At the start of each new school year, we get the email from the ITS reminding us to complete the STAR Chart. Periodically we get the odd survey or Survey Monkey link. It seems that we are often being asked to rate ourselves and our proficiency with technology. Some surveys are quite long and tedious. It begs the question, however: to what end do we gather all this data?
One must assess one's proficiency in order to determine needs and define goals. If the gathering of the data is simply to rate, though, it is not as likely to have buy-in from those being rated. Teachers are more motivated to answer accurately and thoroughly when there is even the possibility of follow-through and support post-survey. When professional development or new technology acquisitions indicate that the surveys were analyzed and given credence, not only does morale improve, but there will be a greater sense of ownership. The likelihood that these stakeholders will invest themselves in the changes resulting from the professional development or new technology purchases increases exponentially. “They heard us and did something about it!”
On the other hand, it is entirely possible to have too much data. Assessing proficiency without also addressing goals can lead to declining morale and teacher apathy towards technology. If teachers are repeatedly asked about their skills and even about their own personal technology goals, but the infrastructure and budget remain static or limited, teachers are less likely to participate effectively. On a campus where such assessments only lead to a rating, without possibility of improvement, it is only data for data’s sake. The information piles up without reason and buy-in is lost.
No comments:
Post a Comment