"Schools need to prepare students for the workplace, and businesses need workers who are prepared not only in basic skills but in higher order thinking skills and problem solving that form the core of most new curricula" (Richards, 2001, p. 114). Our schools need funding and materials and one of the best ways to obtain these are through corporate partnerships. However, we must be careful to avoid some of the trappings of business (Richards, 2001).
Partners can offer great opportunities when it comes to technology for our schools. Many schools obtained both hardware and software as well as other benefits such as cable and TV materials (Richards, 2001). Still, our schools need to use each of these properly and avoid partnerships that seem too good to be true. As Richards states, we must not treat students merely as consumers (2001). Our schools need to maintain a learning environment, not a sales environment (Richards, 2001).
My school has many partnerships that help in funding our sports, academics and provide incentives for our students. I feel that our school does a good job at keeping the commercialism that can come with partnerships out of the classroom. Our students already are bombarded enough with advertisements. School should be a safe haven for them.
All in all, partnerships are beneficial, if used properly.
Resources:
Richards, J. (2001). Strategies for creating successful corporate partnerships. In LeBaron, J.F. & Collier, C. Technology in its place: Successful technology infusion in schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Monday, March 19, 2007
Staff Development
As educators, we need to be able to change and adapt along with changes in technology and its integration in our schools (Collier, 2001).Through the use of mentors, administrative and even student support, we can become better at using technology for classroom and even personal use. Integration will only happen if we all take ownership and tailor staff development to our own specific needs (Collier, 2001).
Mentors are a great way to help any teacher that wants to learn something new. My first year teaching, I had a mentor to guide me with anything that came along, including technology. Our school, as I said before, is lucky enough to have an ITRT on site to mentor and guide us through any technological roadblock. Often, the mentors of new technology are the younger teachers that are new to teaching, but professionals at all things electronic. To this day I still help my mother program her phone. Sometimes, I will help a person at school with the grading software and in return they may help me with something that I have not yet mastered. We all need to work together to be successful (Collier, 2001).
Administrators need to provide development for teachers that is tailored to individual needs (Collier, 2001). We need to group teachers according to ability and content area to maximize productivity during a technology development session. Those with little technology experience will need to go through more of the basics than those that have been doing this for years. It is simple differentiation, just for the staff instead of the students.
Often the best source of technological advice are the students (Collier, 2001). Many of our kids grew up with computers in the home and I am sometimes asking them how to fix things when something goes wrong. I thought I was technologically inclined but some of these kids are amazing in thier skills on a computer. This can truly make one feel old, even at 26. Granted, they still listen to some of the same music that I do but the computer thing is a real generational gap.
All in all, we need to constantly support each other as a school community (Collier, 2001). f we want to succeed, the support simply needs to be in place.
Resources
Collier, C. (2001). Staff development for technology integration in the classroom. In LeBaron,
J.F. & Collier, C. (eds.) Technology in its place: Successful technology infusion in schools. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mentors are a great way to help any teacher that wants to learn something new. My first year teaching, I had a mentor to guide me with anything that came along, including technology. Our school, as I said before, is lucky enough to have an ITRT on site to mentor and guide us through any technological roadblock. Often, the mentors of new technology are the younger teachers that are new to teaching, but professionals at all things electronic. To this day I still help my mother program her phone. Sometimes, I will help a person at school with the grading software and in return they may help me with something that I have not yet mastered. We all need to work together to be successful (Collier, 2001).
Administrators need to provide development for teachers that is tailored to individual needs (Collier, 2001). We need to group teachers according to ability and content area to maximize productivity during a technology development session. Those with little technology experience will need to go through more of the basics than those that have been doing this for years. It is simple differentiation, just for the staff instead of the students.
Often the best source of technological advice are the students (Collier, 2001). Many of our kids grew up with computers in the home and I am sometimes asking them how to fix things when something goes wrong. I thought I was technologically inclined but some of these kids are amazing in thier skills on a computer. This can truly make one feel old, even at 26. Granted, they still listen to some of the same music that I do but the computer thing is a real generational gap.
All in all, we need to constantly support each other as a school community (Collier, 2001). f we want to succeed, the support simply needs to be in place.
Resources
Collier, C. (2001). Staff development for technology integration in the classroom. In LeBaron,
J.F. & Collier, C. (eds.) Technology in its place: Successful technology infusion in schools. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Saturday, March 10, 2007
Technology for urban schools
"Preparing all children for viable futures may seem expensive, but it will be money well spent. The cost of graduating class after class of students unprepared to meet the needs of today's and tomorrow's workforce will be far more expensive" (Gallagher, 2001, p. 41). This quote sums it all up about education in many of our urban areas. We are for too preoccupied with teaching to a test than to actually promote learning through technology. Also, urban areas are often the most difficult to incorporate technology due to the fact that there is no major tax base to fund any major projects. On top of that, there are many aging and older school facilities that are difficult to upgrade(Gallagher, 2001).
Teaching and emphasizing minimal standards for our urban students is a good thing. We need to have competent skills and means to measure those skills. However, the high stakes accountability that our students have to face is far more important to our lawmakers than upgrading technology in urban schools. It simply is not economically possible to have both up to date technology as well as provide all the needed services for urban students. These schools can receive various levels of funding which are determined by economic need, the number of students with disabilities and most of all test scores (Gallagher, 2001). Urban schools are notorious for lower scores and higher levels of poverty and special needs. Unfortunately these major problems seem to overshadow the need for technology integration (Gallagher, 2001).
Old schools can also pose a challenge to technology integration due to inadequate wiring, expensive renovations and even hidden dangers such as asbestos. According to Gallagher, these factors are just more reasons that many urban schools are stuck in a cycle of low achievement and continue to pass unprepared students through the system (2001).
Luckily, our school does the best we can with the materials that we have. We may have 25% of our students from low socioeconomic backgrounds, but we have a supportive PTO and are always looking for new ways to improve our technology plan. We are all stakeholders in the process and many of us have even taken on the challenge of technology integration as one of our professional goals. Hopefully, we will make a difference to our students and set an example for some of those urban schools out there that deparately need a change.
Gallagher, E.M. (2001). Technology for urban schools: Gaps and challenges. In LeBaron, J.F. & Collier, C. Technology in its place: Successful technology infusion in schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Teaching and emphasizing minimal standards for our urban students is a good thing. We need to have competent skills and means to measure those skills. However, the high stakes accountability that our students have to face is far more important to our lawmakers than upgrading technology in urban schools. It simply is not economically possible to have both up to date technology as well as provide all the needed services for urban students. These schools can receive various levels of funding which are determined by economic need, the number of students with disabilities and most of all test scores (Gallagher, 2001). Urban schools are notorious for lower scores and higher levels of poverty and special needs. Unfortunately these major problems seem to overshadow the need for technology integration (Gallagher, 2001).
Old schools can also pose a challenge to technology integration due to inadequate wiring, expensive renovations and even hidden dangers such as asbestos. According to Gallagher, these factors are just more reasons that many urban schools are stuck in a cycle of low achievement and continue to pass unprepared students through the system (2001).
Luckily, our school does the best we can with the materials that we have. We may have 25% of our students from low socioeconomic backgrounds, but we have a supportive PTO and are always looking for new ways to improve our technology plan. We are all stakeholders in the process and many of us have even taken on the challenge of technology integration as one of our professional goals. Hopefully, we will make a difference to our students and set an example for some of those urban schools out there that deparately need a change.
Gallagher, E.M. (2001). Technology for urban schools: Gaps and challenges. In LeBaron, J.F. & Collier, C. Technology in its place: Successful technology infusion in schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Chapters 2 & 4 (LeBaron & Collier)
In chapter 2, LeBaron outlines successful integration of technology into the curriculum. Two things that stand out are that we need an effective paln for technology as well as the participation of each stakeholder in the process (LeBaron, 2001). We need to each take ownership in the use of technology in the curriculum for it to be successful. Also, we must have a clear set of goals and guidelines in place to maximize effectiveness of technology integration (LeBaron, 2001). Two other major topics discussed by LeBaron include the ideas that we need to use technology appropriately for each curriculum and that we need to assess its effectiveness properly (2001).
In my school there are many techers that fully embrace the use of technology in the classroom. They are teachers of all ages, levels of experience as well as subject area. Luckily, we have a supportive administration as well as a full time computer guru. Many of us, myself included have used technology integration as part of our professional goals.
In Chapter 4, Jarvela uses an appropriate subtitle for establishing success in the long run in terms of technology integration: "Getting the story out" (Jarvela, 2001, p. 43). We need to share our successes with others in our school and the community as a whole. Parents and politicians all need to know how we are teaching and how technology is helping our kids. We must show proof that technology motivates and helps students enhance their learning (Jazrvela, 2001). If we do not share our successes, then we will lose funding for new technologies. We need to enhance and document our constructivist uses of technology, our teaching for understanding and our authentic assessments (Jarvela, 2001). This is a lot easier said than done but we all need to do our part. If we are to gain more tools for our classrooms, we need proof in the form of higher test scores on standardized tests. Unfortunately, this seems to be the only thing that the public seems to look at to measure improvement. So just keep on using technology and document your success. One day, someone in power might just listen to you.
References
Jarvela, S. (2001). Technology and learning: Getting the story out. In Lebaron, J.F. & Collier, C.
Technology in its place: Successful technology infusion in schools. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
LeBaron, J.F. (2001). Curriculum planning for technology rich instruction. In Lebaron, J.F. & Collier, C. Technology in its place: Successful technology infusion in schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
In my school there are many techers that fully embrace the use of technology in the classroom. They are teachers of all ages, levels of experience as well as subject area. Luckily, we have a supportive administration as well as a full time computer guru. Many of us, myself included have used technology integration as part of our professional goals.
In Chapter 4, Jarvela uses an appropriate subtitle for establishing success in the long run in terms of technology integration: "Getting the story out" (Jarvela, 2001, p. 43). We need to share our successes with others in our school and the community as a whole. Parents and politicians all need to know how we are teaching and how technology is helping our kids. We must show proof that technology motivates and helps students enhance their learning (Jazrvela, 2001). If we do not share our successes, then we will lose funding for new technologies. We need to enhance and document our constructivist uses of technology, our teaching for understanding and our authentic assessments (Jarvela, 2001). This is a lot easier said than done but we all need to do our part. If we are to gain more tools for our classrooms, we need proof in the form of higher test scores on standardized tests. Unfortunately, this seems to be the only thing that the public seems to look at to measure improvement. So just keep on using technology and document your success. One day, someone in power might just listen to you.
References
Jarvela, S. (2001). Technology and learning: Getting the story out. In Lebaron, J.F. & Collier, C.
Technology in its place: Successful technology infusion in schools. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
LeBaron, J.F. (2001). Curriculum planning for technology rich instruction. In Lebaron, J.F. & Collier, C. Technology in its place: Successful technology infusion in schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
NCLB
When it comes to No Child Left Behind, there is a lot of controversy. In my opinion, it is a good idea to have national standards and a curriculum that is consistent for all students in any state. However, it does not truly work this way since each state and even district can differ drastically in curricula (Cawelti, 2006; Frontier, Pheifer & Zellmer, 2006; Guilfoyle, 2006). One major problem I have with the program is that it preaches that we need to do whatever it takes to help students learn and grow through differentiation of teaching and assessment, yet it strictly enforces the use of only one type of high stakes assessment for everyone at the end of the year (Cawelti, 2006; Frontier, et al.;2006; Guilfoyle, 2006). How can we show valid statistics of what the students really learned or how much they grew if we only put all of the emphasis on one test? Also, many teachers, parents and politicians misuse and misunderstand the scores and data provided by such assessments(Cawelti, 2006; Frontier, et al.; 2006; Guilfoyle, 2006). The scary part is that many of the people that decide on the funding for schools have no clue how to properly analyze, compare and interpret test data. We are leaving many behind with unfair assessment such as minorities, ESL kids and those of low socioeconomic status(Cawelti, 2006; Frontier, et al.; 2006; Guilfoyle, 2006). We are also in some cases lowering our standards by allowing loopholes for some students in terms of score reporting for AYP(Cawelti, 2006; Frontier, et al.; 2006; Guilfoyle, 2006). We need to differentiate assessment, not fudge the numbers. I will keep this rant short for tonight so stay tuned for more NCLB complaining at another time. Standards= good; Misuse of data and standards = bad. Cookie next to computer = good ; dog trying to steal it = bad...I better go!
References
Cawelti, G. (2006). The side effects of NCLB. Educational Leadership 64 (3), 64-8.
Frontier, A., Pheifer, D. & Zellmer, M.B. (2006). What are NCLB’s instructional costs? Educational Leadership 64 (3), 43-6.
U.S. Department of Education (2005, September 19) No Child Left Behind. Retrieved
February 21, 2007, from http://www.nclb.gov
References
Cawelti, G. (2006). The side effects of NCLB. Educational Leadership 64 (3), 64-8.
Frontier, A., Pheifer, D. & Zellmer, M.B. (2006). What are NCLB’s instructional costs? Educational Leadership 64 (3), 43-6.
U.S. Department of Education (2005, September 19) No Child Left Behind. Retrieved
February 21, 2007, from http://www.nclb.gov
Wiske et al.; Chapters 3,4 &5
Chapter 3 of Wiske, Franz & Breit discusses the idea of using generative topics to enhance technology use in the curriculum (2005). When teaching for understanding we need to use topics that can be explored in detail, meet our curriculum standards and interest students (Wiske, et al., 2005). I try to find things that interest my students in relation to our prescribed curriculum and just go with it. We use the internet for research and other software for presentations and information organization. Thanks to easy internet access, I can do a lot more with my students than my mother ever could when she was a teacher. As long as we connect, use multiple teaching styles, deepen understanding of topics and open the lines of communication, we will be successful in the generative aspect of our learning (Wiske, et al., 2005)
Chapter 4 is essential for any technology integration in schools since it seems almost like common sense...have clear goals (Wiske, et al., 2005). If we set clear goals outlining how we expect to use technology in the curriculum, then we can avoid confusion and conflict. We have to do more than just put kids on the computer. We need to have valid reasons why we are doing it that apply to thier learning (Wiske, et al., 2005). We can use technology not as a novelty, but as a tool to extend our curriculum. Sometimes, I even learn from my students when it comes to using different tools in the classroom. It is always fun to watch how they choose to design presentations in my class.
Chapter 5 continues to outline the previous topics from the other chapters but includes the idea of using technology to aid performance assessment (Wiske, et al., 2005). Since I am relatively new to teaching, I learned from the beginning that there is more to learning than just a right or wrong answer. The process of working with information is much more important. We need to focus on growth, not just right and wrong. I try to incorporate as many activities as I can for the students to work with new information. This can range from a simple internet search to a Wiki project to powerpoints and other presentation software. I am learning to let the students take more of the lead in thier learning and technology makes that so much easier. The only thing that I need to constantly remind them is to not trust everything on the internet, which ties into a previous entry.
Reference
Wiske, M.S., Franz, K.R. & Breit (2005). Teaching for understanding with technology. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Chapter 4 is essential for any technology integration in schools since it seems almost like common sense...have clear goals (Wiske, et al., 2005). If we set clear goals outlining how we expect to use technology in the curriculum, then we can avoid confusion and conflict. We have to do more than just put kids on the computer. We need to have valid reasons why we are doing it that apply to thier learning (Wiske, et al., 2005). We can use technology not as a novelty, but as a tool to extend our curriculum. Sometimes, I even learn from my students when it comes to using different tools in the classroom. It is always fun to watch how they choose to design presentations in my class.
Chapter 5 continues to outline the previous topics from the other chapters but includes the idea of using technology to aid performance assessment (Wiske, et al., 2005). Since I am relatively new to teaching, I learned from the beginning that there is more to learning than just a right or wrong answer. The process of working with information is much more important. We need to focus on growth, not just right and wrong. I try to incorporate as many activities as I can for the students to work with new information. This can range from a simple internet search to a Wiki project to powerpoints and other presentation software. I am learning to let the students take more of the lead in thier learning and technology makes that so much easier. The only thing that I need to constantly remind them is to not trust everything on the internet, which ties into a previous entry.
Reference
Wiske, M.S., Franz, K.R. & Breit (2005). Teaching for understanding with technology. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Sunday, February 11, 2007
LeBaron & Collier (Chp. 10)
When using new technologies in the classroom, schools need to have a clear set of goals and policies in regards to their uses. Also, ethics, policy development and responsibility need to math the overall goals of the educational system (Friel, 2001). Our students must follow acceptable use policies set forth by the school system to ensure both online safety and responsible use (Friel, 2001). As teachers, we need to model appropriate uses of technologies and teach our students how to evaluate information, especially information found on the internet (Friel, 2001).
Students need to be information literate, meaning that they need to learn the skills to distinguish valid information from that which is invalid (Friel, 2001). As a Civics teacher, I deal with various forms of primary and secondary sources and I am always trying to get my students to ask questions about where the information came from. All too often, we see students pulling information off the internet and taking it at face value. I am always pushing my students to be critical of what they read, see or hear. To be truly effective in this goal, a school needs the collaboration of all staff members, especially media specialists and librarians (Friel, 2001).
Acceptable use is always a controversial topic since the first amendment is blurred when it comes to expression online and in other forms of media (Friel, 2001). In my county, we do have policies set in place in every school dictating exactly how computers should be used and we also have blocking software in place to keep our students away from less than savory websites. However, this brings up the question of knowing when and how to block access. Still, I agree with the article in that teaching responsible use is the best solution to avoiding uncomfortable online situations (Friel, 2001).
“Educators must teach students the importance of citing all of their sources, no matter what the format” (Friel, 2001, p. 128). See, it is that easy to avoid plagiarism. Even in my class, I encourage the students to cite even information found in the text. We practice writing and this helps reinforce responsibility. I know that there are websites that actually sell term papers and teachers of secondary and post secondary students often have to deal with these situations. Yet, as Friel stated, we need to teach proper use early in order for students to get the message (2001). Should a cheating or inappropriate use situation arise in my class, I just follow the school discipline procedures as appropriate for the situation. I have been teaching for four years and our use policies are solid enough that I have never had any complaints or questioning of my actions regarding proper use.
Our students have the tools to learn. We just need to teach them how to act responsibly.
Reference
Friel, L. (2001). Using technology appropriately: Policy, leadership and ethics. In Collier, C. & LeBaron, J.F. (eds.). Technology in its place: Successful technology infusion in schools.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)