At the beginning of this course I was only focused upon passing and earning a M. E.d, but I have come to realize that that I am a natural leader who likes to learn new things, and want s to apply technology in my career again.
Taking the Keirsey Personality test at the beginning of this course made me accept my unique personality. The report revealed that I was a Rational Mastermind, and boy do I fit that profile. Before, I would be reluctant to lead because I thought that my personality was too different from my colleagues. But now I know that my personality is a unique gift.
My attitude toward technology has changed. Once upon a time I was very interested in technology, but I became frustrated with the ever-changing game. I became complacent. This course has renewed my interest and shown me a new approach to using technology in the classroom.
Taking this course has helped me to regain my confidence, regain my curiosity, and actually look forward to earning my M.Ed. so that I can lead my colleagues to a new 21st Century way of teaching.
Friday, December 16, 2011
Success is in the eye of the beholder
For the most part, yes, I was successful in carrying out the course assignments; however, some assignments were more successful than others. The most difficult week was week 2's assignments, and most discouraging part was that I spent the most time doing the assignment for the low score I received. The assignment had many elements: set up a blog, create 3 blogs from research, create a PowerPoint from research, imbed the PowerPoint, upload the PowerPoint, find a book to read, etc. Because I am not familiar with blogging or imbedding, I ran into obstacles and frustration in learning then applying the process. I became discouraged because I could not navigate as easily as I thought I should have. Also, because of the difficulty navigating, I was not able to reach the depth in connect that I wanted. But I did learn the mechanics through an activity, and I saw that it was a relevant way to learn a new skill.
No Relevance Here
While I was able to see the relevance of integrating digital technology and project based learning into my classroom, I did not see the relevance to certain sub-population of students that are prevalent at my district. Where I teach there are a lot of at-risk students who come from low socioeconomic backgrounds. There are a lot of these students who do not have computers, Internet access, or digital devices such as ipods or mp3s. These students have limited access, at school only. Therefore, I was not able to find a link with relevance to help to motivate these students to learn digitally. The article Real Projects in a Digital World points out that "students naturally turn to digital tools - which they have grown up using - to investigate, analyze, communicate, and connect" (Boss,S., & Krauss. J. (2007). However, it does not address those students who have limited access as children and progress to high school without gaining a strong enough background in technology to perform critical thinking. The article Bridge the Digital Divide for Educational Equity provides some ideas for students who have limited access because of disabilities, but not for students who are poor. Therefore I am still searching for a rationalization or a remedy to help poor students obtain the necessary hardware to want to gain the necessary 21st Century Skills.
Boss, S. & Krauss, J. (2007). Real projects in a digital world. Principal Leadership, 8(4), 22-26.
Mason, C.Y. & Dodds, R. (2005). Bridge the digital divide for educational equity. The Education Digest, 70(9), 25-27.
Boss, S. & Krauss, J. (2007). Real projects in a digital world. Principal Leadership, 8(4), 22-26.
Mason, C.Y. & Dodds, R. (2005). Bridge the digital divide for educational equity. The Education Digest, 70(9), 25-27.
Answers to questions right now, right now, right now. . .
For the past couple of years I had noticed a change in my students, and even mentioned my observation during a meeting with the administration. The meeting was about how to improve classroom management and student discipline. My students were causing disruptions through not being able to contain their questions. They needed the self gratification of knowing the answer to their question right then, and some students would even become defiant when I pointed out the disruption. The responses I received in the meeting were examples of what other teachers did in their classrooms. The main response was to tell the students to put their hand down and wait, because they need to learn patience and self discipline. However, because of this course I have found a better answer. I have changed my perspective and approach on the way that I give instruction. The article, Real Projects in a Digital World, provides information that students must understand the relevance of instruction, whether it be directions or content. Therefore, giving students a task oriented assignment leads them to answer their own questions about information on the lower levels of bloom’s taxonomy and gain the confidence to seek clarification for higher levels, thus “creating experiences that satisfy diverse learning styles and learner dispositions” (Boss, S & Krauss, J. 2007). The reason for self gratification of knowledge is because “Digital Natives crave interactivity – an immediate response to their each and every action” (Prensky, M. 2001), which has been learned through the experiences in the digital world. Therefore, this class helped me to rationalize changes that I had already observed in my students; and adapt to their needs.
Boss, S., & Krauss, J. (2007). Real projects in a digital world, Principal Leadership, 8(4), 22-26.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants: Part2. On the Horizon, 9(6), 1-9.
Boss, S., & Krauss, J. (2007). Real projects in a digital world, Principal Leadership, 8(4), 22-26.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants: Part2. On the Horizon, 9(6), 1-9.
Expectations, Outcomes, and Alignment
Last year I attended Manor New Tech High School’s Think Forward Institute and saw a new type of learning environment. Going through the program prompted me to think about how this type of classroom setting was relevant, adaptable, applicable, and would it last to serve our students or be just a passing educational fad. My expectations for this course were to answer some of the questions I had asked myself and I learned that, because of how rapidly the world of information has changed, using technology and digital resources is the best way to teach our students. Marc Prensky states that “the brain changes and reorganizes itself differently, based on the input it receives” (Prensky, 2001). This article on changes in the brain made me see that we are in a mental evolutionary development stage of human history. To know that current student’s brains process information differently and therefore have physiological differences in processing proves that school must adapt in order to teach students subject matter that they need to know. And because this evolutionary change is learned, not inherited through DNA, reinforced my perspective that the classroom be a place to foster learning.
Prensky,M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants: Part 2. On the Horizon , 9(6), 1-9.
Prensky,M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants: Part 2. On the Horizon , 9(6), 1-9.
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
webconference 11-29-11
The first web conference that I attended, ever, on November 29, 2011 was successful, though I did not know what to expect or how to participate, I learned about the structure of the program and, by the end, welcomed the participation.
When I purchased my webcam, I read and read on the boxes to see which one would be the best. There was an older lady standing beside me asking questions, and I was a little embarrassed that I knew next to nothing. However, my sixteen year old daughter had the knowledge while I just became confused with all the bells and whistles. My daughter, being part of the new digital learning generation, explained to both us the differences between the webcams. recalling this experience reinforces the learning that I have done in this class about Texas striving for a collaborative learning environment between teachers, students, and community. To finalize my choice, I remembered what the course syllabus said about a webcam, that is need not be an expensive one; and therefore I chose a simple webcam of a name brand that I was familiar with from work.
During the web conference Professor Borel gave an outline of the course. She informed us that our course consisted of an internship for leadership, which would result in our being eligible for the principal's exam. Our course would also provide us with eligibility for the technology exam as well. Being able to get a duel certification from an accredited online program will help me to reach my goal of being an administrator and a technical school, such as Manor New Tech High School, and continue to have a full time job teaching. A second fact that she told us about was how the courses cycled, and that we would eventually be participating in classes with other students who were at a different placement in the program. To me, this is important for more collaboration and gaining knowledge about future class structure.
Actually being able to put a face with the names that I have been seeing on the discussion boards helps the class to become personable. Interacting with these fellow students gave me encourage me to press further because I could see their questions, mistakes, apprehension, and even receive validation for my own mistakes. This puts a positive light on an isolated way of learning. I am definitely looking forward to my next web conference.
When I purchased my webcam, I read and read on the boxes to see which one would be the best. There was an older lady standing beside me asking questions, and I was a little embarrassed that I knew next to nothing. However, my sixteen year old daughter had the knowledge while I just became confused with all the bells and whistles. My daughter, being part of the new digital learning generation, explained to both us the differences between the webcams. recalling this experience reinforces the learning that I have done in this class about Texas striving for a collaborative learning environment between teachers, students, and community. To finalize my choice, I remembered what the course syllabus said about a webcam, that is need not be an expensive one; and therefore I chose a simple webcam of a name brand that I was familiar with from work.
During the web conference Professor Borel gave an outline of the course. She informed us that our course consisted of an internship for leadership, which would result in our being eligible for the principal's exam. Our course would also provide us with eligibility for the technology exam as well. Being able to get a duel certification from an accredited online program will help me to reach my goal of being an administrator and a technical school, such as Manor New Tech High School, and continue to have a full time job teaching. A second fact that she told us about was how the courses cycled, and that we would eventually be participating in classes with other students who were at a different placement in the program. To me, this is important for more collaboration and gaining knowledge about future class structure.
Actually being able to put a face with the names that I have been seeing on the discussion boards helps the class to become personable. Interacting with these fellow students gave me encourage me to press further because I could see their questions, mistakes, apprehension, and even receive validation for my own mistakes. This puts a positive light on an isolated way of learning. I am definitely looking forward to my next web conference.
Sunday, November 27, 2011
NETP: Teaching and Learning and Learning and Teaching and more Learning
The state of Texas has created a plan for integrating new and various forms of technologies into public schools. The state has a vision. And, while this could be a chicken or the egg scenario, the federal government has a technology plan as well. Both plans are similar in that they want to make changes to the way schools are operated, how students learn, and how teachers teach. The fundamentals of learning and teaching are changing from one of 'I say, you do,' to 'I facilitate, you perform and teach me too.'
Collaboratively. That is the style of education in the future, according to the National Education Technology Plan. The people in the room who facilitate learning do so from a positive position of empowering their student to become autonomous learners. These people will retain their title as teacher by being innovative with assigning students to perform selected tasks in selected, but engaging, environments. These environments will vary from individual to group settings; critical thinking to problem solving; and using various types of multimedia and digital resources. Teachers will also have the responsibility of directing students to new literacy skills of filtering information as relevant to the subject or applicable to the task.
Students will take control of their own learning by researching and performing tasks. Instead of being fed information from the teacher, then expected to be able to recall the information; students are led by competencies and concepts. These competencies and concepts are knowledge that is required by federal and state guidelines, such as the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS). Students are made aware of what is expected of them and thus take responsibility for acquiring what is necessary to pass state mandated standardized tests. The concepts are built around subjects, such as U.S. History; therefore integrating multiple levels of Bloom's Taxonomy.
Some issues that could arise from this new direction for school systems is feedback from the community. Parents and organizations and even old school educators often criticize and question the unknown. Parents who are not familiar with the new push to have students responsible for their own learning and critically question a teacher's role and system of grading, and to parents grades are very important. Organizations that contribute tutoring to help schools could see a drop in volunteers because of the rapidly growing distance between what school was and now is. The most important problematic issue is incorporating old style teachers to embrace and integrate the new way of teaching. Teachers are creatures of habit. There are many jokes that float around about teachers who refer to the laminated lesson plans year after year.
The great realization about the new collaborative classroom set by the National Education Technology Plan is that problematic issues can be solved through the same methods being facilitated in the classroom. Having parents and organizations become responsible for their own learning through the district facilitating resources. Administrators answering questions and sharing information on discussion boards can alleviate a parent's critical fear of the unknown. Teachers who are reluctant to throw away their laminated lesson plans can collaborate with fellow teachers and even their students . . .yes, their students. Teachers who hold onto using technology as a way to enhance record keeping and filing, can now reach out and take that model of collaboration to include the students. Thus classroom becomes a scientific system of learning, with experiments, research, and application; and therefore eliminating the need for professional development that is not grade level or subject relevant.
In conclusion, the National Education Technology Plan seeks to achieve collaboration through the responsibility of teacher and students to facilitate teaching and learning in the classroom.
Collaboratively. That is the style of education in the future, according to the National Education Technology Plan. The people in the room who facilitate learning do so from a positive position of empowering their student to become autonomous learners. These people will retain their title as teacher by being innovative with assigning students to perform selected tasks in selected, but engaging, environments. These environments will vary from individual to group settings; critical thinking to problem solving; and using various types of multimedia and digital resources. Teachers will also have the responsibility of directing students to new literacy skills of filtering information as relevant to the subject or applicable to the task.
Students will take control of their own learning by researching and performing tasks. Instead of being fed information from the teacher, then expected to be able to recall the information; students are led by competencies and concepts. These competencies and concepts are knowledge that is required by federal and state guidelines, such as the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS). Students are made aware of what is expected of them and thus take responsibility for acquiring what is necessary to pass state mandated standardized tests. The concepts are built around subjects, such as U.S. History; therefore integrating multiple levels of Bloom's Taxonomy.
Some issues that could arise from this new direction for school systems is feedback from the community. Parents and organizations and even old school educators often criticize and question the unknown. Parents who are not familiar with the new push to have students responsible for their own learning and critically question a teacher's role and system of grading, and to parents grades are very important. Organizations that contribute tutoring to help schools could see a drop in volunteers because of the rapidly growing distance between what school was and now is. The most important problematic issue is incorporating old style teachers to embrace and integrate the new way of teaching. Teachers are creatures of habit. There are many jokes that float around about teachers who refer to the laminated lesson plans year after year.
The great realization about the new collaborative classroom set by the National Education Technology Plan is that problematic issues can be solved through the same methods being facilitated in the classroom. Having parents and organizations become responsible for their own learning through the district facilitating resources. Administrators answering questions and sharing information on discussion boards can alleviate a parent's critical fear of the unknown. Teachers who are reluctant to throw away their laminated lesson plans can collaborate with fellow teachers and even their students . . .yes, their students. Teachers who hold onto using technology as a way to enhance record keeping and filing, can now reach out and take that model of collaboration to include the students. Thus classroom becomes a scientific system of learning, with experiments, research, and application; and therefore eliminating the need for professional development that is not grade level or subject relevant.
In conclusion, the National Education Technology Plan seeks to achieve collaboration through the responsibility of teacher and students to facilitate teaching and learning in the classroom.
Saturday, November 26, 2011
To Asses or not to Assess? that is the question.
In order for the Texas Long Range Plan to move students into becoming 21st Century Learners, the state and schools must be made aware of exactly what is happening in the classroom. The classic way to gather information and note application of knowledge is to take an assessment. While the current assessment, the STaR Chart, is a relevant way to identifying needs and directing attention to the state requirements, it does not give data on interdependence of the relationship between student and teacher in the classroom.
The STaR Chart divides assessment of school districts into different categories, for example Teaching and Learning. Teachers are given generic questions to answer about their rating on how technology is being taught in the classroom. This type of question and answer does not account for any skills that a student might have gained in the classroom through an activity, and therefore contributed to application of the state plan. Teacher and student relations in the classroom are the foundations for learning and should be included in the assessment.
In the article Adopt and adapt: shaping tech for the classroom, author Marc Prensky points out that teachers do not "trust their kids with technology that they demand extensive 'training' before they will try anything new." And while the STaR Chart does account for Educator Preparation & Development. its does not account for when a teacher feels comfortable enough with new technology to trust their students to use it appropriately. Teachers consider themselves to be the custodians of knowledge and therefore will no send out what they do not think that they can send out correctly. However, in a digital world, students are more familiar with the technology than the teacher thus causing a change in roles, which is uncomfortable to teachers who are digital immigrants.
Also, the STaR Chart does not take into consideration those teachers who see the assessment as irrelevant. Year after year teachers view the same needs going unaddressed and the same questions being asked with out consideration. Teachers are pressured in every direction by to meet new standards with the same textbooks, ancillaries, and shortages; not to mention pressure from parents and the community which contributes to teachers feeling "over burdened" (Prensky, 2005). However, the positive aspect of the assessment is that teachers can answer truthfully at no consequence of jeopardizing their job. Negative answers only help to identify needs, implement solutions, encourage reaching goals.
In conclusion, assessment for meeting technology standards is a a relevant way to help schools meet the Texas Long Range Plan for Technology; however, altering the assessment for unconventional alternatives could prove to be a positive means of identifying goals that are being met. Also, attitudes are not considered, which plays a big part in exchanging any information. Perhaps teacher evaluations should be considered in the assessment. Doing so would encourage teachers to try and implement new technology.
Prensky, M. (2005). Adopt and adapt: shaping tech for the classroom. Edutopia: The George Lucas Foundation
The STaR Chart divides assessment of school districts into different categories, for example Teaching and Learning. Teachers are given generic questions to answer about their rating on how technology is being taught in the classroom. This type of question and answer does not account for any skills that a student might have gained in the classroom through an activity, and therefore contributed to application of the state plan. Teacher and student relations in the classroom are the foundations for learning and should be included in the assessment.
In the article Adopt and adapt: shaping tech for the classroom, author Marc Prensky points out that teachers do not "trust their kids with technology that they demand extensive 'training' before they will try anything new." And while the STaR Chart does account for Educator Preparation & Development. its does not account for when a teacher feels comfortable enough with new technology to trust their students to use it appropriately. Teachers consider themselves to be the custodians of knowledge and therefore will no send out what they do not think that they can send out correctly. However, in a digital world, students are more familiar with the technology than the teacher thus causing a change in roles, which is uncomfortable to teachers who are digital immigrants.
Also, the STaR Chart does not take into consideration those teachers who see the assessment as irrelevant. Year after year teachers view the same needs going unaddressed and the same questions being asked with out consideration. Teachers are pressured in every direction by to meet new standards with the same textbooks, ancillaries, and shortages; not to mention pressure from parents and the community which contributes to teachers feeling "over burdened" (Prensky, 2005). However, the positive aspect of the assessment is that teachers can answer truthfully at no consequence of jeopardizing their job. Negative answers only help to identify needs, implement solutions, encourage reaching goals.
In conclusion, assessment for meeting technology standards is a a relevant way to help schools meet the Texas Long Range Plan for Technology; however, altering the assessment for unconventional alternatives could prove to be a positive means of identifying goals that are being met. Also, attitudes are not considered, which plays a big part in exchanging any information. Perhaps teacher evaluations should be considered in the assessment. Doing so would encourage teachers to try and implement new technology.
Prensky, M. (2005). Adopt and adapt: shaping tech for the classroom. Edutopia: The George Lucas Foundation
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)