EDTECH 542- Worked Example

Here's my screencast on setting up folders and a sharing process for students and teachers in a school using Google Apps for Ed.

EDTECH 542 week 2 learning log

Assignment: Post a reflection regarding your research this week on Project-Based Learning. What were you able to find? How do you think PBL will fit into your teaching style? Do you have an idea for a project? If so, begin articulating it now.

I have found that there is so much more information, models, and research supporting Project-Based Learning than there was when I first began my study of it a few years ago. This is very encouraging in light of other changes in education, including the implementation of Common Core, changes in standardized testing procedures, and the integration of technology in classrooms.  I believe that teachers that integrate PBL into their classrooms will produce students who will be better prepared for the challenges of college and career.  They will internalize the skills of perseverance, inquiry, and determination - skills that children have when young, but somehow are squelched by their education system as they grow older.  As Sir Ken Robinson said, the education system has anesthetized our children’s ability to be creative, and we as teachers need to find ways to “wake them up.”  Project-Based learning can (when done well) do that,  as it offers opportunities for students to use their innate creative skills to demonstrate learning.  It also allows students with different learning styles and learning challenges options to “show what they know.”  By design, PBL provides differentiation that traditional classroom teaching can not.

If I was currently teaching students, I believe PBLs would fit well into my teaching style.  Much of the work my students did in the past was of this style - unique creative outcomes, collaborative teamwork, some connection to students’ lives, reflection on learning.  

Because I will spend much of this coming year teaching teachers, my PBL for this class will address adult learners.  Specifically, I will create a project based on ISTE*T standards for promoting digital citizenship and developing digital age learning opportunities. My goal will be that teachers learn more about digital literacy resources so they can instruct their high school students how to be better digital citizens.  As my (new) school has just adopted a 1:1 tablet program, I also want this to be an opportunity to teach the teachers how to use some of the tools on their tablets.  

Technology Use Planning Overview

Technology use planning is the process of creating a near term school  technology "roadmap." This roadmap should have significant details, worded in terms of student learning, teacher knowledge gain, productivity improvements or other meaningful school-based goals,  for a period of approximately one year. Beyond that one year period,  higher level, less precise goals can also be outlined and documented.  The technology use plan needs to be reviewed frequently (perhaps as often as monthly, and at least quarterly), as technology is changing so rapidly that it is very easy to end up with a document that has many irrelevant, inappropriate, or other useless elements to it. The time horizon for 'detailed' plans should continue to extend out approximately one year, on an ongoing or rolling basis and will include components related to hardware (e.g., infrastructure, computers)  software (e.g., web based tools, computer programs) and training. The focus should always ultimately be on improving student learning in some meaningful (and hopefully measurable) way. 

 Input for the details of the plan need to be gathered from all appropriate constituents - teachers, students, parents, administrators, and perhaps community/business members, as well. Significant research regarding best practices, and "current ed tech thinking" needs to occur as well, as fact finding is critical to the viability - and success - of the plan. Visiting other schools, understanding thought leaders (via blogs, seminars, professional development events and so on),  the state of 'best' applications capabilities, etc. are all needed - at some level of detail - to start a viable plan. As the plan owners become more familiar with the edtech landscape, the reality of the plan's implementation at the school/district, and any budgetary implications of the plan, it can then be subsequently adjusted. It is clearly a living document, and people involved will need to understand that flexibility for all, and all being "light on their feet" are critical elements, as is a willingness to take on new ways of teaching that support the technology use plan. 

1. How might the new National Educational Technology Plan 2010 be an effective and powerful resource for technology use planning?

The National Educational Technology Plan from 2010 is an effective tool that, if followed, would significantly improve student effective use of technology in school, and beyond. The concept of technology powering education is an excellent (if difficult to achieve) vision.  In addition, I feel that the NETP would aid students in developing so called "21st Century Skills" - that is, Collaboration, Communication, Critical Thinking and Creativity skills. In my opinion, students gaining these skills is a primary driver for adding technology to the curriculum. Technology also enables students to truly "show what they know" about academic subject matter, so on that basis as well, the NETP makes a strong case for increased educational technology. Add in productivity gains for teachers and administrators, and "meeting students on their own turf" to better engage them, and the NETP is clearly a framework that should be used by all schools in the United States.

That said, technology does not come free, and barriers were identified that can make the plans essentially non-implementable given today's educational environment. Some of the most difficult barriers include resistance by teachers, as well as a  fairly profound lack of knowledge by many administrators AND teachers about "how to proceed." Most educators probably buy in conceptually that more technology in school is appropriate, but getting beyond the conceptual stage to actually doing something are two different things. That said, some sort of framework is certainly needed, given that the US does not have a true "Technology Curriculum" (some elements of tech do appear in the Common Core State Standards), the NETP is, as I noted, a good framework.

In particular, the breakdown into the five main focus points of  engaging and empowering learners, using technology to improve (appropriate, focused) assessment, preparing teachers to fully embrace and utilize tech to augment their curriculum and engage students,  ensuring that the infrastructure (not just hardware!) is effective, in place and functioning, and that some attention be paid to using technology to improve the productivity of education from the individual teacher up to the district/state level are all powerful and apprpriate goals. Many details within each goal were defined. There was almost too MUCH information conveyed; this is not something that could have easily been avoided, however some additional wordsmithing would have helped make it a more user-friendly and readable tool to use

2. Do you agree with See about tech use plans needing to be short, not long term? Why or why not?

I agree that detailed plans should not extend much beyond one year or so. The plans do, obviously, need to be revisited frequently (every 3-4 months), as noted by Mr. See: technology changes too rapidly to make longer range plans not very worth it. For that same reason, we must revisit the plans frequently and adjust as needed. I think that it is appropriate to craft longer-ranger, high level goals that are technology oriented, but not technology dependent.

I might add that I was VERY impressed and enjoyed John See's article, and I have already started to quote from it and utilize some of his thinking  with my principal about how to continue our ed tech integration at St. Leo the Great. His wording, logic, and forthright approach were much appreciated, and I plan to continue to circle back to and use his article.

It is perfectly appropriate to have, now, some sort of goal that speaks to cloud- based textbooks in place for (in my school's case) 3rd - 8th grades in 3 to 5 years. This would provide students with 24x7 access, include a wide array of internet-connected additional functionality to increase student learning and engagement, would provide some interesting notation/marking/sharing capability, as well as simply lightening their backpack burden. I'm pretty confident, by then, many/most of the issues still impeding this from easily becoming reality now will be resolved by then.

3. What do you think about his comment that "effective technology plans focus on applications, not technology?"

I do agree with this view, that tech plans need to be application-focused.  I tend to look at tech solutions in terms of the goal fulfilling the student- or educational- need. That will, ultimately, translate to an application, or a suite of applications, which was his point.

As I noted above, a reasonable longer-rang goal could be to anticipate integrating cloud-based textbooks (and support materials) into the curriculum.  The CK-12 non-profit, for instance, appears to be on their way with some solutions that should be sorted out (easily?) in 3 years. That goal is not really tech-dependent per say, as opposed to saying "We want another set of ipads (androids, whatever) in place in 2nd grade by 2015," which is clearly a tech-based goal.

As Mr. See noted, technology shifts far too rapdily to make meaningful long term, meaningful tech-based plans. In the shorter term, I still do not believe the focus be on technology. Just as in a business, we need to look at the NEED we are trying to fulfill - related, most typically, to the student. One way to do that is to look at Bloom's Taxonomy and determine the type of tool the teacher could apply to a student learning situation. This could range from 'Remembering/Understanding' (students practicing math facts)  to 'Evaluating/Creating'  (creating a movie synthesizing many different aspects, facts, prevailing ideas, etc. during the run up to the Civil War). This type of thinking can, hopefully, help the teacher look for applciation solutions (as well as NON tech ideas and actvities) to engage student learning.

4. What experiences have you had with technology use planning and what have been your experiences in terms of outcomes (both good and bad?)

For the last 4 years, I have created a technology plan for St. Leo the Great. It was not nearly as complete, and certainly did not cover the breadth of goals identified in the NETP. I  worked with my faculty (and did significant research on my own) to gather ideas, develop a plan, and later, gain understanding/buy in from the faculty. We developed high level goals for the faculty to focus on, benefiting student learning. For instance, last year, there were four overall goals (all very much student focused). One of the goals was to improve student search/website evaluation skills. Another was for students (3rd grade and up) to create student portfolios. A third was for us, as a school, to engage in many lessons on Digital Citizenship (from Common Sense Media).

The results were mixed, from teacher to teacher and grade to grade. Due to other circumstances (big personnel and other fires to be fought) at the school, I was unfortunately not in a position to coach and encourage my staff to accomplish these goals. So, the results were mixed. Upper grades did get much of the Digital Citizenship lessons, and much progress was made. Lower grades was more of a mixed bag (some lessons all crammed in to the last 3 weeks of school for instance). Similar results occurred for the improving search/website evaluation. If the teacher had a handle on how to teach it, progress was made. If not, no/limited progress occurred. That said, overall, the use of technology increased fairly substantially at the school, and for that, I am very proud of the faculty and students of St. Leo's.

In earlier years, we had a bigger need to get our infrastructure in order, and those plans went more smoothly, probably because I was more engaged and managed it on more of a day to day basis. In addition, much of that work was subcontracted out, and once we were able to understand how to manage the costs (via leasing in this case), it was a more controlled process.

I think this year will be different, as my responsibilities have changed and I will be able to spend more time on curriculum and edtech integration. Several of my other duties have been reassigned to other personnel, and so, in theory, I'll have more time to work with teachers, both 1:1 and in the classroom, to accelerate our edtech and improve student learning. Finally, a new teacher has been hired, and about 15 hours a week of his time will be spent directly in the classroom with teachers and students, with the sole purpose of adding 'more' (appropriate, useful) edtech to the curriculum.

In summary, if I'm more in control of the outcomes, the results seem to be more 'positive' and complete. If I have to rely on others (faculty in this case) and cannot provide the level of support/professional development they really need, the results will be more mixed. I'm happy that, this year, I will be able to devote more time to supporting the faculty to better engage edtech to improve student learning.

Digital Inequality

Here is my Digital Inequality VoiceThread.



The main takeaway from this study was the vast difference in access for people in MANY different situations. Just in the US alone, there is significant inequality regarding access to the internet (aka access to knowledge). It gets much more profound in 3rd world areas, particularly on the African continent. It was interesting to see the rise of cell phone access, as that may be a 'way out' for those where local telephone lines are non existent.

Finally, I found it very interesting, while studying the National Education Technology Plan, how far off my school and my district (private) are in certain areas of growth. We have significant work to do, and this report helped me understand that. The focus of my VoiceThread is on 3 particular elements of the NETP plan. The area to concentrate on for our school at this time is with "Teacher Preparedness and Connectivity." I think an important goal for my teachers is to learn more about, and ultimately embrace and use, the vast community of other educators out there with knowledge, ideas, tips, best practices, and so on.

We have the infrastructure in place at my school (St. Leo's), and we certainly have the commitment to edtech here as well. Teachers need to be given the time, training and tools to become more proficient in their craft, and technology resources (Twitter, Pinterest, and the like) in social media can help them significantly. Again, the ultimate goal needs to be how to best impact student learning, and I believe that more exposure to 'centers of excellence' and other people with 'answers' is one important way our teachers can impact that learning.

This was an interesting assignment, and brought many very difficult to solve, yet critical, issues to the forefront. I'm hopeful that my plans can positively impact some of the issues, at least at my school.

It was also enjoyable to use VoiceThread. I use it with students in my class on occasion, and it was nice to dust off those skills again. I was a little perplexed by some issues I had connecting my (new) microphone, but once I figured out how to configure the computer, it was all good.

EDTECH Challenges

I chose as my edtech challenge Item 1, the continued rise in importance of digital literacy across all disciplines. I'm responsible for building the overall edtech strategy at my school, and digital literacy clearly continues to be an important area requiring significant attention. I teach 7th grade Social Studies, and so I have seen first hand the struggles some students have had, from using appropriate search terms through being able to critically analyze a website for validity. They still have issues understanding "ownership" of the information (e.g., written, photos, video) as well. Students still tend to Google an item (without much thoughtful time spent on organizing potential search terms), and use the first or second item in the Google list (as I noted in the video).

We found Common Sense Media, a website with a significant amount of resources on a wide variety of "Digital Citizenship" topics, and this fall will start the 3rd year of its use.It is steadily becoming part of the culture of our school, but it is a long process. Common Sense Media (CSM) includes a large amount of lessons associated with the analysis and evaluation of digital media, and so is an excellent tool for our teachers to use. There are age-based curriculum maps, and more lessons than any teacher really has time to complete. From the curriculum maps, a small team of teacher at my school developed, by grade, what we deemed the most important areas to be taught - the series of lessons that must be done by end of year. Since CSM covers much more than digital literacy, the curriculum is intended to last the full year. Depending upon the grade, there are anywhere from four to ten lessons to be taught.  Here is an example of one of the 6-8 grade lessons on Identifying High-Quality Sites.

The teachers at the school conceptually buy in completely to the need for students to grow their digital literacy. For instance, our 5th grade teacher ran an "experiment" with the students at the start of the last year, asking them to do basic research on Sitting Bull. It was obvious, based upon the research done, and the results, that the students need significant coaching to develop their skills. All teachers understand the importance for students to 'get' the concepts of digital literacy.

We also recognize this is an interdisciplinary issue, and so, for our middle school in particular, we have broken up the lessons by teacher/subject, so all get to work with the students on some aspect of Digital Citizenship. In one way or the other, MANY of the lessons do touch upon, or directly address, digital literacy. For instance, a  majority of the lessons in 4th and 5th grades are focused on media, how to evaluate it, understanding copyright and intellectual property ownership, and so on. Here's a link to our K-8 Curriculum, based upon CSM"s overall lessons and curriculum map.

In summary:

1. Digital literacy is a cornerstone of the skills our students must master to be successful in our digital world. This is a life skill, not just an academic need.
2. Our school recognized that need, and uses Common Sense Media as our primary resource for materials to train our students.
3. We have a curriculum which has been used for 2 years, to help students understand all aspects of digital literacy and citizenship. 
4. The teachers do understand the need for students to gain these skills, and this year, I anticipate an ongoing continuation of the curriculum to help students. All the teachers at the school have now been through the program once or twice, and so the comfort level should be high.

Here is my video that represents some of the main issues, and the approach two teachers took to address them. Enjoy!

Searching for Goodness by gtognetti on GoAnimate

Elements of Educational Technology

Elements of Educational Technology

As I dug into AECT's Elements of Educational Technology paper, I was pleasantly surprised by what I got out of it. For one, it was interesting to see how interrelated the various elements described were. This does make sense, but I was impressed by the time taken to make the elements 'hang together' effectively. I don't believe I learned a significant amount of new information, but certainly looking at the "Facilitating" and "Learning" concepts in more depth reinforced some of my views. That was encouraging.

I believe that document has stood the test of time fairly well. If it were written today, some additional details about 'digital citizenship' would likely be included. There was quite a bit implied in the "Ethical Practice" section about the importance of ethical behavior by ed tech professionals (modeling for our students); it's likely that more attention would be placed on copyright, intellectual property ownership, plagiarism, etc. if it were written today.

It was interesting to see that the approach that was reinforced in the Learning and Facilitating areas was that of a student-centered learning environment. While there was no direct reference to technology reinforcing and facilitating  '21st century learning' concepts like collaboration, communication, critical thinking and creativity, I still got the distinct impression that those types of concepts were compatible with the elements defined by AECT. In summary, this was a well written paper that accurately described the elements of an educational technology professional.