Web Conference Pt. 2

Today I was finally able to participate in a web conference after many unsuccessful attempts last week. There were a number of additional web conferences added so that more people had the opportunity to participate. The new conferences limited the number of participants to 25, which I think led to a more productive conference. In our conference, we started to talk about Web 2.0 tools and how to use them. Most of the participants had heard of or used blogs and podcasts. Some had used other tools like wikis or Wordle, but most people were not aware of these or how to use them. A question that came up was 'How many tools are there?' That is a difficult question to ask because many new tools are added daily! I have used blogs, podcasts, and wikis but I am always looking for new things to use, and I should remember to search for new tools regularly. Towards the end of the conference, most of the participants had questions about completing their internship portfolios. I did notice there were a lot of people who were about to take the 'Principal Internship' course, which is the final course. Since this course is only my 8th course out of the 12, the questions helped me to anticipate any confusion I may have as I get closer to the end of the program. Above all, it reminded me to stay up to date on my competency logs! I am very appreciate that new web conference times were added to this course. I find that I really enjoy conferencing as it gives me a chance to collaborate with people I wouldn't normally cross paths with, as well as get clarification on any questions I have. I look forward to conferencing again in the future!

Web Conference: EDLD 5352 Instructional Leadership

This evening I attended a web conference for my Instructional Leadership course. The short-lived conference was a reminder that sometimes technology does not always work as planned. The conference was supposed to last for one hour and the purpose was to discuss the readings and assignments from Week 4, as well as participate in discussion with our colleagues while using web conference hardware and software. Instead, the conference was ended by our instructor after 15 minutes and nothing was accomplished. This was mainly due to the fact that some users were unfamiliar with how to use the software and hardware, which caused problems when typing and reading responses. This was compounded by the fact that there were 100 participants in the conference. I have participated successfully in a web conference in my last course and it seemed to run better when there was a smaller number of participants. I also noticed a large number of participants were unsure of how to use the web conference software. Perhaps future conferences would benefit from a 'help sheet' posted to the discussion board, much like the sheet to help post a table to a blog.

Technology Integration Professional Development Action Plan

Technology Integration Professional Development Action Plan

When putting together a professional development plan, I used two primary sources to decide the greatest need on my campus. Our STaR Chart data from the 2009-2010 school year indicated that my campus had a great need in the area of Educator Preparation and Development. I want to address this area in my professional development plan. The other source I consulted was our Campus Improvement Plan. I was alarmed to realize that there was not very much detail as to how to use technology to improve learning and instruction. On the other hand, the district plan was very detailed. I would like to address this issue through my professional development plan for 2011-2012 school year. I have included a sample of four specific professional development sessions, though I know there are many more that we will create over the course of the summer.

Goal: To provide professional development to address areas of need identified by campus data and to define Campus Improvement Goals relating to Technology while ensuring goals align with the District Improvement Plan.

Action Steps	Person(s) Responsible	Timeline (Needed by)	Needed Resources	Evaluation
Form a Campus Technology Committee and plan a meeting schedule	Administrators, Staff Members	March 2011	Time	A committee made of school stakeholders is formed and a vision is established.
Create a campus-centered survey for teachers to assess technology proficiency	Technology Committee (members are Rachelle LeBlanc, Katie Turek, and Kimberly Kirkley)	April 2011	Time Computer Survey Monkey website	A survey is created and easily accessible online for teachers to take.
Review STaR Chart data, AEIS data, teacher survey, LoTI survey, Campus Improvement Plan, District Improvement Plan to identify campus needs	Technology Committee, Technology Facilitator, Administrators	April 2011	Time Access to campus data Access to district data	Data is examined and areas of need are identified for the campus. Needs are organized in order from greatest concern to least concern. Professional development session ideas are named.
Technology-oriented professional development sessions for both the campus and district for the 2011-2012 school year are scheduled and posted for staff	Administrators, Technology Committee, Technology Facilitator,	May 2011	Time Computers Campus needs assessment	A professional development schedule for the 2011-2012 school year is given to each teacher with over 30 hours available. Teachers are able to plan which courses they wish to take and/or research information on course subject matter for required sessions.
Scheduled professional development sessions for the campus are planned with student-centered learning as the focus	Assistant Principal, Technology Committee, Technology Facilitator	July 2011	Time Computers Internet access Technology resources such as websites, applications, hardware, and software	Professional development sessions are created and are learner-centered. Sessions reflect using technology to support and enhance curriculum and instruction.
Campus Professional Development Session: New Teacher Technology Training session	Kimberly Kirkley	August 2011 (before start of school year)	Time Computer Lab Internet access	New to Riddle teachers are familiarized with the technology available to them on the campus in regards to software, hardware, and websites. Teachers are taught how to use the Eduphoria and eSchool systems that the district uses on a daily basis.
Campus Professional Development Session: Using data to drive instruction	Assistant Principal	August 2011 (before start of school year)	Time Computer Lab Internet access	Teachers will learn how to use Aware data, AEIS data, and data from surveys. Teachers will gather and analyze data and learn how to use data to make decisions concerning instruction.
Campus Professional Development Session: Using Blogs and Wikis to enhance learning and instruction inside AND outside of the classroom	Katie Turek	August 2011 (before start of school year)	Time Computer Lab or classroom with laptops for each participant Internet access	Teachers are able to set up their own blogs and/or wikis to use in their classrooms for the upcoming school year. Teachers leave with an understanding of how to use these resources to support learning and instruction even when not in the classroom.
Campus Professional Development Session: Survey Says! Using survey tools in the classroom	Rachelle LeBlanc	August 2011 (before start of school year)	Time Computer Lab or classroom with laptops for each participant Internet access	Teachers are able to set up an account on a survey site such as Survey Monkey and are able to design a 'Getting to Know You' survey for students to take during the first week of school. Teachers leave session with ideas for using surveys for assessment, voting, parent communication, and more. Teachers leave session with ideas for students to use surveys in the classroom.
Campus Professional Development Session: Modern Presentations: Going beyond PowerPoint, Excel and Word	Technology Facilitator	August 2011 (before start of school year)	Time Digital Camera, Camcorder, or Smart Phone with either capability Computer Lab or classroom with laptops for each participant Internet access	Teachers learn how to use different technology tools to create presentations that move beyond slideshows or charts and graphs. Teachers will create a commercial, magazine ad, or radio commercial to communicate why technology should be used in the classroom.
Additional Campus Professional Development sessions based on needs analysis	Technology Committee, Technology Facilitator, Technology Specialist, Assistant Principal, Librarian	Ongoing through June 2012	Time Computers Internet access Technology resources such as websites, applications, hardware, and software	Teachers will attend both required and optional technology-related professional development sessions. Teachers will understand learning can happen anywhere and anytime with technology and can customize online lessons to teach units or courses. Teachers will use their knowledge to demonstrate SBEC Technology Application Standards during instruction.
Give campus-centered survey for teachers to assess technology proficiency (same survey from beginning of year)	Technology Committee	April 2012	Time Computer Survey Monkey website	Data will be collected and compared to data from the beginning of the year. Professional development will be considered successful if data shows growth in technology proficiency among staff members over the school year.
Reflect over year and meet to discuss next year's plan	Technology Committee Administrators Technology Facilitator	May 2012	Time	The new campus improvement plan will be compared to the current district improvement plan to check alignment. Professional development ideas will be gathered based on assessed needs from plans.

Evaluation for Technology Integration

Because I used information from both the campus STaR Chart and the Campus Improvement Plan, I will consult both to evaluate effectiveness of the action plan. I will not be able to fully evaluate the plan until the 2011-2012 STaR Chart is available, but I will be able to use the 2010-2011 STaR Chart to see if the trends from the previous year continue. In addition, the 2010-2011 STaR Chart data can be used to shape the Campus Improvement Plan for the 2011-2012 school year. The 2010-2011 Campus Improvement Plan will again be compared to the District Improvement Plan to see if the technology goals are in alignment. The 2010-2011 Campus Improvement Plan will also be examined to ensure that technology goals are included, and that a plan to integrate technology aligns with the Texas Long-Range Plan for Technology 2006-2020.

In addition to using these two sources of data, the school will use other surveys to evaluate the technology plan. After each professional development session, a survey will be emailed to the participants. There is already a plan similar to this for the district technology sessions. The district surveys must be taken for credit to given for a course, but each survey is identical and does not always fit the content. The campus surveys will be tailored to each professional development course so that the sessions can be evaluated individually. The technology facilitator and technology committee will see to it that the LoTi Digital Age Survey is taken by teachers each year to measure growth and assess needs. The technology committee will give a short technology proficiency survey at the beginning and end of each year to measure growth.

Additional data will come from walkthroughs, professional development sessions, and CBA data. The principal and assistant principal will be able to evaluate whether or not they have witnessed an increase in technology integrated into curriculum and instruction during evaluations. Professional development sessions will enable the technology facilitator and technology committee to showcase technology projects from teachers throughout the campus. CBA data will be used and compared to lesson plans to determine whether data is being used to drive instruction. All of these methods will continue to be monitored throughout the school year.

Technology Integration Organizational Chart

Technology Integration Organizational Chart for Frisco I.S.D.

Responsibilities relating to Technology:

School Board: The school board is the district's policy-making body. During board meetings, district policies concerning technology can be changed or updated, and budgets can be allocated for technology resources. The school board communicates their decisions to the superintendent.

Superintendent: The superintendent represents the district in many ways. The position must look in the best interest of the students, campuses, and multiple stakeholders to ensure that student achievement is always improving while the district makes the necessary changes to keep up with the advances made in the field of technology. The superintendent is instrumental in creating a vision for the district regarding technology and how it will be used to enhance student learning. The superintendent also oversees the creation of the district improvement plan.

Deputy Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction: This role supports the superintendant by implementing policies and directives from the school board and by supporting and monitoring the progress made toward the district technology vision. This is achieved by ensuring that the Technology TEKS are integrated into the district curriculum through the scope and sequence, resources and instructional materials, and professional development.

Executive Director of Technology: The executive director of technology creates the technology goals for the district improvement plan. This is accomplished by reflecting on the technology vision of the school board and the superintendent and establishing the necessary steps it will take to attain that vision. The executive director of technology also studies, evaluates, and as appropriate, recommends the adoption of new technology instruction materials, methods and programs and the purchase of computer hardware, software and other instructional technology tools for the district.

Director of Elementary Instruction: The Director of Elementary Instruction is responsible for making sure that elementary school principals have the resources needed to support student achievement. This position ensures that the district curriculum is being implemented in every campus and assesses the curriculum on a regular basis to ensure that appropriate changes are being made when necessary. In addition, the Director of Elementary Instruction reviews campus assessment data for evidence of TEKS mastery.

Coordinator of Elementary Instructional Technology: The Coordinator of Elementary Instructional Technology ensures that the Technology TEKS are being integrated into curriculum and instruction on all of the elementary campuses in the district. In our district, this position is responsible for the creation of a newsletter that highlights technology projects around the district and gives ideas for technology integration in the classroom. This newsletter is available to all district stakeholders. The Coordinator of Elementary Instructional Technology provides support to campus Technology Facilitators and provides them with resources.

Director of Technology Operation: This role helps to coordinate and set up all of the technology in the district, as well as maintaining the network and servers. The Director of Technology Operation provides support for the campus Technology Specialists when needed.

Principal: The principal ensures that all teachers are integrating technology into curriculum and instruction, and that the Technology TEKS are being taught on their campus. Any decisions concerning technology made in the district are communicated to the campus by the principal. The principal must ensure that the necessary steps to achieve the district improvement plan goals being made, and also that the campus improvement plan aligns to the goals of the district where technology is concerned. The principal works with the assistant principal, the technology facilitator, the technology specialist, and the teachers to ensure that budget funds are being used for technology to support and enhance learning on the campus.

Assistant Principal: The assistant principal assists the principal in ensuring technology is integrated into instruction. She also works with the technology facilitator to coordinate professional development for technology, using the STaR chart, AEIS data, and teacher surveys to help decide what needs the staff needs to meet. The assistant principal works with the principal to evaluate whether or not teachers are using technology in the classroom to meet the needs of the students.

Technology Facilitator: The technology facilitator provides technology-related resources and professional development over technology to teachers. This role is also responsible for working with teachers to plan and integrate technology into curriculum and instruction. The technology facilitator checks out iPods, cameras, and other technology to staff members as needed.

Technology Specialist: The technology specialist ensures all technology is working correctly. When a teacher has an operational problem, a help ticket is created to alert the technology specialist. In addition, the specialist role is responsible for setting up computer labs, technology-related projects such as video conferences, and ensuring that all systems are updated in a routine manner.

Teacher: Teachers are responsible for integrating technology into curriculum and instruction on a daily basis, and also ensuring their students master the Technology TEKS. The campus administration, technology facilitator, and technology specialist provide resources for teachers to achieve this. Teachers are also responsible for attending professional development sessions that will help them stay updated on technology and how to integrate it into curriculum and instruction.

Texas STaR Chart Presentation

Check out this SlideShare Presentation:

Texas STaR Chart Presentation

View more presentations from leblancr.

Blog Post 3: Reflection on the National Educational Technology Plan: Transforming American Education: Learning Powered by Technology

The National Education Technology Plan: Transforming American Education: Learning Powered by Technology describes how American education be transformed, and this must be accomplished by using technology to provide powerful learning experiences and assess student achievement in authentic ways. The plan outlines goals and recommendations in five areas: learning, assessment, teaching, infrastructure, and productivity. It also describes what people need to learn, how people need to learn, where and when people need to learn, and who needs to learn.

In the area of learning, the goals are for students to have engaging learning experiences both in and outside of school, and to prepare them to be active participants in a society that is connected around the world. To achieve this, learners must be engaged and empowered in their learning experiences. The idea is to use technology to enable students of any background, race, or gender to achieve by providing them individualized instruction.

For teaching, the goals are for educators to have technology support both individually and in teams. This technology will enable them to teach more effectively by connecting them to a vast library of resources. To achieve this, educators must work in teams instead of individually, and they must be provided access to technology tools at all times.

The greatest concern that I see with this plan is the current budget woes that are plaguing our nation at this point in time. I think that the area of infrastructure is one of the most important pieces of this plan. For all the rest of the pieces to fall in place, the infrastructure needs to exist to support it. Creating the infrastructure requires funds, and I am worried that technology will be one of the first things to but cut back.

Blog Post 2: Reflection on LRPT, 2006-2020

According to the 2010 Progress Report on the Long Range Plan for Technology, 2006-2020, it was designed to support "an engaging, relevant, and future-focused system of education for young Texas learners, prepare each student for success and productivity as a lifetime learner, a world-class communicator, a competitive and creative knowledge worker, and an engaged and contributing member of our emerging digital society" (Texas Education Agency, 2010). The progress report describes the strategies that the state has used to support this goal, as well as the progress that has been made so far.

One of the first things that has impressed me about the Long Range Plan for Technology is that the original plan actually began in 1988. Since then, there have been regular updates to the plan as advances in technology have been made and have impacted society. This communicates to me a sincere desire by the state for their plan to be successful and meaningful.

The progress report states that in the area of Teaching and Learning, progress has been made through implementation of legislation, grant funding, and technology programs (p. 9). The STaR Charts reinforce this assertion, with decreases in the classifications of Early and Developing Tech (though it is still the highest classification at 55%), and an increase in the classification of Advanced Tech to about 35%. The Target Tech appears to have grown as well, though not by a large amount. I believe this is an accurate assessment, and I have seen evidence of many of the programs being made available such as distance learning, interactive video conferences, electronic course programs, and increases in the amount of digital content available in the classroom.

In Educator and Teacher Development, the progress report shows evidence of how the necessary resources for schools are being provided. Again, the STaR chart shows an increase in the Advanced Tech classification to about 25%, but about 65% is still classified as Developing Tech. I have not seen as much evidence in this area on my campus, and in fact, our classification level dropped to Developing Tech last year.

For Leadership, Administration, and Instructional Support, the report shows progress through evidence of providing leaders with recommendations for the use of technologies and expectations for staff. The STaR Chart shows the greatest increase in the classification of Advanced Tech to over 50%, with a slight increase in Target Tech as well, to about 5%. The STaR Chart itself is evidence of the progress in this area, and is something that my campus has used for each year that I have taught there.

The last category, Infrastructure, is where I believe the most progress should have been made, and the highest classification is Advanced Tech (at almost 60%). There was an increase in the Target Tech classification as well. I see evidence of progress in this area through the various technology resources I have access through.

I beleive that progress has been made since 2006, and I am interested to see what further way this plan is updated as new advances in technology are made.