EDUC 6715 - Online Learning in Schools Presentation

In my presentation I highlighted both benefits of online modules for students and teachers.  Part of my role as an Instructional Support Teacher is to train teachers to improve instruction.  As a trainer of teachers I would like to inform teachers how online learning can benefit them as much as it benefits their students.

Educ6715online presentation

Reflection of Course EDUC 6714 Reaching and Engaging All Learners Through Technology

A social network is a place to share ideas, clarify misconceptions, provide feedback and work with colleagues.  I found it very helpful to bounce ideas off of others.  I enjoyed receiving feedback on my posts from colleagues.  Knowing others would view my work made me put even more time and energy into what I was going to post.  I looked forward to reading what others had posted in order to add to resources I had already found. I enjoyed the camaraderie and collaboration in our social network.  It was easy to use and is full of valuable information.  It was especially interesting to read other posts to compare others’ thoughts, opinions, and resources to mine.  It encouraged me to expand my own knowledge.  Together we can boost one another’s motivation and morale.  We may need reminding that when we have faith that our students can learn, they can learn just about anything (Laureate Education, 2009e).  Our resources on the social network are researched and described by our members.  Using what we have worked on collaboratively can save me hours of time to search for all by myself.  I am thankful to have had the opportunity to share with my colleagues and to have an amazing resource that I will definitely use.  I am seriously considering beginning a social networking site with my teachers.  I feel it is a very valuable tool!  What a great forum to work together toward a common goal.

One of the best parts of our social network is that it will not disappear and will remain a resource I can return to again and again.  I can use the resources there as I slowly integrate Universal Design for Learning and Differentiated Instruction into my school.  I will refer to them as I assist teachers to us more differentiated instruction in the classroom.  I know, if I try to do too much too quickly, that it will not have a positive outcome in my school (Tomlinson, 1999).  Each month I can highlight a different resource found on the social network.  Many of the sites have links to other sites that I will investigate to analyze their usefulness in my school. 

One of the resources I found was an inservice day presentation about multiple intelligences (http://www.op97.k12.il.us/lincoln/mi.html).  This is a resource I can definitely adapt to present to the teachers in my school.  I also will use the Power Point presentation I created on Universal Design for Learning (http://www.slideshare.net/LynneKMath/udl-presentation-48204) to help the teachers in my school understand what it is, how it can be used, and how they can help our students learn more.  I will inform teachers that differentiation is using the same goals for all students, but changing the pathways to reach those goals (Laureate Education, 2009j).  I must meet with my new principal, in the beginning of the year, to run things by her and to see if she is in agreement with what I wish to share with the teachers.

            Technology is a valuable tool to meet students’ needs in many different ways.  It can assist me in surveying students, reviewing content in new and interesting ways, practicing skills through games and activities, creating new products, or expanding knowledge through enrichment exercises.  Technology allows connections to the real world, prepares students for their futures, motivates and engages students, makes learning more personalized and gives students an opportunity to create authentic products (Laureate Education, 2009d).  Also, technology can enlarge text, read text out loud, translate specific content, or house differentiating assignments for each student.  Technology can be incorporated in tiered lessons and tic-tac-toe choice boards. When using technology to differentiate learning, the sky is the limit.  Students can plan their own learning, contact experts in a field, or solve real world problems using technology. Technology is amazing, however the digital divide could hamper technology integration in my school (Salend, 2009).  It is unfair that there is such an inequity between districts that own a lot of technology and ones such as mine that are ninety-eight percent poverty and lacking technology (Bray, Brown & Green, 2004).  Funding for incorporating digital resources into our classrooms may be a problem in my district.  Technology is an expensive tool to purchase (Smith & Throne, 2007).  We have a grant resource person in my district that I plan to contact and work with to secure more technology in my school (Smith & Throne, 2007).

Technology ensures students are engaged in their learning and increases the amount and depth of their learning (Laureate Education, 2009c).  Technology can be used to differentiate by readiness, interest, learning profile, content, process and/or product.  A tic-tac-toe board of choices for students can be created using technology and can incorporate technology into students’ differentiated choices.  This allows students to choose what they prefer to do and are good at doing (Rose & Meyer, 2002).  When students have the choice to pick ways they choose to learn, they will learn more than imagined (Tomlinson, 2009).  Technology is a patient tool that offers immediate feedback, can create individual learning pathways, and fosters interest and enthusiasm in the quest for information (Smith & Throne, 2007).  Technology can be used for skill and drill, tutoring, practice, or enrichment.  The goal of differentiation is to challenge each learner at the appropriate level (Rose & Meyer, 2002).  Technology assists teachers with this goal.  Technology is like a magnet for students.  We have a large ELL population who really enjoy time on the computer.  There is a lot of English on the Internet and, therefore, it can contribute to ELL students’ understanding and use of English (Bray, Brown & Green, 2004).  Also, technology can link ELL students to contacts on the Internet who speak the same language and belong to the same culture (Bray, Brown & Green, 2004).  In addition, assistive and compensatory and remedial technologies help teachers differentiate to provide all students with adaptations to be successful in school (Bray, Brown & Green, 2004).  Technology is a necessary tool to differentiate lessons for students in our least restrictive classroom environments (Bray, Brown & Green, 2004).  We have adapted the inclusion model for our special education students.  Technology is helpful in meeting the needs of our special education population.  Also, technology allows teachers to store a large amount of information without messy papers or bulging drawers (Smith & Throne, 2007).  It is a tool that allows us to differentiate our instruction without overwhelming amounts of paperwork (Smith & Throne, 2007).

There are some steps I can take to begin instructing teachers in my school about Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and Differentiated Instruction (DI).  After the initial intruction using sites listed above, I can delve into specifics with the teachers.  I know how important it is to begin the year with routines of grouping and working independently (Laureate Education, 2009f).  For example, teachers should practice classroom groupings of some students working on differentiated tasks while others are working on specific standards-based activities (Tomlinson, 1999).  Task cards or directions on tape are one way to foster independence in groupings in the differentiated classroom (Tomlinson, 1999).  The routine of grouping will take practice.  It may be best to begin with everyone working together on the same task and then provide differentiated materials within each center (Tomlinson, 1999).  UDL and DI begins with identifying potential learning barriers and eliminating them (Meo, 2008).  A helpful organizational tool may be the use of student folders (Tomlinson, 1999).  Students’ differentiated work may be kept there for ease of work storage as well as organized one-on-one conference time with students (Tomlinson, 1999).  Encouraging and planning on students working in groups gives them practice with a 21^st Century Skill.  Students are expected to leave school with the ability to work cooperatively and solve problems with others (Smith & Throne, 2007).  Knowledge and skills with technology can assist students in finding higher paying jobs in their futures (Bray, Brown & Green, 2004).  These are all discussion items I will bring up with the teachers in my school.

The classroom atmosphere is going to be changed using UDL and DI.  Teachers should share their thinking about classroom activities and have discussions with students to improve classroom practices (Tomlinson, 1999).  Teachers should get to know their students through discussions and surveys.  Students who feel their teachers know them are more likely to take educational risks and increase their learning (Tomlinson, 2009).  Many of the resources in this course recommend starting small with differentiation.  This will also allow teachers a feeling of comfort and confidence as they successfully implement differentiated instruction one piece at a time (Smith & Throne, 2007).  It is an excellent suggestion to work on differentiation with a partner with whom you can share the workload and bounce ideas off of (Smith & Throne, 2007).

Parents can be very helpful in the differentiated classroom.  I will recommend teachers invite parents in to assist a group or work one-on-one with struggling students on a specific skill (Tomlinson, 1999).  Parents may be willing to prepare materials or enter information into the computer to help out (Smith & Throne, 2007).

I need to explain that differentiated instruction is not a how-to list of strategies, but a way of thinking about teaching and managing a classroom (Laureate Education, 2009g).  It gives each student the opportunity to increase his or her learning (Laureate Education, 2009h).  The changes for differentiation should occur with the curriculum, not the individual student (Center for Applied Special Technology, 2009).  Technology is new for many teachers, so they must continue to learn about new tools and strategies that will help students be most successful (Laureate Education, 2009g).  Teachers’ new roles will be more guiding and coaching with daily formative assessment to inform us what our next steps should be (Laureate Education, 2009i).  The teacher can carry a clipboard around to take notes on for future one-on-one conferences or to give students feedback (Tomlinson, 2008).  Student response systems (clickers) can be utilized to reflect comprehension and give immediate feedback (Salend, 2009).  Rubrics may also be used as a tool for students to reflect upon learning and self-assess to guide their own learning (Salend, 2009).  Reflection is also key in assessing our own teaching and improving what we do in the classroom (Laureate Education, 2009i). 

Another area I will guide teachers with in the beginning of the year is pre-assessment.  Pre-assessment needs to be done in order to form flexible groupings based on readiness (Smith & Throne, 2007).  It can then be determined which students need enrichment or reinforcement of specific skills (Smith & Throne, 2007).  Brain-based learning has informed us that students need to be taught using recognition networks, strategic networks, and affective networks (Laureate Education, 2009b).  It is important to learn about students’ networks since students assess the importance of each bit of information they learn, determining whether or not they feel it is valuable to learn about (Rose & Meyer, 2002).  Formative assessment should continue throughout students’ learning (Tomlinson, 2009).  It is an opportunity to give non-evaluative feedback to students.  Teachers must give students feedback to guide their learning in the right direction and motivate them to continue to learn.  Feedback on an ongoing basis is more valuable than a summative grade (Tomlinson, 2008).  It will keep them on the right path to learning so that when they are summatively evaluated they will be able to demonstrate what they have learned.

Students are ready for a differentiated classroom.  Teachers should not stand in the way to helping students maximize their own learning and incorporate 21^st Century skills (Howard, 2004).  As an instructional leader in my school I can inform teachers about UDL and DI so they may incorporate it into their daily teaching.  Teachers have the ability to help each and every child learn to his/her potential.  Together we can change education, one step at a time.

  

References:

Bray, M., Brown, A., & Green, T. (2004). Technology and the diverse learner: A guide to classroom practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Center for Applied Special Technology.  (2009).  UDL guidelines, version 1.0.  Retrieved from http://www.udlcenter.org/aboutudl/udlguidelines  

Howard, K.L.  (2004).  Universal Design for Learning:  Meeting the needs of all students.  International Society for Technology in Education, 21 (5), 26-29.  Retrieved from the ERIC database.

http://www.op97.k12.il.us/lincoln/mi.html

http://www.slideshare.net/LynneKMath/udl-presentation-4820419

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009a).  Reaching and engaging all learners through technology.  [Motion Picture].  Assessing Students.  Baltimore: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009b).  Reaching and engaging all learners through technology.  [Motion Picture].  Brain Research and Universal Design for Learning.  Baltimore: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009c).  Reaching and engaging all learners through technology.  [Motion Picture].  High-Quality Curriculum.  Baltimore: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009d).  Reaching and engaging all learners through technology.  [Motion Picture].  Introduction: Reaching and Engaging All Learners through Technology.  Baltimore: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009e).  Reaching and engaging all learners through technology.  [Motion Picture].  Introduction to Differentiated Instruction.  Baltimore: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009f). Reaching and engaging all learners through technology.  [Motion Picture].  Managing the Differentiated Classroom.  Baltimore: Author.

 Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009g). Reaching and engaging all learners through technology.  [Motion Picture].  Putting It All Together.  Baltimore: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009h).  Reaching and engaging all learners through technology.  [Motion Picture].  Universal Design for Learning.  Baltimore: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009i).  Reaching and engaging all learners through technology.  [Motion Picture].  Virtual Field Experience: Managing the Differentiated Classroom.  Baltimore: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009j).  Reaching and engaging all learners through technology.  [Motion Picture].  What is Differentiated Instruction?  Baltimore: Author.

Meo, G.  (2008).  Curriculum planning for all learners:  Applying universal design for learning (UDL) to a high school reading comprehension program.  Preventing School failure, 52(2), 21-30.

Rose, D., & Meyer, A.  (2002).  Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for learning.  Retrieved from http://www.cast.org/teachingeverystudent/ideas/tes

Salend, S. (2009).  Technology-based classroom assessments.  Teaching Exceptional Children, 41(6), 48-58.  Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.

Smith, G., & Throne, S. (2007). Differentiating instruction with technology in K-5 classrooms. Belmont, CA: International Society for Technology in Education.  Retrieved from Education Research Complete database.

Tomlinson, C. (1999). Differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development. 
Retrieved from the Walden Library ebrary.

Tomlinson, C.  (2009). Learning Profiles and Achievement.  School Administrator.  66(2), 28-33.  Retrieved from Education Research Complete database.

Tomlinson, C.  (2008).  Learning to Love Assessment.  Educational Leadership, 65(4), 8-13.  Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.

Reflections of the GAME

The GAME plan is a valuable tool to use in the classroom.  It is important that students learn to set their own goals.  It is a huge step in self-directed learning and is a life-long lesson that will benefit students in their future work worlds.  According to Dr. Katherine Cennamo, self-directed learning is one way you can find your own learning strengths (Laureate Education, 2009f).  Once you know your strengths you can utilize them to do your best work.

My personal favorite section of the GAME plan is the M monitoring stage.  As I used the GAME plan professionally, the monitoring and altering of my plan was very valuable and kept me on target.  Educators must learn to monitor and adapt to situations and be flexible (Laureate Education, 2009e).  They must keep an open mind and be willing to change with the times.  Students must learn the same skills.  As they self-monitor and receive input from teacher and peers, they can adapt and make changes based on feedback.  One of the best parts of the M stage in the GAME plan is that it is not judgmental.  Students can change their project, keeping in line with their goals, without being penalized.

Honestly, I am not sure how this will change my professional practice.  I really like the GAME plan and believe it will have a very positive educational benefit to both teachers and students.  This type of learning gives students the “time and opportunity needed to practice collaboration skills” (Ertmer & Simons, 2006, p. 43).  Teachers talk too much and students do not talk enough.  The GAME plan will rectify some of this problem.  Students with many different abilities and languages can work together to solve a problem (Cennamo, Ross & Ertmer, 2009).  I am not a classroom teacher so I do not have a core group of students with which to use this.  I can professionally introduce this to teachers in my math data study meeting and show them examples, but I cannot force them to use it.  How many times have I been introduced to something that sounds awesome, but without experience or training with it I do not attempt it in the classroom?  I have a feeling that will happen.  Maybe I can tie it into the problem-based pilot program I am working on in 4th grade math.  I currently only know one out of four of the teachers that will teach 4th grade next year, but she is willing to try something new.  I do know that I will use the GAME plan as I plan my own lessons to do with my students.  I think it is an excellent strategy for teachers to use to plan their lessons.  It focuses student learning and encourages teachers to reflect and evaluate to improve their professional practice, as well as encourages the integration of appropriate technologies (Ertmer & Simons, 2006).

This course has made me very aware that teachers hold the key to provide students with the technology knowledge they must have for their futures.  Currently most schools teach students what they need to know to be prepared to take their state tests (Prensky, 2008).  Our students deserve more than that.  Students are capable of using technology tools, but we must make an effort to allow them to use them in our classrooms (Laureate Education, 2009h).  Although the NETS-S are not well known or publicized (or tested) they are important components of a well-rounded education in today’s world.  Technology can be seamlessly intertwined with learning, when using the GAME plan, to instruct students.  There are also many benefits of using online networking sites (Laureate Education, 2009j).  Not only are these lessons rich in authentic learning, others can give quick feedback to you so you may improve your work (Hargis & Wilcox, 2008).  It is a teacher’s responsibility to incorporate technology into lessons.  Technology is a tool to enhance, compute, display, demonstrate and organize learning.  According to the NETS-S students should be using technology to create, communicate, collaborate, research and problem solve (http://www/iste.org/Content/NavigationMenu/NETS/ForTeachers/2008Standards/NETS_for_Teachers_2008.htm).  These skills may all be accomplished using the GAME plan.  The GAME plan can be adapted to problem-based learning lessons, social learning or networking, and/or digital storytelling.  These types of lessons can be used in any curriculum and allows students to share their learning with a wider audience (Laureate Education, 2009g).  I am sure the GAME plan can be used with many other teaching/learning strategies, but I know through experience it works well with these three types of lessons.

An immediate change I can make is to purposefully list the NETS-S standards I am reaching in my lessons as well as the state standards.  That way I am much more aware of which NETS-S I am addressing and which ones I need to purposefully plan to incorporate.  I can make a conscientious effort to utilize technology tools I have been learning about as well as others that are available for my students to use.  I understand that with the population of students I teach using technology will assist in leveling the field of knowledge (Laureate Education, 2009b).  It will also increase the level of engagement and motivation in my students (Cennamo, et. al., 2009). This will give my students more of an advantage than they would have compared to other students in other districts.  Also, students can be taught how to continue their learning outside of the classroom as they use social collaboration on the Internet (Laureate Education, 2009k).  Another immediate change I can make is to post lessons I have taught or videotaped lessons of other teachers on the school website I developed (Laureate Education, 2009c).  Students who are absent or who need a little bit of extra reinforcement can use this to review or see what they missed (Laureate Education, 2009c).  One other change I can make is to make teachers aware of how technology may be used to differentiate for their students (Laureate Education, 2009d).  For example, there are tools for our many ELL students as well as students who have difficulty typing on the keyboard (Laureate Education, 2009d).  I already use technology for assessment, however next year we are adding Senteo clickers that students may use to record answers to questions which teachers may use as formative or summative assessment (Laureate Education, 2009a).

In conclusion, this course has taught me many new strategies and different methods to integrate technology into my teaching.  These skills are invaluable to a teacher in today’s classroom.  I feel much more equipped to increase student achievement and better prepare my students for the future.  I will often utilize what I have learned in this course.

References:

Cennamo, K., Ross, J. & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology Integration for Meaningful Classroom Use: A Standards-Based Approach.  (Laureate Education, Inc., Custom ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

Ertmer, P., & Simons, K. (Spring 2006). Jumping the PBL implementation hurdle: Supporting the efforts of K-12 teachers. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(1), 40-54. Retrieved from http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1005&context=ijpbl.

Hargis, J., & Wilcox, S. M. (2008, October). Ubiquitous, free, and efficient online collaboration tools for teaching and learning. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 9(4), 9–17.

http://www/iste.org/Content/NavigationMenu/NETS/ForTeachers/2008Standards/NETS_for_Teachers_2008.htm

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009a).  Integrating Technology Across the Content Areas [Motion Picture].  Assessing Student Learning with Technology.  Baltimore: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009b).  Integrating Technology Across the Content Areas [Motion Picture].  Enriching Content Area Learning Experiences with Technology, Part 1.  Baltimore: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009c).  Integrating Technology Across the Content Areas [Motion Picture].  Meeting Students’ Needs with Technology, Part 1.  Baltimore: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009d).  Integrating Technology Across the Content Areas [Motion Picture].  Meeting Students’ Needs with Technology, Part 2.  Baltimore: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009e).  Integrating Technology Across the Content Areas [Motion Picture].  Promoting Creative Thinking with Technology.  Baltimore: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009f).  Integrating Technology Across the Content Areas [Motion Picture].  Promoting Self-Directed Learning with Technology.  Baltimore: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009g).  Integrating Technology Across the Content Areas [Motion Picture].  Spotlight on Technology: Digital Storytelling, Part 1.  Baltimore: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009h).  Integrating Technology Across the Content Areas [Motion Picture].  Spotlight on Technology: Problem-Based Learning, Part 2.  Baltimore: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009j).  Integrating Technology Across the Content Areas [Motion Picture].  Spotlight on Technology: Social Networking and Online Collaboration, Part 1.  Baltimore: Author.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009k).  Integrating Technology Across the Content Areas [Motion Picture].  Spotlight on Technology: Social Networking and Online Collaboration, Part 2.  Baltimore: Author.

Prensky, M. (2008, March). Turning on the lights. Educational Leadership, 65(6), 40-45.

Are you GAME?

Are you GAME?

I learned a great deal using the GAME plan process.  I believe the most important step for me was M, monitoring.  Due to the time of year I began my GAME process I had to keep making adjustments to my plan.  In the GAME strategy that is fine as long as you stay with your goals.  There is something to be said for accepting change.  Educators, in general, are not great with change.  It takes a lot of time and comfort to be flexible with whatever occurs.  In my job change is inevitable.  Students change, teachers change, administrators change, materials change, school buildings change.  One of the few variables that have not changed is my goal.  My job, as I see it, is to help both students and teachers be the best they can be in order to for students to achieve (and make AYP).  When using this strategy with students it is wonderful if they can learn to monitor and alter what they are doing to reach their goals.  What a fabulous life-long lesson for them. 

The NETS-T and NETS-S are very similar.  The teacher’s role in the National Education Standards in technology is to plan for, introduce and model what the standards for students.  When we plan activities that integrate technology we are providing our students with opportunities to develop their technology skills. When students use the GAME plan process they are essentially following the NETS for students.  During the Action stage students will be using creativity and innovation to explore and identify trends in the information. With our guidance and scaffolding students will learn to be creative and innovative using technology.  Students will be communicating and collaborating with their peers during the Action and Monitoring stages of the GAME plan. When we design lessons that integrate technology, students learn to use technology to collaborate and provide feedback for their peers, such as Wikis and blogs.  During the Action stage students will use technology to conduct research. Teachers can model using technology to demonstrate how students can use the Internet to do research, as well as how to apply critical thinking skills.  Critical thinking, problem solving and decision-making are integrated in the Action and Monitoring phases of the GAME plan.  In these steps students gather data and make decisions about how to best solve their problem.  When they monitor their plan they may need to make decisions about the course of their learning and alter what is occurring.  As teachers think aloud and explain the importance of digital citizenship and its’ responsibilities, students are learning through our example.  The more teachers learn about technology, the more likely they are to use it and strategically teach it to their students as an enhancement to the curriculum.

Just as the GAME plan process focused my efforts on my goals, I believe it would be helpful to use with students.  Concentration on set goals will assist students to become independent self-motivated learners.  These characteristics are important 21^st Century skills expected by future employers.

When teachers plan using the GAME process they can naturally integrate technology to enhance the lesson and assist learners in displaying, analyzing and presenting information.  Teachers can plan problem based learning experience for their students using the GAME process.  Problem based learning is an example of how teachers can facilitate and inspire student learning and creativity.  Digital tools are naturally used as students research solutions to authentic problems.  As teachers introduce their units they model digital age skills and learning.  Teachers need to demonstrate these tools and use the think aloud method in order for students to understand how to use them. 

I believe the GAME plan process is a natural fit to enhance student proficiency in the NETS-S.  These tools need to be integrated into classrooms for students to benefit from all technology has to offer them.  Their futures depend upon it.

References:

Cennamo, K., Ross, J. & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology Integration for Meaningful Classroom Use: A Standards-Based Approach.  (Laureate Education, Inc., Custom ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

http://www.iste.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=NETS

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009a). Integrating Technology Across the Content Areas [Motion   

             Picture].  Baltimore: Author.  

Two Fouls but not out yet...

One of the lessons I am learning with this GAME plan is that do not expect everything to go as planned and be open and flexible to adapt your ideas to new paths.  I feel as if I am taking one step forward and two steps back.  For example, I was on my third anchor of finding interactive resources when I was called down to test some kindergarten students.  I quick locked my computer and went down to test 8 students.  Upon my return I noticed my computer was not locked but logged off.  The data guy had come to fix my connection to the color printer.  When he logged me off he did not save my work.  Another lesson learned.  It would have only taken me a few seconds to save the document prior to going to test the students.  So, three hours of work was lost.  The weird part is I usually have an autorecover function, but not this time.  I am still working on collecting these interactive resources for the teachers.  I told some of the teachers about it and they are really excited!  So, this is a goal I am still working toward.  Also, I did get the opportunity to ask my supervisor if I could pilot a problem based learning program in fourth grade for next year.  He said I could, but I did not get the opportunity to talk details with him.  I hope to do that at my meeting with him this Thursday.  If he is still game I will begin to use the current standards to come up with authentic problems.  I still do not know who will be teaching fourth grade next year, so it is hard to determine if they will be game to try something new.  The one teacher I know is staying in fourth grade is willing and ready. We will collaborate often this summer.  I can begin the groundwork planning though.  I know it will be easier with two of us working on it together.


My second NETS-T goal is also still in motion.  I have contacted our district representative for Compass Odyssey to ask him if there is a district step-by-step instructional guide on how to set up students and assignments.  He said there was not but that he would be willing to develop one.  I hope to meet with him to work on this together.  I will discuss this with him on Thursday morning.  I know Compass Odyssey is being used often, but it is not being used to differentiate the way it can.  I will change that with the simple directions and training in the beginning of next year.  Another step I can take toward this direction is to analyze the data for the most recent benchmark test for our third graders.  This will give me specific information, by standard, which I can share with teachers in the beginning of next  year.  I can develop lists of students, per standard, that need additional work on that skill.  This will begin next year with differentiation in mind and will lend itself well to training on Compass Odyssey.


A new learning goal is increasing through my courses at Walden.  I am learning to model digital age work and learning.  I am using digital tools to collaborate and share information with teachers in my school.  I model what I am learning in my courses and train teachers how to use these tools.  I know it will take time for these to be incorporated into their lessons, but I will be persistent.  


The learning approaches I will try next time to improve learning are to set small step goals in order to reach the long-term goals.  I know this is a bad time of the year to try new things and to motivate teachers and/or students to learn new skills, but I have had so many setbacks that it is frustrating.  If I set small goals and continue to keep the big picture in mind I will remain flexible and less frustrated.  

Game Blocked

Well, this week was just about as unproductive as last week.  My meetings (as well as my pull out groups) keep getting cancelled and rescheduled due to a variety of end of the year activities.  I believe this is just not the best time to begin a GAME plan when everything and everyone seem to be winding down.  I have decided, through reflection, to refocus my efforts right now on something I can do by myself rather than through collaboration.  I have another math meeting this morning.  I am going to ask my supervisor if he knows if our state standards truly are changing.  With this information I can begin to plan.  I am going to collect ideas, sites, resources, etc. (perhaps problems based) for each anchor.  I will put these in folders with the future plan to upload them onto a grade level wiki.  I can organize each page as a different anchor.  Eventually I can make this a district wide wiki.  I will begin with fourth grade and then move to third.  Those are the grades I work with the most since they are the ones that take our state tests.  This is the best I can do at this time of the year to work toward my first NETS goal. 

Again, I will have to be creative and rethink my plan of action for my second NETS goal.  I do not believe I will have a chance to meet with the teachers by grade level for our final meeting.  Instead, I can analyze our data from third grade and begin to formulate anchor groups.  This will assist teachers in the beginning of the year as they are getting to know their students.  I will provide additional information to meet their mathematical needs.  Rather than meeting with the teachers to model how to add assignments and students to Compass Odyssey, I can develop a step-by-step form to present at the beginning of next year.  In addition, I still have some students left to test in kindergarten and first grade.  Our population is very transient, so we are constantly getting new students.  I have at least 8 students to test in order to have data on them for the beginning of next year.

So, my Goals remain the same, but my Actions needed to change based on Monitoring and Evaluating what I have accomplished and what is possible to accomplish at this time of the year (Cennamo, Ross & Ertmer, 2009).

Reference:

Cennamo, K., Ross, J. & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology Integration for Meaningful Classroom Use: A Standards-Based Approach.  Chapter 11.  (Laureate Education, Inc., Custom ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

Three Strikes and I am OUT!!!

I have hit a few roadblocks this week in my goal to update and infuse technology into my fourth grade math teachers’ lessons.  First, we were unable to hold our weekly meeting today.  One of the teachers had to use her preparation time to go pick up her son.  The meeting is postponed until tomorrow.  Another roadblock is that at a math meeting yesterday I learned that our scheduling next year will tell us specifically which lesson we are to teach on exactly which day.  How in the world will that work with problem-based learning?  Teachers will have to teach the math series each day according to this new schedule.  Administrators should be able to walk into any math class on any day and know exactly what is being taught.  The only positive outcome I view with this is that when students transfer from one school to another in the district (which happens daily), they should be at the same spot in math as our school.  In addition, I learned that there is going to be a template for each daily math lesson.  Specific times will be allocated to specific sections of the lesson.  There is NO ROOM in this template or this schedule for any flexibility in math.  This template lists the sections and time frames per section for each daily math lesson.  So, now when administrators walk into the room they will not only know exactly what lesson is being taught but exactly which section of the lesson will be taught at which time.  The final kink in the plan is that I met with my principal yesterday and she told me she is reassigning many teachers to different grades next year.  The fourth grade team that I have been working with all year is now going to have only one of the teachers the same next year.  Should I still plan with them as if they are teaching fourth grade next year (they do not know they are being moved)?  Should I modify the entire plan now that the math department has squelched my dreams?  I really do not know how to progress or if I should progress from here.  The only idea I have at this point is to talk to the head of the math department and ask if we could pilot a problem-based math curriculum next year.  The only problems with that are that we have spent a ton of money on our current series, and I have no idea if the teachers who will be teaching fourth grade next year will go this route with me.  I am trying to be flexible and remain positive about this, but it is difficult.  Any advice??

My second goal is going well.  We have eight new students this week.  I have ordered bubble sheets for them so I can test them.  I have only gotten to one so far.  Also, the newest benchmark data is now available in the computer for me (Laureate Education, 2009).  I can add the data from this assessment to teacher’s data charts so we can look for trends in student data and performance (Cennamo, Ross & Ertmer, 2009).  Then I will schedule my final data meetings of the year where we will review data (Laureate Education, 2009).  In addition this is the meeting where I will model how to assign specific assignments for Compass Odyssey.  My schedule is now lighter than usual, so I can use the extra time to begin researching and developing activities for each anchor for anchor folders.  I will then be a resource person for the teachers and students.  I have not yet had a chance to research additional differentiation sites.  That task remains on my list. 

References:

Cennamo, K., Ross, J. & Ertmer, P. (2009). Technology Integration for Meaningful Classroom Use: A Standards-Based Approach.  (Laureate Education, Inc., Custom ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2009). Integrating Technology Across the Content Areas [Motion Picture].  Assessing Student Learning with Technology.  Baltimore: Author.