by: Katrina Powell
Student at Lamar University/Academic Partnership Graduate Program
Most of my internship was acquired through the Lamar Consolidated ISD within a few offices of Foster High School and the district IT CITS and Department.
The knowledge skills gained through my field experiences were eye- opening and at the same time awakened me to many professional areas in which I feel I could grow into a leader and help make differences or enhance changes that would create a more positive educational atmosphere for both faculty and students.
TF1A- I took part in an after school two hour session as an assistant to Jeff a CITS for the district to demonstrate the many uses and various tool of SMART Technology to approximately 50 teachers. The training was at the development center and each teacher was provided a lap top to work on during the training session. As Jeff conducted the training from a SMART board I monitored the room and assisted any faculty member that seemed to have difficulty or fell behind in the steps. I felt the training was a positively presented one since it was interactive and the teachers were able to mimic each step and then practice on their own as well.
TF1B – My role was to demonstrate two virtual science labs to the science department using a Frog Dissection program and a Coaster Creator (Physics) to help train a small group of teachers on how to reach various learners. I discussed how students were able to better see the organs and placement in the program prior to the actual dissection so the confusion was lessened in the classroom and it helped to prepare them with the tools necessary for the lab. The second tool was from the Jason Project and one that I used prior to teach potential and kinetic energy and shared with the teachers my test data that supported the knowledge gained from constructing this lab in the PC lab versed the conventional classroom lab of pipe foam and marbles.
TF-II A -- The biology department asked that I help create a unit lesson plan and share with teachers using technology strategies. I gave 3-5 examples for each. The lesson was designed with several tools which would reach diverse learners : ie Review Games, Individual Presentation by Students, and group and cooperative projects that required research and web 2.0 tools. I also created the lesson to be taught from the SMART boards in the classroom for more hands on student and teacher involvement. I was informed there was a lack of this by the campus instructional technology person.
My feedback from the lesson design was very positive and was going to be implemented into the unit.
TF-IIB – In February I assisted with the SMART NOTEBOOK for SMART Boards, Slates and Airlines training. Again this was an interactive training session in which it allowed me and the presenter the ability to demonstrate and then ask the faculty members to do practices using the same tools in which we presented. They learned how to group objects which was able to be used in math concepts, how to create interactive tables or pictures, etc. At the end of the training I asked teaches if they knew the features prior to training and most said no they did not; that they were too afraid to do much that power points from the SMART board for fear of looking dumb in front of their students. I feel they left with more confidence than they came with.
TF-IIC – The campus CITS came to me with a request for a lesson plan for Natural Selection since I had a background in science. The teacher was not using a lot of technology and needed some informational and educational websites to help her with her technology based lesson. I did the research of the specific lesson being taught and researched several websites. Once I looked at them and determined what they offered; I made suggestions of how to incorporate them in the lesson.
A few were suggestions were: nclark.net/biology; pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/educators/teachstuds/svideos.html
TF-II D-- While working with the campus curriculum coordinator, she asked if I could help create a training which could incorporate teachers using technology tools they have access to but rarely use. The training session was going to introduce the literacy of types of assessments and help open a door to the more in-depth training to come in the summer.
I modeled a plan to create the presentation in power point with each slide having a term and four answer choices to choose from. The following slide would have the correct definition to the term for follow up. We uploaded the presentation to SMART and synced the Smart Response answers in. During this time I was also researching various teacher resources that could be used as a district wide tool from both Google Apps and MS Live @ Edu.
TF-IIE -- During the previously mentioned Assessment Training; I asked that we use a pie chart during the response portion or (literacy quiz) to demonstrate one form of immediate feedback that can come from using any student response system in the classroom. I was able to show each teacher in the room how the class answered as a whole so not to point out anyone’s personal response and also explain that with this information not only does the student gain insight to whether or not they understood the material but the teacher can easily assess if a re-teach in necessary before moving on. All teachers seemed to agree it was a useful tool. I also explained that each response system calculated student data that could be charted for use within their DATA Teams in which they would be receiving more training for.
TF-IIF—I was invited to attend a small group meeting (PLC) to explain E-Learning and discuss four elements (Learner, Objectives, Methods of Teaching/Learning and Evaluation). I introduced a very simple formative assessment to the group that could easily be obtained and used to compare class data or individual student data from. The concept was called a “Ticket out the Door”; each student at the end of the class period was to answer 3-4 short answers (not multiple choice unless for a modification) about the days lesson. The teacher would collect them as they left the classroom on small slips of paper and then quickly assess formatively whether the next day teaching could move on or if review was necessary.
TF-IIIA -- A large project for me to work on for the district was looking at the current data servicing they had and research two other sources in which they would look at switching to after a presentation was made. For this portion I researched the Collaborative Tools and compared Google Apps and MS Live@EDU. Currently the school does their own in house email hosting and also collaborates through D2SC which is the program for lesson plan curriculum. Teachers are able to post remarks to lesson plans for other grade levels to see for cross curriculum support. However, my research showed that Google Apps offered a far better set of tools for teachers and students to share documents and collaborate through Google Docs (real -time), Google Sites team- managed web page), and Google Groups (archives for discussion, mail lists management). There is also an integration of apps with classes called Extensible API’s that will benefit all levels.
TF-IIIB.1 – Sat down and worked with Curriculum Coordinator on the SIOP training presentations and created rubrics to hand out and link to teacher resource page for them to use during their SIOP lesson planning.
During the training the rubrics were handed out and examples were presented to the teachers of how they could easily set up a lesson according to all criteria of SIOP to reach the students level of learning.
TF-IIIC – In my own classroom at the end of school year 2010 I sat up the Jason Project Virtual Roller Coaster lab- COASTER CREATOR in place of the typical hands on lab. I wanted to see how receptive the students were to understanding the simple terms of mass, velocity, and be able to differentiate between the two energies. We spent two days in the computer lab. Day one I did the tutorial with them and went through a couple of examples that were not successful coasters to show them how they can make changes to the formula to have a successful ride. By the end of day two each student had to submit a lab print out of either a successful run or at the end of class they printed out their final results of an unsuccessful run. I used those later on the ELMO to show the graphed differences in height, mass, velocity and we also identified the areas of P and K energy throughout the run. The classes loved the idea of the lab and my Common Assessment scores proved they retained the knowledge.
TF-IIID
In the 2010-11 school year my data team and and instructional coach had identified a small group of students that we felt were high risk and needed TAKS tutorial prep. After school classes were assigned to each teacher. I was in charge of the lesson over moon phases and eclipses. I used the GIZMO program to help the students understand the concept of how the moon phases appear as it revolves and rotates on its axis. The Gizmo presented each waxing and waning phases in a 3D video format that they could stop and replay in order to answer questions. As the teacher I simply had to facilitate the learning and reinforced the concepts. These students were successful after one day of tutorial with GIZMO but struggled from the three days of class lecture and an OREO cookie lab.
TF-IIIE -- While working at Foster High School I learned they had recently adopted a lesson plan program called D2SC from a neighboring district. However, it was not an easy task for the teacher to take their previously created plans and convert them over to the new. I researched possibilities of how this could occur and worked with the CITS (campus instructional technology specialist) on various strategies of campus and even district trainings to help convey the information. This is going to be a work in progress during the next school year however, I was happy to be a part of a small step. The associate principal also informed me at that time that the district had implemented this change and was not really pressuring the teachers yet to change because they had not developed the entire system and no one, even administrators had not been trained. I reflected on that information later that day and felt that as a district it was poor planning and as an associate principal I would not want to not have all the knowledge of a program that I was going to ask my staff to use. Just another note to self moment for me!
TF-IVA -- For this standard I created a literacy quiz and inserted it into a SMART Response format and then demonstrated to approximately 50 teachers. First, though before starting the training session I polled the room of 50. As they arrived I had them sign in and take a Response remote. I heard questions and comments that sparked in me the questions to ask; WHO HAS USED SMART RESPONSE BEFORE? WHO USES IT REGULARLY in THE CLASSROOM?, and WHO HAS ONLY SEEN IT USED OR USED IT AT TRAININGS? The numbers shocked me. 13 out of the 50 had used it and of those 13 only 4 had used it or seen it used at a training before. Each one of these teachers has all of the SMART Technology in their classrooms and on their computers and there are numerous cases of response remotes in the media room to check out. I was shocked to say the least and then decided this was going to be a Real “teachable moment”.
So I explained to them the training was to demonstrate how to set up a quick formative or summative assessment in the classroom. My example was formative with feedback. Each person was to click on the literacy question and then before I showed the correct answer we looked at the responses as a whole in pie chart formula. I made it anonymous but offered the information of how to assign a student # and response # so they can see their individual score without anyone else knowing who it was too. Then after we looked at the whole class information; I would show the correct answer and then go over the information if the percentage wrong was less than 90%. Overall the teachers were very receptive and felt it was easy to use and could see how the students would like the short quiz or test formats too.
TF-IVB – After spending time sitting in on a Data Team Meeting in the first week of my internship with the Curriculum Coordinator, I determined from our own discussion the department did not know how it was to work. She asked if I minded creating a training presentation for her to use at a later date on what DATA Teams should look like and what the role was. Since I had been apart of a very active DATA Team and that was my personal interest I was happy to. The presentation was to first paint a picture of what a team should look like. Typically, it would consist of a department or individuals that teach the same subjects within a department. I also presented the types of data (numbers) they should be looking at. This particular department meeting; the lead teacher told the Curriculum Coordinator that they did not discuss their numbers with each other; which was astonishing to us both. How can you truly assess if the students are gaining knowledge and why not share the data, especially if you are doing common assessments? So, she asked me to pull examples of how easy it was to input data and analyze it. I pulled from my own Excel spreadsheets and elaborated on who also should be involved in those meetings. This would include the instructional coach, coordinator, and a campus administrator and I listed how often the meetings should occur. My work was acceptable to her and because she and I saw this in the same light she said it saddened her to think these teachers were not doing what was best for the students.
TF-IVC – My mentor asked me to assist her with recreating a SIOP training presentation to enhance the technology side and to also come up with and create my own presentation for a COMMON FORMATIVE Training to be used now and added to in the summer for extended training. She however, said this need to be innovative and I am not savvy enough. I asked the campus CITS to assist me once the presentation was approved to upload to SMART due to me not having log in permissions during my internship. I created the presentation and created diagrams from worded resources to help convey the steps in an easy to understand format. As a classroom educator I know it becomes very boring when someone is just reading to you or you are asked to read everything presented. I wanted this 15 -20 slide presentation to be brief and interesting and something that teacher could take a print out of back to their classroom and refer to the models as needed without frustration.
Mrs. Bible approved the creativity and technology and then made a couple changes to suit her information being presented. I uploaded it to SMART and then we went to the training room to run through it the day before the staff development trainings. While she knew the basics of a SMART board I had to give her a few shortcuts and demonstrate for her how to run the presentation completely from the board. She was appreciative of my guidance and I appreciated being able to take that lead role.
TF-VA -- According to the LCID 2011-12 Campus Improvement Planning that I studied as part of my internship; certain technology required trainings would be implemented. From what I understand almost every campus and classroom is equipped with SMART Technology however, not everyone is trained to use it.
Objective 4 of the CIP states that there is to be integrated learning environments using technology. So I participated in one of those required trainings. Teachers gathered at the Staff Development Center/Technology Building and for two hours they were trained in detail by a CITS (Campus Instructional Technology Specialist). On this day of training the 25 plus teachers present in the 2 hr after school training were there to learn more about SMART Notebook. Each was provided laptops to work with as the instructor demonstrated and shared various tools. I had gone over the training with the CITS previously at my campus and he allowed me to go around the room during training and assist any teachers that were unable to keep up or seemed to get stuck. I enjoyed that aspect of the training but learned a great deal of how easy it is to teach technology by doing technology. I later sat down with the Technology Leader of the district and discussed how often teachers come to those trainings versus the online self training programs. He said they have a better turn out in the building because the online tutorials do not give them the opportunity to practice during the lesson. This is what I complained about in my old district when we had required technology trainings as well.
TF-V.B -- I need to survey teachers and learn just how many were not using the well provided technology in their classrooms but wanted a fair amount of data so I chose two large high schools to survey. First because they are teachers and are extremely busy I chose a simple five question survey they could be done via computer/email per Survey Monkey. I know how time consuming a long survey can be when you have many other irons in the fire. Most importantly my goal was to discover the number of those using the technology on a regular basis and those not. Then to find out the reason why. What I learned was that most of the teachers not using the various forms of technology felt that when they were trained with it at first it was just too brief; with no hands on training, and that the lack of content connections were made. After the survey’s were completed I spoke to a few teachers one day and told them my ideas as a school leader in this matter; of how its vital to take the time to train every content area in techniques and strategies that work for them with the technology resources they have. The ladies said “ we want to work under you then”. I was stunned by their response to me personally but not shocked that they too desire better formatted training. I took this information back to my CITS and shared with him my ideas. He said with budget cuts it was almost impossible to do it with the limited staff of CITS. I think this is where budgets need to be reassessed.
TF- V.C – After sitting in on a couple of data team meetings with the Campus Curriculum Instructor and basically seeing a lack of data or discussion of data I chose to share my personal Data Analysis Spreadsheet with her. The idea was to show her that its extremely easy to create such a document that the entire campus could use so that when the administration sit down to look over the data collected by each department; they all are similar enough to reduce confusion. I also expressed how they could place the template on a shared campus drive for each teacher and then each department could share their data spreadsheets through Google Docs, etc.
The sheet merely showed how they could do separate report styles from their SRS (student response systems), log in the formative or summative data, break it up by differentiated student groups (GT, MOD, 504, PRE-AP/AP, etc.).
I was asked to create a short presentation to speak about this at future campus training. I was happy to do so and know the information passed along will be considered in the future. I hope that it becomes district wide- because the information I received from teachers and administration was that the district announced the need for DATA TEAMS but the lack of training has prevented it from happening properly.
TF-V.D.1. -- For this part of my field study and standard I seem to feel that my explanation in a long term research project fit the mold. While researching many areas of pro/con for the district IT department on the switch over to Google Apps. One of the areas in which I looked at deeply was the “Anytime, Anywhere” browser-based accessibility for both teachers and students. This would allow them to work from home or school or anywhere for that matter that can access Google. The app allows for document sharing in real- time through specialized collaboration tools. I found this to be very similar to Google Docs but a school (teaching and learning based program). Many of the case studies of other schools using Google Apps in their districts noted the way this app has opened up door for students who are unable to attend school due to long term illness and other unusual circumstances. The number of students leaving to do home schooling was declining as well for those schools. I feel that personally it would allow me as a teacher to give my students immediate feedback on projects and allow me to work on them as they come in rather than all at once in the paper form. The students also benefit because its another form of feedback and communication for them to improve learning from.
TF- VI.A -- After all of the intensive hours of researching
the competitive new DATA Service Providers for the district, I also created a
small presentation on the Enterprise Management side of the products. Part of
what I was asked to create was a simple table showing the two products (Google
Apps and MS @EDU), to break down the current legal access limitations to the
newer accesses. Currently, there are no student email in the district because
of the type of server they use which can not house both student and staff. So
the new access would allow email for both as well as Blog set ups with access
at home for the students and teachers to use for collaborative
teaching/learning tool. In this part of the presentation I do not go into the
detail of the legal issues however, they are explained in a separate area and
suggestions of how each one of the Apps recommends the legal uses and
provisions be placed.
TF- VI.B --- As part of this ISTE standard I sat down and
discussed with the CITS and SPED program staff about how technology has been
integrated or not integrated into that particular program. I shared this
information with a couple of other staff members later and to my surprise they
were not aware of this program’s growth. Personally, if it pertained to how the
SPED students were able to learn their curriculum I would want to know about
it. I felt the district break down in communication here was a big let down.
Anyway, the program was purchased by grant money and it
allowed the SPED teachers to purchase SMART Tables for the classrooms of
students with profound learning disabilities. These students can not learn in
an inclusion classroom and need specialized curriculum. The tables allow for
touch screen accessibility and show them or demonstrate real- life learning
skills through pictures, videos etc. The students are able to interact with the
table and provide feedback to teachers. This is greatly used with students in
wheel chairs because of motor control issues and that are not able to respond
verbally.
Because of the success in the few schools and classrooms the
program is planning to expand the use of the SMART Tables to the ESL area and
create a pilot program for them as well.
TF- VI.C -- Speaking of ESL pilot programs; one that I came
across in my daily discussions and learning of SIPPA and its training.
Each campus and then district level administrators are
looking at using the SIPPA browser to create a pilot program which incorporates
more advanced strategies and technology for these ESL/ELL learners and the
teachers. Unfortunately, this is such a new plan in the early research stages
that I was unable to obtain details. However, I plan to look into the plan
again later in the next school year to see how far they have come. This
district has the funds and technology resources to create some great avenues
for ELL learners and they have a large population that would benefit greatly.
TF- VI.D -- While researching Google Apps. And MS @ EDU, for
the districts future plan to switch from purchased Data Server Providers to in
house; I was asked to break down in a small presentation the details of the
Privacy Policies and Protection of Faculty and Students. Because of the likes
of Google we looked more closely at its components first. I and the IT director
agree that even Google seemed easier to navigate and because of the services
being all FREE; the district would be more interested to hear that information
first. So, I looked at the top three most important aspects.
1. Restricted authorizations which allow the district to set
limits and restrict certain access for students that would be accessible for
staff.
2. Policies/Procedures of Customer Data would provide the
district to incorporate or adapt Google’s own policies into their own.
3. Email filters which would only allow school- only
sharing)
I can tell you that of the three 1 and 3 were the easiest to
comprehend. I think #2 is going to take people at higher levels than myself to
sift through those policies and such to make sure they align to what the
district wants. However, #3 was most impressive because this cut down on staff
generating emails outside of campus/district from the “School Email server and
students as well. I see where this helps in numerous ways. First, it filters
the amount of SPAM and personal emails flooding the server and keeps all staff
email accounts professional for the most part. However, one downside I see
immediately would be having other instructional institutions or companies
contacting a teacher could be an issue. We all know every time you sign up for
an instructional course or account to access materials they need your school
email.
The other good side pertaining to student email would be the
safety of the students and also if there were ever any reason to check student
accounts they can access those emails and track them through students/schools.
TF-VI.E -- In my old district at the jr. high level I was on
the committee to help open up our computer to the community of ESL/ELL and
other families of students with the need to access internet. Most commonly
these families did not own a computer or could not afford the internet service
to access their student grades, email teachers, access teacher pages to keep up
with assignments, etc. So our school began the first “outreach”. One night a
week the lab was open after school hours til 7PM for parents and students to
use. Teachers like me were asked to be there to monitor the use and help when
needed. Most of the time the students did their homework and parents checked on
grades.
I took this idea and presented it to my campus mentors and
CITS. They like the idea and felt it was good but I explained one of my
concerns was that my previous district lacked making each family go through any
type of User Policy/ Guideline Class and suggested that be a top priority if
they were to implement such a program too.
The whole idea is to provide low – socioeconomically
disadvantaged families/students similar or same opportunities for successful
learning outcomes.
TF- VII.A -- The district IT Coordinator asked me to look at
researching and presenting a proposal to the district for a future move from
their current Data Service Plan of using multiple providers to using one single
provider and running all student and teacher email accounts, collaborative talk
accounts, cloud storage, and staff technology training in- house under the one
Data Server. To get stated on the project my first areas of interest were to
look into the current uses of Web Locker, Edmodo to see if they were compatible,
and most importantly the E-rate funding the district was given in the past. From
the information presented to me currently 67% of the district is at a Tier 1
and this summer all the contracts were coming due to however they had already
presented their cost based on last year to FCC.
After about 7 hours of research I found that the programs
they were wanting to keep and run along with the new system were compatible and
not only would the E-rate funding not affect the crossover cost but I also
learned that this particular district was able to save a large sum of their
budget from the previous two years when other districts had to lay off
employees. So the technology department was not going to lack funding for the
extra IT trainings and hire out work to be done when the time came to change systems.
TF-VII.B.—During a visit to another high school where I was
able to shadow a CITS, I was able to ask him to walk me through the details of
the campus vs. district purchasing of various equipment and how their Distance
Learning Software/hardware were purchased. I had to rely on his data because it
seemed that the person that had been with the distance learning
program/purchasing recently retired and as a way to save more money the
district said we can just not fill this position and allow a certain few CITS
to cover the duties.
I don’t think in hindsight this was in the district’s best
interest because the CITS carry enough on their plates to have to cover the
intense program details of Distance Learning at four high schools. However,
this is merely an observation and opinion on my part.
In my discussion with Mr. Peterson, walked me through the
how the process of purchasing has changed in recent years to a more complex
process. It seems that when any equipment; especially surrounding the distance
learning classrooms was needed the teacher would simply submit a work order to
the campus CITS. He or she would verify the need and communicate whether or not
the district had the item(s) or if an order was necessary. Once an order was
determined; the CITS would contact then, two local vendors that provided the
district with excellent service and a reasonable discount. The P.O was created
by accounts payable and then the equipment was shipped directly to the campus
in need and delivered and set up by the CITS. This entire process usually took
no more than 5 days from start to finish. He then went into an example of a
recent purchase process for new viewing media equipment for the high school we
were at that day. First the email from the teacher to CITS still happens,
however, now the process changes to go directly through accounts R/P. They
create the work order, research from non-local vendors and usually don’t use
the best cost; which can take days to do. Once they find a vendor and place
order and pay with P.O; the order ships to a central location in the district
where communication has broken down causing the equipment to sit for additional
48-72 hours before the CITS is notified. At that time then it is delivered to
its proper location and then installation happens by another department of IT
called (installers). He said the most recent purchase of a simple overhead
projector for a classroom took almost 5 weeks from start to finish. This not
only put the teacher out, the students struggle and most of all the IT
department takes the flack from everyone but yet they are not in control any
longer. He clearly does not agree with the changes to the process. I personally
see many areas of improvement too.
TF-VII.C. -- When my mentor Mrs. Bible asked me to help her
with a Common Formative Training at the campus level I jumped at the
opportunity. She also posed the idea that it needed to have some kind of recent
technology attached to it but something that was low budget because it was the
Spring and she was low. I asked her if
she felt comfortable with the SMART program and she said “to an extent” but if
you are good with it then you can do the presentation”.
We spent two days brainstorming the ideas of the Staff
Development Training and she explained that it should be an introductory
version to what was to come later in the summer. My suggestions after all the
resources were compiled was to introduce the terminology and some basic ideas and examples of what Common
Formative Assessment was but to use the Smart Response System as teachers would
in the classroom.
I compiled a brief version and presented it to her two days
later. Basically we did an introduction page and then decided there were 9
terms they needed to have complete understanding of before the summer and
concentrated on those. I took each slide and made it like a literacy quiz. A
slide with the term and four choices appeared for the teachers to click in
their answers and immediately after the last response the pie chart on the left
would reveal the overall % of correct answers. We chose that if it was less
than 99% correct we would go on to the next slide which was an explanation
(definition if you will) of the previous term.
Many of the teachers were not comfortable with the SMART
Response system and so it was also an opportunity to demonstrate to them
exactly how feedback to the class or students help in formative assessments and
assist the teacher in how they are presenting the material.
This was an eye opening three days for both she and I. Mrs.
Bible herself became very familiar and comfortable with using SMART during a
presentation and I was able to model my own skills and help lead the trainings.
TF - VIII.A. --- Another component to my district Data
Server Project was to look at the change over to Google Apps vs. MS Live @ Edu
; in terms of the Enterprise
management of Entry and Cost. I was nervous with this aspect of the project
because I was only given certain information pertaining to current cost; while
not being an actual employee of the district. I can understand their
limitations with me however; to truly compare I needed a base line to begin
from. When I clearly was not going to get that I then created my presentation
around the details of the cost of start up from nothing of the two very
different Service Programs. There were also the cost of adding on additional
firewalls and protective services if needed.
I took the position of Google Apps first because it seems
that 99% of what I found they offered in terms of what the district would need
was going to be free. The only cost would be sending their IT staff to various
training courses after they completed so many online tutorials. The other cost
would come from updating equipment and expanding bandwidth to house more
programs to run at the same time without interruption.
However, when it came to the MS program; there were several
small fees from ordering the initial software, then each individual program
such as social media connections, email, wiki /blog type programs were also
add-ons.
TF – VIII.B1. -- One more component to the district
presentation was the changes in the use of social media between teacher and
student. Currently the teachers are able to collaborate through EDMODO which is the equivalent of a school base Facebook page. The district Coordinator expressed to me that
his vision and the entire department’s vision was to open the doors of
collaboration up between teachers and students. Teachers today are not using
the current system much and the new version of lesson plan program they just
adopted (D2SC) from another local district almost mimics it; because teachers
have a designated place to post notes of the lesson and important statistical
information for cross curriculum collaboration.
However, in Google Apps we found that it allows the teacher
and students to open up a forum type discussion around specific Unit Lessons
and even allows a place for the teacher to communicate with the class as a
whole or one-on –one with students and parents. The student can submit parts of
an assignment and it can be looked over; feedback given and then possibly
graded on the program, but with confidentiality also conserved.
TF-VIII.C1. -- Throughout the months of my internship I was
invited to a few meetings; campus- based and after a couple of those meetings;
they called PLC’s and Data Meetings; I met with the campus curriculum
coordinator and Associate Principal to discuss their opinions of the team
collaborations. Mrs. Bible felt the school as a whole did not know what Data
teams were to look like and felt extended modeling and training needed to be in
place. Mrs. Barr on the other hand while agreeing with Mrs. Bible somewhat;
extended her opinion that it was the district’s fault. Her feeling and actual
words were, “if the administrators are not properly trained then how can we be
sure our staff are doing it correctly?” Good point, however something of an
excuse too. Here is my two cents. I did not word it that way to her but I did
ask if I could express my opinion. I was allowed to do so. I first asked why
they felt the district would subject the schools to certain criteria and place
demands on them to implement these changes without training the
administrators? The reply I was given
was vague. Basically, I understood it to be something they were pushing from
upper level but not implementing for another year or two. So my response was,
‘if that is the case then each semester trainings should be done via
department; since they are all different content areas on how their Data Team
and PLC meetings should look and what they purpose of these meetings are.’ I
also expressed later to Mrs. Bible and Mrs. Barr that I would be happy to come
back and assist with summer trainings. I presented the material I had created
from my prior experience and knowledge of these two areas in hopes that the
Assoc. Principal who is a retire- rehire would look closely at the reasons
their school isn’t meeting AYP this year. I felt a vision was there but that
not all of the administrators are working toward the same goal. This is not a
successful team.
TF- VIII.D. and E. – I
chose to combine these two reflections together because the information seems
to over lap each and similarities of the two parts of the presentation.
The final component of the District Technology Data Service
Plan was to create a “Feature Set” table as a summary of all the comparisons
and contrasting change over features between the Google Apps and MS Live @ EDU
providers. It was broken down very simple with each of the features offered
between the two and then X’s placed under the corresponding category name. I
also only listed the features in which I was told that need to change or be
added for the district’s change over.
For example, Email of staff and student, Collaboration,
Storage, User Rights, Access, Provisioning, etc.
For the most part both offered similar features however,
Google’s user ability was less complicated and the ways in which these areas
could improve teaching and learning and cost savings seemed to be expressed
more so in the case studies than when compared to Live @ Edu’s case studies.
Most of the school data I found showed the MS Data Service as great start up
and one that they could build on to as the district needed. Many small districts
liked MS however, in a district as large as LCISD with 20,000 + students and a
1,000 + teachers can’t afford to just start from scratch again. They need the
cost effective change over.
This is where VIII E. standard comes in to play. In the
feature set I also included a separate table to show the cost, barriers to
entry of the infrastructure, time (implementation, support and training, and
SIS components. The details showed again where Google Apps was far less of a
system that required less training for district IT staff, but it offered a
number of online self-help trouble shooting webinars and tutorials to be used
in house rather than having to pay for that outside support as with MS. Overall
the MS server would offer many of the familiar items that already were
available to the district computers like all of the MS office programs and
communication would still run through Outlook but LCISD was ready to look at
how they can be a district of the 21st Century and begin to access
more Web 2.0 tools without having to purchase more apps along the way. Google
seems to be the answer for them to do this for now. I hope that all of my
research and information provided them with the tools to make the best decision
for them at the right time.
No comments:
Post a Comment