Texas STaR Chart Data
View more presentations from Charlotte Duchamp.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
A Presentation of Texas STaR Chart Data
Check out this SlideShare Presentation: The analysis and summary of campus and statewide STar Chart data for the years 2006-2009. This presentation includes data about South Park Middle School in Beaumont, TX, as well as statewide campus information. The information in this presentation was obtained from the Texas STaR Chart website.
Friday, November 27, 2009
Week 2 Assignment Part 2
Week 2 Assignment Part 2
Key Area 3 of the Texas STaR Chart covers Leadership, Administration and Instructional Support. Within this category there are six sub-categories that questions are centered around. These sub-categories are Leadership and Vision, Planning, Instructional Support, Communication and Collaboration, Budget and Leadership and Support for Online Learning. Aspects of these areas are presented on the survey and then ranked on a scale of 1 to 4 based on the teachers preception of the instructional leadership on their campus. 1, or Early Tech, is the lowest score possible, 4 or Target Tech, is the highest score possible. Over the last three years, my campus has continuously declined in this area. For the 2006-2007 school year my campus was categorized as Developing Tech with an average total of 10. By the 2008-2009 school year, my campus was classified as Early Tech with an average total of only 7. The majority of the sub-categories in this Key Area received an average ranking of 1. Only 1 sub-category has received an average of 3 during the past 3 school years. This area is Communication and Collaboration. Leadership and Vision, Budget, and Leadership and Support of Online Learning have always received as average score of only 1. These are the three weakest areas in this classification and therefore need the most improvement.
To improve these areas, the campus administrators should create a campus technology vision to be presented to the staff. This vision should be closely monitored and followed to ensure the achievement of the state and campus goals. Also, more of the budget should be allocated to purchase and maintain computers and technology for student and teacher use. As it stands now, there is no computer lab on campus for teachers or students to use. A computer lab should be put in place immediately so that students have access to technology on a regular basis. The campus leadership must make technology implementation a priority on the campus. The instructional leaders and administrators must encourage the use of technology by teachers and motivate students to also make use of technology. The administrators can do this by providing training for teachers and by allowing teachers to collaborate and plan how to make the best use of technology. Administrators should also model the use of technology and praise those who effectively use technology in the classroom. A full-time technician should be hired to maintain the technology on campus and train teachers in the use of technology. This technician should be the one to offer technology support and assistance to staff members as well.
My campus is moving in the opposite of the statewide trends according to the STaR Chart summary data for the years 2005-2008. For the statewide summary, the percentage of Early Tech classifications has become smaller, while the percentage of Developing Tech and Advanced Tech classifications has gotten larger. The majority of teachers over the last available three years have felt that their Administration and Support systems are in the Developing Tech stages. Advanced Tech has the next highest percentage statewide. Target Tech has also shown some growth, although the growth has not been significant in this category. Throughout the state, the development of technology on campuses seems to be increasing, but on my campus the development of technoloy in Key Area three is declining quickly.
Key Area 3 of the Texas STaR Chart covers Leadership, Administration and Instructional Support. Within this category there are six sub-categories that questions are centered around. These sub-categories are Leadership and Vision, Planning, Instructional Support, Communication and Collaboration, Budget and Leadership and Support for Online Learning. Aspects of these areas are presented on the survey and then ranked on a scale of 1 to 4 based on the teachers preception of the instructional leadership on their campus. 1, or Early Tech, is the lowest score possible, 4 or Target Tech, is the highest score possible. Over the last three years, my campus has continuously declined in this area. For the 2006-2007 school year my campus was categorized as Developing Tech with an average total of 10. By the 2008-2009 school year, my campus was classified as Early Tech with an average total of only 7. The majority of the sub-categories in this Key Area received an average ranking of 1. Only 1 sub-category has received an average of 3 during the past 3 school years. This area is Communication and Collaboration. Leadership and Vision, Budget, and Leadership and Support of Online Learning have always received as average score of only 1. These are the three weakest areas in this classification and therefore need the most improvement.
To improve these areas, the campus administrators should create a campus technology vision to be presented to the staff. This vision should be closely monitored and followed to ensure the achievement of the state and campus goals. Also, more of the budget should be allocated to purchase and maintain computers and technology for student and teacher use. As it stands now, there is no computer lab on campus for teachers or students to use. A computer lab should be put in place immediately so that students have access to technology on a regular basis. The campus leadership must make technology implementation a priority on the campus. The instructional leaders and administrators must encourage the use of technology by teachers and motivate students to also make use of technology. The administrators can do this by providing training for teachers and by allowing teachers to collaborate and plan how to make the best use of technology. Administrators should also model the use of technology and praise those who effectively use technology in the classroom. A full-time technician should be hired to maintain the technology on campus and train teachers in the use of technology. This technician should be the one to offer technology support and assistance to staff members as well.
My campus is moving in the opposite of the statewide trends according to the STaR Chart summary data for the years 2005-2008. For the statewide summary, the percentage of Early Tech classifications has become smaller, while the percentage of Developing Tech and Advanced Tech classifications has gotten larger. The majority of teachers over the last available three years have felt that their Administration and Support systems are in the Developing Tech stages. Advanced Tech has the next highest percentage statewide. Target Tech has also shown some growth, although the growth has not been significant in this category. Throughout the state, the development of technology on campuses seems to be increasing, but on my campus the development of technoloy in Key Area three is declining quickly.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Week 1 Assignments Part 3
Week 1 Assignment Part 3
Long Range Plan for Technology
By analyzing the Technology Applications and the Texas Long Range Plan, I now know what the state goals for technology are, and can form a campus plan to reach those goals. I am aware of what is expected of students, teachers, administrators and districts and will be able to hold those people and myself accountable for the success of the plan. Before reading this, I did not know that Texas had a plan in place for technology implementation in the classroom. However, I was aware of the new teacher training requirements because I am a fairly new teacher and had to receive technology training in order to become certified. The TLRP is designed to familiarize Texas students with new technology so they are able to stay competitive in a technology driven world and workplace. The plan has to be monitored and changed to reflect the technology of today. The plan also levels the playing field by enabling students to have equal opportunities through distance learning and online collaborations. Reccomendations for state, regional and local education agencies are outlined in the plan, as well as reccomendations for higher education, parents and the school community. Most of the requirements focus on collaboration with schools and support of the district's technology implementation. The plan encourages administrators to be supportive of technology, by modeling technology use for the teachers and motivating teachers to utilize more technology in the classroom. Most teachers enjoy using technology in the classroom and find that it makes their job easier, but without the support of the campus instructional leader, the state's technology plan will not succeed. Another piece of the plan that is vital to the success of the TLRP, is the technology infrastructure. Students must have access to high-speed connectivity in order to be able to achieve the required technology skills. Access to this connectivity service allows students to collaborate and communicate online, find information from online sources and participate in distance-learning opportunities. Schools must also ensure that the networks are safe and secure. The school infrastructure is critcal to the student's success and is supported by the state through funding.
As an instructional leader, it will be my responsiblity to monitor changes in the plan and inform my staff members of those changes. It will also be my responsibility to ensure that teachers are given the appropriate training and equipment to fulfill their technological duties in the classroom. I will have to maintain effective technology on campus and be aware of new technology that is available to schools and students. This will require more effort from me, but will enhance the student's learning and success. During faculty meetings, I will need to effectively model the use of technology and encourage and motivate others on campus to use such technology themselves. Now that I have gained more knowledge about the plan, I will be able to follow the plan and strive to meet the goals of the state. I will also be able to implement technology into existing and new curriculums on campus.
Long Range Plan for Technology
By analyzing the Technology Applications and the Texas Long Range Plan, I now know what the state goals for technology are, and can form a campus plan to reach those goals. I am aware of what is expected of students, teachers, administrators and districts and will be able to hold those people and myself accountable for the success of the plan. Before reading this, I did not know that Texas had a plan in place for technology implementation in the classroom. However, I was aware of the new teacher training requirements because I am a fairly new teacher and had to receive technology training in order to become certified. The TLRP is designed to familiarize Texas students with new technology so they are able to stay competitive in a technology driven world and workplace. The plan has to be monitored and changed to reflect the technology of today. The plan also levels the playing field by enabling students to have equal opportunities through distance learning and online collaborations. Reccomendations for state, regional and local education agencies are outlined in the plan, as well as reccomendations for higher education, parents and the school community. Most of the requirements focus on collaboration with schools and support of the district's technology implementation. The plan encourages administrators to be supportive of technology, by modeling technology use for the teachers and motivating teachers to utilize more technology in the classroom. Most teachers enjoy using technology in the classroom and find that it makes their job easier, but without the support of the campus instructional leader, the state's technology plan will not succeed. Another piece of the plan that is vital to the success of the TLRP, is the technology infrastructure. Students must have access to high-speed connectivity in order to be able to achieve the required technology skills. Access to this connectivity service allows students to collaborate and communicate online, find information from online sources and participate in distance-learning opportunities. Schools must also ensure that the networks are safe and secure. The school infrastructure is critcal to the student's success and is supported by the state through funding.
As an instructional leader, it will be my responsiblity to monitor changes in the plan and inform my staff members of those changes. It will also be my responsibility to ensure that teachers are given the appropriate training and equipment to fulfill their technological duties in the classroom. I will have to maintain effective technology on campus and be aware of new technology that is available to schools and students. This will require more effort from me, but will enhance the student's learning and success. During faculty meetings, I will need to effectively model the use of technology and encourage and motivate others on campus to use such technology themselves. Now that I have gained more knowledge about the plan, I will be able to follow the plan and strive to meet the goals of the state. I will also be able to implement technology into existing and new curriculums on campus.
Week 1 Assignment Part 4
Week 1 Assignment Part 4
Technology Applications TEKS Summary
A spiraling or scaffolding curriculum, such as the Technology Applications, builds on skills that are previously learned. Students start out with basic skills, such as keyboarding proficiency, which must be taught in order to complete the other technology tasks, such as project creation. By repeatedly using the basic skills that are taught under the Foundations domain, students become better over time until they finally master each one. Through the other three Technology Applications domains, students are given numerous opportunities to practice the Foundation skills. The spiraling curriculum allows students to achieve technology knowledge and skills by building on previously learned skills. Students are more likely to be successful and less likely to get frustrated when they build a little at a time, as opposed to being bombarded by information or going out of order. Also, by building on previously learned skills, students already possess the needed skills and knowledge to master the next level of TEKS. The Foundation domain gives students basic skills that then open up into more advanced technological skills. Since the curriculum is also dynamic, it is ever-changing to meet the needs of the students as technology changes.
What students learn in Pre-Kindergarten is a perfect example of how the Technology Applications curriculum builds upon itself. The Pre-K curriculum teaches students the basics of computers, including the names of the input devices (mouse, keyboard, etc.). In addition to the standard input devices, students must also properly work a touch screen, CD-ROM and audio recorders, which help learners with various learning styles. When students are aware of what the equipment is called and the functions they serve, they can then understand how to use them properly. Students also must be able to open and navigate age-appropriate software. This will help them later in the technology learning because most software programs have a lot of the same buttons, such as save, open, and close. Students should also be able to create their own projects in these software programs. By the end of the Pre-K year, students should be able to locate information and gain knowledge by using technology. This curriculum helps students to become aware of the parts of the computer and allows them to become familiar with the basic aspects of the operating system. By doing this early on, we give them the technological foundation to build upon each year.
Technology Applications TEKS Summary
A spiraling or scaffolding curriculum, such as the Technology Applications, builds on skills that are previously learned. Students start out with basic skills, such as keyboarding proficiency, which must be taught in order to complete the other technology tasks, such as project creation. By repeatedly using the basic skills that are taught under the Foundations domain, students become better over time until they finally master each one. Through the other three Technology Applications domains, students are given numerous opportunities to practice the Foundation skills. The spiraling curriculum allows students to achieve technology knowledge and skills by building on previously learned skills. Students are more likely to be successful and less likely to get frustrated when they build a little at a time, as opposed to being bombarded by information or going out of order. Also, by building on previously learned skills, students already possess the needed skills and knowledge to master the next level of TEKS. The Foundation domain gives students basic skills that then open up into more advanced technological skills. Since the curriculum is also dynamic, it is ever-changing to meet the needs of the students as technology changes.
What students learn in Pre-Kindergarten is a perfect example of how the Technology Applications curriculum builds upon itself. The Pre-K curriculum teaches students the basics of computers, including the names of the input devices (mouse, keyboard, etc.). In addition to the standard input devices, students must also properly work a touch screen, CD-ROM and audio recorders, which help learners with various learning styles. When students are aware of what the equipment is called and the functions they serve, they can then understand how to use them properly. Students also must be able to open and navigate age-appropriate software. This will help them later in the technology learning because most software programs have a lot of the same buttons, such as save, open, and close. Students should also be able to create their own projects in these software programs. By the end of the Pre-K year, students should be able to locate information and gain knowledge by using technology. This curriculum helps students to become aware of the parts of the computer and allows them to become familiar with the basic aspects of the operating system. By doing this early on, we give them the technological foundation to build upon each year.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Week 1 Assignments Part 1
Week 1 Assignment Part 1 A and B
Technology Skills Assessments
In part one of the Week one assignment, we were supposed to take part in technology assessments. The first assessment focused on our personal use and knowledge of technology. I think of myself as technology literate, however this survey allowed me to become aware of technology area in which I am unskilled. The domains of Communication and Solving Problems with Technology Tools were my weakest domains. I only answer yes 67% of the time under these two domains. Under Solving Problems, most of the questions to which I answered no dealt with collaboration and creating projects. Under the domain of Communication, I again found that I need work in the area of creating products and tracking the progress of those products. I agree with the results of this survey, because I do not have experience in collaboration or product creation. I also liked this survey better than the other one because it focused on my personal technology skills, while the second survey focused more on what I use in the classroom. At my school, we do not have technology available for teachers to use, so a lot of the questions on the second survey were not relevant to me. There was only one area in the second survey that allowed me to say that technology is not available to me, so I do not feel the second survey was a true reflection.
The second survey focused on the use of technology in the classroom. These questions were harder for me to answer, or couldn't be answered at all because there is minimal technology available on my campus. I know this is a problem, and as a teacher, I should push for more technology. Every year, my department makes the suggestion for more technology, but nothing is done. I need to try harder to reach this goal. If I were the principal of a campus, I would make sure that teachers are given the opportunity to learn and use technology as needed in the classroom. I felt that the results of this survey did not truly reflect my knowledge of technology because the questions were directed at what was used in the classroom. Since I do not have access to technology, I am unable to use it in the classroom. It is not that I don't know how, or refuse, it is that I do not have the equipment necessary.
Technology Skills Assessments
In part one of the Week one assignment, we were supposed to take part in technology assessments. The first assessment focused on our personal use and knowledge of technology. I think of myself as technology literate, however this survey allowed me to become aware of technology area in which I am unskilled. The domains of Communication and Solving Problems with Technology Tools were my weakest domains. I only answer yes 67% of the time under these two domains. Under Solving Problems, most of the questions to which I answered no dealt with collaboration and creating projects. Under the domain of Communication, I again found that I need work in the area of creating products and tracking the progress of those products. I agree with the results of this survey, because I do not have experience in collaboration or product creation. I also liked this survey better than the other one because it focused on my personal technology skills, while the second survey focused more on what I use in the classroom. At my school, we do not have technology available for teachers to use, so a lot of the questions on the second survey were not relevant to me. There was only one area in the second survey that allowed me to say that technology is not available to me, so I do not feel the second survey was a true reflection.
The second survey focused on the use of technology in the classroom. These questions were harder for me to answer, or couldn't be answered at all because there is minimal technology available on my campus. I know this is a problem, and as a teacher, I should push for more technology. Every year, my department makes the suggestion for more technology, but nothing is done. I need to try harder to reach this goal. If I were the principal of a campus, I would make sure that teachers are given the opportunity to learn and use technology as needed in the classroom. I felt that the results of this survey did not truly reflect my knowledge of technology because the questions were directed at what was used in the classroom. Since I do not have access to technology, I am unable to use it in the classroom. It is not that I don't know how, or refuse, it is that I do not have the equipment necessary.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
