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.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment