#20 Open Post--The End!

I cannot believe I have almost completed the online technology course!  From my previous posts, especially at the beginning, my apprehension was very evident.  It is no secret that my personal learning curve has been gigantic!  My sense of accomplishment and personal satisfaction at this point is almost equal in size because I have had some success with something I have been fearful of in the past...technology!

This was my first experience with online learning.  For me personally, the format of the course has probably inhibited my learning when compared to receiving instruction in the traditional face-to-face setting.  I am such a visual learner!  However, I felt like the course was structured and laid out very well.  The posted assignments took us clearly through the material.  I thought the pacing was appropriate as far as the space between assignments and tests. 

One of my goals was to become more aware of current technology and software available to enhance my job as a reading teacher.  I definitely appreciated the chapter in the Roblyer text on integrating technology into the reading/language arts curriculum!  I also relied heavily upon the Atomic Learning website for tutorials in completing the three tech. assignments.

As far as suggestions, I can really only think of two things.  My first thought is regarding the applicability of the database assignment for teachers in general.  I definitely struggled on that assignment although I finally completed it--even well!  While I am happy to know how to create a database and mail merge, I am not sure that I will ever have the chance to use that knowledge in my current position.  Perhaps an assignment utilizing some current software that pertains to our teaching field would have been more helpful...almost like a hands-on demo.  My other suggestion would be some tweaking to the group project on AT.  I think devoting the entire third face-to-face meeting to group work time would have been very helpful to my group.  It is so hard as working adults with lives and families to schedule time to meet with three other busy individuals!  Perhaps setting more due dates for that project along the way would have been better. 

Overall, I have enjoyed my experience!  Along about week 8, I didn't know if I would make it to this point!  Looking back now, it seems that the semester went by very quickly.  I must really be getting old!  Although I am graduating in 2 weeks, I think the MTT program has a lot to offer students.  The enthusiasm and pride in that department is very evident...not only on the part of the students but the instructors as well! 

#19 Open Post--Self-Reflection

At the beginning of this course, I set five technology goals for myself:

1.  Increase my proficiency with iStation, an on-line reading assessment/curriculum program that Frisco ISD recently implemented.
2.  To become more familiar with Excel--functions, sorting, etc.

3.  To learn how to create graphs of my students' fluency rates.

4.  To match technology to the curriculum that I teach--What am I teaching now in the area of reading that I could teach better with technology?

5.  To complete the on-line technology course in which I am currently enrolled. Although this is a short term goal, my learning curve is so great that I will definitely consider completion a major accomplishment!

So, how have I done with these five goals?  I believe I have made progress on four of the five.  The only one I have not really done any work on is number three--creating graphs of my students' fluency rates.  I feel very comfortable with iStation at this point...I have even conducted some staff development on my campus over the program.  I scored a 17/20 on the spreadsheet I created for this class.  In addition, I have some concrete ideas for blending technology with the curriculum that I teach.

While these three are important, goal number five is the most significant to me.  Although I have not yet completed the course, I am beginning to see the "light at the end of the tunnel!"  I keep reminding myself of the Little Engine that could, "I think I can, I think I can, etc."  Prior to this course, I had very real barriers in my mind to technology because of my personal experience.  Technology and I have a "love/hate" relationship!  While I recognize the need for technology for efficiency, etc., I typically have very bad luck when it comes to operating a computer!  I want to use the computer, but I am skeptical as well.  Knowing that I have almost completed a masters level technology course has done great things for my self-esteem regarding technology.  Because of some of my successes, I feel much more confident.  That is not to say that there have not been bumps in the road this semester during the class.  I do think though that pressing through these "bumps" without much instruction has helped me tremendously!  If I do have trouble, I at least now know of some resources (i.e. Atomic Learning) to turn to for help. 

Although I haven't done any work on graphing my students' fluency scores, I feel far my confident in my abilities to go and seek out how to create these graphs myself.  It reminds me of the assignment to create a database with a mail merge document for my technology class.  I did not receive any credit for the first assignment submission because I had not met the rubric criteria--nothing was done correctly!  In fact, when I started the assignment the first time, I had to google which program to use to even begin creating a database!  See, my learning curve has been huge!  My second attempt, after some instruction, went much more smoothly...in fact, I got all 20 points for the assignment the second time!  Because of this small success, I will be more eager to figure out how to graph my students' fluency scores. 

#18 Open Post--Redefining Music Literacy

Up until this point, I have not given much thought to the impact of technology on the arts, especially music and art instruction.  While some feel that technology does not have a place in such traditional "humanistic endeavors", I disagree.  I believe that the introduction of technology broadens these areas by giving more people opportunities to be a part of music and/or art.  I agree that "technology can be seductive" and that people need to appreciate unique human abilities, but I also think that the introduction of technology in these areas creates more opportunity.  What about the student who does not possess a great deal of artistic ability but who can create an amazing design by manipulating digitized images?  What about the student who cannot physically play an instrument but has an excellent ear for editing and mixing pre-recorded music? In addition, knowledge about new technologies in the arts (i.e. sound, animation, graphics, etc.) helps all students become better consumers of electronic art or music.  Today's popular music relies heavily on technology for both production and live performance.

Because of the emergence, proliferation, and dominance of computerized technologies, I see the business of teaching music and art facing redefinition.  The Music Educators National Conference stated, "The K-12 music curriculum that was established by the 1930's has evolved only gradually since that time...The curricula that were acceptable in the past will be inadequate to prepare students for the 21st century" (Roblyer, 2005, p.371).  I personally was involved with a typical secondary school music program at Apollo Junior High and Berkner High School in Richardson, Texas in the late eighties and early nineties.  I think it would be interesting to go back and see if or how the infusion of technology has impacted the programs.  I would venture to say that sheet music is now more organized than the messy library that we were accustomed to because of music management software.  I would also bet that current students don't submit cassette tapes of themselves playing for chair tryouts any longer or take paper/pencil tests on notation or musical structure.  Computer technology would be an incredible asset to even the traditional music program.

I loved the idea in the Roblyer textbook for a general music class to create a website at the end of the school year as a culminating activity.  I think this would be a great way to help integrate all students.  Students who are naturally gifted in music have a part as well as students who are drawn to music technology.  Within each group, students are assigned areas of the site according to individual strengths and literacies--using web page authoring tools, graphics, text, sound, operating a sequencer or video camera, etc.  This is also an excellent suggestion for teaching music history.  If students are given the freedom to incorporate pop music into their project, I see participation in a general music class being very appealing to many students, not just the ones who can play an instrument or read sheet music. 

#17 Open Post--Texas STaR Chart (Part 2)

In my previous blog, I discussed the online STaR Chart that specials teachers and pull-out program teachers on my campus were asked to complete last week.  The STaR chart is a requirement that all Texas teachers are to complete annually.  This year, however, was the first year I was asked to complete the chart.  (When the email came through, I had no idea what the STaR chart was!)

The technology facilitator had all specials teachers come down to a lab on our campus and complete the chart together.  I of course did not say anything during the process, but I found it very interesting that the facilitator was either telling us what score to mark or "leading" us to choose between two numbers.  I know that my scores were inflated because a person with my level of tech. knowledge should not be submitting a chart with predominately 3's and 4's as scores.  A score of 3=Advanced Tech while a score of 4=Target Tech.  There is no advanced tech in me, and I am surely not "on target!"  After completing the chart, I decided to hunt for some more information regarding the Texas STaR Chart.  My predictions were confirmed!  The results of the chart are used by districts to apply for grants, to determine funding priorities, and to determine where to allocate funds.  The results are also used by districts to fulfill requirements for NCLB, Title II, Part D that all teachers should be technology literate and integrate technology into content areas across the curriculum.  Is NCLB really working or have districts just found a way to provide lipservice? 

We got a report from our tech facilitator this week saying that our campus received 100% on the STaR Chart.  Well of course we did since teachers were told what answer to select!  The experience made me wonder if other districts complete their charts in the same manner?  The scores are obviously not valid if teachers are not permitted to express their true opinions of their own skills or their thoughts of professional development offerings for technology or current equipment that is available.  Our tech facilitator was standing behind all of us as we rated the leadership, administration and instructional support on our campus.  Who is going to mark his/her true opinion with the tech facilitator watching?  I know my campus doesn't have the latest and greatest in equipment, but the report shows that we do.  I don't feel like I am well-trained and receive an abundance of technology professional development, but the report says I am/do.  How can the results ever be valid when funding is tied to the results? 

Participation in this technology course, if nothing else, has opened my eyes to areas of deficit in me personally with regards to technology as well as the needs on my campus.  One of the reasons I was so frustrated after this experience is because the purpose of the chart was completely defeated.  I will get off my soapbox now!  It comes down to the fact that our campus and district wants to look good, but it is at the expense of what teachers want or need to become better at what they teach.

#16 Open Post--Texas STaR Chart (Part 1)

This past week, I had my first experience with the Texas STaR Chart.  (Because of the amount of content for this blog, I am going to post two blogs on the same topic.  This first blog will highlight the purpose of the chart and give some background information.  The second blog will be more reflective in nature and highlight my experience and thoughts of the chart.)

STaR stands for School Technology and Readiness.  It is an online tool that is used to help teachers in self-assessing their efforts to integrate technology across the curriculum.  It was designed to align with the Texas Long Range Plan for Technology, 2006-2020.  Statewide reports, compiled from the teachers STaR charts, are useful in fulfilling requirements for NCLB, Title II, Part D that all teachers should be technology literate and integrate technology into content areas across the curriculum. 

The chart focuses on four areas of the long range plan:
1.  Teaching and Learning
2.  Educator Preparation and Development
3.  Leadership, Administration and Instructional Support
4.  Infrastructure for Technology

Each key area is divided into six focus areas.  Within each focus area, indicators are provided for assessing teachers' levels of progress.  A score of 1=Early Tech, 2=Developing Tech, 3=Advanced Tech, and 4=Target Tech.  Of course, the goal is for all teachers to reach the Target Tech level.  The data from the first two areas feeds automatically into the electronic version of the Texas Campus STaR Chart.  (I will try to attach my campus' scores to this document.  The latest posted report is from 2008-2009.)

The teacher STaR chart has been voluntary since its introduction in the 2004 school year.  Beginning with the 06-07 school year, all Texas teachers are required to complete the chart annually.  This was the first year, however, that specials teachers and pull-out program teachers on my campus were required to complete the chart.  My reaction and reflection of that experience will be posted in a subsequent blog!

#15 Open Post--Where did Social Studies go Wrong?

This is a giant question that has led to the "History Wars" and other debates regarding the content and focus of social studies.  I believe that the deemphasis of social studies began when social studies themes and topics were excluded from statewide assessments.  Because teachers tend to focus primarily on tested material, social studies is often placed on the back burner.  From my own teaching experience as a third grade teacher, social studies was only put into the plans every other six weeks and was only taught then if enough time was left in the day. 

I know that there are many challenges with teaching social studies.  One is the vast amount of material to cover.  Another challenge to social studies instruction is the availability of information on the Internet.  This brings me to my opinion again on media literacy.  I think we need media literacy now more than ever!  With the abundance of information available on the Internet, students are able to find information on any topic that either supports or contradicts what is being taught during social studies lessons in the classroom.  I agree with the Roblyer text that teachers can use contradictory information found on the Internet as tools to teach students how to become critical consumers of information--a hallmark of being media literate.  Students need to be taught how to monitor and become more analytical of the information they receive.

This type of teaching will not likely find its way into more directed approaches of teaching social studies content however.  I do believe that studying social studies in this way would help to make the content more meaningful to students because it makes use of the information they are surrounded by.  It would perhaps be a more dynamic way of learning key concepts.  In my opinion, it would also support the discussion of more civic and ethical issues.  I feel like the struggle to give proper emphasis to all social studies topics in education could be one cause of the huge problem regarding the lack of morality and the rapid decline of personal judgment in our country today.

#14 Open Post--More on Print Literacy and Media Literacy

Many educators believe that with the growth of media and information technology, media literacy is just as important as--or even more important than--print literacy.  The Roblyer text refers to print literacy as learning to read and write.  In my opinion, a person cannot be media literate without being print literate.  I feel that print literacy should still be the primary literacy instruction for developing readers, but I also agree that much more emphasis should be placed on media literacy once a child acquires the ability to decode and comprehend text. 

This then leads to more questions--at what point does this print literacy acquisition happen and when can I begin teaching media literacy?  I do not think you can pinpoint an exact time that a person becomes a "good" reader.  Becoming a good reader takes practice--the more you read, the better you read, the more you read, the better you write, the more you write, the better you read...  The cycle continues.  There are observable skills that a child displays while reading that indicate he or she has a comfortable grasp of reading.  When that is present, I believe the process of teaching media literacy can begin.  Becoming media literate requires practice just like print literacy.  Why not teach the two literacies simultaneously and not exclusive of one another? 

The traditional definition of literacy, when print was the supreme media format, was the ability to decode, understand and communicate in print. But the world has evolved, and print is no longer the dominant media format—that role has been usurped by the electronic media. To be literate today, people must be able to:


decode, understand, evaluate and write through, and with, all forms of media

read, evaluate and create text, images and sounds, or any combination of these elements.

In other words literate individuals must possess media literacy as well as print literacy, numeral literacy and technological literacy.  I do not think the question should be if and when to replace print literacy with media literacy.  As I stated earlier, print literacy is a prerequisite to achieving the other types of literacies.