of work that is required, I am enthusiastic in my resolve to go into this program head on and make it work. I don't believe I completely understood what Ms. Borel was talking about when she said that the greatest challenge in this program will be time management. I am beginning to understand.

EDLD 5306 Power Point E-Rate

Check out this SlideShare Presentation:

Edld 5306 power point e rate

View more presentations from jboyd05.

National Educational Technology Plan

The National Educational Technology Plan (NETP) is the nation's vision for integrating educational practice and technological skill together to produce an educational system of public schools in which American students learn the skills to be successful in the 21st century. To accomplish this goal, the NETP describes essential areas which the nation's state education agencies will need to focus on and put in place to assure successful outcomes for students in the U.S. Those essential areas are learning, assessment, teaching, infrastructure, and productivity (NETP, p. vi). Learning is not about what specifically to teach students. Rather it is about learning what to teach to students that matches each student's learning style as well as what to teach them. In this plan differentiation is the key to ensuring student success. The plan calls for assessments that take into account modern technology skills and competencies. The success of these measures are to be determined by data based on research. Teaching and learning are to be a connected process that is shared by both the teacher and the student. Furthermore, both teachers and students should make learning a 24 hour, 365 days activity. Through the use of online resources like blogs and wikis as well as other more traditional tools such as on-site professional development. Other tools include the various ideas available for consumption from educational technology sources. The NETP is a good vision for implementing technology into the nation's educational system.

Some issues with the NETP include an infrastructure that is incomplete in many local districts. Finding funding to improve that situation is also a great challenge facing the nation and many of its districts as well. In my local school district, the availability of computers for classes to use as a natural part of the instructional day is very limited. Instead of having computers in a classroom, they are use on a sporadic basis. There are C.O.W.'s  (computers on wheels) which are available on an inconsistent schedule. Teachers seldom use that technology for classroom projects. Students may use their personal computers at home to complete projects and papers, but they do not have such tools in their classrooms during the day. Many teachers have interactive white boards with projectors at their disposal, but of those there are still many who seldom, if ever use them. While in theory they have been trained how to use the technology, in reality, they are not comfortable using it. Hopefully, in the coming years we be able to realize the goals of the NETP, but there is still a lot to do to see that through.

U.S. Department of Education (2010). National educational technology plan:

          Transforming American education (Draft). Washington D.C.

District Technology Plan

Since the Texas Youth Commission is in the process of developing its technology plan, I am instead going to discuss and reflect on Giddings ISD's Technology Plan from.

Giddings ISD's Technology Plan includes five goals: integrating technology into the curriculum to enhance student performance, provide professional development to reach goal one, provide the infrastructure necessary to equip both staff and students with the tools to integrate technology into the curriculum, provide the administrative support for the technology curriculum and assessment, and to collaborate with the community and parents of the children of the district. These goals are based on correlates/categories from the Long Range Technology Plan (LRTP), NCLB, and e-Rate. They are listed here in this order on the plan.

When these goals were established for the years 2009-2012, the district was in much better financial shape than it is now. There was a different superintendent than now. As such, the goals were different than they may be in the near future. The goals as they are written however, do provide for ongoing professional development. The people responsible for implementation are the assistant superintendent, principals, assistant principals, and district instructional technology director. Funds are made available for professional development, such as $139,000 for educator development of the total budget of $2.4 million. An additional $534,000 has been appropriated for teaching and learning initiatives to use for teacher learning as well as curricular learning for students. Of that $534,000, a portion of that is used for infrastructure to equip both students and staff with the tools necessary to integrate technology tools for education. In each of the goals listed there is an element of administrative support listed as those responsible for implementation. Each goals has either an assistant superintendent and/or an assistant principal along with the instructional technologist as people responsible for ensuring that these goals are implemented.

The technology infrastructure includes hardware, software, telecommunications equipment and technology professionals to ensure that they all work as intended. GISD has contracted some of its infrastructure that it cannot maintain efficiently itself, specifically the telecommunications. The district has established a plan that includes updating general computer labs, educational multimedia equipment, and staff and student used computer stations on an annual basis and to maintain them as necessary. They also have a plan to re-evaluate the filters and security tools and software as needed to ensure a safe learning environment for students as well as staff. The budgeted amount of money for telecommunications equipment is $166,000 of which $48,000 is funded via e-Rate. For the district this represents only a small portion of the total telecommunications expenditures. It seems as though the district has budgeted well for its telecommunications equipment and support.

The district's technology evaluation process utilizes various committees, district wide surveys for data purposes, technology resource and maintenance schedules, and it has provided several key questions to answer to evaluate the plan. The various committees include the District Improvement Committee, the Campus Improvement Committees, and the administrative staff identified as responsible for ensuring implementation. The surveys include using StaR Charts survey given at the end of each school year and lesson plan surveys to measure how well technology is being implemented into classroom lessons. The district calendar provides a look at the number and frequency of staff development days and how many of them are used for technology trainings can and are offered throughout the school year.

These goals represent the district's attempt to implement the directives established by NCLB, LRTP, and to secure funding through e-Rate which brings us to the discussion of budget. With the country and many states, including Texas, experiencing heavy pressure to do more with less, goals such as this one set by the district have become much more difficult. Much of the money that was expected to be available in 2008-2009 when this plan was originally written may not be available for the next fiscal year. In addition, the previous superintendent has left the district and someone else has taken that position who appears to have a different vision for the district and his own method for seeing that vision through. The district will continue to place a high value on technology applications TEKS implementation in the curriculum as required by the LRTP. To that end, teachers will be expected to increasingly use technology in their lessons to their students.