instructional technology

LeBaron provides an interesting discussion on the gaps between urban schools and the average schools. The comparison of a study of the Chicago Public Shools showed how many of the schools fall short in providing internet and other technology to these inner city schools. This seems to be the great divide that technology has created.

The average school has a 20 to 1 ration while the urban schhols are running 50 and 75 to 1. There is a need to close this gap and allow all a comparable equality in access. Le Baron ( 2005)

We probably all feel a need to get more. I know being a rural high school in a suburban school district, I feel at times that we are always the last to achieve or get the new technology. Last wi fi, the last conversion and so on. Of course we are also the smallest.

LeBaron, J.,Collier,C. Technology In Its Place. (2001) Jossey-Bass. San Fransisco.

Everybody needs to establish goals to be successful and it is no different in integrating and using technology. Wiske examines the establishment of goals that need to be looked at in your classroom.You need to focus on  big ideas, encompass multiple dimensions, define connections between lessons and their activities, and share your goals publicly. Wiske (2005)

She says to focus on the knowledge of the students and help them to understand the substance of the topic. She says it is important to get may involved in setting the goals in order to be effective.Wiske (2005)

The case study of the water habitat project was used further to discuss how they went form notebooks to keeping their notes on line to even expanding their thinking to do research and pull more information. Then they looked at collaboration to get information and to share the information with others. Imagine all this by adding a computer or two to the classroom. Wiske (2005)

I see that setting the goals help to give direction and help to gain a better understanding to the lesson and thus gain higher achievement. I gain abetter understanding of how understanding the goals help to use the technology more wisely.You must use the larger goals and tie them into the more specific concepts of the curriculum.

She pointed out the four issues to address when integrating the technology into your lessons.

1. select appropriate technology 2. Pans ways to gain significant educational advantage 3. prepare your self and the students to use the new tools 4. Coordinate access with the students and other memebers of the educational community. Wiske (2005)

We then looked at assessments. She pointed out the keys to success as conduct assessments throughout the process, make sure the criteria is clear, allow the students the opportunity to mointor their own work, and the assessments should be provided by different people. She stressed the assessments throughout bu utilizing the steps for writing by following a pre write, a draft, an edit, another edit, a revision and a publishing of the final. This was all used in discussing writing about birds.Wiske (2005)

You must stay abreast with the students work as to verify that they are heading in the proper direction. Goals and assessments two more areas to help you understand technology through integration and its use.

Wiske, M.S.,Franz, K., Breit, L.; (2005).Teaching for Understanding. Jossey-Bass. San Fransisco.

Our readings discussed the planning phase of curriculum utilizing the new technology. We as teachers are trying to have our students reac a higher level of learning as expressed by Bloom’s Taxonomy and in Tomei’s Technology Taxonomy. Integrating the technology allows us to strive to reach those higher levels.

LeBaron showed the stages of planning including:

1. Creating shared vision of curriculum

2. Assessing needs

3. Describing goals

4. Defining key imputs

5. Assigning personal responsibility

6. Evaluating results

It was shown how we need to plan for technology without the influence of budget constraints. After you have established your goals and direction, go back and look at the monetary influences. We have to examine all areas of learning. Le Baron (2006)

We also looked at preparing the students for the future and in participating and communicating in society. Using one’s cognitive learning and collaborating with others is of great value ad a necessity. LeBaron (2006)

In my classroom I build my plan form the curriculum we are studying. I lookat how to integrate the technology to gain the best opportunities available. I look at data and earlier assesments to reach out and help with the shortfalls my students appear to have in reading, math, and writing skills while enabling them to incorporate the real world environment into their studies. I strive to have my students value their experiences in the working environment translate into their academic achievement.  

I encorage the new technology to be used to increase their motivation. it could be developing ads or creating portfolios or movies. This seems to catch their attention and helps them to express themselves more openly. We use IG Pro to and SCORE to capture the data from the students and allow us to share the data with others. My evaluations depend upon performance levels, creativity, professionalism and other areas of concentration.

Planning for the right classroom is involved and needs to allow for much flexibility.

LeBaron, J.,Collier,C. Technology In Its Place. (2001) Jossey-Bass. San Fransisco.

It will be interesting to see if the NCLB Act will be renewed druing this term. It appears that it may be delayed due to the division of where the act needs to be. Many have felt  that the US government has created legislation that place mandates and no real support especially financial to pay for these mandates. The act has forced the states to look at some needs of the educational system. Test scores have improved, but at what cost. Teacher quality has improved, but with pay being like it is, will there be the predicted teacher shortage of the future?

Not teaching in a SOL core area, still has it’s pressures. We want the students to improve and be successful, but at what expense of increasing the learning hierachy. Anytime you set a number that has to be met , you are leaving open areas that my be expoilter. Teaching to the test. Does that really promote learning? So much has to answered. I am gladd they are taking a step back to reexamine where it needs to go. Make it better and make it right.

The Wiske book laid solid groundwork for “Teaching for Understanding” in chapters 3-5. It was stressed that we can achieve better by reaching students on how they can take their learning and connect it to the real world. The idea of the math quilt was outstanding, and then folowed it uo with the photo journalism. Wiske (2006).

I find this idea interesting since it has been going on for years in the career and technology area of education. If the student can understand why they are attempting things, then it makes it easier to understand that they must put forth the effort.

We have to establish goals in our plans including what new technologies to use, what significant educational benefits, preparing all to use the technologies, and organize the access to the tools of technology. Wiske (2006).

An understanding of reaching performance levels is important. It stressed that the body might be working but not the mind. We need to utilize the technology to envelop the mind and it’s reaction to gain a higher level of learning. Writing and art does not neccesarily mean deep thought provoction. Our project must be geared to allow the students to incorporate these ides in order to allow for that development of learning.

Wiske, M.S.,Franz, K., Breit, L.; (2006).Teaching for Understanding. Jossey-Bass. San Fransisco.

LeBarron discusses the appropriate use of tchnology and the potential pitfalls we may find. What is mentioned reiterates many thoughts and expressions of teachers and administrators that I have had. they look at information literacy and the use of copyrighted material, potential plagarism, and the use of online references. It is so easy in obtaining the information, especially online. It is also easy to cut and paste information that has not been given credit. I have found the use of applications that highlight otheres people on wotk to be interesting, and I have been following their use in many of our schools and school districts. It does not appear to be the endall method. We have to instruct and inforce the rules and laws mwith our students and especially in our own usage. LeBarron (2001)

The article also looked at informational policies. Censorship,acceptable usage policies, filters, privacy issues and child safety also are important. Where do you draw the line between safety and privacy and censorship. What is appropriate?LeBarron (2001)

We constntly grapple with nthese delimas all the time. In implementing our new SCORE and struggle with how far can I go. The generation today has seen much more acceptable behavior than when even I grew up. They thinl nothing of copying songs and other works and totally see nothing wrong.

LeBaron, J.,Collier,C. Technology In Its Place. (2001) Jossey-Bass. San Fransisco.

This is a paper on professsional devlopment in technology.itec-545-paper.doc

Our readings in the LeBaron book deals with the typical acquisition and use of technology. We deal with what leadership is needed to accomplish a successful integration of technology program. There has to be real planning and direction so that this new technology is being utilized in our schools. LeBaron (2001)

It is interesting to see comparisons of the thought of people leading our technology in the classroom revolution. After several classes I am becoming synical of the popular belief of buy it and they will use it. Cuban’s thoughts against the ideas are sticking in my mind more and more. The article states several steps to bring succes about. They suggest creating urgency, get together a coalition, have a vision, communicate that vision,have people in power to inact the vision, gain change abd use that change to your advantage. LeBaron (2001)

They then discuss the idea of politics in the schools. God forbid. Their ideas of ople together is great. I think that is the key.LeBaron (2001)

As I see and listen in my own school, I notice this nice technology coming in but only a few peope using it with a regual consistency. Our department has the list previously mentioned in the previous blog. However only a couple of us use it on a fairly regular basis. I am trying to increase and get as much tutoring as I can. The ITRT is always ready to assisit. Unmfortunately most seem to be waiting to have it spoon fed to them. The new communication software we have, (Angel), is slow in being implmented. It requires a n effort on the teachers part to learn how to implement it. I see it as a great addition. I also read papers in how other counties that have bought even more are seeing the same type of problems. Until we get up to par with the technology there will probably be this lag.Again Cuban seems to be hitting it on the head.

The leadership has to growa and the nine principles are appearing even more important. Get the vision and plan, integrate it, assess it, support it, develop it , and look at how it affects the community and ethical and legal standards.The growth is being made available to us, now it is up to us to utilize it and make it useful.

I myself can not wait to use it more and more. I might be learning on the go, but I am learning. I see so much possibility in engaging the students. Imagine we might actually get ahead of them.

LeBaron, J.,Collier,C. Technology In Its Place. (2001) Jossey-Bass. San Fransisco.

My schools resources.
Do we have COWs (laptop computers)?

We have 3 for the school to use. My department  career and Development also has one.
Do we have a computer lab?

Yes we have two with approximately 40 compuiters each.

Do we have simulation software?

Many departments have use of some. We use one in retailing. it allows you to actualy set up a store and mange it.
Do we have problem solving software?

My department does not have any but the science department has.
Do we have a projector?

Each class has a projector in our departmet. Just about every class has one in school.
Do we have a smartboard?

We have 3 in our department and many more in the school.
Do we have a digital camera, digital video camera, etc?

We have many digital cameras in our department.

Do we have image editing software?

Limited use of editing software.
Do we need to sign up to use the equipment?

Yes in the department or in school for most resources.
What is available in the library for teachers and students to use? Databases, etc.

The library has use od data bases.
How do teachers learn how to use these tools?

We have an ITRT to help us learn. Professional development and individually.
How do our students learn how to use these tools?

We teach and or the ITRT can assist us.

Bookmark:

www.iKeepbookmarks.com/brucech

The big question of teaching to performance flexibility is appearing in so much of the publications we are reading in the educational world. The question of No child left behind changes seem to reiterate it. Are we teaching our students to learn to respond a,s,c, or d,or are we trying to add the flexibility to allow the students the opportunity to explore unto different paths for their responses.

Wiske defines understanding as a flexibility apability. She further goes on to say that teaching for understanding expands on that by analyzing collaborative teaching and learning. She examines how the topics should fall into subjects that cross areas of study, that are interesting to the student and teacher and has no set area of entry. Reflective, collaborative communities have established a framework for educators. This framework is set up into five areas. Topics, goals, performances, assessments, and the reflective collaborative communities. Wiske (20050

The bootom line is you have to be able to accept coaching, and help from collegues, your approach needs to be flexible, and you need to focus to leverage technology.We need to move quickly as technology is constantly changing. It is repeated that we must take into consideration the learners interests, account for their experience, engage the learner actively, have the students critique their own work, and work in a collaborative effort. Wiske (2006).

Generative Curriculum Topics -take into consideration the learners interests

Understanding goals- focus on key concepts and ways of thinking

Performances of understanding- engage in actively ways

Ongoing assessments- self critiques with others

Reflective, collaborative communities- go outside the normal area

We have to bring technology into this format. Look at the diversification of methods of expressing our last assignments. We saw webpages, power points and videos. All of these expressed the same basic information on introducing the nine principles of technology. Each method alowed for different ways of researching general topics. These principles tie into this framework offered in our current readings. So many of them blend into the concepts of the framework.Hving these principles in place make it easier to integrate technology. Without them complicates the idea of integration and tends to throw you into a more traditional approach. even problem based learning integrates well into this teaching for understanding framework. it seems that if we want to get into higher levels of taxonomy, we must incorporate thes concepts into our lesson plans. We need to fight to get into the 21st century level of learning.

Wiske, M.S.,Franz, K., Breit, L.; (2006).Teaching for Understanding. Jossey-Bass. San Fransisco.