Technology Plans....Everyones got one!

Technology is an ever changing beast and our nation and state have tried set forth goals and guidelines for technology. I find that both plans have something to offer teachers. Technology is to be use to increase learning by both plans, however that is all they have in common. The national plan goes in to much more detail about technology use in education. I really appreciate that the national plan wants to have learning experiences outside of school. I believe that technology can connect teacher and student in ways that can keep learning an ongoing process. Incorporating technology in all content areas isn’t easy; however the national plan really does look at how to change that objective. I find it very interesting that both the national and state plan include a plan for technology used by teachers but that my district plan does not. Is a technology plan supposed to be only geared to technology for teaching and learning or is it also geared towards the productivity tools that teacher must use daily? I would expect a technology plan for a classroom to focus on what students would actually come in contact, however without an infrastructure there would be no technology in the classroom. “Develop a teaching force skilled in online instruction,” this is my favorite goal from the national plan. I feel like I am finally maybe getting to some online instruction. However, no one in my school or district is telling me that I have too. So we have these great plans, now what? If I were not in this program, I would not have seen these plans. I feel that currently in education we spend lots of time, energy, and money on ideas and plans that never make it to the classroom. When are these plans going to be truly implanted in schools?

Technology Implementation … changing education faster than a speeding BULLET!!

No matter how the technology in your classroom came to be, you have to know how to use it. Beyond just how the software works but how to really incorporate technology in to your engaging lessons. The only way teachers can really learn how to use new technologies is ongoing professional learning. What factors drive professional learning?

 “Results-driven” education has caused everyone in education to change the way they think. Professional learning is no different, however it is up to educational leadership to move teachers passed only using word processing and PowerPoint.

 “Systems approach” to the way technology is managed in schools is a must. If all the middle school classrooms in a school system have the same technology, then professional development could be organized at a district level. Keeping technology the same from room to room also make it easier for teachers to transition from room to room. If a teacher doesn’t have a regular classroom and floats from room to room, the rooms need to have the same technology for the teacher to teach effectively using technology or the teacher won’t use any technology. Professional learning can also be taken to the next level after teachers are initially trained.

Constructivist views of teaching influence how teachers teach. While I personally enjoy constructivist teaching I don’t want to “reinvent the wheel.” Technology needs to flow with what we are teaching and how the students can best utilize technology to grasp concepts and ideas. Constructivist teaching isn’t always the easiest to plan for making it more difficult for teachers. Not all teachers teach with a constructivist style, therefore making any professional learning using technology and constructivist lessons very difficult. 

In order for me to know what is “really” happening in my school, I would need to be able to observe other teachers in my school. I can really only speak to what is happening in my classroom and those directly around me. I have an idea of what others are doing on my grade level(which isn’t much), however as for the other grade levels I don’t know.  In middle school you don’t see too many teachers take students to a computer lab just to complete drill activities, however most of us post some sort of drill activity on our websites that students can use at home. It seems that most time students spend in front of a computer is research online or typing up papers from the research. However, in my classroom I try my best to cover concept 1. Currently working on a podcasting project, I am trying to incorporate new technology avenues that students might not know how to use while still wrapping up a unit. Concept 1 isn’t easy for teachers in content areas to cover, because we have so much content to cover that teaching students how to use a program can take too much time. This is where the technology teacher at a school is essential to the use of technology in the school. The technology teacher can assist academic teachers by preparing students for projects. When I started to read concept 2, I realized how important my students could be in creating the outline for the next project I hope to complete with my students. I want my students to create a “social network” for the periodic table of elements. After doing a quick poll to find out how many of my students have a facebook account, I quickly realized all of them in fact have facebook. Since they are already the experts in social networking, I am going to create a task force to help me create the guide lines for the project. I am excited to see what they come up with! Concept 2 really inspired me to work with my students in the planning stages more. While I am not ready to include all 75 of my students just yet, I think this is a great start in to tackling concept 2. Teachers are given the long list of concepts to be covers. It’s called STANDARDS!! It’s the nature of the beast we all call education. While I would much rather have just a few main ideas that we could explore together, that really isn’t my choice, therefore concept 3 I rarely see in my school or my classroom. I believe that all students need social time and concept 4 is rooted in students needing that interaction. Social interaction in the classroom isn’t the easiest activity to manage, however social interaction using technology is easier to manage. Teachers that use blogs, allow student to interact with the teacher and their peers. This is a great way for students to communicate where teachers can monitor. However, social interaction is very rarely the central part of classroom. In science, students do work more with their peers during a lab activity, but again it isn’t the central part of the classroom. I wish I could just present a problem and let my student tackle it; however I still feel I must guide them through the process of solving a problem. I wish I could say that concept 5 is present in my classroom however it definitely isn’t very often. I believe that all five of these concepts can’t be present simultaneously, however at times they are present.

 “Electronic technologies often not used in ways consistent with constructivist principles of learning, and no reason exists to believe they will be in the near future,”(Pepi & Scheurman, 1996) is a very powerful statement of current education that I agree and disagree with. Yes, it is difficult to incorporate technology in to constructivist learning, but not impossible. And it is happening now. Pepi & Scheurman made that statement over 14 years ago. I don’t believe that technology in constructivist learning has increase since 1996, however it isn’t were I would like it to be. I know that technology isn’t always used when it could, sometimes pencil and paper is just easier.

Bad teaching is always something that will be a problem in education. It is truly unfortunate, that adults that don’t really want to work, teach, and guide today’s youth are in classrooms. Technology can’t replace teachers, so I agree that taking a closer look at getting rid of bad teachers is a good idea, but I personally don’t see that happening. So why not focus on enhancing learning with fantastic technology?

Creighton is spot on here. I know that when I am told to come to a “learn to use a smart board” class I cringe. I don’t want to go learn something new that I won’t have help with later. Workshops are a great way to introduce something however, that doesn’t help the teacher much beyond that. Looking at the other side of this issue as well, when do teacher have time to practice and get feedback before actually trying something new in the classroom? I struggle to come up with ways to overcome this issue. The only way that I have found that works for me is to lead by example, and share my knowledge with others and support and encourage them as they being to implement new technology in their own classrooms.

The 12 descriptors for constructivist teachers are a great reminder as to what I should be doing in my classroom. Requiring students to elaborate responses is necessary to gain a full understanding of students’ knowledge. I love when I ask a student to explain and they look at me like “that’s the answer because you said so.” I do my best to make sure students can explain why something is so that they understand it beyond just knowing the answer.  Sometimes when I am teaching, I will ask a question and then state “don’t raise your hand just think about it.” This gives more students an opportunity to come up with the answer, and keeps those crazy arm waving students at bay for a few moments. Both of these descriptors, I believe most teachers are using all the time in their classrooms, however I don’t really see how these apply to the direct use of technology. They are just good teaching practices. Most of the other descriptors appear to line up with technology use very easily. Descriptor 1 is a challenge for me personally; I want students to have freedom to have autonomy and initiative on their own and I encourage it, however what do you do with the students that don’t care and a teacher isn’t going to make them care. No amount of technology is going to make a student have personal initiative. However, teachers can use technology when using constructivist strategies beyond simple drill activities. To be honest I don’t use some of these strategies at all, however after reading this I plan to start using more of them. How can schools best help teachers identify and use the 12 descriptors of constructivist learning?  Professional learning is one answer, and another answer is simple sharing the information with teachers. So much of this information was learned at one point or another sometimes just a reminder would be helpful to get teacher using new tricks in the classroom.

My initial reaction was there is no way anyone at my school would do this, especially if they already have the required PLUs needed to renew their teaching certificate or already have a masters. And that opinion didn’t really change. Maybe it’s where I am; or maybe that is the way teachers really are, I don’t know.  However, the value of this information and the implantation of a unit that includes the principle would be amazing for the students(teacher) in the long run. Teachers experiencing the constructivist model while learning themselves, allows teachers to better understand to help them implement the strategies in their own classroom. It always helps to experience something to truly understand its benefits. I would love to do a class like this. However, I have to be honest, unless it was a part of this masters program I wouldn’t have the time. If it was required by my school at this time, I would be extremely frustrated and overwhelmed by yet another staff development that would not ever be used.

Creighton’s concluding remarks are sadly true. I wish they weren’t. Technology is a wonderful thing that can help engage students of all different learning styles.

Doesn’t the saying go “the sage on the stage?” Creighton is right, as teachers we are actors and actresses and we all have a role to play. Those of us that are trail blazers, are willing to jump in feet first in to whatever new technology interests them. I believe that trail blazers are going to make a new path, however it is going to be the path they want, not necessarily a path others would or could follow. Although trail blazers make their own path they are willing to bring others along the journey with them. Those that are resisters, while they must have the mind set of “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it,” at some point they are going to have to make the choice to join the band wagon or become a saboteur. Resisters usually don’t have options either way. They tend to be the bulk of a school staff. As for those saboteurs, it is important to try and have them help you blaze new trails than watch from the valley. Saboteurs, don’t/won’t change their ways in the classroom unless mandated and even then it’s a stretch to get them on board. You never know when resisters or saboteurs are going to surface during the roll out of a new program.

It is hard for me to understand where resisters or saboteurs are coming from most of the time, however this year with the roll out of our new student information system….. I might have become a resister. Looking at the reasons for resistance and sabotage, it helped me understand why I had become a resister to the new student information system. I don’t like loss of control, excess of uncertainty, and all the new surprise that came with the new system. I had to change several of the ways I communicate with parents. It has been difficult coming up with new strategies and methods for something that was already working for me. Maybe if this system was helpful and more useful then the change wouldn’t have been meet with such a resistance from me. I, also, see how so many of the other reasons effect those that I work with. Change is hard.

Change is hard. So how do we get past the hard part? Teachers need a strong leader that incorporates all stakeholders. Teachers and other stakeholders are more likely to come on board with a new technology if they feel a part of what is happening and can express thoughts along the path of implementation. Also focus on how technology helps my educational goals and not just using technology for using technology. Finally, the more you educate teachers on technology the more technology will be used in today’s classrooms.

Creighton believes that leadership must manage and lead a technology program. It can’t be just one or the other. Creighton also believes that technology must be considered in all areas of the school improvement plan not just in isolation. I agree with Creighton. Implementing technology should be no different than any other educational initiative. Technology is necessary tool for success outside the classroom. Why does technology be difficult? Technology as a tool engages and enhances learning.  I agree that technology should be used in all content areas on a regular basis, however I can see that being met with major resistance (mainly because in public schools, we don’t have enough hardware). When students are expected to use the available technology regularly, proficiency will increase as well as student learning.

Technology use in today’s world is inevitable. School leaders cannot turn a blind eye to technology. Leadership must embrace technology and lead teachers during this ever changing technology era.  Just because someone doesn’t speak up doesn’t mean they don’t care. Sometimes I forget that others don’t always speak up, but that doesn’t mean they are indifferent to technology. The in-group and the out-group are all teachers that need in some way to use technology. Leaders need to build trusting relationships with faculty and staff in order to have staff follow their leadership as new technologies are integrated.  Technology changes daily and there is nothing we can do about it. There is not stopping technology development so everyone can catch up. Technology leaders know this, however they need to have a clear vision of how technology is going to impact learning and what educational goals technology is going to help meet.  I agree with Creighton, some technology can push education backwards. Teachers and students still need to interact in order for the use of technology to be successful. Leadership that doesn’t support of technology to move use forward instead of backwards is doing education a disserves. While technology can improve the dialogue between teachers and students, however I do believe that it can reduce effectiveness at times. For example, having students read and respond to the same questions, and then have everyone in the class respond. May not generate that many different responses; however having the students complete the same reading and responding to different thought provoking questions could create more dialogue.  Only meaningful responses should be included, forces and required ones don’t add to the educational experience. I have found in previous online classes that discussion boards have not added anything to the learning experience. (I don’t find that to be the case in this program)

To move beyond just improving achievement in reading, math, and science, which is where my school is focused, the school improvement plan should include technology. Technology is a valuable part of education today and school improvement plans cannot ignore that.  A new statement for my school can be as simple as “How can technology help to improve academic achievement in all content areas?”

My school’s main goal is to take student CRCT scores from level 2 to level 3. Ultimately, my school wants to be considered a high academic achieving school.  So how do we become the high academic achieving school? The SIP states that teachers will use technology to differentiate instruction, utilize personal response systems and use interactive websites to reach all learning styles. Finally, we will know we have achieved these goals when CRCT results come back and there is a higher percentage of level 3s than there were the pervious year. The example out of Texas gave me a clear and easy example to follow on how a SIP as well as technology should be intertwined during the planning stages. If technology helps achieve the goals of a SIP, then technology is being used affectively in the classroom.

At my school I would say there are a number of teachers that want to use new technologies to increase learning. However, the resistors out number the driving forces. So many teachers at my school have the “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it” attitudes. I believe the best way to have the resistors change their minds about technology is show them on an individual basis what it can do for them. While working with resistors one on one can be time consuming, it is so much better than a staff development meeting in the library where you can’t see what is being presented. Teachers cannot tune out one on one attention from another teacher that understands exactly where the resistor is coming from. Having a group of teachers or teacher committee would be the most efficient way to go about stream lining the message that goes out to the resistors. 

The order in which the process begins has no real affect on the outcome of the planning process. Whether, a planning committee starts with looking at where they want the school to go or what they currently have in house school improvement will be the final outcome.