Margaret

**//

[|Pay It Forward]

media type="custom" key="5979049"

Paper Airplanes Try this link to see an interesting video clip

media type="custom" key="5979381" All You Need Is Love!

media type="custom" key="5979713"The Pink Panther

media type="custom" key="5979541"The Greatest Love of All

PEGGY,

Great reflection! Check out some of the great work that is happening with the "Powerpoint Revolution". Ask me about it in class and I'll show you.

David

Weekly Reflection #5: 4/11/10 The Technology Fix - Part IV - "Too Troubled to Focus"//** ** Alexanderville School District: Reading this account was reminiscent of some challenges our district faces. There's been frequent turnover in administrative positions and we have a new superintendent whose has implemented many new initiatives. We have teachers who use technology heavily, while others barely touch it. Programs were purchased by the district years ago which became "baby sitters" for kids during computer time. Some schools are begging for more equipment, while others barely use the equipment they have. In the midst of these challenges, our district tech. budget is being cut and we have over 900 computers that will be out of warranty by the end of this year.

Porter Elementary School: I can only imagine how difficult it was for the teachers in this school to switch from Macs to PCs. Why would a district make that decision mid stream? Worse yet, the teachers and students were acclimated to programs that were working well, and with the switch to PCs, they had to abandon their use because they couldn't afford to buy the PC version. I found that to be a crucial mistake and a huge demotivating factor in integrating technology in instruction. It's no wonder the staff is frustrated.

Fisher High School: The infamous "misuse" of power point software caught my attention in this chapter. Our 4th grade students are introduced to power point and when they come to me in 5th grade, I "burst their bubble", but telling them it's not about changing backgrounds, flying things in and out, and cutting/pasting sentences from research sources. They're always so disappointed. However, when they stand up in class to give "quality" presentations, where //they// do the talking __not__ the slides, they are profoundly proud of their accomplishments. Coming from the business world, I am acutely aware of the roadblocks to giving teachers "time" to learn new technology and absorb new initiatives. In business, typically your job can "sit" for a day while you attend a seminar or conference, and unless there's a crisis, no one has to provide backup. In teaching, you must always have a substitute....even for 1/2 a day. This makes it very difficult to provide "work time" to delve into new areas. Some schools provide one 1/2 day per week, when student dismiss early and teachers work on professional development. Our school district has considered this possibility for one 1/2 day per month, but transportation issues are a concern.

Lincoln Elementary School: Eight principals in 11 years, multiple language needs, and community health and welfare needs explains why this school is "too troubled to focus" on technology. However, I couldn't help but wonder if they should be focusing on computer "language" programs that can assist this international student body in learing English. That single step could be incredibly valuable for these children going into the future. Maybe I'm oversimplying the problem, but I believe you need to take "baby steps" and choose small, attainable goals whenever you're trying to acquire. **

In conclusion, Pflaum made a comment in this section of his book that really caught my attention. He asserts, //"With school budgets so tight, I doubt that technology, with its ambigouus impact on measured performance, will be budgeted at the levels seen during the past decade."// I'm afraid that day is here!


 * //Weekly Reflection #4: 4/7/10 The Technology Fix - Part III - "Hit or Miss" Commitment//**
 * Springdale High School**: More than sufficient computers, but lack of "required" training for teachers. New teachers are coming out of college with direct instruction versus project based learning approach. We need to get teaching colleges on the same page with our schools. I'm finding that many graduates with teaching degrees are not given an opportunity to experiment with new technologies.

//Very true. I hope we start to see changes in this. //


 * Harrison Elementary School:** Sufficent computers, but once again lack of time to properly train teachers and/or students. The cut, paste lesson was reminiscent of when I tried to teach my class how to use the thesaurus on Word. I was fortunate to have a smart board and each student faced the smartboard with their laptops. We walked step-by-step through the lesson, but it took several "follow-up" lessons until students gained confidence with using this tool. The "time factor" for teaching students how to use technology is critical for success.


 * Woodvale Middle School:** It was interesting that Pflaum found new teachers using technology, but sacrificing content. On the other hand, veteran teachers who "embraced" technology, often did a better job of using it as a tool to enhance content. Unfortunately, not all veteran "embrace" technology. I liked his quote...It (technology) was a servant to the content, not a substitute for it.


 * City Academy:** This chapter focused on the reality we (teachers) are dealing with today. The "accountability era" that Pflaum refers to is a politcal reality for all schools throughout the nation. The struggle between constructivism and behaviorism theories is a conflict that teachers face on a daily basis. Administration enourages teachers to incorporate technology (constructivism based) while they pressure teachers to prepare students to perform well on standardized tests (behaviorist based).

//Good point. Where do we strike the balance? Something has to give somewhere.// 


 * Emerson Elementary School:** This school experience brought to light the question of "when" is the use of technology enhancing instruction versus traditional methods. Teaching a geometry lesson use "interactive" tech tools could enhance instruction, but just having children watch a teacher "drag and click" geometric shapes on a computer screen is actually less interactive than passing wooden blocks around the classroom. We can't lose sight that the use of technology must be carefully chosen to improve/enhance instruction & learning.


 * Lambert Elementary School:** This was another example of sacrificing content for technology. The excel spreadsheet lesson turned into kids choosing fonts, colors, etc...rather than analyzing the data. The spreadsheet, and subsequent graph, should be a tool that visually represents data with the goal of observing relationships in the information. We need to set a clear goal for using technology in a lesson.


 * In general, these schools seem representative of what I see in most schools. I believe most districts are "randomly" handing out technology without specific guidelines. I believe they're hoping to get teachers "excited" about technology on a personal basis by allowing them to "experiment" and gain expertise. However, with this financial commitment, it's crucial that districts set specific guidelines for the use of technology. Our district is in the process of creating such a plan, but the progress is slow because of the "time" and "training" factors.**

Great insight with your week 3 reflection. The lack of measurable results, in light of the serious commitment from each district, is somewhat disconcerting. The technology itself is not the change, as you say...just tools for change. Teachers will always be the change agents as we are the ones implementing effective technology use alongside our students. Thanks for your hard work.
 * //Peggy,

David//**

[|Methacton Website] __Weekly Reflection # 3: 3/23/10:__

This category of schools with "committed leadership, but less focused technology plans", often lacked clear goals or action plans. St. John's thought a laptop for every student would set them apart from other private schools and touted their enrollment had increased because the students liked having laptops. They equated laptops with "change". At Longfellow, there was enthusiastic leadership, but the tech. plan was still in the formative phase. Ludlow's major concern was a drop in test scores, but they weren't sure how (or if) technology would improve scores. However, they liked the immediate feedback of computer scored benchmark tests. Lastly, Western Hills was using technology for data driven decisions about instruction to find out "what's working" and "what needs fixing". Their vision was strong, but they had many roadblocks to overcome before achieving their goals.

There is a common theme in these readings that concerns me. Each time the question was raised about "//measurable performance"// the responses were inconclusive. Some of the quotes were:


 * St. Johns - "too early to tell"
 * Longfellow - "can't say it (technology) has improved performance"
 * Ludlow - "there's no effective way to measure results"
 * Western Hills - "probably no direct effect on SAT 9 scores, but they (computers) keep students engaged"

In addition, there were many instances where classroom teachers weren't aware of what students were doing on computers because the screens weren't facing the teacher. What ever happened to "walking around a classroom"? When my students are working on laptops, I continually circulate throughout the room to give them assistance, offer suggestions, etc...

Pflaum commented that he sees teachers at some schools absorbed more with technology than content. Once again, this focuses on the fact that technology is a "tool" and should be used to differentiate/enhance instruction, and assist in analyzing data to drive instructional decisions in the classroom. It does not replace "good instruction" and/or "engaging teachers". Think of your best teacher...was it the personal qualities that made him/her memorable to you?

__Weekly Reflection # 2: 3/14/10: (St. Patty's Green)__ It was refreshing to find that "Technology Fix" was not a research based book, but rather based on the author's personal observations and anecdotes. Instead of sitting in an 'ivory tower' and publishing research data, he visited schools across the country to gather information on a first hand basis. Even though I ultilize data in analyzing problems, it is imperative to understand how variables impact that data before making decisions. Too often, decisions are based on raw data alone.

I also found it interesting that Pflaum used "computers" and "technology" interchangably in his book. Even though he is acutely aware there is more to technology than computers, he attempted to find a correlation between "well defined computer use", strong leadership, and improved student performance.

Chapters 1-5 focused on schools making the best use of technology, with strong leadership, and focused technology objectives. It was eye opening that 4 out of 5 of these schools supported low income students. We often talk about lack of financial resources with respect to being "on par" with technology, but in these schools, the leaders found alternative ways to secure the funds necessary to reach their goals.

The lack of curriculum coordination with regard to typing skills in "St. Mary's" was reminiscent of similar conflicts I've experienced in our schools. The technology skills of our teachers vary from classroom to classroom and school to school, so students aren't always getting the same exposure to technology. St. Mary's is an example of how important it is to have a strong technology plan across grade levels. Our school is currently in the process of creating a district wide technology curriculum and it's difficult to agree on the "age level" that a desired technology skill should be introduced, reinforced, and then finally mastered.

Harriet Tubman's computer reading program was impressive, but it was a summer program servicing class sizes of 8-9 students and at a cost of $25,000 per classroom. The principal was creative in securing funds for the program, but I couldn't help but think how the principal had the "salaries" of the summer teaching staff approved. I assume the school was severely "at risk", so they pullled out all the stoppers.

Longworth was a prime example of the power of "focused objectives" with regard to technology. The students could clearly see that learning Oracle programming would open doors to well paid jobs in the future. It seemed that each teacher had clearly defined objectives for his/her students with regard to the sciences, english vocabulary, etc... As an elementary teacher I often feel like a "jack of all trades, master of none". It would be exciting to teach courses where I could focus on more "specific" goals, versus the broad goals of the elementary level. As he closed this chapter, Pflaum commented on the volume of software programs available on the market and the lack of time teachers have to evaluate their effectiveness. I chuckled that his underlying goal is to find out why his software programs didn't sell...interesting!

I'm "signing off"...didn't read the last 2 chapters yet..... PS 3 things I'm finding frustrating using this Wiki space....there's no "undo" button, no spell check, and I've lost information that I've typed when I hit enter sometimes.


 * Try using the history feature and revert to a"history" version you are satisfied with.

David**

__Weekly Reflection #1: 3/7/2010===__

After "skimming" the NETS for students, teachers, administrators, and technology directors, it was apparent the technology directors have much more "accountability" at this point in time. They're responsible for assisting teachers and the technology facilitators in the district in their efforts to support student learning. The technology director is also responsible to the district superintendent for promoting "technological" growth among the teaching staff and to insure internal systems are fully operable at all times.

In our district, we recently hired two technology facilitators; one for the high school and one for the intermediate/elementary schools. In the past, each building principal contracted a technology facilitator in his/her building, but the recent hirings are newly created positions. These facilitators work diligently to develop technological growth among the teaching staff, but they are "stretched thin" among a large staff.

In a perfect world with unlimited financial resources, an abundance of free time, and highly motivated teachers, the technology director would have no problem meeting the expecatations of the job. However, with budget cuts, time constraints, some teacher resistance to learning new technologies, and efficiently utilizing the time of the facilitators, the job off the technology director is an uphill battle.

As future administrators, I believe the responsibility for promoting the technological growth of our teaching staff will fall on our shoulders. We will need to "lead by example" and use digital age tools in our communications with our staff. With the advent of data driven decision making, we will need to become adept at using all the digital tools at our disposal. Additionally, we'll need to find ways to communicate and collaborate with our colleagues in the most timely and efficient manner...perhaps utilizing a WIKI space?

When creating a district technology plan, it's also difficult to come to consensus regarding the age at which a child should be expected to __//master//__ certain technologies. There a direct correlation between the expertise of the teaching staff and the proficiency of the students. Add to that equation, the exposure to and availability of various technologies the students receive at home, and we have difficulty ensuring "equitable access" to digital tools and resources (as mentioned by Stefan in our last class).

In conclusion, the NETS lay a utopian framework for technology in our schools, but in reality, without the proper resources and commitment of all parties involved these standards will be difficult to implement. > > What I do worry about most Peggy is the financial resources. During this difficult time many districts around the country are getting rid of EA and ESP staff. In our district the school board has voted to furlough 38 ESP. Where did the money go that was budgeted a year in advance? Here we are putting in smart boards in every classroom in our building and we just let go of two paras. > > We also need to think about the costs of repairing technology and then keeping up with it. I know that our laptops really take a beating. How do we keep up with the forever changing technological world? Will we always be behind the eight ball? >