Hardware evaluations and how times have changed.

While reading chapter 10 I felt like Picciano (2011) spoke truth immediately when he said "there frequently has been too much emphasis on the acquisition of hardware alone.  A common assumption was that once the hardware was acquired the other components would follow."  I feel this has been true more often than not in many local systems including my own.  We have over the years installed lots of great technology hardware and devices, such as smartboards, slates, interactive response clickers, and many other things in classrooms.  These things have many times, however, gone unused or not used to their full potential due to lack of professional development or lack of technical support.  I always found this to be very discouraging as one of the technology support people in my building.  I always found myself looking at those things as wasted money when they weren't being used to their full potential.  I do see this changing currently though.

With the push in most systems being focused on 1:1 initiatives whether it be a bring your own device (BYOD) or system provided technology, our system, too has begun exploring this type of technology with our students.  This time, however, we are doing it differently.  We have pilot groups using chromebooks with groups of students to find potential problems/issues that may arise in classroom use settings on a small scale before we look at implementing something like that on a system-wide basis.  We are also looking at building up the infrastructure within the older buildings to be able to support a 1:1 initiative before it becomes a possibility so that we will be ready before it becomes a reality.  Laying the groundwork so to speak.

Being part of this pilot group has been a learning experience for both my students and myself.  They also have enjoyed knowing they are part of the decision making process.  While working through this pilot program, we have visited most all of the evaluation criteria for evaluating and selecting computer hardware identified as important by Picciano (2011, p.190) performance, compatibility, modularity, ergonomics, vendor, and cost.  We have had some issues with performance, but not many, compatibility is one issue we have been waiting on to make sure Aspire/ACT online testing would be compatible with chromebooks. One compatibility issue which is also mentioned in reference to math programs by Weldon(2013) in his article is some issues we have had with programs using Java, but we have found fixes for most of those.  Modularity and ergonomics seem to be fine, software availability has been somewhat of an issue transitioning system-wide to Google Apps for Education. The vendor issue, I believe, speaks for itself as Google is a global entity, and cost is the major selling point for chromebooks.  The per pupil cost per chromebook is not much more than a text book costs per student.  Here is a quick video overview of chromebooks for education.

I feel that this pilot program approach has also met several of the recommendations of Weldon(2013) from his article about implementing chromebooks successfully.  We have been phasing in Google apps for education in our system over the past few years as well as providing professional development in that area.   We have a technology "think tank" with stakeholders to provide feedback and ideas for technology implementation.   We are now working through the pilot program with a few small groups in different grades and schools throughout our county.

Thinking About Chromebooks? Here's Everything You Need To Know First.

So, overall, I haven't always been involved with the hardware or software selection process in my district.  I have, however seen changes over the years and I am happy to say I am a part of the process this time.  We have come a long way in how we do things and how the decisions are made.  While we are exploring the possibility of our district's use of classroom sets of chromebooks or our preparation for a 1:1 initiative I think we are headed in the right direction and using our resources wisely.  I hope that we continue to move forward in this style with whatever technology decisions we make in the future.

References:
 Chromebooks for Education Overview. (2012, May 16). Retrieved March 27, 2015, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSbZQNJwPuI

Picciano, A. (2011). Educational Leadership and Planning for Technology (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson.

 Weldon, D. (2013, April 23). Thinking About Chromebooks? Here's Everything You Need to Know First -- THE Journal. Retrieved March 27, 2015, from http://thejournal.com/Articles/2013/04/23/Thinking-About-Chromebooks-Heres-Everything-You-Need-to-Know-First.aspx?Page=2

Audio and Video Texts and Introductions...Take Two

While reading chapters 5 and 6 I was worried I might be in over my head. Audio and Video editing are not my strongest areas.  Add to that the thought of revisiting my own video of myself talking on camera.  Well, lets just say there was a little voice in the background the whole time I was reading.  While I love using instructional audio and video texts in my classroom and do so quite often, the thought of making my own is not very appealing. As the reading progressed, however, I did become more comfortable thinking about the editing process as we began talking once again about the MAPS heuristic and how it applies to both audio and video texts.  Whether we are crafting written, audio, digital or video, we always have to consider these four points (mode, media, audience, point, and situation) and Hicks (2013) frames them in reference to video on page 111, which is where I started the editing process for my video.  

I chose not to recreate my video from scratch, because I was happy with the content as far as the composition of my speaking part, but I did want to enhance it and add some things using the MAPS heuristic for evaluation.  The first thing I addressed was the mode. The mode of this assignment was informational, to inform my classmates about who I am, which I felt was covered with the content of the original video. The next element of MAPS is media.   I chose to stick with my original media which was a video of me talking directly to the camera.  I felt the point of this video was to introduce myself to my classmates and this was taking the place of an actual face to face class but I wanted to recreate that feel.  The next thing I had to consider was my audience. Who would be viewing my video?  My classmates, while all in education, all have different subject areas and backgrounds so I wanted to share some of what makes my experience and what I bring the to class unique.  Lastly, for situation and context, I wanted the video to feel relaxed and have a conversational feel while incorporating some pictures to add to what I was saying as well.

After all the consideration, I began working on the editing process. I was in complete agreement with Hicks(2013, p115) that “a challenge in any writing situation is getting started.”  I started out using a free service called wevideo. WeVideo Introduction  I do think would this would be a good starter video editing tool for my students. I think when I tackle the video projects with my students this is what I will start them with because it has the introductory video and gives a little more instruction than imovie. However, I already had my idea of what changes I wanted to make while keeping the original audio and I could not do that with the free version of wevideo.  So, I made the decision to tackle imovie.  While a little frustrating at first, after several youtube video tutorials and a little trial and error, I ended up with a finished product pretty close to what I had pictured in my mind.  Overall, even though I was a little stressed about the project itself, I did enjoy the reading and the process once I got started.  Here is the finished product. 

ED529 Introduction Video Revised

I added Captions and text at the beginning to reiterate my name and what the purpose of the video was.  I added pictures of myself, my family, and my classroom to give a feel of my environment and family.  I also added screenshots of common technology tools I use in the classroom in case those watching the video were not familiar with them. Overall, this experience wasn’t nearly as bad as I thought it would be and I learned a lot in the process.  I now feel like I would be much more comfortable making and editing a video for my class, and I feel like I would be better equipped to help my students do the same thing.

Resources:

Hicks, T. (2013). Crafting digital writing: Composing texts across media and genres. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

IMovie In Under Five Minutes. (2011). Retrieved March 23, 2015, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J79_0h3ozS0&feature=youtu.be

Make and share amazing videos online. (n.d.). Retrieved March 23, 2015, from https://www.wevideo.com/overview

Data…..use it or lose it??Tests, assessments, data collection, data-driven instruction, formative assessments, and summative assessments can all be overwhelming. As teachers, administrators, and instructional coaches, how do we design it, use it, manage it, and what do we do with it all?  Where to start can sometimes be the hardest part, but we first have to make sure that the data we use is relevant.  We have to be measuring and looking at what matters.  Are our assessments measuring what we, as stakeholders,  feel matters most? Do our goals match what we feel is most important for our schools and communities?  Then once we have this data, what do we do with it all?  I am not only referring to the annual tests but also the daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, formative and summative, formal and informal assessments that teachers gather.  Gone are the days of teachers looking at annual testing results once a year and saying,  “Hmm, maybe I should change a few things,” and moving on to the next year.  No longer is it acceptable for teachers to have students failing to master concepts without making changes to their instruction in the classroom.  Teachers are now collaborating, looking at data in creative ways, working with their peers and mentors to figure out what needs to be done to make all students successful.  Gathering and organizing data takes a great deal of time, and, thankfully, many systems have employed instructional coaches to assist in that role.  But in most, if not all, schools, teachers are no longer “islands unto themselves” but functional parts of school communities that work together to ensure student success.  Collaboration has become part of most school’s culture.  The collaborative model for data-driven instruction also makes use of a teacher’s natural inclination to turn to other teachers for support.

One of the most creative ways to incorporate data collaboration that I found while looking at data-driven instruction research is data walls. I think that this is a wonderfully visual way of looking at student progress throughout the year, and I have talked to my grade-level team about possibly using them in the future. Here is a clip explaining the process.

https://www.teachingchannel.org/videos/differentiated-instruction-with-data-walls

I think that this process is a great example of what “fosters and utilizes a sense of community.” (Picciano, 2011, p.89) Teachers have to work together and be creative to craft our instruction to meet our student’s needs on a daily basis.  In our chat, it was mentioned that in a team setting with collaborative planning and data collaboration, each student gets multiple advocates who get to know them well and have the ability to speak for them.  I think that this type of collaboration has become a vital part of what teaching and data-driven instruction looks like in our time. Teachers collaborating with other teachers can be one of our most valuable resources; It can also be one of our most valuable assets.  This collaboration can not only benefit our students but also our teachers.  According to Sparks (2013), effective teams strengthen leadership, improve teaching and learning, nurture relationships, increase job satisfaction, and provide a means for mentoring and supporting new teachers and administrators.  There are several things that the Center for Teaching Quality recommends for best practices in collaboration: scheduling adequate time for collaboration, aligning collaboration for both horizontal and vertical collaboration, structuring collaboration meetings formally, and creating an atmosphere of mutual trust.  (Berry, Daughtrey, and Weider, 2009)  

References:

Berry, B., Daughtrey, A., & Wieder, A. (2009). Collaboration: Closing the Effective Teaching Gap. Center for Teaching Quality.

Data Walls. (n.d.). Retrieved 8 March 2015, from https://www.teachingchannel.org/videos/differentiated-instruction-with-data-walls#

Picciano, A. G. (2010). Educational leadership and planning for technology (5th ed.). United States: Allyn & Bacon.

Sparks, D. (2013). Strong Teams, Strong Schools. Learning Forward, 34.