An Introduction To The Texas S Ta R Chart
View more presentations from Sean Davis.
An Introduction To The Texas S Ta R Chart
View more presentations from Sean Davis.
domingo, 29 de noviembre de 2009
miércoles, 25 de noviembre de 2009
Week 2 assignment
From the Texas Technology Long Term Goals 2006-20, I decided to focus on the Educator Preparation and Development. I chose this section as I would like to learn more about an area that is so critical to the success of implementing appropriate technology into our schools. All teachers go through a preparation program that teaches them how to use technology with students. As the document suggest teachers should be motivated, responsible, and know how to prepare students for the 21st century by using appropriate technology. The document goes into detailed recommendations on Educator Preparation and Development for different areas of education. There are recommendations for the Texas Education Agency, The State Board for Educator Certification, regional education service centers, local education agencies, texas higher education, and parents, communities, and the private sector.
There has been quite a bit of progress in the area of Educator Preparation and Development. Looking back at the last 3 years from 2006-07, 2007-08, and 2008-09 the scores have been 13, 14, and 18 respectively. This is a star chart classification of Developing Tech, Developing Tech, and Advanced Tech respectively. As you can send the trend for this area is showing significant improvement.
However this is not the same trend and progress we see at the state level. For the 2007-08 school year the results for percentage of Texas schools in the area of Educator Preparation and Development where as follows: Early Tech- 5.4%, Developing Tech- 74.2%, Advanced Tech- 19.9%, and Target Tech- .6%. As you can see, the high majority (72%) of Texas schools fall into the Developing Tech area. If you compare the same data from the previous year (06-07), you would see that the percentage in these areas is roughly the same- Early Tech- 8.2%, Developing Tech- 74.0%, Advanced Tech- 17.0%, and Target Tech- .7%.
One recommendation would be to work on the vertical alignment of the TEKS. I would also push administrators to ensure integration of appropriate technology, and 100% of educators to meet the SBEC standards, as well as 30% or more of the budget allocated for professional development.
There has been quite a bit of progress in the area of Educator Preparation and Development. Looking back at the last 3 years from 2006-07, 2007-08, and 2008-09 the scores have been 13, 14, and 18 respectively. This is a star chart classification of Developing Tech, Developing Tech, and Advanced Tech respectively. As you can send the trend for this area is showing significant improvement.
However this is not the same trend and progress we see at the state level. For the 2007-08 school year the results for percentage of Texas schools in the area of Educator Preparation and Development where as follows: Early Tech- 5.4%, Developing Tech- 74.2%, Advanced Tech- 19.9%, and Target Tech- .6%. As you can see, the high majority (72%) of Texas schools fall into the Developing Tech area. If you compare the same data from the previous year (06-07), you would see that the percentage in these areas is roughly the same- Early Tech- 8.2%, Developing Tech- 74.0%, Advanced Tech- 17.0%, and Target Tech- .7%.
One recommendation would be to work on the vertical alignment of the TEKS. I would also push administrators to ensure integration of appropriate technology, and 100% of educators to meet the SBEC standards, as well as 30% or more of the budget allocated for professional development.
lunes, 23 de noviembre de 2009
PreK TEKS
After reading about the PreK TEKS, I was surprised to see what was required of Texas Preschoolers. They covered all of the basic computer introductory skills a Preschooler might need. They will have a basic introduction to navigating software programs, identifying and using different hardware components of the computer, experience with voice and sound recorders, touch screens, and CD Roms. They will also use software applications to create and express ideas. Preschoolers will also recognize that information is accessible through technology. After covering these objectives the preschooler will have a base to continue on his/her technological journey into elementary school.
Technology objectives are laid out in a spiraling or scaffolding curriculum. Many of the TEKS will be revisited and students will have multiple opportunities to master knowledge or skills. For example the objective of "using software applications to create and express ideas" might be accomplished in the early years with more basic software or with paint or word. Later in elementary school they will revisit this objective but with more advanced software or with programs such as Power Point, Movie Maker, or Publisher.
Technology objectives are laid out in a spiraling or scaffolding curriculum. Many of the TEKS will be revisited and students will have multiple opportunities to master knowledge or skills. For example the objective of "using software applications to create and express ideas" might be accomplished in the early years with more basic software or with paint or word. Later in elementary school they will revisit this objective but with more advanced software or with programs such as Power Point, Movie Maker, or Publisher.
Long Range Plan for Technolgy 2006-20
After reading the Long Range Plan for Technology I would like to comment on a few sections. The Vision is a general overview that discussed where the State of Texas would like to go with technology in the next 15 years. As educators we should extend our traditional boundaries of our concept of a school year, scholastic age, and geographic location. The technological advances will blurr the lines of these preconceived parameters. The state must provide the necessary technology and human infrastructure. Teachers must have access to technology, quality professional development, and time to implement learned strategies.
The US society will undergo drastic increases in the Hispanic population and should make technological adaptations where necessary. We have moved from an industrial society to a technological age. Technology and advanced communication have transformed the world into a global economy. India and China are graduating many more students from college and with technological degrees than the U.S.
The 21st century learner is extremely technology savvy. Teachers must change their style to accommodate this new student population. However, they should still teach reading and writing skills. Finally, they must incorporate more technology in their education.
Teachers have expressed their opinions as well. They have called out for more technology professional development. Most teachers use technology for communication and Internet. Most teachers have home computers with DSL, but they do not use it for work related issues (for this they use their work computers). All teachers agree their job is easier with technology, and it helps to have a schools website and laptops.
The next several sections of the document is broken down between Teaching and Learning, Educator Preparation and Development, Leadership Administration, and Instructional Support, and Infrastructure for Technology. In each section a long list of recommendations are listed subdivided between TEA, State Board of Educator Certification, Regional Education Service Centers, Local Education Agencies, Texas Higher Education, and Parents, Communities, and the Private Sector.
The last section I examined was the study of the needs to get where we want to go. One of the areas of need are teacher workstations, professional development, instruction and tech support, and a robust technological infrastructure. Other areas were leadership and support, strategies to measure progress, discounts for technological purchases, and software standards.
What I have learned in this document can assist me as an instructional leader in deciding where to prioritize needs at my school regarding technology. Once priorities and budget are set, then a structure can be put into place to make them become a reality.
The US society will undergo drastic increases in the Hispanic population and should make technological adaptations where necessary. We have moved from an industrial society to a technological age. Technology and advanced communication have transformed the world into a global economy. India and China are graduating many more students from college and with technological degrees than the U.S.
The 21st century learner is extremely technology savvy. Teachers must change their style to accommodate this new student population. However, they should still teach reading and writing skills. Finally, they must incorporate more technology in their education.
Teachers have expressed their opinions as well. They have called out for more technology professional development. Most teachers use technology for communication and Internet. Most teachers have home computers with DSL, but they do not use it for work related issues (for this they use their work computers). All teachers agree their job is easier with technology, and it helps to have a schools website and laptops.
The next several sections of the document is broken down between Teaching and Learning, Educator Preparation and Development, Leadership Administration, and Instructional Support, and Infrastructure for Technology. In each section a long list of recommendations are listed subdivided between TEA, State Board of Educator Certification, Regional Education Service Centers, Local Education Agencies, Texas Higher Education, and Parents, Communities, and the Private Sector.
The last section I examined was the study of the needs to get where we want to go. One of the areas of need are teacher workstations, professional development, instruction and tech support, and a robust technological infrastructure. Other areas were leadership and support, strategies to measure progress, discounts for technological purchases, and software standards.
What I have learned in this document can assist me as an instructional leader in deciding where to prioritize needs at my school regarding technology. Once priorities and budget are set, then a structure can be put into place to make them become a reality.
sábado, 21 de noviembre de 2009
Technology Assessments
I completed the Technology Applications Inventory as well as the SETDA assessment for teachers. Both of these were assessments to evaluate my personal technology abilities as well as technology in the school where I work. The results were eye opening as the results were not what I expected them to be; however I do agree with the results. I scored higher in areas that I didn’t see myself as having strengths as well as lower in other areas that I would not have imagined.
The Technology Applications Inventory is divided into Foundations, Information Acquisition, Solving Problems, and Communication. My score was as follows:
Domain
Total # of Questions
# of Yes Responses
# of No Responses
Foundations
18
13
5
Information Acquisition
10
7
3
Solving Problems
18
16
2
Communication
12
5
7
What surprised me was that on the Foundations, Information Acquisition, and Solving problems I had a high percentage of “yes” responses compared to “no” responses. In the Communication section I had a higher number of “no” responses to “yes” responses. This was surprising to me as before the assessment I believed that technology communication was a strong point for me.
The SETDA teachers’ survey highlighted some areas that I feel like myself and my school are lacking. Areas I highlighted were data collection, student engagement, technology use in planning, not using best practices, data analysis, educational software, using technology to improve parent and student involvement, and more professional development needed. One area where I do feel we are sufficient is use of word processing, spreadsheets, email, power point, and internet use.
The Technology Applications Inventory is divided into Foundations, Information Acquisition, Solving Problems, and Communication. My score was as follows:
Domain
Total # of Questions
# of Yes Responses
# of No Responses
Foundations
18
13
5
Information Acquisition
10
7
3
Solving Problems
18
16
2
Communication
12
5
7
What surprised me was that on the Foundations, Information Acquisition, and Solving problems I had a high percentage of “yes” responses compared to “no” responses. In the Communication section I had a higher number of “no” responses to “yes” responses. This was surprising to me as before the assessment I believed that technology communication was a strong point for me.
The SETDA teachers’ survey highlighted some areas that I feel like myself and my school are lacking. Areas I highlighted were data collection, student engagement, technology use in planning, not using best practices, data analysis, educational software, using technology to improve parent and student involvement, and more professional development needed. One area where I do feel we are sufficient is use of word processing, spreadsheets, email, power point, and internet use.
Suscribirse a:
Comentarios (Atom)