The Best Wordle

          title="Wordle: heather">
          src="http://www.wordle.net/thumb/wrdl/1399476/heather"
          alt="Wordle: heather"
          style="padding:4px;border:1px solid #ddd">

© 2009 Jonathan Feinberg

Terms of Use

The Constitution: My First Prezi

What a Difference a Day Makes!

     Tuned in for the second attempt at a web conference, and I am very happy with the experience. I felt respected and valued and I learned a great deal about technology integration, specifically about some new Web 2.0 tools I had not heard about before.

     There were quite a few questions about the LCE, ILD, and TK20, but they were fortunately deflected in favor of topics NOT answered by Dr. Cortez-Rucker. Off topic: I took my LCE back in February and was pleased to meet and chat with Dr. Rucker. It was a very positive experience and I was home by 2 PM (a three hour drive!) 

     Back the conference: Dr. Cummings was very adept at managing the crowd, and maintained an environment of mutual respect. She took control periodically to summarize or clarify, and I now have a better idea how 100 people can interact positively and productively.

     Some things I plan to investigate as a result of the conference: Jing, SuccessMakers, and Prezi. 

  

Technology Integration Professional Development Action Plan

The Texas STaR Chart is the starting point to assess progress and determine goals. Jan Schiff Elementary School opened in 2008 and currently has two years’ worth of data to evaluate. According to both years’ results, the school is strongest in Infrastructure for Technology, which is rated as Advanced Technology.  The remaining three domains were all rated as Developing Technology, and the weakest area is Teaching and Learning.

     While Jan Schiff Elementary has shown outstanding commitment to seamless integration in technology instruction, the growth has been somewhat static in the first domain, Teaching and Learning.  The administration has demonstrated a commitment to securing the necessary funding to provide infrastructure. To this end, the Principal and Assistant Principal have developed a strong, positive relationship with all stakeholders, including PTA, parents, and faculty members.

     While it appears that, to an extent, the static growth in Domain I may be in part due to the relatively new campus environment and forced turnover that occurred when Schiff students and teachers were moved to a newer campus in 2010. It must be addressed, however, that there should have been more growth in this area due to the availability of technology in all grade levels.

     It may be concluded, then, that professional development must be improved and increased in order to strengthen the instructional capacity of the classroom teachers. Teachers must demonstrate awareness of and familiarity with the TEKS for technology in all content areas.

     Teachers need professional development that increases awareness and willingness to seek out and use digital content in all academic areas. Hands-on professional development is needed that will improve student access to teacher-created web-based content. The training should be research-based and address the ever-changing digital equipment to which teachers have access. Professional development must also address the needs of new staff members who were hired after the acquisition and training for any digital equipment.  Appropriate professional development will provide teachers with opportunities and skills in which their students can communicate interactively, experience higher-level thinking, and consult with content experts in a digital setting.

Action	Responsible Parties	Timeline	Resources	Evaluation
Review STaR Chart Data, CIP to identify campus needs	Administration, Campus ITS, Classroom Teachers	April 2011	Data, Computer Lab and screen	Prioritize needs and determine primary focus
Technology Staff Development opportunities are posted on eLearning and in staff workroom	Dana Fish, Campus ITS	April-May 2011	eLearning	Teachers have access to professional development that is relevant to their content areas and accessible
Campus Professional Development Sessions	Dana Fish, Campus ITS; Jill Wolosonovich, Librarian; Corlette Hill, Education Tech Specialist	May-August 2011	eLearning; Atomic Learning; campus computer lab; district computer training center	Classroom teachers earn 6 or more technology hours toward the 14 hour Gold Standard required by the district
Campus Staff Development to familiarize teachers with the LRPT and NCLB requirements	Dana Fish	August 2011	Computer Lab, screen; Texas STaR Chart overview and refresher	Improvement in two or more domains of the STaR Chart rating. Two or more domains will be Advanced Tech and there will be measurable growth in all domains

Web Conference Experience

I attended my first mandatory web conference this evening. I am, in a word, disappointed. I entered the room twenty minutes early because of the large numbers of people participating. I saw that there were 99 people at one point, which is entirely too many for a productive conference. I am beginning to feel that I need to find a Masters' program that has fewer participants. This one has become entirely too unwieldy for quality assurance.

I sat back from my keyboard and watched the screen flash back ad forth from full text to webcam views, and back again. The text flashed by too quickly to really read, but from what I could ascertain, I was being reprimanded for my unprofessional conduct. I typed a few questions, but even that seemed wrong. The conference abruptly ended, and while I feel somewhat guilty for somehow not doing it correctly, I don't feel entirely responsible. I didn't clog up the board with any "Hey girl!" greetings and I didn't "e-play" with any icons. I attended in good faith and wasted some of the last hours of spring break that I should have spent with my children.


I am concerned that a technology course is so plagued with confusion and conflict. I have felt belittled by several of the communiques and am still baffled by some of the directions. Some of my colleagues followed the syllabus directions to the letter and then we all received a generic hand slap for not following directions. If this is a course that is still being designed, I would appreciate more assistance and fewer reprimands. It has never been my intention to annoy anyone, and I am sincerely giving this course 100% of my effort, to the detriment of my position at school and my family.


I sincerely want to meet the objectives of the course, but more than anything I just want it to be over. This is disappointing when so much time and money has gone into it. We have learned a great deal about the culture of a campus, and while this is not necessarily a goal of this particular course, I have learned a great deal about the culture of Lamar University. 

A National Plan?

The Draft National Educational Technology Plan is not quite as long as the Texas Long-Range Plan, but they borrow heavily from one another. The goals set forth in the draft plan are remarkably similar to those of the long range plan for the state of Texas. A major difference is the quantity of statistics in the National Plan draft, some of which are harrowing:

     “Of students who do graduate from high school, one third are unprepared for postsecondary education, forcing community colleges and four-year colleges and universities to devote precious time and resources to remedial work for incoming students.” (National Center for Education Statistics, 2003).

The draft plan is peppered with edgy new terms such as “collaboratories” –which evokes a scientific (or research-based) opportunity for 21^st learners to collaborate.

     In short, the national plan seeks to close the achievement gap for all learners by raising the number of college graduates from 39% to 60% by 2020.  The report explains relatively the same terms as the Texas plan; teaching, learning, assessment, and infrastructure are the key components.

     Not surprisingly yet conspicuously absent in the draft is clarification on how these lofty goals will be attained, since budget woes have constricted the growth of nearly every district in the state of Texas. If news sources are reliable, these budgetary crises are not limited to the Lone Star State. How then will these goals be funded and by whom? If these goals become mandates, it will be very interesting to see how monies are allocated in order to meet the recommendations of the report. If there are thirty children in my elementary classroom, will I be able to ensure equal access to them all? Will I even be there to lead these 21^st Century learners?

    

    

STAR Chart Report: Week 2 Assignment

Posted in partial fulfillment of requirements of EDLD 5352, Lamar University

S ta r chart report

View more presentations from cmmurat.

Progress Report on the Long-Range Plan

     The Progress Report on the Long-Range Plan for Technology, available online for anyone with good close-up vision and a few hours to spare, can be found at http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index2.aspx?id=5082&menu_id=2147483665. It offers a comprehensive view of the plan for bringing today’s schools into the 21^st century. The plan is an acknowledgement that students possess greater technology skills than their local school infrastructure can support. It is widely believed that improvements in technology have to be systemic and consistent in order to be effective, and the plan describes both the plan and its current status from September 2008 to August 2010. . 

     Written in two major sections, the progress report begins with descriptions of the four key areas of the Long Range Plan: Teaching and Learning; Educator Preparation and Development; Leadership, Administration, and Instructional Support; and Infrastructure, notably the four components of the Texas STaR chart. The second part sums up how the twenty regional service centers are meeting the recommendations of the Long-Range Plan.

     The first component of Teaching and Learning is the Texas STaR Chart, and the progress report details the strides made in this area. Technology grants have provided improvements for classroom teachers through integration of interactive lessons. Initiatives such as the Technology Immersion Project allow students to have access to increased opportunities to integrate technology into their learning.

     The section on Educator Preparation and Development also begins with STaR chart data with graphs. The NCLB legislation provided funding to improve teacher training and access to technology, and the standards of educator preparation are described.  Online training opportunities address the needs of teachers unable to commit to more fixed, traditional models of professional development. Programs such as the Intel® Teach Program and iTunes University are examples of such online offerings.

     Leadership, Administration, and Instructional Support and Infrastructure for Technology are the last sections in the report and each addresses STaR chart data. Specific information regarding broadband access and internet safety issues are features of this section.     

     The Progress Report demonstrates how the crucial resources for administrators, teachers, librarians, and students are being provided for Texas’ 21st Century classrooms.

Technology Assessments: Pros and Cons

    
     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.

Week One Ruminations

When information comes from a network, it is not always obvious where it came from, who wrote it, or why. This expands what it is to be a successful and responsible reader today. It means that part of reading is asking questions about what you are reading." (David Warlick,Literacy in the New Information Landscape.)

My 5th graders have spent the past week creating projects for a Creative Showcase video conference with another school. I was previewing some of their projects and was startled to find a photo of Ruby Bridges "as she looks today"; the photo is of a woman who is clearly in her eighties, which I am fairly certain Ruby Bridges is not. The students had already left so I tried to retrace their digital steps. It didn't take long. A cursory search of AP Images for "Ruby Bridges" brings up many photos, one of which isRuby Butler, an octagenarian who witnessed a lynching in the 1950's from a bridge.

The ten year olds who are savvy enough to create a movie on Moviemaker using imported photos from AP still need their "old school" digital immigrant teacher to be the guide on the side and remind them that whatever pops up on the screen isn't necessarily fact, and even if it is, it may not be relevant to the task.

We have been talking all year about the dangers of Wikipedia and its often false information, but I need to be more vigilant in monitoring their use of the "safe" and district-endorsed databases, because information, while readily available, must be questioned, not only for its accuracy, but its value to the objective. Because I teach reading comprehension, it is a lesson we include regularly: What is the author's purpose?

As for myself, I have begun to question information that comes from a network more thoroughly. Before committing to a course of action or route to a destination (of both the physical and academic sorts) I have to verify the validity of the information. Yahoo Maps are often exactly that--maps for the yahoos who trust them and have time to spare rerouting. Even Google Maps can have outdated satellite images and provide very convincing but false data. News sources can be biased just like their old yellow journalism print counterparts. Questioning truly is part of being a responsible reader.

Entering the Action Research Arena

Goal: Determine the effectiveness of classroom performance system technology when consistently utilized in instruction. Compare standardized test scores where the technology was and was not utilized.

 

ACTION STEPS	PERSON(S) RESPONSIBLE	TIMELINE	RESOURCES	EVALUATION
Survey teachers interested in utilizing the system	C. Murat	8/17/2010-8/30/2010	Attendance records for introductory training held 7/28/2010	Survey Monkey sent via email
Monitor usage of CPS™ system	C. Murat D. Fish	9/1/2010-5/25/2011	Sign-out sheets/logs	Survey Monkey sent via email; voting via Outlook
Compare Iowa Test of Basic Skills scores (ITBS™)	C. Murat	10/2010	ITBS scores from 2009 and 2010	Analysis of students' individual scores from 2009 to 2010; class comparisons
Compare Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) scores	C. Murat	5/26/2011-6/15/2011	Test data from 2009 and 2010	Analysis of students' individual scores from 2009 to 2010; class comparisons
Compile and publish results	C. Murat D. Fish M. Brewster	6/30/2011	School web site, PTA newsletter, blog	Conclusion on effectiveness of CPS™ technology

Getting It Together

We're getting there! The AR project has evolved slightly. The main focus will be determining whether sustained use of a new technology has a measurable impact on student learning. I will focus on Math and Reading scores on the ITBS and TAKS.

I will be sending out a brief questionnaire soon.

But first, a detour: I have to teach a staff development on our first day back!
It's how to incorporate the ELPS into your content area. I have materials and know pretty much what I am going to say. But yikes. The first day back? I need to find a way to incorporate it into my internship portfolio. Certainly going to put it in my Vita.

Full Speed Ahead

1. Foundation: I will track usage of a technology resource in the classroom setting and determine the effectiveness by comparing standardized test scores in two areas:
A) How are individual student scores affected by using the CPS™ system from the previous year?
B) Are test scores in classrooms in which the system is utilized consistently higher than those in which it is not utilized?
2. Analyzing Data: I will compare Iowa Test of Basic Skills scores from 2009 and 2010; I will analyze TAKS scores from 2009 and 2010.
3. Developing Deeper Understanding: It will be necessary to define terms when referring to “consistent usage”. I will also need to consider variables such as student health and attendance when comparing individual scores from the previous year to current results.
4. Engaging in Self-Reflection: Are there other factors which may be affecting the results of the study? Should faculty attendance be considered? Are the tests similar or have there been changes in format? Has the scoring system changed from 2010 to 2011?
5. Exploring Patterns: What emergent patterns exist regarding who is or is not utilizing the technology? Are teachers with 1-5 years experience more or less likely to utilize the technology?
6. Determining Direction: Will the analysis focus on Reading, Math, Science, or a combination? What are the advantages/disadvantages of limiting the direction?
7. Taking Action: If there is noticeable improvement where the technology has been consistently utilized, is this data compelling enough to promote more school wide use? Would improvement lead to more monies being dedicated to procurement of more such devices and training?
8. Sustaining improvement: The technology has existed for more than five years. What factors are needed to promote sustained usage of the tools and will newly-hired staff members have access to training?

The Plan Takes Shape

Jan Schiff Elementary’s PTA is purchasing a class set of the classroom response system, or “CPS” from eInstuction for each grade level. Schools have purchased such technology-based tools in the past with mixed results. The tools, while portable, have been utilized enthusiastically at first, but gradually gather dust on a shelf in a storage closet. The product has undergone an upgrade and has been introduced to a new staff. It is hoped that consistent implementation of CPS use will result in improved student learning. This leads to the action research question:
What percentage of the faculty consistently utilizes the classroom performance system and do the students using it have higher standardized test scores?
The student response pads, or “clickers” are “small, handheld devices that allow students to respond to questions asked verbally, on paper or on screen” and enable teachers to instantly assess comprehension. eInstruction makes the claim that the product is the most widely used student response system in education, and can be found in over 100,000 classrooms from K-12 and higher education classes. Other than anecdotal summaries, there does not seem to be hard data regarding the impact of the product on standardized test scores.

Week Two Realizations

My principal has weighed in on my three possible topics, and she would like for me to pursue choice #2: How does the new eInstruction technology improve reading instruction? What is the percentage of teacher buy-in?
Stay tuned for these and other "wonderings". There is a not-actually-mandatory teacher meeting on Wednesday at 11:30, and I am "wondering" how many teachers will actually show up. So many teachers don't, won't, or can't check their school email, so it will be interesting. While I am there, I plan to nab one of my new NEO2 keyboards so I can start fiddling with it and learn all its intricacies.

Moving Along

I have had to identify three possible topics for research. This is what I have so far:


1) I would like to chart the effectiveness of our bullying policy in its 2nd year at my school. I'd track the number of incidents documented and determine if the number is decreasing from the previous year. I would utilize anecdotal information from teachers and students. This would determine the impact of the policy and give insight that could lead to improving the policy.

2) My school is about to purchase eInstruction's classroom performance system (CPS or "clickers"). I recently received a grant for the NEO2 wireless keyboards. I want to see how these two technologies can be used together and I would track how many other teachers utilize this technology and the impact on reading and writing scores.

3) I would like to know how absenteeism and tardies correlate to student progress. Are students with above average absence/tardy rates scoring at or below average?

Beginning the Journey

Action research can be facilitated through blogging. Celebrities who don't tweet often blog. (Perhaps they have more to say?) Educators should utilize the blogging format because their constituents, or students, are digital natives and more likely to pay attention to this format. What is action research and why is it relevant? A departure from traditional research methods, AR focuses on the actual practitioners, or teachers, and their concerns and issues. Outside researchers traditionally brought in reforms and methods that may or may not have been relevant to the classroom. AR leaves behind the traditional, linear methods and incorporates a more cyclical approach. Inquiry is the beginning. What "wonderings" (Dana 2009) will lead to positive changes in the school environment? What questions, sometimes nagging ones, can be studied through inquiry and reflection, that might bring about these positive changes? I have chosen the social issue of bullying for the focus of my action research. There are plenty of nagging questions associated with this issue. Issues such as teacher motivation, student apathy, and professional development are also areas where AR can be beneficial, but I selected bullying because it is an issue that has not wavered in my twenty-plus years in the classroom. Bullies have found new methods, such as social networking and texting, but the foundations of bullying have remained consistent. I have been forced to sit through inservices related to the topic which have served no one but the presenter. A video featuring cartoon ants and no dialogue has made the rounds and received accolades from school counselors and administrators, but it merely baffles the real stakeholders, the students. I believe that inquiry and continual dialogue are the only ways to truly reveal the roots of bullying, and blogging is an effective route to begin this journey. Dana, Nancy Fichtman (2009). Leading With Passion and Knowledge: The Principal as Action Researcher. Thousand Oaks, CA; Corwin Press.