Since I had a major role in developing my district's current tech plan, part 1 was more or less a repeat of work I completed in the spring. I did learn that my team members are great and should be very valuable in developing a useable plan for me in the future.
Future School:
1 to 1
Constructivist based
Heavy use of Web 2.0 tools - lots of collaboration and student to student communication
The teacher having a less dominant role
Less emphasis on grades
Little Brother:
So far, this book is rather interesting to me since I used to be one of the people trying monitor what students are doing and trying to stay one step ahead.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Sunday, September 14, 2008
TQ #3
TQ #3
For you TQ#3, briefly describe (two paragraphs or so) what you learned from completing Part 1 of the Technology Plan. Each person's response will be different (this is an individual (not a group) assignment. Read and comment on your teammates' entries.
Response
Helping write part 1 of the Technology Plan was a familiar experience. As the person responsible for overseeing CSD's current plan, which is the district our project is based on, I have already completed this process just a short time ago. Ever feel like you've been there before? As I discussed in class, our existing plan is written in a manner to comply with state regulations. I don't see it as a functional plan that is very useful to me or the technology staff.
With this project, I think our team can start to build the plan I would like to have. Initially, I found myself editing much of what was written only to discard it and make relatively minor changes. From what I have seen already, I think our group will come up with a good plan without me steering it to where I have already gone. I am curious to see where we end up when this class is finished and how close it will match the current path of the district.
For you TQ#3, briefly describe (two paragraphs or so) what you learned from completing Part 1 of the Technology Plan. Each person's response will be different (this is an individual (not a group) assignment. Read and comment on your teammates' entries.
Response
Helping write part 1 of the Technology Plan was a familiar experience. As the person responsible for overseeing CSD's current plan, which is the district our project is based on, I have already completed this process just a short time ago. Ever feel like you've been there before? As I discussed in class, our existing plan is written in a manner to comply with state regulations. I don't see it as a functional plan that is very useful to me or the technology staff.
With this project, I think our team can start to build the plan I would like to have. Initially, I found myself editing much of what was written only to discard it and make relatively minor changes. From what I have seen already, I think our group will come up with a good plan without me steering it to where I have already gone. I am curious to see where we end up when this class is finished and how close it will match the current path of the district.
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Supplementary text
For my two books, I choose...
Disrupting Class:How Disruptive Innovation will Change the Way the World Learns
Little Brother
Disrupting Class:How Disruptive Innovation will Change the Way the World Learns
Little Brother
TQ#2
Thoughtful Question #2:You have completed Wenglinsky, and you have read the two executive summaries that suggest serious failures in a major national reading program and in the best math and reading software. In three-to-five paragraphs, use what you learned from Wenglinsky to interpret the findings of the two reports. Suggest one or more plausible reasons for the poor results presented in the reports.
After reading both of these studies, I was not at all surprised to find no significant results in either study. After all, aren't we used to seeing this result in studies measuring the impact of technology on the educational process? Now, after reading Wenglinsky, I feel I have a better understanding of why that happens. That is if you buy into his theory. Personally, I find his ideas intriguing and may help those of us in the field better understand technology's role.
I had difficulty applying Wenglinsky to the Reading First Impact study. After reading the executive summary, I learned the various components of instruction that were focused on but very little about any technology used to assist in the instruction of these components. After reading the King Middle School study, my feeling is that the technology was probably in there somewhere, but not the main focal point. I was pleased to see professional development was included, but there was little detail on the development program. From what I was able to get out of the summary, the program did not appear to be constructivist based at all. Taking all of these items into account, I would say according to Wenglinsky, the impact of the program suffered from the pedagogy.
In the second study, Effectiveness of Reading and Mathematics Software Products, I was pleased to see some technology products with familiar names. The first thing that came to mind as I read the software titles was that most of the titles were drill and kill. This immediately raised some flags for me when applying Wenglinsky. The programs are not much more than a place to put the students. As I look back to my own school district's use of some of these programs, only one is still in use.
It is no wonder we find the results that were reported. If we believe in Wenglinsky's ideas, we will keep seeing this same result until the field comes together on two things. First, when it comes to technology, the constructivist approach has a better chance of success. Second, we must focus on the training of our teachers to ensure they have the tools and knowledge needed to succeed. The latter is something that in my experience, is often overlooked.
After reading both of these studies, I was not at all surprised to find no significant results in either study. After all, aren't we used to seeing this result in studies measuring the impact of technology on the educational process? Now, after reading Wenglinsky, I feel I have a better understanding of why that happens. That is if you buy into his theory. Personally, I find his ideas intriguing and may help those of us in the field better understand technology's role.
I had difficulty applying Wenglinsky to the Reading First Impact study. After reading the executive summary, I learned the various components of instruction that were focused on but very little about any technology used to assist in the instruction of these components. After reading the King Middle School study, my feeling is that the technology was probably in there somewhere, but not the main focal point. I was pleased to see professional development was included, but there was little detail on the development program. From what I was able to get out of the summary, the program did not appear to be constructivist based at all. Taking all of these items into account, I would say according to Wenglinsky, the impact of the program suffered from the pedagogy.
In the second study, Effectiveness of Reading and Mathematics Software Products, I was pleased to see some technology products with familiar names. The first thing that came to mind as I read the software titles was that most of the titles were drill and kill. This immediately raised some flags for me when applying Wenglinsky. The programs are not much more than a place to put the students. As I look back to my own school district's use of some of these programs, only one is still in use.
It is no wonder we find the results that were reported. If we believe in Wenglinsky's ideas, we will keep seeing this same result until the field comes together on two things. First, when it comes to technology, the constructivist approach has a better chance of success. Second, we must focus on the training of our teachers to ensure they have the tools and knowledge needed to succeed. The latter is something that in my experience, is often overlooked.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
TQ #1
For my thoughtful question, I chose the Virginia success story. This story was interesting for me since I have been part of the Pennsylvania Classrooms for the Future grant in my district for the last three years. In addition, laptops are the big item in many districts today. While it is great to have them, I often wonder how well they are really used. As the reading pointed out, how the technology is used is more important than the technology itself.
In Henrico County, within a three year window, all high school students and staff, middle school students and staff, and elementary staff received laptops. In all, over 28,000 laptops were deployed. The article goes on to stress that the goal was to use the laptops in a constructivist approach. Also important, this was done in a district where the amount spent per pupil was over $500 dollars less than the state average. In a six year window, the percentage of high school and middle school students using the Internet jumped from 5% to 100%.
In addition, students can now take online courses such as advanced math and science or even SAT prep courses. This district not only had a plan to purchase laptops, they had a plan to use them. The resulting awards Henrico county has received show how important this is to implementing technology. Administrators and teachers need to understand this before introducing new technologies. That is the only way to make them successful.
In Henrico County, within a three year window, all high school students and staff, middle school students and staff, and elementary staff received laptops. In all, over 28,000 laptops were deployed. The article goes on to stress that the goal was to use the laptops in a constructivist approach. Also important, this was done in a district where the amount spent per pupil was over $500 dollars less than the state average. In a six year window, the percentage of high school and middle school students using the Internet jumped from 5% to 100%.
In addition, students can now take online courses such as advanced math and science or even SAT prep courses. This district not only had a plan to purchase laptops, they had a plan to use them. The resulting awards Henrico county has received show how important this is to implementing technology. Administrators and teachers need to understand this before introducing new technologies. That is the only way to make them successful.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)