Texas Star Chart
View more presentations from jhohnstreiter.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Friday, November 27, 2009
Long Range Plan for Technology
Educator Preparation and Development. The preparation must include preparing students for the world they live in which carries a heavy load of technology. Training and development must be made available for all. All stakeholders are to receive continuing training and local/state support to implement these technological proficencies into daily lesson plans. (The Long-range plan for technology, 2006-2020, 2006)
What does this mean? This means that educators need technology training on the latest and greatest hardware and software being made available. This training and support is as important as learning the grading system. Many times this is overlooked due to budget restraints puts a hold on updating technology as well as the ever-so-often excuse of "what's not broken, don't fix it." Students and their learning styles are changing every year just as the level of technology and we need to stay on top of it or it will stay on top of us. (The Long-range plan for technology, 2006-2020, 2006)
Our technology department is under tight budget restraints that don't allow for much in terms of upgrading and that combined with a large staff/student population, not much in terms of new technology or the important training are made available outside of our educational service center. The trends of our state is to differentiate teaching to encompass technology, but without the funding to back it, many schools are forced to remain status-quo. (The Long-range plan for technology, 2006-2020, 2006)
My recommendation to attack this problem is to utilize all resources that are available to our disposal and begin writing technology grants. With the state keeping our school district under a microscope (due to unacceptible rating in completion), it would suit us better if we can upgrade/train with resources from awarded grants. As an administrator, I would highly encourage my staff to go to as much training that is offered. Present incentives that would motivate teachers to attend at all times of the year, especially the summer break. If you are going to require teachers to use it, make sure they are trained and proficient.
The Long-range plan for technology, 2006-2020. (2006). Texas Education Agency.
Retrieved from http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/technology/lrpt/lrpt_lrpt.html.
What does this mean? This means that educators need technology training on the latest and greatest hardware and software being made available. This training and support is as important as learning the grading system. Many times this is overlooked due to budget restraints puts a hold on updating technology as well as the ever-so-often excuse of "what's not broken, don't fix it." Students and their learning styles are changing every year just as the level of technology and we need to stay on top of it or it will stay on top of us. (The Long-range plan for technology, 2006-2020, 2006)
Our technology department is under tight budget restraints that don't allow for much in terms of upgrading and that combined with a large staff/student population, not much in terms of new technology or the important training are made available outside of our educational service center. The trends of our state is to differentiate teaching to encompass technology, but without the funding to back it, many schools are forced to remain status-quo. (The Long-range plan for technology, 2006-2020, 2006)
My recommendation to attack this problem is to utilize all resources that are available to our disposal and begin writing technology grants. With the state keeping our school district under a microscope (due to unacceptible rating in completion), it would suit us better if we can upgrade/train with resources from awarded grants. As an administrator, I would highly encourage my staff to go to as much training that is offered. Present incentives that would motivate teachers to attend at all times of the year, especially the summer break. If you are going to require teachers to use it, make sure they are trained and proficient.
The Long-range plan for technology, 2006-2020. (2006). Texas Education Agency.
Retrieved from http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/technology/lrpt/lrpt_lrpt.html.
Pre-K Technology Applications
The Pre-K TEKS start students off with what we as educators describe as the basics with computer technology and those TEKS are repeated to greater complexity throughout the education process. Grades 1 - 3 have TEKS that are also repeated in Grades 4 - 6, Grades 7 - 8, and Grades 9 - 12 in each technology application strand. That will create a common assessment for educators in the areas that are vital, hardware and software. The progression is well past turning on the computer, rather using search engines, data management, data processing, and th proper application of the use of hardware. (Technology Applications Student Standards for EC-12: Prekindergarten Guidelines and K-12 TEKS, 2005)
An example of a spiraling student skill is the K - 2nd grade student will demostrate appropriate use of hardware and software to use terminology and start and exit programs to create and save. In grades 3 - 5, the students will follow the previous skills as well as identify characters of input, use remote access equipment such as printers, and make necessary adjustments for compatibility. In grades 6 - 8, the above skills are included as well as comparing/contrasting various devices for processing and analyze the correct software to use as well as demonstrate an understanding of internet terminology. Finally, grades 9 - 12 demonstrate programming and analyzing code proficiency, operating systems, and decision-making skills all the while including the skills found in the prior grade grouping. (Technology Applications Student Standards for EC-12: Prekindergarten Guidelines and K-12 TEKS, 2005)
Technology Applications Student Standards for EC-12: Prekindergarten Guidelines and K-12 TEKS. (2005). Texas Education Agency. Retrieved from http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/technology/ta/stustd.html.
An example of a spiraling student skill is the K - 2nd grade student will demostrate appropriate use of hardware and software to use terminology and start and exit programs to create and save. In grades 3 - 5, the students will follow the previous skills as well as identify characters of input, use remote access equipment such as printers, and make necessary adjustments for compatibility. In grades 6 - 8, the above skills are included as well as comparing/contrasting various devices for processing and analyze the correct software to use as well as demonstrate an understanding of internet terminology. Finally, grades 9 - 12 demonstrate programming and analyzing code proficiency, operating systems, and decision-making skills all the while including the skills found in the prior grade grouping. (Technology Applications Student Standards for EC-12: Prekindergarten Guidelines and K-12 TEKS, 2005)
Technology Applications Student Standards for EC-12: Prekindergarten Guidelines and K-12 TEKS. (2005). Texas Education Agency. Retrieved from http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/technology/ta/stustd.html.
Review on 2 Tech Tests
The tests that I took told me just what I already knew. I have a pretty good base on how to use a computer and the basics that are necessary for an average (maybe above-average) teacher needs to know in order to be known as semi-competent with technology. The first exam (Technology Applications Inventory, TAI) showed me that I have a pretty good foundation and an average information acquistion skill. What I struggle with is solving problems and communication with technology. The second exam (SETDA Teacher Survey) gave me the same results that from the previous exam. I am fluent in the basics but am below average in the advanced skills.
As an educator of over 15 years, I find that the results are directly indication of the drive for technological development led by administration. Most of the required technology staff development sessions are focused on a new attendance/grading system or e-mail protocol. There have been time to time opportunities to attend a 40 minute session covering Word or the newest Windows operating systems (guts session). These are the weaknesses that our (my current) technology leadership have demostrated. As for myself as an administrator, I feel that I would want my teaching staff to be competent with the four areas of Word Processing (i.e. Word, Excel, Power Point, Outlook). If I want my staff diversifying their lessons by incorporating technology into their plans, I would want to provide all the training possible to move the teacher from novice to advanced (at least past developing). I would want to give incentives (stipend, Comp time, planning days) for staff to attend summer trainings to become more fluent in the above mentioned technology.
I found the assessments interestingly difficult to answer (SETDA), but clear with their results (TAI). The results were predictable and I would imagine that to a non-technology teacher, the norm throughout Texas.
As an educator of over 15 years, I find that the results are directly indication of the drive for technological development led by administration. Most of the required technology staff development sessions are focused on a new attendance/grading system or e-mail protocol. There have been time to time opportunities to attend a 40 minute session covering Word or the newest Windows operating systems (guts session). These are the weaknesses that our (my current) technology leadership have demostrated. As for myself as an administrator, I feel that I would want my teaching staff to be competent with the four areas of Word Processing (i.e. Word, Excel, Power Point, Outlook). If I want my staff diversifying their lessons by incorporating technology into their plans, I would want to provide all the training possible to move the teacher from novice to advanced (at least past developing). I would want to give incentives (stipend, Comp time, planning days) for staff to attend summer trainings to become more fluent in the above mentioned technology.
I found the assessments interestingly difficult to answer (SETDA), but clear with their results (TAI). The results were predictable and I would imagine that to a non-technology teacher, the norm throughout Texas.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)