Recent Changes

Teaching with technology is largely an issue of philosophy, rather than technical skills.
EDLD 5362
anything else. (Miles, 2010) My colleagues
The second assignment about social networks was something that I have used extensively for four or five years. I haven't had time to do much the last couple of years with expanded job responsibilities and this degree program. This assignment allowed me to review these tools and refresh myself on their usefulness.
I appreciated the opportunity to review student information systems in the third assignment. This was one of those aspects of educational technology that I haven't had the chance to explore much. I learned a lot about our information system, but the examination was very superficial. I couldn't tell you much about it today, beyond what I know from regular discussions with the technology staff that manage it.
Group interactions in the discussion boards are an important aspect to learning. I also had informal interaction with others from another cohort. These were more helpful to me.
CramlingtonLV, . (Producer). (2007). 20th century & 21st century teachers. [Web]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJYpsB3o0Uc
S. Miles (Personal communication, August 15, 2010)

Teaching with technology is largely an issue of philosophy, rather than technical skills.
EDLD 5362
The network systems management course was interesting. I often looked forward to the courses that required me to look at aspects of information technology that I haven't been able to explore much. The first assignment concerning how the Internet has affected education was interesting. I have been teaching for 19 years, and the teacher I interviewed has been teaching for 40 years or so, I believe. She said something that I have been trying to get across to teachers and my technology coach colleagues for a long time. The Internet has changed the classroom philosophically as much as anything else. My colleagues feel that they should just teach which buttons to push, but when teachers don't implement what they learn in training, they wonder why. The truth is that technology can't be implemented in education with the same philosophy as teachers have followed. Technology forces a student-centered classroom.
The final assignment was designed to bring everything together to apply to the school technology plan. My concept for the video hit a snag as I was putting it together, but the idea of applying that to real practice was sound. I work extensively with the instructional aspect of our technology plan regularly.
Group interactions in the discussion boards are an important aspect to learning. I also had informal interaction with others from another cohort. These were more helpful to me.
CramlingtonLV, . (Producer). (2007). 20th century & 21st century teachers. [Web]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJYpsB3o0Uc

Dr. Abernathy used this video in this course, but it is still the best one I could find. Students today are different. The world they are going to is different, so we have to teach differently.
EDLD 5306
Everything in this course is relevant to the work I do now. My job is to train teachers in the use of technology. The information about effective professional development has already been applied to the design of upcoming training sessions. The needs of the 21st century student and the 21st century worker are dominant themes in training sessions I am planning and collaborating in with others. The needs of our teachers, drives the training sessions that I am planning. The state long range plan for technology will be prominent as I write the outline for classes. I had been focused on web 2.0 technologies for a couple of years and had lost a bit of my focus on the TLRP for technology. This course helped to refocus my attention on that. The teaching and learning section of the Texas STaR chart will shape and describe course goals in my sessions. I will be using a lot of the ideas gained from the article about creating evaluations for courses. We design and redesign an annual self assessment each year for the teachers based on the Texas teacher STaR chart. This course helped to see how others interpreted the STaR chart. That has helped the last couple of years as we reassess the teacher self-assessment.
I completed all of the course assignments. Some of them were things that I had done before. The course assignments that involved blogs and wikis were not new to me. The blog was a small focus and I didn’t continue with that blog beyond the requirements of the assignment; primarily because I have three others that are on school district systems and the new one was more than I could juggle at the time. The wiki assignments titled E-Communication and Online Community as well as the Online Collaboration assignment, were more focused and I couldn’t adapt them to my other 4 wikis that I already maintain. I was a co-presenter and collaborator on another wiki designed closely to the assigned tasks, but these assignments gave me the opportunity to take on more of an organizer role than a collaborator role. It was interesting to view that experience from the different perspective. I didn’t do much on the wiki used in this course, but this did put me in the position to look at it from that new perspective which was an educational experience itself. Group collaboration was minimal, limited to interaction in the discussion boards. The two wiki assignments referenced above were designed to include participation from colleagues in Magnolia. My colleagues didn't participate in them.
I learned that a large part of the focus I have been working toward in my job has been in the right direction. I have explored many of the aspects of the web 2.0 environment and when I think I am ahead of the curve, something new pops up to remind me just how far behind I really am. I have also rejected many of the educational software concepts that have been developed, with a preference for technology that is used to produce products and solve problems. Many of the authors that were assigned mentioned the benefits of these educational tools and I am reconsidering the value of them. I am now more open to the benefits of a balanced technology program that allows for the use of educational software and the use of productivity software that helps create authentic products and solve real world problems.
Nesbitt, B.J. (Producer). (2007). A Vision of k-12 students today. [Web]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_A-ZVCjfWf8

EDLD 5306
I expected this course to give a general overview of things that a technology director would need to know. That would include a range of things from instructional practices, to budgeting, and even possibly to some knowledge of infrastructure. I believe the course helped me achieve most of that. I was glad to see a dominant focus in instructional practices. It is the teaching that the entire program should be built around and that was the predominant theme. Everything else is built into that goal. The focus was on the 21st century learner, and their needs and future has to be front and center of that.
EverythingEverything in this for classes. That wasn't new learning for me because I have been a technology coach for several years. I had
I had a certain amount of knowledge about the tools that our assignments were centered around. The part concerning building a collaborative community of learners using a wiki was interesting. I have done some of that but the fact that I didn’t get much participation from my instructional technology team members forced me to rely on my experience as a collaborator rather than stretch my knowledge and work as an organizer. I appreciated the use of web 2.0 tools in this course and feel that it helped me and many of the other participants.
I completed all of the course assignments. Some of them were things that I had done before. The course assignments that involved blogs and wikis were not new to me. The blog was a small focus and I didn’t continue with that blog beyond the requirements of the assignment; primarily because I have three others that are on school district systems and the new one was more than I could juggle at the time. The wiki assignments titled E-Communication and Online Community as well as the Online Collaboration assignment, were more focused and I couldn’t adapt them to my other 4 wikis that I already maintain. I was a co-presenter and collaborator on another wiki designed closely to the assigned tasks, but these assignments gave me the opportunity to take on more of an organizer role than a collaborator role. It was interesting to view that experience from the different perspective. I didn’t do much on the wiki used in this course, but this did put me in the position to look at it from that new perspective which was an educational experience itself. Group collaboration was minimal, limited to interaction in the discussion boards. The two wiki assignments referenced above were designed to include participation from colleagues in Magnolia. My colleagues didn't participate in them.

Cut at www.tubechop.com
EDLD 5333
The first assignmentassignment, analyzing Campus Need and Personal Vision, was about focused on. The second assignment, Mining for Data involved analysis of AEIS data to determine campus strengths and weaknesses. This data was completely new to me. I know that principals used AEIS data before, but I hadn't seen the reports before. I believe that a complete picture of the data is important and the more legitimate data that is available, the better. The third assignment, Targeting and Addressing a Need is something I do frequently concerning technology use rather than campus instructional purposes. The SMART goal concept gave some good guidance for goal setting, but I felt it was too restrictive. The fourth goal, Action Planning and Professional Growth were in line with my normal job. Relating it to the AYP and AEIS data was a new activity for me and I was able to gain greater insight to the needs of the campus through that activity. Again, that was extending my reach beyond the areas I have been able to practice. I also
We also discussed ways to get staff to buy into change plans and the principal's vision. Staff are the ultimate factor in a school's improvement and data is the ultimate measure of success. Sometimes an instructional leader needs to make the decisions, but often staff buy-in can be managed better through committee decisions that are generated by the membership of the committee. It is also best to have the committee members share the decisions with their own grade level or subject area teams. My next step in the process would be to determine the success of my efforts to improve. The team would also be asked to look over the data to identify any areas of weakness or potential problems. One thing I would like to do is consider multiple years of data to look for patterns in specific grade levels to determine areas of strength and weakness. Also to consider patterns on the same students from one grade to the next to look for patterns related to specific student groups. This would allow me the opportunity to determine which test score patterns may be related to particular student groups and which could be attributed to the teaching practices of their teachers. One of the problems of a single year snapshot of scores is that it is difficult to determine whether problems are related to a teaching deficiency and which are related to a particular class's weaknesses.

I expected this course to give a general overview of things that a technology director would need to know. That would include a range of things from instructional practices, to budgeting, and even possibly to some knowledge of infrastructure. I believe the course helped me achieve most of that. I was glad to see a dominant focus in instructional practices. It is the teaching that the entire program should be built around and that was the predominant theme. Everything else is built into that goal. The focus was on the 21st century learner, and their needs and future has to be front and center of that.
Everything in this course is relevant to the work I do now. My job is to train teachers in the use of technology. The information about effective professional development has already been applied to the design of upcoming training sessions. The needs of the 21st century student and the 21st century worker are dominant themes in training sessions I am planning and collaborating in with others. The needs of our teachers, drives the training sessions that I am planning. The state long range plan for technology will be prominent as I write the outline for classes. That wasn't new learning for me because I have been a technology coach for several years. I had been focused on web 2.0 technologies for a couple of years and had lost a bit of my focus on the TLRP for technology. This course helped to refocus my attention on that. The teaching and learning section of the Texas STaR chart will shape and describe course goals in my sessions. I will be using a lot of the ideas gained from the article about creating evaluations for courses. We design and redesign an annual self assessment each year for the teachers based on the Texas teacher STaR chart. This course helped to see how others interpreted the STaR chart. That has helped the last couple of years as we reassess the teacher self-assessment.
participation from currentmy instructional technology team members allowedforced me to 2.0 tools in this course and feel wiki assignments titled E-Communication and Online Community as well as the Online Collaboration assignment, were more experience itself. Group collaboration was minimal, limited to interaction in the discussion boards. The two wiki assignments referenced above were designed to include participation from colleagues in Magnolia. My colleagues didn't participate in them.
I learned that a large part of the focus I have been working toward in my job has been in the right direction. I have explored many of the aspects of the web 2.0 environment and when I think I am ahead of the curve, something new pops up to remind me just how far behind I really am. I have also rejected many of the educational software concepts that have been developed, with a preference for technology that is used to produce products and solve problems. Many of the authors that were assigned mentioned the benefits of these educational tools and I am reconsidering the value of them. I am now more open to the benefits of a balanced technology program that allows for the use of educational software and the use of productivity software that helps create authentic products and solve real world problems.

I had the opportunity to work with a team to include technology into the district Language Arts curriculum guides. Standard two is about creating curriculum that is appropriate to a specific teaching unit. (Williamson, & Redish, 2009) This was a two day session and it was a bit frustrating. The curriculum writing team spent the first day being trained for the educational philosophy the director wanted them to follow and the format of the initial documents. This was a necessary task, but it left very little room for my participation in the process. I was also learning how the documents were being compiled and it was difficult to see how technology fit in. The teachers spent the second day writing the initial documents and never got to the point where technology fit in. I helped them to use the technology tools like Google Docs and the Word templates that were set up. Standard two is focused strongly on modeling the use and implementation of technology. (Williamson, & Redish, 2009) I wasn't able to get much actually placed in the planning documents, but we did model some technologies that were new to them. I had the chance to talk to some of the groups, but to my knowledge there was nothing written in the documents that referred to technology. It was an important first step, but not immediately productive. I'm certain that with time and continued effort this will pay dividends.
Prepare online training on Web 2.0 and collaboration for technology summer training
the concepts. Standard two discusses modeling methods and strategies for teaching. (Williamson, & Redish, 2009) We feel test it. Standard one involves the evaluation of training and training platforms. (Williamson, & Redish, 2009) The use of that platform for the online courses was a very big challenge, but it is easier for the teachers and ties directly into our professional development tracking system.
Present iPod pilot program to technology directors at the region service center and attend the technology directors conference
web filters. Standard five is about the ethical issues of technology. (Williamson, & Redish, 2009) There were and students. Evaluating technologies is an important part of a technology facilitators job. I appreciated the chance to see Project Share. It is
Armstrong, B. (Producer). (2007). Break away-ordinary people doing extraordinary things. [Web]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUT1ADtIHQU
Williamson, J, & Redish, T. (2009). ISTE's technology facilitation and leadership standards. Eugene, OR: International Society of Technology in Education.

I worked with a member of the iPod pilot team and my technology director to present our efforts to integrate iPod Touches into some fourth grade classrooms. We presented our rationale while the teacher told what they had done and how it worked. That session was presented twice, then we participated in a town hall style discussion about social networking in school. This was probably the most interesting part of the day as technology directors discussed the issues associated with allowing social networking tools through their web filters. There were some districts that have opened up their filter to allow social network sites. They didn't have any problems with student abuse of the privilege. They did have problems with teachers, however. We spent some time discussing who is responsible for those issues. Disciplinary issues are not the job of technology and just because technology was used doesn't change that. The idea that the web filter shouldn't be used for discipline was also discussed. This was interesting because we have been discussing ways to open the web filter up for a while. They also discussed Project Share which is a system for social networking, training, and electronic portfolios for Texas teachers and students. It is a very interesting system and one that is worth watching. We have already begin uploading teachers to the system.
Armstrong, B. (Producer). (2007). Break away-ordinary people doing extraordinary things. [Web]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUT1ADtIHQU
T. (2009). Iste'sISTE's technology facilitation
Prensky, M. (2001, October). Digital natives, digital immigrants. Retrieved from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky - Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants - Part1.pdf
Texas State Board of Educator Certification, Initials. (2008, April). Technology applications standards for all beginning teachers. Retrieved from http://www.sbec.state.tx.us/SBECOnline/standtest/standards/techapps_allbegtch.pdf

Each week after the principal meeting, I participated in the curriculum team meeting. This was a great opportunity for professional growth for me. I have been involved in instructional technology for 10 years and it tends to trap you in a position of troubleshooting and repair. Participating in the curriculum team meetings gave me the opportunity to extend my learning from technology to curriculum. ISTE standard 5 lists, "Develop an awareness of instructional design principles and their importance in developing hypermedia and multimedia products." (Williamson, & Redish, 2009) I believe that curriculum and instruction are the proper place for technology training, but most technology facilitators are hired for technology prowess rather than knowledge of instructional practices. We were also able to conduct informal training and help the curriculum team use technology. It also gave me the opportunity to extend our technology training into curriculum training. That was a major step forward in our district. We discussed many instructional tools to evaluate them and determine their instructional value. This was part of standard eight. (Williamson, & Redish, 2009) Participation in the curriculum meetings also opened the door to participate in curriculum writing sessions. Participating in the curriculum team activities has moved our instructional technology department forward a great deal.
Work with secondary Language Arts curriculum writing team to integrate technology into the district Language Arts curriculum guides
curriculum guides. Standard two is about creating curriculum that is appropriate to a specific teaching unit. (Williamson, & Redish, 2009) This was fit in. I helped them to use the technology tools like Google Docs and the Word templates that were set up. Standard two is focused strongly on modeling the use and implementation of technology. (Williamson, & Redish, 2009) I wasn't able to get much actually placed in the planning documents, but we did model some technologies that were new to them. I had
Prepare online training on Web 2.0 and collaboration for technology summer training
We decided to create all technology training as online courses. This makes training more convenient and effective. We will also offer face to face training days for those who prefer help in person. During the face to face training days, participants will still be completing the online course, but a technology coach will be available to help teach the concepts. We feel that it is very important to use this medium so our teachers can consider the benefits of online teaching with their students. I have created an online course before for the teacher training for the second year in our district. The system we used for these courses was not user friendly. It also caused a lot of issues. I spent a lot of time trying to get everything to work. The WYSIWYG didn't even have a way to create a live link. I spent a lot of time on this and finally got all of the modules to work. I had to go back and repair a number of them later and still have to check periodically. The system also doesn't work well with Mozilla Firefox. I had to keep switching from Internet Explorer to write the course and Firefox to test it.

Each week, I prepared a slideshow for a web conference with district administration and principals. Standard seven says, "Use distance and online learning facilities routinely." (Williamson, & Redish, 2009) That is just the tip of the iceberg because the weekly use of the web conference brought principals and district administrators into the discussion about policies and school needs. At the beginning of each week, I would remind the district administrators to send information for the meeting to me. As the year went on, I began to use Google Docs to create the slideshow and invited district administrators to add content themselves rather than sending me the information. On Wednesday each week, I download the slideshow and then upload it to Wimba, our web conference system. Then I sent an invitation to the principals. Then I managed the web conference each week. After each meeting I saved the archive and send that link to the meeting participants. This allows me to explore the possibilities and functionality of web conferences. I was also able to get district administrators to start using Google Docs. While trying to get them to see the possibilities of Google Docs, they didn't resisted it until it made one of their duties easier. Standard five includes modeling the use of technologies. (Williamson, & Redish, 2009) Modeling Google Docs has influenced our curriculum team a great deal.. They weren't interested in Google Docs when I first brought up the idea, but after a short time collaborating on the principal meeting slideshow, they have begun using Google Docs with their curriculum writing teams.
Curriculum team meeting
to curriculum. ISTE standard 5 lists, "Develop an awareness of instructional design principles and their importance in developing hypermedia and multimedia products." (Williamson, & Redish, 2009) I believe that curriculum and instruction are the proper place for technology training, but most technology facilitators are hired for technology prowess rather than knowledge of instructional practices. We were in our district since the technology should be a part of instructiondistrict. We discussed many instructional tools to evaluate them and curriculum.determine their instructional value. This was part of standard eight. (Williamson, & Redish, 2009) Participation in the curriculum meetings also opened
Work with secondary Language Arts curriculum writing team to integrate technology into the district Language Arts curriculum guides
I had the opportunity to work with a team to include technology into the district Language Arts curriculum guides. This was a two day session and it was a bit frustrating. The curriculum writing team spent the first day being trained for the educational philosophy the director wanted them to follow and the format of the initial documents. This was a necessary task, but it left very little room for my participation in the process. I was also learning how the documents were being compiled and it was difficult to see how technology fit in. The teachers spent the second day writing the initial documents and never got to the point where technology fit in. I had the chance to talk to some of the groups, but to my knowledge there was nothing written in the documents that referred to technology. It was an important first step, but not immediately productive. I'm certain that with time and continued effort this will pay dividends.