Reflections+for+ISTE's+Technology+Facilitation+and+Leadership+Standards

TF/TL Standard I: Technology Operations and Concepts
As implied by Williamson and Redish (2009), “Effective educators in the digital age must acquire a basic set of technology-related knowledge and skills.” Throughout this Masters program, in courses like Concepts of Educational Technology; Digital Graphics, Animation and Desktop Publishing; Video Technology and Multimedia; and Web Design, I have had the opportunity to increase my understanding of the performance indicators of this standard. I have a deeper understanding of the process of analyzing data to drive improvement efforts, know how to create eye-catching newsletters to use as a communication tool, know how to use a web page as an instructional tool, and can create multimedia projects that integrate curriculum. While the assignments were beneficial, the best application of this new understanding came while I performed as a campus instructional technology facilitator. I developed a technology-based needs assessment that teachers completed that I used to plan professional development opportunities. I helped teachers use common features of computer operating systems through a series of //Tech Times// newsletters I wrote with a colleague that featured various tools in each issue. Another colleague and I led teachers in a collaborative effort by participating in a wiki. As these teachers worked on Title I campuses, and “teachers with the lowest levels of technology proficiency are likely serving some of the nation’s highest-need students” (Market Data Retrieval, 2004), we made a concerted effort to increase the use of technology tools in daily activities on these campuses. As mentioned above, I have been involved in developing professional development on my campuses. It was always a challenge to get teachers to attend optional trainings, and having just recently stepped out of the classroom myself, I understand the constraint of time. So when Trotter (2009) said, “Data also suggests that professional development including a curriculum integration focus is more effective in helping teachers feel prepared to integrate technology than professional development that centers solely on technology operations and concepts,” I understood that teaching a class on how to operate Comic Life was less effective than a class that offered ideas for integrating Comic Life into their curriculum. All successful technology integration projects must embed basic operations and concepts, as you cannot start a building project without a foundation. My challenge is to figure out how to build a program that is so beneficial that teachers won’t consider it optional.

Market Data Retrieval. (2001-2004). Technology in education surveys 1999-2004, as reported in E. Fox (2005, May 5). Tracking U.S. trends. //Education Week Special Issue: Technology Counts 2005//, 24(35), 40-42. Trotter, A. (1999, September 23) Training Matters: Preparing teachers for the digital age. //Education Week Special Issue: Technology Counts 1999//, 19(4), 37-43.  Williamson, J. & Redish, T. (2009) //Technology facilitation and leadership standards: What every K-12 leader should know and be able to do//. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.

TF/TL Standard II: Planning and Designing Learning Environments and Experiences
Opportunities to practice planning and designing learning environments came in courses like Leadership for Accountability, Teaching with Technology, and Instructional Design. After analyzing my campus’ AYP and TEA Accountability performance data, I was tasked with creating an action plan for my campus. As my campus falls within the lowest 3 levels according to the LoTi framework, creating a plan that increased use of technology was important to me. I appreciated the opportunity to work with teachers and administrators on this campus to put this plan and professional development agenda in action. Working collaboratively gave us a chance to better understand each person’s role and to view technology as a tool to help our students, especially our economically disadvantaged ones. I was also able to use the knowledge I acquired in this standard to help teachers implement new Promethean ActivBoards to increase math performance among our bilingual students. My colleague and I had to develop activities that would accomplish two goals: show teachers how to use the boards themselves, and how to effectively use them in their instruction. We have discovered the importance of following the suggestion of Williamson and Redish (2009): “Immerse teachers in professional learning experiences similar to the learning experiences they are expected to design.” As a member of my district’s Elementary Curriculum Team, I have many opportunities to plan and design learning environments and experiences. My district follows Wiggins and McTighe’s (2000) “backward design” template to help us be sure our curriculum focuses on the learner. I am looking forward to helping our Social Studies team develop a guaranteed and viable curriculum that teachers will begin implementing this fall. My biggest challenge is to help teachers discover what I know to be true about technology. Today’s students won’t be able to avoid technology in their futures. While we’re teaching them to read, write, and compute mathematical equations, we must also prepare students to communicate, collaborate, and create using various technology tools.

Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J. (2000). //Understanding by design // . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Williamson, J. & Redish, T. (2009) //Technology facilitation and leadership standards: What every K-12 leader should know and be able to do // . Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.

TF/TL Standard III: Teaching, Learning, and the Curriculum
Through courses like Teaching with Technology, Instructional Design, Web Design, Video Technology, and Digital Graphics, Animation, and Desktop Publishing, I was able to put my experiences as an instructional technology facilitator to use and apply the lessons I learned immediately. As students are “increasingly immersed in media-rich environments beyond the school day” (Williamson and Redish, 2009), our schools must be sure to address the needs of these digital learners. In fact, “students claim they could learn better and more deeply by constructing products, accessing online learning opportunities, finding information tailored to specific learning goals” in computing environments (Gates Foundation, 2006). I was able to apply new learning in Desktop Publishing to my monthly //Tech Times// newsletters that I sent to teachers to keep them abreast of exciting new web tools and to provide them with short “how-tos” and “did-you-knows.” Feedback from the teachers led me to continue my efforts to provide busy teachers this type of professional development.

Curriculum and technology integration is a big part of my job. I appreciated the background knowledge I gained about lesson design through my Lamar courses when I attended my district’s curriculum team meetings. I was pleased to see that my district’s and Lamar’s stances on curriculum were aligned. Additionally, I have the responsibility of making our teachers aware of the technology TEKS for our state. Most teachers aren’t even aware that there are actually TEKS. My technology team and I must find ways to embed technology into the curriculum and then support teachers in the integration efforts through modeling and professional development.

Curriculum and technology integration is too big a job for me by myself. I wonder how we go about getting the support of our district leaders, and making sure they understand the technology standards for students set by our state. What can be done to establish some accountability standards so that technology skills are not overlooked? Our team has been working on a project to try to answer this question.

Gates Foundation. (2006). //Why do kids drop out?// Retrieved June 6, 2010, from [|www.gatesfoundation.org/nr/downloads/ed/TheSilentEpidemic3-06FINAL.pdf]

Williamson, J. & Redish, T. (2009) //Technology facilitation and leadership standards: What every K-12 leader should know and be able to do//. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.

TF/TL Standard IV: Assessment and Evaluation
“While technology leaders influence the strategic direction of technology-related assessment and evaluation initiatives, technology facilitators integrate these initiatives into daily practice in schools” (Williamson and Redish, 2009). This statement sums up one of my tasks as instructional technology facilitator. Courses like Leadership for Accountability, Teaching with Technology, and Instructional Design have given me experiences that have enhanced my understanding of the many facets of assessment and evaluation using technology. I have learned to consider the diverse needs of our learners so that all students are successful when planning assessments and evaluating assessment tools. Our elementary schools have recently begun using a computer-based testing program that allows teachers to administer assessments that establish learning paths for their students based on performance on those assessments. In the classrooms, I am supporting the use of group response systems by developing assessments and training teachers to develop their own. We are finding these systems to be great assessment FOR learning tools. We have also implemented a new system that allows us to administer benchmarks, scan the answer documents on site, and receive test results via computer immediately. I am training teachers how to use the system and how to analyze their data for effective instruction.

Currently, there are no assessments for student technology literacy in my district. I am part of a team that has worked to align the technology TEKS and break them down into teacher- and kid-friendly language. Now we have to present our plans to our leaders and help them see the need for accountability in this area. I feel it is important we act in this area as soon as possible. Williamson, J. & Redish, T. (2009) //Technology facilitation and leadership standards: What every K-12 leader should know and be able to do//. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.

=Standard V: Productivity and Professional Practice=

Teacher productivity and professional development is probably the biggest part of my job as instructional technology facilitator. I have had many opportunities to apply the standards, indicators, and tasks of TF/TL-V. I have attended various technology conferences (TCEA 2009 and 2010; Tech Forum 2009) and am a member of TCEA and ASCD. I appreciate the chance to recharge and stay abreast of the latest tools in instructional technology (TF-V.A.1 “participate in professional development activities and professional technology organizations”). Through the analysis of my campuses’ STaR charts in Concepts of Educational Technology (EDLD 5306) and the analysis of a technology needs assessment I created and used to survey my teachers, I was able to plan for professional development according to the results of these surveys (TF-V.B.1 “continually evaluate and reflect on practice to make informed decisions regarding the use of technology in support of student learning). Teachers felt their needs were being met when I offered trainings on the very topics they said they needed.

TF-V.C. Apply technology to increase productivity is probably the performance indicator that I apply most. Through my monthly //Tech Times // newsletters that I create I am able to model the use of graphics, desktop publishing and word processing features as well as share productivity tips and tricks with my teachers (TF-V.C.1). These newsletters, improved as a result of Digital Graphics, Animation, and Desktop Publishing (EDLD 5366) have inspired teachers to create their own to further communication efforts between school and home, leading to requests for trainings on creating newsletters as well as for using their websites more effectively (TF-V.B.2). I have also been involved in training teachers to use a new suite of products that make analyzing assessment data, gathering resources and materials for curriculum planning, and registering for professional development a breeze. We have created video tutorials and how-to documents with graphics to deliver this training to our teachers (TF-V.C.5). Part of this suite makes assessment data immediately available, but sometimes you can have too much of a good thing. I offer training sessions on how to manage the data and break it down through the use of Excel spreadsheets (TF-V.C.8). While the goal is for teachers to integrate technology into their curriculum, they are most enthusiastic about ways that technology can make their jobs easier. I guess it’s a start.

I am most excited about being applying my learning about Standard V through Teaching with Technology (EDLD 5364) and Instructional Design (EDLD 5368) by supporting my bilingual teachers in implementing newly installed Promethean interactive whiteboards as a result of a grant to promote improvement in math scores among bilingual students. This involvement has given me the opportunity to create an online learning environment (TF-V.D.3) to facilitate collaboration among teachers on different campuses. Through this collaboration the teachers communicate about their ideas and struggles and share lessons and resources they have created or discovered. Like Williamson and Redish (2009) mentioned, we are "helping educators build on what others have created instead of constantly reinventing new solutions." This online environment is also a great place to share current research (TF-V.D.2) as it applies to our students and their needs. Teachers have expressed an appreciation for the 24/7 ability to participate and use the resources. Another opportunity to apply this indicator (TF-V.D.4) will come next year as we roll out an application that opens up our use of wikis, blogs, and even student web presences through UniServity. It is always a challenge to implement new applications, especially ones as large as this one is, but we are taking it slowly and piloting it in volunteer campuses. My concern is the campuses that have volunteered tend to be our high socio-economic ones that are eager to test the new methods in communication and collaboration. How can we assure our low socio-economic schools are using this technology as well, when they feel so much more pressure to prepare students for tests rather than their futures in the 21st century?

Williamson, J. & Redish, T. (2009) //Technology facilitation and leadership standards: What every K-12 leader should know and be able to do//. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.

=**Standard VI:** **Social, Ethical, Legal, and Human Issues**= Standard VI “will be applied in virtually every decision a technology facilitator or leader makes” (Williamson & Redish, 2009). Every site I evaluate with hopes of sharing with teachers and their students, every newsletter I create, and every application I promote must pass the safe-for-students test. I have been so excited about certain sites and online applications until I find questionable content that is easily accessed. Having just been called in to explain my promotion of a certain site that contained inappropriate advertisements in the margin, I am well aware of the problems caused and concerns parents have when students are able to access inappropriate material from school. I have modeled legal and ethical practice related to technology use (TF-VI.A.) when creating project examples that include proper citations to use when including graphics, a common practice among students in my schools. Teacher-created end-of-year slideshows are filled with music. I have to remind teachers not to share online or provide copies of the slideshow if copyright rules are not followed regarding the music used. Too often, giving proper credit to the owner of the content is ignored or considered unimportant. If I don’t model it in my examples, teachers won’t expect it from their students. This indicator is also addressed at the beginning of every year when I remind teachers of the district’s Acceptable Use Policies and guidelines to follow regarding cyber safety and digital citizenship. Taking that one step further, I co-authored a pamphlet for students that discussed the DOs and DON’Ts of online safety. Even our youngest students are taking part in social networks. It is important that they understand how to stay safe online.

Through Teaching with Technology (EDLD 5364) I was able to use the CAST lesson builder to create lessons for students with diverse backgrounds and abilities. I came to realize that I needed to provide learning materials that met the needs of all of my students. It is a big task, but the CAST book building site allowed me to consider the needs of hearing impaired students and students who struggled with reading (TF-VI.B.1). Of particular concern for me is the issue of equitable access to technology resources for all students (TF-VI.E.1.). One of my campuses has a high number of students on free- and reduced-lunch as well as having a large bilingual population. Another campus has students from high socio-economic backgrounds. One campus feels the need to spend a lot of time preparing for state-mandated tests, while the other campus consistently performs at exemplary levels. There is a vast difference in how the two campuses use technology. I feel it’s a matter of mindset. For the low-SES campus, technology is something to squeeze in when there is time left, or when a unit requires it. The exemplary campus lives and breathes technology and has students using wikis and blogs. The PTAs of both campuses have different financial resources. The exemplary campus uses it to purchase more technology equipment. The low-SES campus will not even purchase color toner for the printers. My district has recently begun enforcing a technology template to work towards insuring that ALL campuses have the technology resources and budget. My challenge is to help my low-SES campus see the value in using technology to engage their students and still meet state testing expectations.

Williamson, J. & Redish, T. (2009) Technology facilitation and leadership standards: What every K-12 leader should know and be able to do. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.

=**Standard VII: Procedures, Policies, Planning, and Budgeting for Technology**= =**Environments**= I joined my district’s technology team just as we put a record-setting technology bond into effect. While it was a hectic time to join, it was exciting to be on the forefront of providing support for the educational use of all of the new equipment. We had to be sure to provide a level of support that ensured the equipment would be used properly and effectively and not be a source of frustration that caused teachers to abandon its use. Surprisingly, even with the influx of additional equipment, which decreased student-to-computer ratios, the most common excuse teachers give for not integrating technology into the curriculum is “insufficient access,” in line with a random national survey (CDW-G, 2006) as reported by Williamson and Redish (2009). To respond to this issue, I participated in a committee that worked to improve perceptions of our end-users. We addressed issues of training (TF-VII.A.8) and troubleshooting (TF-VII.B.3). Often, a user would submit an electronic request for help and wouldn’t be notified that the request had been fulfilled. We made changes to the process of submitting a help ticket so that our end-users would know their requests are being handled. We also made changes to our call desk so that users could be directed to the proper help channel by selecting from options in the greeting. To help our help desk respond to the needs of our users, I have created how-to-directions and placed them in a location accessible by help desk personnel so that they may assist callers more effectively (TF-VII-B.5).

Performance indicator TF-VII.A: “Use the school technology facilities and resources to implement classroom instruction,” describes my primary role as instructional technology facilitator. Whether through professional development sessions (TF-VII.C.1) or in classrooms, as often as I’m allowed, I model various technology tools (TF-VII.A.4) in a way that shows how they can be integrated into the curriculum. I create example activities to provide teachers with ideas, which are often positively received. Whatever it takes to get a teacher to integrate the technology, I do. However, getting time with a teacher, even to offer him or her a break while I demonstrate integration, is not easy. It’s frustrating to hear complaints about things not going well when technology is involved when I wasn’t invited to help. My offers to help are too often ignored or declined. I think it goes back to that popular excuse of a lack of time. How can I show them that time will be better used if we integrate?

TF-VII.B.6 mentions t he use of distance and online learning facilities. I have thoroughly enjoyed facilitating my campuses’ involvement in Read Around the Planet, a video conferencing event that matches up our classrooms with other classrooms from around the world. These videoconferences open up students’ worlds as they communicate live with students in far-flung places. Usually, participation in Read Around the Planet spurs a teacher to integrate other distance learning activities.

CDW-G. (2006). //Teacher Talks survey//. Retrieved August 23, 2007, from http://newsroom.cdwg.com/features/feature-06-26-06.html

Williamson, J. & Redish, T. (2009) Technology facilitation and leadership standards: What every K-12 leader should know and be able to do. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.

=**Standard VIII:** **Leadership and Vision**=

I have had the opportunity to experience many of the performance tasks for this standard during my first two years as an instructional technology facilitator. While I would hardly call myself a leader when I first joined this department and began this Master’s program, I have grown into a leader thanks to the support of my team and the experiences of this program. I have met performance task TF-VIII.A.1 through co-leading several trainings regarding the use of interactive whiteboards, planning professional development sessions for my campuses and for the district’s Continuous Improvement Conference every February. By using current research in educational technology, I am able to plan an agenda that meets the goal of improving student learning.

To drive improvement efforts, one has to know where one has been. Using historical records (TF-VIII.B.1) to analyze trends helps to establish baselines and goals for future improvement efforts. I’ve discussed our STaR charts with campus principals to set goals on each campus improvement plan. I’ve referred to teacher technology skills matrices to determine the trainings needed on each campus. These efforts result in meaningful goals and trainings that meet the needs of my learners.

One of the most rewarding tasks has been (TF-VIII.D.4) aligning the technology TEKS, providing ideas for ways to integrate them, and re-wording them in kid-friendly terms. It has been a painstaking process. But the student- and teacher- proficiency matrices that are coming out of this process are going to help improve technology skills for both parties. While there are currently no accountability measures for elementary technology proficiency, these matrices will help students and teachers know what the goals are and where they stand. Our teachers and students are quite familiar with matrices for every other subject area, so implementing them for technology should be no problem. We have seen improvements in student ownership of learning through the use of matrices. I am frustrated by the amount of time it has taken to get these matrices out to our stakeholders. There is a delicate balancing act to make sure teachers aren’t overwhelmed by all of the expectations. Apparently, we are still waiting on the right time to share these matrices with principals and their teachers.