Dirk Funk, district, On-line Instructor/Design Facilitator | His responsibilities include researching data-based best practices and applications of technology usage. |
Tammy White, cluster, Technology Coordinator | She makes sure technology and training is available for schools. |
Tim Mathew, cluster, PC Technician | Work orders are sent to him and he fixes technology issues. |
Debbie Byrd, campus, Curriculum Specialist | She takes inventory on technology that teachers are using. |
Rowdy Bryan, campus, Instruction Technology Coordinator | He is the in-house person to go to for computer problems (for instance, helping with students’ log-ins). |
Terry Mead and Debbie Knezek, campus, Technology Teachers | Both teachers have computer labs and teach computer/technology classes. |
Jody Potts, campus, On-line/E-combo Classes for Students | She is the overseer for students to complete assignments given to them by the on-line professor. |
Principal’s duties include aligning the budget to the technology needs of the campus (using the data from the STaR Chart for instance), to purchase appropriate technology, and to provide training for new technology (initial and on-going). The principal will also turn to Dirk Funk when wanting to implement new technology, will ask Tammy White to help set up trainings, will ask Debbie Byrd to monitor the usage of technology within the classrooms, will ask teachers to turn in work orders when their technology is not working properly, will provide an extra period for Mr. Bryan to assist teachers, and will monitor Ms. Mead’s and Ms. Knezek’s students’ performance in class.
Within the one hundred and twelve pages Long Term Plan for Technology, 2006-2020 (Adopted by the State Board of Education) document, the goals and vision are outlined and detailed. Specifically all learners should:
• have access to relevant technologies, tools, resources and services for
individualized instruction 24 hours a day/7 days a week.
• use information and communication technologies to collaborate, construct
knowledge and provide solutions to real-world problems and situations that are
encountered.
• use research-based strategies in all subject areas to improve academic
achievement.
• communicate effectively in a variety of formats for diverse audiences (p. 33).
It is important for teachers to be aware of what is expected of them. Teachers need training relating to the Long Term Plan for Technology, 2006-2020, NETS*A Standards, as well as AYP results, and AEIS results. Teachers also need to be aware of the campus and district improvement plans. How can teachers be accountable for data, standards, and improvements that they are not aware of? It is the responsibility of administration to provide training and data to teachers in order to make informed, collaborative decisions.
There seems to be a gap between technology and teachers’ usage. Technology is available and even in the classrooms, but teachers’ feelings of inadequacy due to not being knowledgeable on how to use available technology is dampening the opportunities for learning to occur- both teachers and students are missing out.
Teachers need to be surveyed throughout the year. The initial survey at the beginning of the year should ask teachers what technology they have available in their classrooms, ask if they use it and if so, how often. The survey should also ask what types of training they would prefer. Then the professional development can meet the needs of the teachers. Several professional development opportunities, as well as, different levels of training will then be available. As data provided by the teachers is being evaluated, the principal can also discuss the results of the STaR Chart from the previous year. At this time, areas of strengths and weaknesses can be discussed.
Initial training is provided when new technology is placed in the classroom; however, according to the STaR Chart (three years in a row), professional development is a weak area for my campus (scored as developing in Key Area II: Educator Preparation and Development). When the Smart Boards were installed last year, an initial training was given to teachers in the form of a half day from two technology department members. The technology instructors showed different functions and aspects of the equipment; however, no further training has been offered. According to Mrs. Galloway, Curriculum Specialist (retired last year), “More training is definitely needed. We are not lacking the equipment, just lacking the knowledge to use it”. I asked Mrs. Sandefer (8th Grade Assistant Principal) if she knows if any technology training or professional development is planned and she said “the focus is getting prepared for the STAAR test, so at this time, we are not scheduling any professional development”.
The NETS*A Standard 4 mentioned in Video 3 (Week 3) pertain to “organizational leadership- every component of curriculum, assessment, and campus improvement should have a technology component”. The student acceptable use policy for my district is outdated. Students have access to the policy through the Student Code of Conduct manual (Appendix C). Certain sites that would benefit education are blocked for teachers and students. This area needs to be addressed and then bigger issues can be discussed, like the use of cell phones for educational purposes. One uncertainty is how to assess this new way of doing things. Also in video 3, the professors suggested that “we need to find new ways for outcome and process as well”. This in itself is intimidating. Teachers like assessments, how are we going to accurately measure student success?
Getting to interview two students gave me the chance to do what Cindy Cummings, a visiting Clinical Instructor of Technology, suggested in Video 4 (Week 3) “sit down with students, see how they are using technology at home, ask them the barriers to using technology at school”. The two students I interviewed agreed that technology is not used enough in the classroom. They confirmed that they use more technology outside of the classroom than in it. According to Prensky (2008), “Compared with students’ technology-infused lives outside of school, the traditional classroom is a somber place” (p. 40).
In summary, data needs to be shared with the staff members at all times: before school starts, during the school year, and at the end of a school year. Data can be taken from Eduphoria, AYP Reports, AEIS Reports, just to name a few. Teachers need to be provided initial training and on-going training especially concerning technology. Teachers need to be given professional development that caters to their specific needs (similar to differentiated instruction for students). The professional development opportunities need to be evaluated. Staff members were surveyed before school started as to what technological training they have received. They also need to be given an evaluation to fill out after each training they have received, so that improvements can be made.
.
-Abernathy K., Cummings C. , & Jenkins S. Instructional Leadeship: The technology link. Videos 3 and 4 from week 3. Retrieved at https://lamar.epiclms.net/resource/1459/web/welcome.htm?LoginPrefix=lamar&ReturnUrl=%2fLearn%2fHome.aspx
-Amarillo Independent School District (2011). Campus improvement plan. Retrieved from http://www.amaisd.org/
-Amarillo Independent School District (2011-2012). Plan for district improvement.. Retrieved from http://www.amaisd.org/
-Long-Range Plan for Technology (2006-2020). Instructional Materials and Educational Technology Division. Texas Education Agency. Retrieved from http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index2.aspx?id=5082&menu_id=2147483665
-Prensky, M. (2008). Turning on the lights. Educational Leadership, 65(6), 40-45.
-Texas STaR Chart. Campus chart. Retrieved from http://starchart.esc12.net/
