The STaR Chart provides information that can direct educators as they seek professional development, and funding for technology related initiatives
star chart
View more presentations from Lamar University.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Texas Long range star chart
Check out this SlideShare Presentation: Check out this SlideShare Presentation: The STaR Chart provides a method of collection data to measure if schools advancing to goals expressed in the Texas Long Range Plan for Technology
The STaR Chart provides information that can direct educators as they seek professional development, and funding for technology related initiatives
The STaR Chart provides information that can direct educators as they seek professional development, and funding for technology related initiatives
Sunday, June 6, 2010
Long range plan
Of all four areas of the Texas Long Range Plan for Technology, the one that I believe has the most impact of the rest is the Educator Preparation and Development area. We need teachers fully equipped with the knowledge and skills necessary to integrate technology into instruction, else technology plan become useless.
The Educator Preparation and Development area is has six sections; Content of Professional Development, Models of Professional Development, Capabilities of Educators, Access to Professional Development, Levels of Understanding and Patterns of Use, and Professional Development for Online Learning. According to the Texas STaR Chart, our school scored overall at the Developing Tech stage in the 2008-2009 school years. An overwhelming majority of the state’s schools, a 74.2% of the schools were at the Developing Tech stage in the 2007-08 year. Nearly 84% of Texas schools were at the Advance Tech or Developing Tech stage. Our campus has not move in the direction of Advance Tech.
Based on the Texas Campus and Teacher STaR Charts, in order to turn these trends around, we need to develop on-going professional development that focuses on providing tech application strategies for educators that will create learning environments where kids are allowed to think critically and where they have the means to collaborate with experts across business, industry and higher education. We also need to offer anytime, anywhere learning available through individually guided activities and inquiry action research. In order for teachers to be able to do this, we must also provide professional development that helps all teachers in technology and it uses. Teachers should also receive year around professional development training in order to create learning opportunities for all students.
It doesn’t matter how much administrative support or advance infrastructure we develop, incorporating technology in teaching and learning will not occur until teachers have the time and knowledge to do it.
Kahan, K, Brite, T, LaGow, R, Torres, T, Freguson, K, & Little, N, The Texas long-range Plan of Technology http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/comm/leg_reports/2008/08pr_to_lrpt.pdf
The Educator Preparation and Development area is has six sections; Content of Professional Development, Models of Professional Development, Capabilities of Educators, Access to Professional Development, Levels of Understanding and Patterns of Use, and Professional Development for Online Learning. According to the Texas STaR Chart, our school scored overall at the Developing Tech stage in the 2008-2009 school years. An overwhelming majority of the state’s schools, a 74.2% of the schools were at the Developing Tech stage in the 2007-08 year. Nearly 84% of Texas schools were at the Advance Tech or Developing Tech stage. Our campus has not move in the direction of Advance Tech.
Based on the Texas Campus and Teacher STaR Charts, in order to turn these trends around, we need to develop on-going professional development that focuses on providing tech application strategies for educators that will create learning environments where kids are allowed to think critically and where they have the means to collaborate with experts across business, industry and higher education. We also need to offer anytime, anywhere learning available through individually guided activities and inquiry action research. In order for teachers to be able to do this, we must also provide professional development that helps all teachers in technology and it uses. Teachers should also receive year around professional development training in order to create learning opportunities for all students.
It doesn’t matter how much administrative support or advance infrastructure we develop, incorporating technology in teaching and learning will not occur until teachers have the time and knowledge to do it.
Kahan, K, Brite, T, LaGow, R, Torres, T, Freguson, K, & Little, N, The Texas long-range Plan of Technology http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/comm/leg_reports/2008/08pr_to_lrpt.pdf
National Standards
After reading both the National Educational Technology Plan: Transforming American Education: Learning Powered by Technology (United States Department of Education, 2010), and The Texas Long Range Plan for Technology, 2006-2020 (Texas Education Agency, 2006), it seems they have multiple points in common. The philosophy presented in both documents is essentially the same however; the national plan explores to a greater depth the needs of the 21st century learner.
The national plan has five priority areas: Learning, Assessment; Teaching; Infrastructure and Productivity. The plan focuses on transforming the US education system so it can meet the demands of a 21st century society. That phrase "transforming education powered by technology" is found throughout the plan.
The plan is recommending a major overhaul of the United States education system. It describes a system where technology will play a key role in overhauling the existing system to better meet the needs of students today. An Education system having more student-centric and constant accessibility is the goal. The plan is encouraging a move to "connected teaching" so that teachers will no longer have to work as independent facilitators but instead with the help of technology, they can teach in teams.
Overall, reading the national plan provided me with no overwhelming insight that the Texas plan did not already cover in one degree or another. I found the information fantastic and realistic, but the only real problem is training the teachers and curriculum writers. Once the curriculum focuses on student exploration and problem solving as opposed to rote memorization of content, then much of this plan will be assimilated with ease. I believe current curriculum forces this plan into a slow implemented schedule.
Kahan, K, Brite, T, LaGow, R, Torres, T, Freguson, K, & Little, N. Progess report on the Texas long-range Plan of Technology
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/comm/leg_reports/2008/08pr_to_lrpt.pdf
Atkins, D, Bennett, J, Brown, J, Chorpa, A, Dede, & Fishman, B http://www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/NETP-2010-final-report.pdf
from United States Department of Education Website: http://www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/NETP-2010-final-report.pdf
The national plan has five priority areas: Learning, Assessment; Teaching; Infrastructure and Productivity. The plan focuses on transforming the US education system so it can meet the demands of a 21st century society. That phrase "transforming education powered by technology" is found throughout the plan.
The plan is recommending a major overhaul of the United States education system. It describes a system where technology will play a key role in overhauling the existing system to better meet the needs of students today. An Education system having more student-centric and constant accessibility is the goal. The plan is encouraging a move to "connected teaching" so that teachers will no longer have to work as independent facilitators but instead with the help of technology, they can teach in teams.
Overall, reading the national plan provided me with no overwhelming insight that the Texas plan did not already cover in one degree or another. I found the information fantastic and realistic, but the only real problem is training the teachers and curriculum writers. Once the curriculum focuses on student exploration and problem solving as opposed to rote memorization of content, then much of this plan will be assimilated with ease. I believe current curriculum forces this plan into a slow implemented schedule.
Kahan, K, Brite, T, LaGow, R, Torres, T, Freguson, K, & Little, N. Progess report on the Texas long-range Plan of Technology
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/comm/leg_reports/2008/08pr_to_lrpt.pdf
Atkins, D, Bennett, J, Brown, J, Chorpa, A, Dede, & Fishman, B http://www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/NETP-2010-final-report.pdf
from United States Department of Education Website: http://www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/NETP-2010-final-report.pdf
Saturday, June 5, 2010
Summary Texas Long Range Plan
The Texas Long Range Plan for Technology 2006-2020 breaks down its report into four parts: Teaching and Learning; Educator Preparation and Development; Leadership, Administration and Instructional Support; and Infrastructure for Technology. The results of the study indicate that state is moving toward the Target Technology.
In the Teaching and Learning category, using the Texas STaR Chart for statistics, it appears that teachers are implementing more technology in their classrooms. This conclusion can be drawn from the 5% increase in Advanced Tech and subsequent 5% decrease in Developing Tech. These teachers are using the tech in a number of ways including direct instruction, improved productivity as well as modeling technology skills.
Educator Preparation and Development shows a decrease in the Target Tech. This decrease could be result of additional elements in the 2006 STaR chart compared to that to that of 2005. However, by 2007 assessments fewer campuses were at the Early Tech level which is a position gain.
The state is moving forward toward Target Tech in terms of Leadership, Administration and Instructional Support. This can be seen in the STaR chart where there was growth in both Advance Tech and Target Tech. Advance Tech show larger gains moving from 39% to 45% with Target Tech gaining a single percentage. Another positive indicator is that very small number of campuses is still in the Early Tech stage in this focus area.
Progress in infrastructure for Technology is shown with those campuses rating Advance Tech increasing from 53% to 57%. The most significant gains came from those campuses achieving Target Tech status increasing from 5% to 7%. To achieve Target Tech there must be on demand access for every student and direct connectivity available in all classrooms and web based resources available in multiple rooms.
To sum it all up, even though some of the gains are small, Texas schools are progressing toward the goals outlined in the Texas Lang Range Plan for Technology 2006-2020.
Kahan, K, Brite, T, LaGow, R, Torres, T, Freguson, K, & Little, N. Progess report on the Texas long-range Plan of Technology
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/comm/leg_reports/2008/08pr_to_lrpt.pdf.
In the Teaching and Learning category, using the Texas STaR Chart for statistics, it appears that teachers are implementing more technology in their classrooms. This conclusion can be drawn from the 5% increase in Advanced Tech and subsequent 5% decrease in Developing Tech. These teachers are using the tech in a number of ways including direct instruction, improved productivity as well as modeling technology skills.
Educator Preparation and Development shows a decrease in the Target Tech. This decrease could be result of additional elements in the 2006 STaR chart compared to that to that of 2005. However, by 2007 assessments fewer campuses were at the Early Tech level which is a position gain.
The state is moving forward toward Target Tech in terms of Leadership, Administration and Instructional Support. This can be seen in the STaR chart where there was growth in both Advance Tech and Target Tech. Advance Tech show larger gains moving from 39% to 45% with Target Tech gaining a single percentage. Another positive indicator is that very small number of campuses is still in the Early Tech stage in this focus area.
Progress in infrastructure for Technology is shown with those campuses rating Advance Tech increasing from 53% to 57%. The most significant gains came from those campuses achieving Target Tech status increasing from 5% to 7%. To achieve Target Tech there must be on demand access for every student and direct connectivity available in all classrooms and web based resources available in multiple rooms.
To sum it all up, even though some of the gains are small, Texas schools are progressing toward the goals outlined in the Texas Lang Range Plan for Technology 2006-2020.
Kahan, K, Brite, T, LaGow, R, Torres, T, Freguson, K, & Little, N. Progess report on the Texas long-range Plan of Technology
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/comm/leg_reports/2008/08pr_to_lrpt.pdf.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Web Conference Internship
This was informative but I wish I could have like to see everyone. The internship is great because it lasts 18 months not just a semester. It was nice to listen to my cohorts and hear they have the same problems I am having. These conferences are a new way of communication but so bug need to be worked out in the process. I know that this was trying for some of us but we will get better at the conference. I have experienced new technology over the years but, in the end it all got better after using it for a period of time. I feel that way about making DVD’s and video on YouTube. At first it was painful to do the process. I just kept working to learn the process and what it will take to make a better product. We will get better at this video conferencing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
