Texas S Ta R Chart
View more presentations from Antoinette Clark.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Texas STaR Chart
For the last few years, educators have been asked to complete an anonymous online survey (The STaR Chart) about their schools technology use. Interestingly, the principals are sent a completion percentage letting them know if the reported number of employees have participated in the survey. Understandably, this can leave many sceptic educators apprehensive about sharing thier true feelings. Then again, is any survey truly answered honestly? I guess that's one of lifes mysteries of which we'll never know the answer.
The STaR Chart measures four areas; Teaching and Learning, Educator Preparation and Development, Leadership, Administration & Instructional Support, and Infrastructure for Technology. The STaR Chart gives each school a ranking based on a numeric score ranging from 6 to 24, resulting in Early, Developing, Advanced or Target Technology. This is information the survey taker would need to know if he/she were to offer an accurate guage. This information is not readily available to them. I would suggest that STaR Chart make viewing this information a mandatory prerequisite so that they can make informed statements for the survey.
While my school has grown in all four areas, Infrastructure and Technology is the schools weakest ranked area. Most of the sub-categories have increased according to the survey. However, in actuality, the schools resources have not. From 06 to 09, Students to Computers rating moves from a 1 to a 3, and Technical Support grows from a 1 to a 4. We have the same computer lab, that IS NOT available to all the students, only those needing remediation, and one computer per classroom (if it works). Technical support is not available any more than they have been before. The procedures for getting help and time for it to come is still the same as it was 3 years ago. These and other irregularities, lead me to say that I don’t believe there is much valididty behind these surveys. The growth is seemingly superficial, because there is no evidence of changes that can support this growth. The ranking however, is comparable to that of other schools in the state and nation. To accomplish the target technology rating, I believe the school should invest in a set of classroom computers or make the computer lab a class that each student rotates to during ancillary time. This time could be used to actually teach keyboarding, programming, research or some skill the students will need for advancement.
While I believe the STaR Chart can be a great tool to measure growth and get feedback from educators, I also see many flaws that can be easily corrected. With a few changes for accuracy and validity, this could be very effective.
The STaR Chart measures four areas; Teaching and Learning, Educator Preparation and Development, Leadership, Administration & Instructional Support, and Infrastructure for Technology. The STaR Chart gives each school a ranking based on a numeric score ranging from 6 to 24, resulting in Early, Developing, Advanced or Target Technology. This is information the survey taker would need to know if he/she were to offer an accurate guage. This information is not readily available to them. I would suggest that STaR Chart make viewing this information a mandatory prerequisite so that they can make informed statements for the survey.
While my school has grown in all four areas, Infrastructure and Technology is the schools weakest ranked area. Most of the sub-categories have increased according to the survey. However, in actuality, the schools resources have not. From 06 to 09, Students to Computers rating moves from a 1 to a 3, and Technical Support grows from a 1 to a 4. We have the same computer lab, that IS NOT available to all the students, only those needing remediation, and one computer per classroom (if it works). Technical support is not available any more than they have been before. The procedures for getting help and time for it to come is still the same as it was 3 years ago. These and other irregularities, lead me to say that I don’t believe there is much valididty behind these surveys. The growth is seemingly superficial, because there is no evidence of changes that can support this growth. The ranking however, is comparable to that of other schools in the state and nation. To accomplish the target technology rating, I believe the school should invest in a set of classroom computers or make the computer lab a class that each student rotates to during ancillary time. This time could be used to actually teach keyboarding, programming, research or some skill the students will need for advancement.
While I believe the STaR Chart can be a great tool to measure growth and get feedback from educators, I also see many flaws that can be easily corrected. With a few changes for accuracy and validity, this could be very effective.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Scaffolding Curriculum
In scaffolding instruction a more knowledgeable person provides scaffolds or supports to facilitate the learner’s development. The scaffolds facilitate a student’s ability to build on prior knowledge and internalize new information. The activities provided in scaffolding instruction are just beyond the level of what the learner can do alone (Olson & Pratt, 2000). The more capable other provides the scaffolds so that the learner can accomplish (with assistance) the tasks that he or she could otherwise not complete, thus helping the learner through the ZPD (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000).
Most scaffolds provided are activities and tasks that:
-Motivate or enlist the child’s interest related to the task
-Simplify the task to make it more manageable and achievable for a child
-Provide some direction in order to help the child focus on achieving the goal
-Clearly indicate differences between the child’s work and the standard or desired solution
-Reduce frustration and riskModel and clearly define the expectations of the activity to be performed
This is what authentic engagement should look like, so that no matter what level the student is on, they are able to learn using this method.
Most scaffolds provided are activities and tasks that:
-Motivate or enlist the child’s interest related to the task
-Simplify the task to make it more manageable and achievable for a child
-Provide some direction in order to help the child focus on achieving the goal
-Clearly indicate differences between the child’s work and the standard or desired solution
-Reduce frustration and riskModel and clearly define the expectations of the activity to be performed
This is what authentic engagement should look like, so that no matter what level the student is on, they are able to learn using this method.
Long-term Technology Vision
The 2020 plan incorporates students teachers, parents and the community as a whole. The plans demand and stress the importance of students being prepared for a technologically advanced society and ongoing teacher development through these initiatives of authentic engagement and global collaboration.
This plan seems to proposed for a utopia school system. I agree with the need for the technology based lessons and better accountability for those who do get the funding for technology. But realistically, how can we provide 24 hour technology access? Teaching in the inner city of Houston, I am able to see other priorities now. Maybe by 2020 this will be at the forefront of schools campus improvement plan.
This plan seems to proposed for a utopia school system. I agree with the need for the technology based lessons and better accountability for those who do get the funding for technology. But realistically, how can we provide 24 hour technology access? Teaching in the inner city of Houston, I am able to see other priorities now. Maybe by 2020 this will be at the forefront of schools campus improvement plan.
Technology Assessments
In Course 5352 Instructional Leadership: The Technology Link, we were asked to take 2 assessments on technology use. It appeared these were more like surveys that gave an overview of the educators use of technology and that of the students as well. While I would consider normally consider myself to be techno-literate, after reviewing taking these assessments, I have to reconsider. I am quite familiar with a few operating systems and totally oblivious about many others. The domain I seem to be most comfortable with is communication. I believe I can safely assume that this is my strongest area because this is what I do regularly. The other domains require in-depth knowledge of systems, not just your use of them. In summarize, I have concluded that as educators, we should regularly engage in the latest technology course to stay abreast on how the systems are changing and why.
The SETDA Teachers Survey asked us to evaluate how students were applying technology and it's effectiveness on learning. All the questions were thorough and broad enough to lead me to draw a few conclusions from my own observations. One would be, in order to see if students are benefiting from advanced technology that's offered to students. While some teachers don't offer the same amount or applications of technology, those that do, should have some system in place to ensure it's effectiveness. The second and most apparent conclusion is that Best Practices is the foundation, but that is not always communicated to the classroom teacher. Using technology for teaching is a very flexible area that may only be applied when the teacher is being observed.
I urge educators to challenge themselves to stay abreast on technological advances. Where will you go from here, so that your students are advanced?
The SETDA Teachers Survey asked us to evaluate how students were applying technology and it's effectiveness on learning. All the questions were thorough and broad enough to lead me to draw a few conclusions from my own observations. One would be, in order to see if students are benefiting from advanced technology that's offered to students. While some teachers don't offer the same amount or applications of technology, those that do, should have some system in place to ensure it's effectiveness. The second and most apparent conclusion is that Best Practices is the foundation, but that is not always communicated to the classroom teacher. Using technology for teaching is a very flexible area that may only be applied when the teacher is being observed.
I urge educators to challenge themselves to stay abreast on technological advances. Where will you go from here, so that your students are advanced?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
