Field-based+Activity+Log+and+Reflections

= = = = =Field-based Activities Monthly Reports and Reflections:=


 * Field -based Activity Log March 1 through April 9, 2010



Reflection of Field-based Activities March 1 - April 9, 2010**

This month's activities included three facilitation standards and performance indicators: TF-I.A., TF-I.B.; TF-II.A.1-3., TF-II.B.1.; TF-II.C.1-2.; TF- II.D.1.; TF-II.E.1.; TF-II.F.1.; TF-III.A.1-5, 7.; TF-III.B.1.; TF-III.C.1-2.; TF-III.D.1.; TF-III.E.1.

During the last few weeks, I have in-serviced teachers on how to set up their ELMO's and overhead projectors to their computers. Simple tasks, such as, which wire goes where, and how to adjust settings were modeled so that there would be less confusion and frustration for the "technology challenged" teachers. (The phrase was jokingly coined by a faculty member during our meeting!) The teachers were very excited after the ELMO demonstration, and many of them have pulled the equipment out of the closet and are now using it regularly.

Several teachers have met to collaborate on lesson planning which includes the use of technology with their lessons. I sat with the science teacher and mapped out a complete lesson for three different classes. She and I practiced the lesson together so that we would be able to co-present the lessons to the students. Our presentation was successful. She presented the first part of the lesson for the students while I ran the PowerPoint. I then turned the remote over to her, and she finished the PowerPoint and the rest of the lesson. I monitored students at their computers and was there to provide technical and moral support. We met to debrief at the end of the day. She was very pleased with the lesson, the results, and the enthusiasm exhibited by the students!

I assisted teachers in locating and navigating through a number of educational websites. I guided them through NetTrekker, Brain Pop, Discovery Education, World Book, EBESCO and several other sites. I led them through several activities on each site so they would be familiar with the way the website worked. Several teachers took turns navigating the sites and did not encounter any problems. I wrote several lessons for use in the computer lab. Third, fourth, and fifth graders each had a writing lesson. They wrote a rough draft using Microsoft Word. Social studies lessons were created for fourth graders. Students incorporated NetTrekker and WebQuest to complete their assignments.

These activities gave me the opportunity to assist teachers in using technology in their classrooms and to help them create lessons for their students. I also had an opportunity to apply and implement methods for using strategies to improve student learning. These opportunities helped me master the standards.

Reference:

Discovery Education. []

NetTrekker. []

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


 * Field based Activity Log May 1 through May 31, 2010

**


 * Reflection of Field-Based Activities May 1 through May 31, 2010**

This month's activities included four facilitation standards and fourteen performance indicators: TF-IV.A.1.,TF-IV.A.2., TF-IV.B.!., TF-V.C.1., TF-V.C.5., TF-V.A.1,TF-V.A.2., TF-V.B.1., TF-V.C.2., TF-V.C.4., TF.V.C.6., TF-V.C.7., TF-V.C.8., TF-V.D.1., TF-V.D.2., TF-V.D.3., TF-V.D.4., TF-VI.A.1., TF-VI.A.2., TF-VI.C.1., TF-VI.E.1., TF-VII.A.3., TF-VII.A.4., TF-VII.A.5., TF-VII.A.6., TF-VII.A.7., TF-VII.A.8., TF.VIII.B.1., TF-VII.B.2., TF-VII.B.3., TF-VII.B.4., TF-VII.B.5., TF-VII.B.6., TF-VII.B.7., TF-VII.C.1.

I gained a great deal of insight regarding my faculty and staff. To begin with, it was exciting to note the enthusiasm by the faculty as they accessed various student assessment websites. I guided them through several district approved web sites that are subscribed to by the district. We were able to access both campus and teacher performance results. They were pleased with their success at creating rubrics in their content area using Rubistar.

I also learned that although some of the faculty were reluctant to use the school wiki, most of the faculty was quite comfortable with the process. In talking to them, I found that two faculty members have their own wiki. They were willing and valuable assistants as we worked our way through the wiki process. We even uploaded one of their class projects to the teacher page. The faculty was adamant about having a "private" wiki so there would not be a liability issue with students or parents.

I was not surprised to learn how little respect students have for copyright law. I ran a PowerPoint for the faculty and students during the lunch periods for three consecutive days. It included two Public Service Announcements I made in a previous Master's course. As I circulated among the students to get their feedback, they seemed unconcerned about pirating movies and music. Many of them explained that their parents frequently purchase pirated first-run movies.

As I began to collaborate with my principal about providing professional development in the area of technology for the faculty, I began to realize the enormous task we were undertaking. I had no idea how much planning is necessary to provide quality professional development. There are so many facets that need to be addressed! I have read the information in my classes, but to actually experience it is almost overwhelming.

The activities helped me master the Standards and Indicators because I had to think through each activity and plan for it before it was implemented. It is sometimes more difficult to provide information during an in-service for the faculty than it is to teach a class of students. Such is the case with the faculty on my campus. Teachers are already tired and have spent a whole day teaching, so I really had to keep the in-service interesting and fast-paced so as not to lose their interest. As we worked through each presentation, the faculty was full of questions. I knew I had to be ready to field any questions they might come up with. By using Williamson and Redish's book, Technology Facilitation and Leadership Standards as my guide, I familiarized myself with many scenarios that I passed on to the faculty.

Reference:

Texas Education Agency. Academic Excellence Indicator System report (2009) Retrieved from [] May 4, 2010.

Texas Education Agency. Adequate Yearly Progress Report. Retrieved from [] May 4, 2010.

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.


 * Field-based Activity Log June 1 through June 9, 2010**




 * Reflection of Field-Based Activities June 1 through June 11, 2010**

This month's activity centered around preparation for the upcoming school year. These activities addressed one facilitation standard and five performance indicators: TF-VIII.A., TF-VIII.B., TF-VIII.C., TF-VIII.D. and TF-VIII.E.

A meeting with the principal was held to discuss the campus's current technology resources and needs. I contacted various district approved vendors to obtain cost estimates of software and hardware which will be purchased by the campus. Planning and updating the current technology plan was set into motion. A copy of the State Technology Standards was used to assist in updating the current plan. Also discussed, was the importance of proactive leadership in developing a shared vision for educational technology among parents, school personnel, students, and the community. The desired effect would result in enthusiastic support both intrinsically and monetarily by the parents and community in raising the necessary funds to obtain technology equipment not covered in the school's budget.

This activity assisted mastery of Standard VIII by allowing me to take part in the process of evaluating the old technology plan and to determine the modifications necessary to bring us into compliance with the State and district technology standards. A thorough examination of the document revealed several weaknesses in our campus technology plan which will be remedied in the new plan. The importance of leadership skills required to promote proactive involvement by all stakeholders brought to the forefront the value of forming collaborative conversation to attain the intended goal. The article, Making Strategic Planning Work, was utilized in the plan to involve all stakeholders in the collaboration and implementation of the Campus Technology Plan and the Campus Improvement Plan.

Reference:

Reeves, D. Making Strategic Planning Work. //Educational Leadership//, (65)4, 86-87.

Texas Education Agency. Technology Applications Student Standards for EC-12: Prekindergarten Guidelines and K-12 TEKS. Retrieved from [] June 10, 2010.

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.