Texas S Ta R Chart

Check out this SlideShare Presentation:

Texas S Ta R Chart

View more presentations from jbasic.

Texas Long Range Plan for Technology - Educator Preparation

The second domain of the Texas Long-Range Plan for Technology, 2006-2020, The Educator Preparation category is the lowest rated category in the Campus Statewide Summary. It identifies the critical need for all, present and future; professional educators to acquire the skills necessary to meet the challenges and needs of the 21st Century learner. The focus of veteran teachers is ongoing job-embedded professional development and continuing education that warrants mastery of the SBEC Technology Application Standards for teachers. It is also required that beginning teachers meet the standards for Technology Applications through Educator preparation regimens that focus on standards and their implementation with core subjects. .

This key area is for how technology is used by the educators in their classroom and how funds are devoted to training. Currently, 75% of Texas educators use technology for administrative tasks and classroom management only. The Technology budget only allows only 6% to 24% for professional development.

Teachers must be able to prepare students for their future in a manner that assures all students will thrive, not simply survive. Online and distance learning is a vital key to continued assurance that today's educators are competent with the implementation technology-enhanced learning communities.

Included in this domain are recommendations to the following:
-the Texas Education Agency (TEA),
-the State Board for Educator Certification (SBEC),
-the Regional Education Service Centers,
-Local Education Agencies,
-Texas Higher Education, and
-Parents, Communities, and the Private Sector.

Although we are making progress locally, statewide and nationally, we still have far to go. In my opinion, my large school district is proactive in its quest to be current and futuristic in all of its technology areas, I do see other smaller local districts who appear to be ahead of us in this plight. More funds, time, and training are necessary to get our teachers as current as possible

Pre-K Technology Applications TEKS

With regular access and exposure to age-appropriate technology and software, pre-kindergarten students will expand their ability to gather data, problem solve, and network efficiently in the 21st Century as they progress through their educational career. As they become familiar and demonstrate competence with input devices, technological terminology, interactive learning, multimedia encyclopedias, and software programs, they will begin the process of lifelong learning through technology integration. What they have learned and experienced in a previous grade level will be reviewed, reinforced and implemented with new learning in subsequent grade levels. A solid foundation will be formed that will enrich and engage student focus and learning while also stressing the importance of valid and ethical communication.


References

Prekindergarten Curriculum Guidelines. Technology Applications. Retrieved November 20, 2009 from http://www.tea.state.tx.us/curriculum/early/prekguide.html

Long Range Plan

Although I was aware of its existence, I knew very little about what the Texas Long-Range Plan for Technology entailed. The Plan itself is clear, concise and deliberate. It is evident that much time and effort has been spent, and will be spent implementing the Plan in the coming years. It is also apparent that a “one size fits all” approach will never meet the technological needs of all students. Online, distance, and digital learning, for teachers and students alike, is a key factor in successful 21st Century learning and survival. Veteran teachers need to commit to ongoing job-embedded professional development to assure mastery of the SBEC Technology Applications for Educators. With administrators leading the way, successful and efficient technology implementation is mandatory to meet the goals set forth in Texas’ Long-Range Plan.

As an instructional leader, I must first understand the “The Plan”. With that knowledge I should be able to convey to staff a clear rationale for the curricula and the requirements of curricular alignment. Therefore, understanding the educational importance of technology integration, I will promote and guide the development of curriculum related to technology on my campus through modeling, collaborative teaching efforts and data-driven research. I will utilize the dynamic framework of the Technology Applications Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TA TEKS) in order to provide and maintain an infrastructure that supports teaching and learning, educator preparation and development, leadership, administration and instructional support, as well as promoting the framework of technology.

Technology Surveys

Like any assessment, a survey is only as good as how well it addresses the ultimate information and goals. As part of EDLD 5352 I was required to take and analyze two technology assessments. Given, my position in my school as the buildings technology liaison, I found myself extremely interested in the questionnaires. The two instruments reviewed were the Technology Applications Inventory and The SETDA Teacher Survey.

Both the Technology Applications Inventory and The SETDA Teacher Survey are about technology use at school. Although there are similarities between the two, there are far more distinct differences. The first survey I took was the Technology Applications Inventory. This instrument included a series of 58 questions within four Domains; Foundations, Information Acquisition, Solving Problems with Technology Tools and Communication. The survey itself was very easy to take. The answers were either “yes” or “no”. The questions were clear and concise. As I took the survey, it was obvious to me where my personal strengths and weaknesses lie.

The second survey I took was the SETDA Teacher Survey. Unlike the Technology Applications Inventory, the SETDA Survey was long and difficult. Whereas the Technology Applications Surveys goal seemed to be the discovery of how fluent the teacher is with technology, the SETDA Survey was not only about the teacher’s fluency, but also about the student’s knowledge base, and how well the teacher is aware, teaches and integrates technology into his/her every day interaction with staff and students.

As a teacher, the surveys strengthened my belief in my personal technology skills. Upon completion of The Technology Applications Inventory, I felt good about myself and how advanced I am, given all of my “yes” answers. It reminded me of my weaknesses in the areas of proper keyboarding standards, citations, and the use of Boolean search strategies (which I rarely need). Contrarily, I found it difficult, actually impossible to complete the SETDA Teacher Survey. As a technology tool, I am sure that it would give me extremely specific information as to my strengths and weaknesses. However, I would have had to actually finish the survey in order to get that info.

As an administrator or as someone on an upper level of technology in a school District, I would certainly recommend that my teachers and staff members take the Technology Applications Inventory or one similar to it on an annual basis. I would NOT recommend the SETDA Teacher Survey based on its length (unless teachers would receive PD or some other type of credit). I would however, consider giving the SETDA Survey to a select group of teacher leaders who might benefit from its results.