Technology Reflection: Technology Configurations

Write a short blog reflection relating to technology integration and classroom technology configurations based upon Bloom’s taxonomy. Focus on the pros and cons of the different configurations. How can one overcome the obstacles? What was eye-opening about the budgeting portion of the assignment?


In a traditional classroom, there may be one computer and projector at the front of the classroom, with desks all in lines facing the front. Since technology has become so prevalent in classrooms, there have been some changes to the typical classroom. 

Unfortunately, there are still several classrooms where there is still only one computer and a projector in the room. I am a teacher who works in a situation like this every day. This situation is not ideal because it requires the teacher to be planned in advance so they can attempt to book a computer lab for any activity that may require the students to doing something online.This configuration also continues to make the teacher the sage on the stage, and have very teacher oriented lessons. However, there are some strategies that can help teachers to overcome the obstacles. For example, teachers can set up stations where each student or pair gets an opportunity to do something on the computer while others use paper resources or complete other activities (Byrne, 2012). Additionally, the solo computer could be used to do review games with students, and it can even be turned into a competition (Byrne, 2012).

Another classroom configuration suggests eliminating the front of the room, making a space for easily re-arranged groups, and creating a space that allows for the teacher to navigate throughout the groups (Leiboff, 2010). This would be ideal for a classroom that had 10 iMacs that could be put at different stations. These configurations are useful for a lot of different activities but there can also be a hassle of having big groups. However, the set-up as well as the circulating teacher should help to make sure that all students are participating in the discussion or activity, and not just one student doing all of the work.

Some more ideal technology configurations would be Chromebook Carts, Computer labs, or BYOD programs. Although these can have negatives, it often allows all students to have their own device to work on. Chromebooks could be uncharged, or have poor wifi connections. Computer labs need to be booked in advance and ensure that all sites are available. BYOD programs bring the possibility of having students without the ability to have their own device, and the possibility of their devices breaking or getting stolen. 

The most surprising aspect of the budgeting portion was the cost of iMacs. I feel as though schools would be hesitant to buy too many mac computer because of the cost. They are reliable, but the price does not really outweigh the reliability. A better alternative that a lot of schools are choosing are Chromebooks. You are able to get a class set of Chromebooks for less than you can get 10 iMacs.



References

 Byrne. (2012, July 12). Tech Alternatives for the One Computer Classroom. Retrieved January 31, 2016, from http://www.freetech4teachers.com/2012/07/tech-alternatives-for-one-computer.html#.VJg4Ll4DA 

 Leiboff. (2010, June 10). Rethinking Classroom Design. Retrieved January 31, 2016, from https://campustechnology.com/articles/2010/06/02/rethinking-classroom-design-guidelines.aspx 

Data Assessment

Data Analysis Spreadsheet

Data assessment is a key to good teaching, and allows teachers to re-teach specific standards when necessary. In order to analyze the data of a formative assessment, I chose to use Google Sheets. I am very familiar with the use of Microsoft Excel, and found Google Sheets to be very similar. I set it up by placing student names down the first column, and the standard number across the top row. I placed a Y or N to describe whether or not a student met the specific standard. After that was done for each student, I highlighted any "N" to allow the outliers to standout. One flaw I found with using Google Sheets was that this would have to be done manually every test. It would be cool if the program automatically highlighted cells with a N.

By adding color to any student/standard that was not met, it was easy to see that standard M:01:NO:6.4 really needs re focus, because only one student answered the question correctly. There were also a number of students who missed standards M:02:GM:6.6 (S), M:02:GM:6.6 (S),  M:02:GM:6.7 (S), and M:03:FA:6.1 (S). I think re-teaching of these standards is necessary and possibly as large group instruction. After reteaching of the highly missed standards (less than 60% met) with activities and practice, the teacher can set up smaller groups for the less missed standards. I would suggest setting up stations where students who need practice with different standards can get the help they need. It also allows students who did well to have time for enrichment. They can be given activities that further their understanding of what they were tested on. 

This sheet can also make it easier for a teacher to see where a particular student is at with their understanding. For example, Zoran, Zyntar, Zhield, and Zamsung answered three or four answers correctly. This suggests that these students need more one on one help, or small group instruction to better help them to understand the standards. There are also a few students who did do well overall (Zucy, Zorelda, Zirii, and Zinvis). These students can help to re teach other students who did not meet specific standards. This would be helpful to all parties. Students who help their peers to better understand material, in turn gain a more in-depth knowledge and understanding of the content (Marzano, 2010). 




References
Marzano, R. (2010, October). Art and Science of Teaching/Reviving Re Teaching. Retrieved January 24, 2016, from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/oct10/vol68/num02/Reviving-Reteaching.aspx 

Teacher Training Presentation

https://www.haikudeck.com/p/c9fca5d57a/using-technology-to-improve-student-learning

Above is the link to my presentation to teachers on training.

Assessing Technology Needs of Teachers

To view my survey please click the following link: http://goo.gl/forms/1aQ9j5sVhY

Due to the powers of Facebook, I was able to get nine people to complete my survey. There where four high school teachers, one middle school teacher, and four elementary school teachers. The purpose of this survey was to get a better idea of teachers' comfort level with different hardware, software, and Web 2.0 Tools, how to increase teachers' comfort level, to see what teachers are willing to do to help spread the knowledge of technology, and finally to see what they expect out of professional development. A needs assessment is key to the start of any project in order to help all staff members feels included, to narrow the focus of the goal, and to see what the attitude of the teachers are about the goal (Meltzer, 2012).

The results of the survey are as follows.
Comfort level with hardware was pretty consistent across grade levels. The majority of teachers surveyed stated that they were comfortable with using hardware such as a projector, laptop, smart phone, and digital camera. The only variation was with the use of an Interactive Response System. High school teachers were significantly more comfortable than elementary teachers. Similar results were shown for software, with the majority of teachers being comfortable. However, when it came to Web 2.0 Tools, there was a large fluctuation in comfort levels across the board. The middle school teacher that was surveyed was considered comfortable with all Web 2.0 Tools. However the high school and elementary school teachers were really only comfortable with using emails and online videos. For more than half of the tools inquired about, zero elementary teachers stated they were comfortable using them, and only one high school teacher stated they were comfortable. This leads me to believe that if this was my staff that I was providing professional development to that our goal would need to be to improve understanding and ability to use Web 2.0 Tools in the classroom.

When it came to improving the comfort level of technology, the preference varied by person. This tells me that several different options should be available to teachers in order to best integrate technology practices into their classroom. According to the survey, improving on hardware and software, observing someone using the technology was the biggest preference. When it came to Web 2.0 tools, teachers still want to be able to observe the technology being used, but they also want to be involved with both big group instruction, and one on one instruction.

An important factor to increasing the technology use in a school is to be able to share that it is working. All of the teachers surveyed said that they would be willing to share their knowledge of different forms of technology, and most said they would take part in modeling the technology and becoming a peer trainer. Creating training materials is something that only one of the surveyed teachers agreed to.

The last two questions to my survey were regarding professional development expectations. When asked what the most important thing to consider when planning professional development, the majority of the responses were along the lines of making sure that it was relevant to teachers and that they are interactive.

 "Make sure it applies to the teachers attending. Don't give PD for something that teachers don't have in their classrooms."

"Making sure that it is relevant to the teachers and something that they actually can use in their daily classes."

"To provide time for participants to experiment with what they are being trained in, and model for them how you would use the tools in the classroom with students."

"Making it user friendly, not having the training as just a lecture."

The step of surveying staff is essential, and I believe that if this was given to an entire staff it would certainly help to better achieve the goal of increasing the proper use of technology in the classroom. It would be important to ensure that the level of training needed is given so that participants do not frustrated or discouraged (Meltzer, 2012).


References
Meltzer, S. T. (2012). Step-by-step Professional Development in Technology. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education, Inc.

Implementing TPACK

Teaching is a complex career, and teachers must always be willing to learn new things to stay up with the ever-changing world of technology. The days of technology free classrooms are gone, and teachers must embrace the advantages that technology brings about. However, having technology in a classroom must be there for more than using it just because it's there, or as an afterthought.

TPACK, or technological pedagogy content knowledge, is a framework that "describes the kinds of knowledge that teachers need in order to teach with technology, and the complex ways in which these bodies of knowledge interact with one another" (Koehler et. al., p 2, 2013). Prior to the increase of technology in education, Shulman’s (1986) asserted that content knowledge and pedagogy knowledge needed to be combined in order to be a successful teacher. If one was a content expert, but did not have pedagogy knowledge, they would not be able to relate information to students. If vise versa, and a person knew a lot about pedagogy but not content, they would not have accurate information to pass on to students. In 21st century schools, the addition of technology knowledge is an important addition to this framework. "Effective teaching is much more than each of the pieces" (Koehler et. al., p.4, 2013).

If a teacher were to implement the TPACK framework into the classroom, they would start with content knowledge that they want their students to understand. By using their learning goals or objectives, teachers can then use a combination of their pedagogy skills and their technology skills to create a well balanced lesson that will be relative to students. Teachers must be careful to not simply lay technology over a lesson plan that already exists."TPACK describes the synthesized knowledge of each of the bodies of knowledge described above with a focus upon how technology can be uniquely crafted to meed pedagogical needs to teach certain content in specific contexts (Koehler, et.al., 2013). 

An issue that a teacher may face while implementing TPACK, is one that I believe I am guilty of. A key aspect of TPACK is using all three areas of knowledge together, and not just laying technology on top. I believe I have just placed technology on top of a lesson that I already had planned for the sake of using it. I think that implementation of this would call for breaking down any previous lessons, and completely incorporating technology pedagogy knowledge (TPK). Additionally, the lack of professional development could hurt the likelihood of properly implementing TPACK in a classroom. Teachers need support in order to increase their TPK to help them to see the best ways to incorporate technology so it is beneficial to students.    

The activities that are displayed in the table in "Instructional Planning Activity Types as Vehicles for Curriculum-Based TPACK Development" (Harris & Hofer, 2009) could definitely serve as a good resource to teachers attempting to implement TPACK. These activities are all seen in a typical traditional classroom, and are all somehow related to core subjects. For example, every teacher of every level should be able to move a verbal discussion to a discussion in a wikispace.


References
Harris, J., & Hofer, M. (2009). Instructional planning activity types as vehicles for curriculum-based TPACK development. In C.D. Made, (Ed.). Research highlights in technology and teacher education 2009 (pp. 99-108). Chesapeake, VA: Society for Information Technology in Teacher Education.

Koehler, M., Mishra, P., Akcaoglu, M., & Rosenber, J. (2013). The technological pedagogical content knowledge framework for teachers and teacher educators. Common Wealth Educational Media Centre for Asia.