Reflect on your own digital footprint. What search results are returned if your name is Googled? How can you make your footprint positive (as opposed to neutral or nonexistent)? What role can we play in making sure our students have a positive footprint?
My digital footprint changes each time I check. Following presentations for various organizations or change in positions or educational changes, I am able to find my footprint online. However, it has been several years since some of these occurrences so my current footprint is nonexistent. Based on the article from CareerBuilder, there are several strategies that I could and should use to create a positive footprint, including: mastering a brief sound bite for my profile pages; developing a network intentionally; showcasing my skills through links to webfolios, blog, or website if relevant to my career (perhaps links to the good things I have done); and using keywords in the Tags section.
Wednesday, April 29, 2015
Monday, April 27, 2015
After Symbaloo:
After using Symbaloo to store various webpages, I must say this would have been awesome to use while I was working on my dissertation, in place of downloading all the various pdfs to my personal computer and figuring out how to store and back-up the many, many, many resources I had. The ease of use and ability to notate in various places and in various ways makes this tool excellent for research.
I guess I don't recognize Susie's problem as I think once you worked to complete and curate a body of resources for your work, you would remember what you had done and where to go, which is the genius of this tool.
Making the resources a part of your regular instruction would mean linking your symbaloos to your LMS or into your Google accounts.
Tuesday, April 7, 2015
Authentic Assessment
Do you believe that authentic assessment is possible in every subject area? Can students at every grade level demonstrate mastery through authentic assessment? Why or why not? Is it practical to ask teachers to complete these types of activities in the current, high stakes testing environment?
I do believe that authentic assessment is possible in every subject area because all material they are learning should be applicable in some way to the child's learning. However, I don't think that authentic assessments i possible for every STANDARD as not all standards are written in such a way to allow for more rigorous or applicable assessments.
I believe that students at every grade level can demonstrate mastery through authentic assessments provided the teacher has adequate time to create, teach, and administer those assessments, and the students are given quality time to respond to the assessments.
Authentic assessment is the basis for inquiry learning. So it is possible, just not probable given the handicapping environments most teachers/students must work within.
I do believe that authentic assessment is possible in every subject area because all material they are learning should be applicable in some way to the child's learning. However, I don't think that authentic assessments i possible for every STANDARD as not all standards are written in such a way to allow for more rigorous or applicable assessments.
I believe that students at every grade level can demonstrate mastery through authentic assessments provided the teacher has adequate time to create, teach, and administer those assessments, and the students are given quality time to respond to the assessments.
Authentic assessment is the basis for inquiry learning. So it is possible, just not probable given the handicapping environments most teachers/students must work within.
Wednesday, March 11, 2015
Module 5 Reflection
Forbes - Rather than money, students have shown that how creative an employee feels when working on a project is the strongest and most pervasive driver. Rewards that are strictly monetary will stifle the creativity of a project and an employee's unique approach. Pure monetary gain takes the "interesting factor" out of a job.
Osterloh and Frey, 2002, Cambridge University Press - Variable play for performance may undermine employees' efforts.
Kohn, A. (https://hbr.org/1993/09/why-incentive-plans-cannot-work). Rewards do not create lasting commitment. They merely, and temporarily, change what we do.
Daniel Pink's comments resonated with me. I have heard research about the negative correlation between incentives and creativity/cognitive engagement several times. It is interesting to note that industry's foray into pay for performance has not met with the resounding success predicted some 10 years ago and while industry has begun to move away from this scheme, education has become mired in it. I think this is due, in part, to an inaccurate and fully underdeveloped understanding of the job description of a teacher held by the general public and, most unfortunately, our legislators.
As an administrator in an elementary building, I found one of the most pertinent ways to increase teacher agency (autonomy, mastery, purpose) was to support teachers as they engaged in action research. The impact of determining what was most impacting students' learning, collecting data, choosing a plan of action, initiating that plan and working with colleagues to work through the plan making professional judgement and adjustments along the way - all in the context of adequate time for discussion, planning, preparation, and expertise - was far and away the most exciting, engaging, motivating year many of our staff members had experienced.
Because my action research was on their work during those two years, I was able to capture their engagement and learning. At the end of our yearlong action research, 95 percent (n=22) of the staff agreed that their work with their action research groups provoked their thinking, causing them to change instructional strategies as the year progressed. Additionally, 82 percent agreed that in their school their voice could be heard through their research, increasing their confidence level and satisfaction.
Monday, February 23, 2015
Reflecting on the various models for tech integration and thoughts in preparation for PD:
Most of the models for tech integration from TIM, to SAMR, to TRUDACOT have on the surface the integration of technology into the classroom. However, all three of the models listed above have as their basis an understanding of pedagogy. The integration of technology is fundamentally a question of pedagogy and the lessening of teacher control within a classroom. The video explanation of the TIM does an excellent job of showing how the matrix, as you move from left to right and top to bottom, moves the teacher from less focus on instructional tools to focus on the content; from teacher ownership of learning to student ownership; from the conventional use of tech tools to the complex use of tech tools (as modeled by students); from procedural understandings to conceptual understandings. These are based in the pedagogy developed by the teacher and within the classroom. It is not about technology, but about the potential technology has (as a tool) to recreate the classroom learning environment.
Five Star will begin an Impact study in the district next month. They will conduct classroom observations, focus groups, and teacher surveys in order to collect data to set goals for our professional development and growth throughout the year next year. While they will be looking at teacher use of technology, the bigger picture is depth of knowledge and pedagogy. What learning situations are students immersed in? Are the tasks they are expected to complete complex, engaging, and higher order or are they surface, unimaginative, and ordinary? Regardless of the tools we use, pedagogy is the more difficult, but critical piece of the puzzle in significantly changing the learning environment. We can give lots of excuses; that teachers need time to learn the technology, that they need to take this in baby steps, that we can't expect too much because this all takes time. What it takes is very thoughtful, thought-filled, collaborative work. The environment we are creating for students is not the environment we experienced or continue to experience. It is the environment we wish we had for learning.
I don't believe we need to take baby steps...as this only promotes status quo. We need to move forward with a deep sense of urgency and of commitment to learning for and with our students.
Most of the models for tech integration from TIM, to SAMR, to TRUDACOT have on the surface the integration of technology into the classroom. However, all three of the models listed above have as their basis an understanding of pedagogy. The integration of technology is fundamentally a question of pedagogy and the lessening of teacher control within a classroom. The video explanation of the TIM does an excellent job of showing how the matrix, as you move from left to right and top to bottom, moves the teacher from less focus on instructional tools to focus on the content; from teacher ownership of learning to student ownership; from the conventional use of tech tools to the complex use of tech tools (as modeled by students); from procedural understandings to conceptual understandings. These are based in the pedagogy developed by the teacher and within the classroom. It is not about technology, but about the potential technology has (as a tool) to recreate the classroom learning environment.
Five Star will begin an Impact study in the district next month. They will conduct classroom observations, focus groups, and teacher surveys in order to collect data to set goals for our professional development and growth throughout the year next year. While they will be looking at teacher use of technology, the bigger picture is depth of knowledge and pedagogy. What learning situations are students immersed in? Are the tasks they are expected to complete complex, engaging, and higher order or are they surface, unimaginative, and ordinary? Regardless of the tools we use, pedagogy is the more difficult, but critical piece of the puzzle in significantly changing the learning environment. We can give lots of excuses; that teachers need time to learn the technology, that they need to take this in baby steps, that we can't expect too much because this all takes time. What it takes is very thoughtful, thought-filled, collaborative work. The environment we are creating for students is not the environment we experienced or continue to experience. It is the environment we wish we had for learning.
I don't believe we need to take baby steps...as this only promotes status quo. We need to move forward with a deep sense of urgency and of commitment to learning for and with our students.
Sunday, January 18, 2015
Reflecting on my second post in the first module. The question regarded which group of standards would best suit my needs as an assistant superintendent. Because we are so very early in this course it is difficult for me to assess whether I am truly addressing the course concepts.
In relation to the standards, I feel my post was accurate although not particularly insightful in bringing new information to the table. I did incorporate relevant professional experience in my response to another class member's post. My post was clear, albeit short.
Collaboration with fellow learners - well, I guess we will see. I find the online discourse more difficult as it is hard for me to "qualify" my online peers. Not knowing them, not being able to hear them express their ideas verbally - to hear where they place their emphasis - being able to really dig deep without the fear of inadvertently insulting someone because I misread a post- this format makes that very difficult for me. Very similar to the difficulties experienced when communicating via email. Reminds me of the book The Giver, and the society's emphasis on precision of language.
In relation to the standards, I feel my post was accurate although not particularly insightful in bringing new information to the table. I did incorporate relevant professional experience in my response to another class member's post. My post was clear, albeit short.
Collaboration with fellow learners - well, I guess we will see. I find the online discourse more difficult as it is hard for me to "qualify" my online peers. Not knowing them, not being able to hear them express their ideas verbally - to hear where they place their emphasis - being able to really dig deep without the fear of inadvertently insulting someone because I misread a post- this format makes that very difficult for me. Very similar to the difficulties experienced when communicating via email. Reminds me of the book The Giver, and the society's emphasis on precision of language.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)