The Leadership Role of the CTO

          In the journal Technology Leaders Wanted: Acknowledging the Leadership Role of a Technology Coordinator, Williams Sugar and Harold Holloman explain that the role of the technology officer has evolved from that of a technology problem solver into more of a leadership role. Sugar and Holloman explain that the role of the CTO falls into four areas including instruction, technical support, analysis of technology needs, and leadership. The CTO must be able to provide instruction to teachers on best practices for the use of technology to best support student learning. This can be done either through formal or informal professional development sessions and can also be provided by modeling those best practices for the teachers. A technology coordinator must also be able to provide technical support at the individual, school, and district level. Not only does this require the CTO to be able to solve technology issues regarding devices, hardware, and software, but it also requires the CTO to be able to evaluate and recommend the purchase of available technology products. The CTO is also responsible for analyzing the effectiveness of the school and district technology plan and how the plan is being implemented. Technology coordinators are responsible for identifying what technology is available, what technology is being used by the district, and whether or not the district is effectively using technology to meet the technology plan and district vision. Finally, the successful technology officer is responsible for providing leadership for teachers both verbally and through action. Sugar and Holloman state that one of the most important role of the CTO is to take a leadership role in developing and implementing the district plan for instructional use of technology and in order to reach this goal it is important for the CTO to collaborate and communicate with building level teams, individual staff and with principals in order to help them successfully move towards the district vision for technology use.

            In Sycamore, the district technology coordinator tends to provide leadership more at the administrative level and relies heavily on the four building-level technology specialists for communicating with principals and teachers. The CTO in Sycamore tends to make decisions at the district level only and isn’t very visible to teachers. Once the decisions are made, they are conveyed to the four building-level technology specialists, who then bring the information, devices, or programs to the schools that they work with. Unfortunately, this tends to make her (the CTO) seem a bit unapproachable and prevents her from developing a rapport with individual teachers. This also puts the responsibility on the building-level technology specialists for bringing information in regards to the success of implementation of the district’s technology use back to the CTO rather than allowing her to evaluate the success of the technology plan on her own. This, at times, seems to cause a bit of a disconnect between how technology is actually being used at the classroom level and the decisions about technology that are being made at the district level. This also tends to put a lot of the responsibility for solving technology issues on the building-level technology specialists rather than allowing them to focus on using technology (and supporting teachers in their use of technology) to improve student learning.

Sugar, W., & Holloman, H. (2009). Technology leaders wanted: acknowledging the

leadership role of a technology coordinator. Techtrends: Linking Research &

Practice To Improve Learning, 53(6), 66-75. doi:10.1007/s11528-009-0346-y

Virtual Technology: 

Bringing the World Into the Special Education Classroom

http://web.a.ebscohost.com.library.aurora.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=3&sid=a149366e-cc41-40e6-a252-e936217828d6%40sessionmgr4009

The article, Virtual Technology: Bringing the World Into the Special Education Classroom, began by introducing the reader to the different types of virtual technology that are available to use in the classroom. The differences between the different types of virtual technology from augmented reality where the user controls an avatar character to interact with a virtual world (think: Oregon Trail) all the way to full immersion experiences where the user dons a headset and hand controllers in order to experience the digital world in the first person. The different equipment needed for each type of virtual experience was explained as well as some of the software that is available that could be used in an academic setting. It was then explained how beneficial this technology could be when used for students with special needs. Field trips can be extremely beneficial for students, allowing them to develop much more concrete understanding of concepts taught in the classroom by allowing students to experience them and interact with them first hand. Unfortunately, once the experience is over, there is no way to revisit the content without going back to the site. The article explained that with virtual field trips, students are able to experience a field trip and then revisit as many times necessary. For students who are heavily impacted by physical or cognitive impairments, very practical virtual experiences are available through programs such as Virtual House or Virtual Supermarket. In the Virtual Supermarket program, the users are able to push a cart through isles and select products. Once finished shopping, the user must bring the items to the cashier and select the correct amount of money to complete their purchase. One can clearly see the benefits from this type of practice for real world life skills of interacting with others, decision making, proper behavior in public all without the added stress of making mistakes.
One of my good friends is a special education teacher in our district who works with students who are very impacted either physically or cognitively. Each year he and his coworkers bring their students to a local convenience store in order to work on proper behavior in a public setting, making decisions, interacting with people in the store, interacting with employees at the store and the process of paying for the goods they are purchasing. I don’t think that he would trade this experience for anything, but I was struck with how beneficial the Virtual Supermarket virtual reality program would be for his students in order to practice these skills before the actual experience takes place. I also thought that virtual technology would be extremely beneficial for general education students, especially at the elementary levels who have difficulty focusing on the important content involved on field trips or are not ready for the physical endurance needed for an all day field trip. Many times after a field trip when we are debriefing or discussing what we learned on the trip, my students are unable to discuss the content either because they didn’t see the content that I was hoping they would experience or because they simply don’t remember it. I would love to be able to use virtual technology to experience the trip before an actual field trip in order to “front-load” my students with information and allow them to plan on where to focus their attention during a field trip. Virtual technology would also be an excellent tool to revisit the field trip site to experience the material at my students’ own paces and as many times as needed to develop a full understanding of the content.

Smedley, T.M., & Higgins, K. (2005) Virtual technology: bringing the world into the special education classroom. Intervention in school & clinic. 41(2).

RSA: virtual field trips

Virtual Field Trips

Bringing "out there" into the classroom

        Field trips are an excellent opportunity for students to learn in a unique environment. Students are able to completely immerse themselves in their environment, using the sights and sounds to build on what they have learned in the classroom. Shrinking school budgets could spell an end to these wonderful learning opportunities for our students, but it doesn't have to. Meyer (2016) explains that virtual field trips allow students to visit far away places and interact with experts in real time without ever leaving the classroom.
        Discovery Education offers virtual field trip packages such as a look at president Lincoln's assassination, exploring the Holocaust through a trip to Auschwitz, or a trip under the ocean. Each of these virtual field trips also includes prepared materials and classroom activities. Another option for virtual field trips is provided through Google Expeditions. This is a more affordable option that still provides 3D field trips using cardboard headsets powered by a smartphone. Another manufacturer of virtual field trip experiences is NASA with their NASA's Eyes computer simulations which provide students with a field trip experience that would otherwise be completely out of their reach. The last option that the article addressed is to construct your own virtual field trip. Although this option would be the most labor intensive for teachers, it would also allow teachers to truly connect the virtual field trip experience with their district's curriculum, their classroom activities, and even to the individual students.

        I have been at the same school for eight years which has given me a unique view of how much our school and district have changed. For the first seven years, each class was provided with a budget that permitted two field trips. With shrinking budgets and increased cost of the field trips, we were only allowed to go on one field trip last year and we have the same budget for this year. The more I learn about virtual field trips, the more I think this may be a feasible option for schools in the future. I will be the first to support the importance of providing our students with field trip experiences. Nothing can take the place of supporting what has been taught in class with a field trip. My students love their animal unit and are completely engaged with every lesson I can throw their way. However, the real learning comes only after our field trip to the zoo. Seeing the animals move, developing an understanding of their true size, and getting to hear the animals provides my first graders with a depth of knowledge that I could never provide in the classroom. Upon return, each of my students can talk at length and in-depth about the characteristics of animals from each kingdom and provide support by accessing their personal experiences. The experience is truly powerful for them. However, from a first grade teacher's perspective, field trips are the absolute worst (second only to parent-teacher conferences). The stress of keeping track of 28 first graders (and some of their parents), organizing the trip, the bone-jarring bus ride, the cost, and so many other factors literally keep me up for several nights leading up to the trip.
        On the other hand, the cost of a set of virtual reality goggles and the equipment that goes along with it costs around $10,000! Yikes! I can't imagine trying to get that purchase past a school board or budget committee...Unless you take into the account that it's $500-$1,000 just for the cost of transportation and admission for a class of 30 students. You could also make the argument that the students safety is not a factor when it comes to virtual field trips as it is on a traditional field trip. Students not only get to fully immerse themselves in their virtual trips, but they can also visit places that are completely impossible to reach on a traditional field trip such as places on the other side of the Earth, inside the human body, or a journey into the farthest reaches of our solar system. I, for one, wouldn't mind it a bit if I never had to take another hour long, ear-splitting, headache-causing, spine-shrinking bus ride.

In closing, consider this...we have 11 first grade classes in our district. If it costs around $500 for each field trip we take (and that's a low estimate) and each class takes two field trips, it costs about $11,000 for our field trips each year. A Google Excursions kit of 30 sets of goggles, a teacher tablet, charging station, and subscription costs just under $10,000.

Meyer, L. (2016). Students explore the Earth and beyond with virtual field trips. T H E Journal, 43(3), 22-25.

RSA: Revamping Tech PD

RSA: Revamping Professional Development for Technology Integration and Fluency

        In her article Revamping Professional Development for Technology Integration and Fluency Sandra Plair calls for improvements to the professional development available to teachers for technology integration. Despite writing the journal almost ten years ago, many of the same concerns that she voiced are still shared by teachers today. Many times the pressure to incorporate technology in education brings about rapid adoption of the newest technology tools in districts where teachers have no experience effectively using the tools for instruction. Teachers either don't understand how the new technology fits into their existing curriculum or they don't see the implementation of these devices and programs as part of their content responsibilities. Unfortunately, the problems worsen when only short periods of training (which are much more sales pitch than training) are provided for teachers with little to no continued support afterward. Plair points out that many teachers leave these trainings not knowing how to bring what they have learned into their classroom, not understanding how to begin using the new technology tools, or discontinue use of the technology tool when problems arise and they have no support for how to trouble shoot.
        Technology directors are overwhelmed with questions and are unable to provide support to each teacher or are unable to provide support specifically for each teacher's class or content area needs. The answer, Plair suggested, could come in the form of technology "knowledge brokers" or technology coaches who would be able to serve as an intermediary between technology directors and classroom teachers. In order for Plair's vision to work, these technology coaches must be allowed to keep up on current technology trends by reading current literature and by attending seminars. These technology coaches also have to be available to address technology questions, there when teachers are initially implementing tech-heavy lessons, and available in a timely manner when problems arise.

        After reading this article, I felt like many of my past concerns with professional development had been validated. Too many times, new programs or technology devices are shoved at use with little or no training. If training is provided for new technology, continued support is hardly ever successfully provided. In the past, our in-school technology teacher served as a coach. Even with his vast knowledge of what technological tools are available for educational uses and how to use the technology, he had a very hard time explaining how to implement the technology in my classroom or how to fit it into our current curriculum. With a shrinking budget, we no longer have a technology teacher for each school. In fact, our technology teacher is spread between three elementary schools which makes our teachers' in-class technology questions difficult to address. I'm truly hoping that after completing our MAET program, I will be able to partially satisfy the role of a technology coach for my grade level team. By having a general understanding of how to use the technological tools in an elementary setting and a good understanding of our content area information, I may be able to better support elementary teachers successfully integrate the technology into their current teaching practices. 

Plair, S. K. (2008). Revamping Professional Development for Technology Integration and Fluency. Clearing House, 82(2), 70-74.

overhead projector infographic

https://magic.piktochart.com/output/23378342-overhead-projector-infographic

RSA: Tech in the Classroom - Yesterday & Today

Technology in the Classroom - Questions From Yesteryear Persist Today

    d          Although the article Power Point, Technology and the Web: More Than Just an Overhead Projector for the New Century was written in 2003 and focused on technology that has since become nearly obsolete, many of the questions, issues and uses of technology discussed in the article are still viable today. The article was written by a college level history professor who was obviously an advocate for the use of technology in the classroom both by the professor and by the students. Although clearly an advocate of technology use in the classroom, DenBeste warned that the use of technology in the classroom must be purposeful, meaningful and useful for both the teacher and student. DenBeste warned that many types of classroom technology (specifically Power Point presentations) can be very time consuming to employ. He also discussed the issue of student access to technology and explained that many students did not have personal computers or access to Internet in order to easily use them for their own education. He also discussed the lack of familiarity with computers among some students in order to effectively use them for their education and expressed concerns about content area teachers being responsible for teaching how to use technology rather than their content areas. This issue is certainly still relevant today. 

                    After discussing the pitfalls of technology use in the classroom, DenBeste went on to explain some of the benefits. Being a history teacher, he was especially enamored with the use of online resources providing students with primary sources of information. He was very careful to explain that students had to be shown how to evaluate the accuracy and validity of these online resources. DenBeste went on to describe how Power Point could be used both by the teacher and students as a means to present information. Finally, discussion boards were discussed as a means for collaboration and discussion among students. DenBeste explained that these discussion boards allow students who were typically shy an unwilling to participate in in-class discussions a means to express themselves and contribute to class discussions without the discomfort of speaking in front of their peers. He explained that these discussion boards provide a sense of community and interconnectedness among class members. 

                      As I read this fourteen year-old article, I was shocked with how little the issues concerning technology use in the classroom have changed. Power Point, a new program at the time, is still commonly used (along with programs like Google Slides and Prezi) and has changed very little. Although there are several new programs and devices, it seems to me that the underlying questions of how and why the technology is being used in the classroom are still extremely important and should be considered before implementation in our classrooms. It seems that sometimes the pressure to use technology in the classroom results in meaningless tech use that doesn't result in improved student learning. I was also intrigued with the concern that DenBeste expressed with having inequity among students in regards to access to technology. Although this issue has less of an impact today than it did in 2003, the difference in access to technology from school to school and student to student is still struggled with today. The familiarity with technology is also something that was mentioned in this article and is still pertinent today as well. An issue that is rarely discussed in this area is who does it fall on to provide our students with direct instruction on how to use technology such as programs and devices? It seems that although the use of technology is becoming much more commonplace in education today, careful thought and planning to make technology use in the classroom meaningful and purposeful is still as important today as it was in the past.   

                   

DenBeste, M. (2003). Power Point, Technology and the Web: More Than Just an Overhead Projector for the New
          Century?. History Teacher, 36(4), 491-504.

Journal Response: Supporting Striving Readers Through Technology-Based Instruction

Supporting Striving Readers Through Technology-Based Instruction

     

     The article Supporting Striving Readers Through Technology-Based Instruction focused on a case study attempting to determine whether or not the use of digital, technology based teaching techniques and materials improved the reading proficiency of children. The participating reading specialists were observed during the capstone semester of their masters program. Data was collected via observations, student performance (progress monitoring and assessments), and self-evaluation and questionnaires. 
     Notable uses of technology during the case study were Flip video cameras for recording readers theatre and to document student reading, online resources to support vocabulary and to practice word skills, word processing programs for written responses, and multi-media programs which were used to create projects to foster comprehension. Teachers recorded their results in a portfolio which included an overview of the instructional activities and assessments used, daily lesson plans, reflective journal entries, and progress monitoring results for the students. Teachers were also observed and interviewed. 
     The results that were shared suggested that the students were more motivated and engaged when technology was used in lessons. Teachers reported that the students showed improvement in their reading, especially in regards to their fluency. The teachers also noted that because of the use of the Flip cameras to record and play back their students' reading for them, the students were able to become more aware of their reading and were able to set reading goals for themselves. 

     Although I was impressed by some of the uses of technology to support reading instruction, I wasn't impressed with the means of data collection as both the observations made by the professor on the teachers' performance and the teachers' observations and data recording were very subjective. Many of the uses of technology in this case study are simply slight alterations of teaching techniques that are typically used in reading instruction. As long as it's done with purpose and meaning, I certainly think there are benefits to implementing the SAMR framework to current reading instruction practices. Whether or not the technology has a direct positive impact on student reading performance or not, it would certainly add a new twist to reading instruction and would probably result in more motivation and engagement among students. 

Laverick, D. M. (2014). Supporting striving readers through technology-based instruction. Reading Improvement, 51(1), 11-19.