Category Archives: Standard 5: Evaluation

Candidates demonstrate knowledge, skills, and dispositions to evaluate the adequacy of instruction and learning by applying principles of problem analysis, criterion-referenced measurement, formative and summative evaluation, and long-range planning.

Ed Tech 503 Final Project :Instructional Design Project

For this final project, which actually was completed through out the course, I created a three hour instructional design project on “introduction to the rock cycle”.  Thinking like an instructional designer is very different than thinking like a teacher.  As a teacher, I create lessons based on state standards, and what students should know, and create assessments (either project based or traditional) to assess if students have mastered the material.

The instructional design process goes far beyond that process utilizing the ADDIE model of instructional design. ADDIE stands for: analyze (learner needs, stakeholder needs), design (instruction and assessment), develop (instruction tools, assessments, evaluations), implement (run the instruction), evaluate (determine if instruction worked, where it needs to improved or changed).  The process is ongoing, and the different components can affect change to other areas.

For me, the initial surveys were quite interesting; I enjoyed learning about what fellow teachers and students thought about instruction and content.  One of the challenges for me was creating a good set of objectives, and then creating a flow chart of tasks from that.  The flow chart was done prior to the objectives, which to me seemed backward.  I couldn’t create a thorough flow chart, until the objectives were done.  I originally created a flow chart for part one, then when I completed my objectives for part tow, the flow chart needed to changed completely.  As I reflect on the project, I plan to update the flow chart one more time.  At this point, the flow chart is a regurgitation of the objectives, but I need to create a task flow chart based on each objective.  I had this epiphany after passing in my final project, so while grading wise, i may lose some points here, I feel like I finally have a good understanding of what it should like!

Creating both the assessments (did students learn the material) and evaluations (was instruction effective) was interesting.  In the past, as a teacher, I would assess students’ learning, and informally evaluate the process.  Using a survey tool for both students and teachers will help me to know if the instruction was successful.

Here is the link to the final project.   IDProjectReportfinal

I chose the following AECT standards: Standard 1: Design: 1.1 Instructional Systems Design, 1.23 Message Design, 1.3 Instructional Strategies, 1.4 Learner Characteristics,

Standard 2: Devlopment: 2.2 AV Technologies, 2.3 Computer-Based Technologies

Stndard 4: Management: 4.1 Project management, 4.3 Delivery System,

Stndard 5:Evaluation: 5.1 Problem Analysis, 5.3 Formative and Summative Evalutaion

Ed Tech 501 Additional Artifact #2: Rubric to assess technology use in classroom

My original intent was to create and find a district approved platform for either my class website/communication or for my students to create a digital portfolio.  In my Earth Science class, my students currently create a paper portfolio, but I wanted to take it to the next level.  Since there are two approved sites for our school, X2 and Richer Picture, the options are limited.  After thinking about this, and communicating with our professor, I decided to create a rubric to assess different technologies that are available to determine which will best serve the needs of mys students and me.

I made list of things that I would like in class website.  The list includes, type of site, ability to email or message students, ability to make private (if needed by district or wanted), user friendly and intuitive to set up and use, ability to attach lessons and links, ability for students to submit work, grading capabilities, district approved, discussion board, ability to allow other teachers to view.  These are all things that I have found to be helpful as I try to find the best platform for my classroom.

I looked at the following sites: Blog sites including Weebly, WordPress, Google Blogger, Google Sites, Google +, Richer Picture, Haiku, Engrade, Moodle, Edmodo, X2 by Aspen, Wikispaces.

I created many accounts, and spent a lot time playing at the different sites, some to no avail as they were cumbersome to navigate without training.  I was definitely on user id and password overload keeping all the accounts straight!  After looking at these sites, setting up accounts, and playing with each, I found that the two school approved sites, Richer Picture & X2 do not have all the capabilities that I would like, and /or are note very easy to navigate without training.

The blog sites are similar, and offer great communication capabilities, but  to use a blog site as a class website is rather cumbersome, and it does not allow for grading.

The class management sites all have grading capabilities, which is important for me.  Moodle has many capabilities, but is not that user friendly without any training.  There is one teacher at the school who is Moodle certified, and has offered to help me, but again, to start anew during the school year, is difficult given the demands of teaching.  I have heard a lot of “buzz” about Edmodo, but did not find that it would be worth the learning curve to switch from my current system to Edmodo.

The best sites in my opinion, after playing and analyzing the sites are the class management sites such as Engrade, Haiku, and Wikispaces.  All allow for grading, and student and or class communication.  All three are fairly easy to navigate & intuitive to set up.  Granted, they take time to set up they way a teacher would like, but I think that any of these three would be a a good choice.  I like that both Haiku & Wikispaces allow for students to post work for peers to see and comment on, that is not available with Engrade.

Another ides would be to tie Blogger, Google sites & Google + together, but this does not offer a grading function.  These three are easy to use, students could share via blogger, comment on G+ or on Blogger.  Class discussions could be set up on G+.  I think that I will use G+ at some point, with my students, but need to first determine the needs first.

I am currently using Engrade, this is my first year, that I have gone beyond the grading functions, and am starting to use some of the other functions, such as creating and posting lessons on line, and using the calendar function.  I may trip to include links for “flipped lessons” as well.  There are also several teachers at our school using Engrade, mostly for the grading function, but some are moving beyond grades.  My students like having the ability to go on line and see their grades, or check the calendar for the days were absent.  I have decided to stay with Engrade, as I did not have the time during the school year to switch to a new platform, but am considering changing to either Haiku or Wikispaces for next year, assuming I have time to play with it over the summer months. If not, I will continue to find ways to use Engrade to create a more engaging classroom experience for my students.

This was interesting in that it forced me to look at many different sites, and determine which would work best for my needs.  There are so many options available, but sometimes, simple is best!

I chose the following AECT standards…

2.3 Computer-Based Technologies because this required a computer to create the documents, and analyze the sites.

3.1 Media Utilization because this required analyzing different sites to make informed decision on implementing in class.

5.1 Problem Analysis because I needed to determine the problem and parameters before moving forward with analysis.
5.3 Formative and Summative Evaluation because this required gathering information, and using it to make an informed decision.

Ed Tech 501 School Technology Evaluation

This assignment was very interesting in that it helped to quantify some of my thoughts about the state of technology at our school.  The Survey asks questions  about a variety areas, and gives a grade of emergent, islands, integrated, or intelligent.  Before doing the survey, I thought that the result would be Islands.  The survey confirmed this for me.  Embedded below is my analysis, as well as the survey sheet.

I think that completing this survey will help me better articulate some of the needs that our school faces, and hopefully allow us to move along the technology spectrum.

I chose the following AECT standards:

4.2 Resource Management  because I needed to examine a variety of school resources including personnel, budget, curriculum and facilities.

5.1 Problem Analysis because I needed to collect, analyze, and interpret data on a school’s use of technology.

5.2 Criterion-Referenced Measurement because I used a specific  survey instrument to evaluate the school’s technology climate.

5.3 Formative and Summative Evaluation because I gathered information to help inform decision process on technology.

5.4 Long-Range Planning because this asignment required looking at the long term five year strategic plan.

 

Ed Tech 501 Technology Use Planning

Technology Use Planning Overview

My favorite quote while doing research on the topic of technology use & planning is “The curriculum must be the vehicle for technology integration. Just as reading is content-free (i.e., incorporates all subject areas), so is technology. We must weave technology into the fabric of learning.” (Earle).  To me, this sums up technology use, technology is not the end, it is the one of the means to reach the end. Technology  becomes part of the lesson, like the textbook, calculator, pencil or worksheet.

What is Technology Use Planning?  Technology use planning is the deliberate act of setting goals for a school (or business, or other organization), and determining how technology can help achieve those goals.  According to Gilbrahar, “technology planning is a major determinant of what is taught, how it is taught and which technology will be used.  As technology determines the instruction directly, the decisions about choosing appropriate technology get worthier.  By choosing the appropriate technology, teachers have opportunities to change and adapt curriculum in different ways or to improve the quality of classroom activities.”   Gilbrahar continues that Technology use planning is not about choosing the tools, but rather determining which technologies will help accomplish the educational goals.  Technology planning begins with goal setting, and then determining the needs based on the goals.  Schools need to set their goals, next develop a plan to meet those goals rather than just invest in technology for the sake of technology.  Kleiman states, “the rapid influx of technology into schools is, in many cases, running ahead of the educational vision and careful planning.”   Also, having technology will not improve learning unless schools address the need for professional development, technical support, the availability of appropriate software, classroom management, and curriculum integration. (Kleiman).

How can we use the National Education Technology Plan as a resource for technology planning?

The National Education Technology Plan calls for “revolutionary transformation” of education using technology.  The Plan lays out several areas for improvement.  These areas are: learning, assessment, teaching, infrastructure, and productivity. Schools can and should use the NETP as a foundation as they develop their own technology plans. The plan recommends that states continue to set their curriculum, and update the curriculum to include 21st century skills such as s critical thinking, complex problem solving, collaboration, multimedia communication.  These skills can and should be expected learning outcomes in curriculum planning.  As part of that planning, districts must assess what technologies will help students achieve the learning outcomes.

Thoughts on See’s Article

This was my favorite reading for this assignment.  I agree wholeheartedly with See’s assessment that schools’ technology plans should be output based, not input based. Technology planners should develop a plan that specifies what it is that students, staff, and administration will be able to do with technology and let those outcomes determine the types and amount of technology that a school needs.  See continues that “technical applications must be taught as part of an existing subject so students understand how technology can be a tool that makes them a more productive and powerful person.”  As a teacher, I agree 100%, I also know that I will need to learn in order to understand how to use the tools, and what kind of lessons I can create to seamlessly integrate technology.

Personal Experience with Technology Use Planning

From the classroom teacher perspective, I have had very limited experience with technology use planning.  In March of 2012, our school published a five year strategic  technology plan.  As a classroom teacher, I did not have any input into the plan (although there were teacher representatives from all the schools in our town), nor had I reviewed it until this project.  I reviewed the plan, and think that it is a good first step, the success of the plan will come with the follow-up and adjustments to the plan.  Technology planning has had an impact on the daily operations of the school where I teach.  The school recently switched its grading and attendance programs so that we would be compliant with state record keeping requirements.  The program that we use, has many components that we do not utilize, and is not always very user friendly.  Professional development would help in allowing us to fully integrate the tools into our planning.

One key component to technology use planning is professional development.  Teachers need to learn not only how to use the technology, but also how to integrate it into the curriculum.  Teachers need to understand, that technology is just another tool, like a calculator, the technology becomes part of the everyday learning.  “For  technology to be used fully in K-12 schools, significant changes are required in teaching practices, curriculum, and classroom organization; that these changes take place over years, not weeks or months, and require significant professional development and support for teachers; and that the needed levels of training and support change as teachers progress through these stages.” (Kleiman).  “Integrating technology is not about technology—it is primarily about content and effective instructional practices. Technology involves the tools with which we deliver content and implement practices in better ways. Its focus must be on curriculum and learning.  Integration is defined not by the amount or type of technology used, but by how and why it is used”. (Earle).  Again, its how we use the tools to reach the goal, a key part is professional development, teachers need to know how to use the tools, so the content is learned by the student.

Reflections

I found this assignment challenging.  There is so much that goes into a good Technology use plan, that I felt, how will I ever know all of this!  Of course, that is why I am enrolled in the program.  Since the start of this class, I have already learned an incredible amount, and my thoughts on technology in education are growing and evolving everyday.  Back in January, my focus was, how can I use technology in the class?  Now, I’m asking more questions such as, how can I get access to technology in our school?  How do we plan effectively for technology integration into curriculum? What tools are available, and how can students use them to learn?  How do we create a dynamic acceptable use policy?  I am excited to see where this journey will take both my students & me!

I chose the following AECT standards:

3.4 Policies and Regulations because any policies put in place need to be part of technology use planning.   “Policies and regulations are the rules and actions of society (or its surrogates) that affect the diffusion and use of Instructional Technology” (Seels & Richey, 1994, p. 47).  This includes such areas as web-based instruction, instructional and community television, copyright law, standards for equipment and programs, use policies, and the creation of a system which supports the effective and ethical utilization of instructional technology products and processes.

5.4 Long-Range Planning because Technology use planning requires schools to look out to the future to plan their needs.  Long-range planning that focuses on the organization as a whole is strategic planning….Long-range is usually defined as a future period of about three to five years or longer. During strategic planning, managers are trying to decide in the present what must be done to ensure organizational success in the future.” (Certo et al., 1990, p. 168).
SMETS candidates demonstrate formal efforts to address the future of this highly dynamic field including the systematic review and implementation of current SMET developments and innovations.

References

Bennett, H. (2003) Successful K-12 technology planning: Ten essential elements, Teacher Librarian, 31(1), 22-25. retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.libproxy.boisestate.edu/docview/224878294/fulltextPDF/13D93428AB3502EDD2D/1?accountid=9649

Earle, R. (2002). The Integration of instructional technology into public education: promises and challenges. ET Magazine Website: 42 (1), 5-13. Retrieved from http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic87187.files/Earle02.pdf

Gülbahar, Y. (2007). Technology planning: A roadmap to successful technology integration in schools. Computers & Education, 49(4), 943-956. retrieved from http://www.mdecgateway.org/olms/data/resource/3917/Technology%20Planning.pdf

Kleiman, G. M. (2000). Myths and realities about technology in K-12 schools. Leadership and the New Technologies, 14(10). Retrieved from  http://www.sfu.ca/educ260/documents/myths.pdf

Mansfield Public Schools, (2012). Five year strategic technology plan. Retrieved from http://www.mansfieldschools.com/pdf%20files/5%20Year%20Tech%20Plan%202012.pdf

See, J. (1992). Developing effective technology plans. The Computing Teacher, 19, (8). Retrieved from http://www.nctp.com/html/john_see.cfm

US Department of Education.  (2010).  Transforming America, learning powered by technology. retrieved from  http://www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/netp2010-execsumm.pdf