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.

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.