Tech Tool Review

National and State Technology Standards

Assignment 9

Stephanie Baxter

       As you read the Introduction to the National Education Technology Plan, what did you determine to be the purpose of the National Education Technology Plan? How does it affect teachers and students, people like you and me? (feel free to be critical if you like).

From my understanding of the National Education Technology plan, there are many goals. I believe there are two main purposes of the plan, one being to provide a well-rounded education that caters to students of all backgrounds, learning abilities and disabilities, ages, and SES levels. Like the introduction states, “America needs a public education system that provides all learners—including low-income and minority students, English language learners, students with disabilities, gifted and talented students, early childhood learners, adult workforce learners, and seniors—with engaging and empowering learning experiences.” The second purpose of this plan is to implement technology into the classroom. It is being used somewhat in classrooms today, but there is so much more potential to be had with all of the different options and resources technology can provide today. The plan even addresses how most students have more advanced technology in their back pocket than an entire classroom has. The introduction states how advanced uses of technology can improve the student learning environment: “With technology we can provide engaging and powerful learning content, resources, and experiences and assessment systems that measure student learning in more complete, authentic, and meaningful ways.” I think a big part of the low success rates in some schools is the lack of motivation and interest many students have. Technology seems to be something that truly engages students of all ages, so I agree that more technology use should be implemented for this reason. The introduction goes on to address how using technology can improve student learning: “With technology-based learning and assessment systems, we can improve student learning and generate data that can be used to continuously improve the education system at all levels.” With technology-based learning we can learn so much about how students learn, what concepts they struggle with, and where improvements can be made. All of this information can be stored online for an endless amount of teachers and educational staff to have access to. It could really change how teachers teach their students and can help them become better educators.

2.      2. As you read the Introduction to the National Education Technology Plan (NETP), what were the main assumptions under which the plan was developed?  (you may copy and paste the main assumptions, and then answer the question below in your own words). What are some concerns administrators, educators, or even students might have with these assumptions?

“     Many of the failings of our education system stem from our failure to engage the hearts and minds of students” I think that the problem that administrators and teachers have with this assumption is the issue of standardized testing. Teachers have a hard enough workload put on them to make sure their students are being taught everything that is going to prepare them for the standardized tests the students are required to take to move on to the next level.  Even more, when student’s fail these tests, teachers are accountable. Teachers are so concerned with this that they have little to no time to think of creative ways to engage their students, especially the older grades. Lesson planning is extremely limited also, so this adds on another stressor. I think teachers would love the idea of making lessons more engaging to the hearts and minds of students, but because of standardized testing, it makes it extremely difficult.

     “Learning depends on effective teaching, and we need to focus on extended teams of connected educators with different roles who collaborate within schools and across time and distance and who use technology resources and tools to augment human talent.” I think the main problem that teachers would have with this problem is the lack of time available for collaboration. Time is limited for collaboration at a single school due to teachers having little to no time to lesson plan. Yes, it being available via technology would help, but the teachers would end up having to do this on their own time because there is simply not enough time in the school day to do this.

     “Making engaging learning experiences and resources available to all learners anytime and anywhere requires state-of-the-art infrastructure, which includes technology, people, and processes that ensure continuous access.” I think the only problem with this is where in the budget this would be possible. School districts are constantly making cuts to programs such as the arts and sports. I don’t see how we can afford to add on an additional resource to schools unless some serious budget rearrangement is considered.

3.  As you read the Executive Summary, the NETP presents a model of learning powered by technology, with goals and recommendations in five essential areas. ( You may copy and paste the areas directly from the document and then answer the question below in your own words).What are the “21st century competencies” - see the section titled “what and how people need to learn”- listed in the summary? How will technology support the growth of these competencies?

 Five essential areas: learning, assessment, teaching, infrastructure, productivity.

The 21^st century competencies are critical thinking, complex problem solving, collaboration, and multimedia communication. Technology can support these competencies because it is being used to do just that in the adult professional world, as well as in colleges by professors. People use technology such as wikis, blogs, and other web tools for research, collaboration, and communication. Teachers can create kid-friendly blogs and other web tools for their students to complete group work or peer evaluations. They can use it to encourage collaboration with students on a group project. Teachers can even stay in contact with their students after school hours through social media tools.

4. As you read The State of Ohio's Educational Technology Plan's "purpose and mission" (page 6), how do you believe it aligns with the National Education Technology Plan? In which respects are the two plans perhaps not aligned?  Why?

Both plans address using technology to enhance the educational opportunities available to students. The Ohio plan focuses on supporting education from P-20 whereas the National plan is more focused on P-12. Both plans will be reaching out to the community to learn what has worked through their experience with technology. The Ohio plan offers the community a chance to give their input and offer suggestions, whereas the National plan does not.

5. As you read Ohio’n w s State Educational Technology Plan outlined on page 8, how do you believe this outline aligns with the "model of learning powered by technology, with goals and recommendations in five essential areas" proposed by the National Education Technology Plan?  In which areas are the two plans perhaps not aligned?  Why?

Ohio’s State Technology Plan’s Outline somewhat aligns with the goals and recommendations of the National Plan but there are definitely some differences. The Ohio plan discusses expanding and integrating P-20 longitudinal data. This goal is similar to that of 2.0 and 4.5 in the National plan. The National plan discusses how “Our education system at all levels will leverage the power of technology to measure what matters and use assessment data for continuous improvement.” This goal discusses the need for improvement of the data we collect through the use of technology. 4.5 discusses how the plan will “Develop and use interoperability standards for content and student-learning data to enable collecting and sharing resources and collecting, sharing, and analyzing data to improve decision making at all levels of our education system.” Again, this is addressing the importance technology has in advancing the data we collect and how it can improve teaching and decisions on a child’s education.

The Ohio plan discusses how it will offer “virtual learning content and opportunities” to all Ohio students. The National plan has ideas similar to this in section 1.3 and 3.3. 1.3 states “States, districts, and others should develop and implement learning resources that exploit the flexibility and power of technology to reach all learners anytime and anywhere.” This is basically saying that the use of technology through computers, tablets, etc., should be available to all students at any time. 3.3 furthers this claim including the use of an internet connection, “Use technology to provide all learners with online access to effective teaching and better learning opportunities and options especially in places where they are not otherwise available.” Both plans stress that online and virtual content should be available to students at any time for free. I also think that both the plans have the goal to have more services available to students and families.

The Ohio plan discusses the goal of providing “advanced student services,” and the National plan somewhat applies with 4.1, “Ensure students and educators have broadband access to the Internet and adequate wireless connectivity both in and out of school.” Schools generally only provide these services while the students are in school. The option of having internet and virtual content available to all students for free is a new and much needed improvement.

Both plans have similar goals and recommendations in regards to staff development. The Ohio plan discusses the delivery of “high quality professional development.” The National plan covers this issue as well in goals 3.5 and 3.0. 3.5 is discussing the need to “Develop a teaching force skilled in online instruction.” I think this goal is geared towards the long-time teachers who have always taught using pen and paper. Many teachers don’t want to face the reality of technologies influence on students these days. 3.0 discusses the main inclusion technology will have on today’s teaching staff, “Professional educators will be supported individually and in teams by technology that connects them to data, content, resources, expertise, and learning experiences that enable and inspire more effective teaching for all learners.”

There are some areas where the plans do not align. The Ohio plan discusses how it will “support public broadcasting and media delivery.” This is not addressed in the National plan. The National plan also does not address the “support of federal programs” like the Ohio Plan does. However, the Ohio plan does not address anything specifically about engaging and empowering students like the National plan does in the first goal, 1.0. It also does not mention anything about assessment, as the National plan does in the second goal, 2.0. Lastly the Ohio plan offers a chance for Ohioans to give their point of view on the plan whereas that option is not mentioned in the National Plan

6. As you read Ohio’s State Educational Technology Plan's "measurements of success" (page 16), what barriers do you see to fulfilling this plan? Provide four reasons why it may not be possible to reach these "measurements of success" in the state of Ohio.

The first item on the plan to “measure the success” discusses “Number of Ohio teacher preparation programs requiring the experience integrating technology into curriculum and teaching practices as part of graduation requirements.” I think the main problem some schools will have with this is not every school in the state can afford to do this. Some schools do not even have computers because of it being in a severely deprived area. The second problem I see is with calculating the “Percentage of students reporting use of technology in the learning environment.” Not every student in the U.S. is going to report this information necessarily. You can tell a student to report this information, it doesn’t mean they will remember to or choose to do this. Unless this somehow involves teachers, you can hold young children accountable for this. Older students, yes this could work. A third problem I find with this is calculating the “Number of students enrolled in on-line courses.” Not every student who has technology available will be able to enroll. Unless the technology is provided to them, which this plan implies will happen. Also, students with learning disabilities and physical disabilities may steer away from this option, which could cause problems with accurate results. One last problem this plan may have is increasing the goal in the “Number of higher education faculty teaching distance learning course sections. I think a lot of teaching faculty would need to be trained to efficiently run distance learning courses. Until this happens, those teachers knowledgeable with distance learning will have a heavier workload with more students. This will cost a poor learning experience and environment due to overworking teachers.

ORC Lesson Plan

The grade for this lesson plan is kindergarten. The subject area is mathematics. This lesson plan focuses on subtraction using a balance. The students are first asked to demonstrate how a balance works using their bodies. The teacher asks for a volunteer and places a container in each of the child's hands. The teacher then asks the child to imagine what it would look like if the container on the right was heavy and left was light. The teacher would then have the rest of the class imagine what this would look like and use their bodies to show what it may look like. Then the teacher will show how a pan balance works. The teacher then puts eight pasta shapes on the left side and two on the right. The children then need to figure out how many shapes need to be moved to balance the scale. The teacher then gives each child a number cube and assigns them to the left or right side of the scale. The children then work out the subtraction equation and then place their pasta shapes on the scale. The teacher has the children record the differences and repeat until the scale balances. Next the teacher gives the students a paper bag and asks the children to place five or less on the left side of the scale and the same with the right side. Tell the other students to take away the pasta shapes until the scale balances. Have the students repeat this switching roles several times. Once finished, ask the children to record one of the ways they balanced the scale, in words or pictures.


Standards

Common Core State Standards – Mathematics

-Kindergarten, Counting & Cardinality

• CCSS.Math.Content.K.CC.A.3
  Write numbers from 0 to 20. Represent a number of objects with a written numeral 0-20 (with 0 representing a count of no objects).

-Kindergarten, Algebraic Thinking

• CCSS.Math.Content.K.OA.A.1
  Represent addition and subtraction with objects, fingers, mental images, drawings1, sounds (e.g., claps), acting out situations, verbal explanations, expressions, or equations.

-Kindergarten, Algebraic Thinking

• CCSS.Math.Content.K.OA.A.2
  Solve addition and subtraction word problems, and add and subtract within 10, e.g., by using objects or drawings to represent the problem.

-Kindergarten, Algebraic Thinking

• CCSS.Math.Content.K.OA.A.5
  Fluently add and subtract within 5.

The lesson addresses standard CCSS.Math.Content.K.CC.A.3 by using pasta shapes to represent numbers 1-10.The lesson addresses CCSS.Math.Content.K.OA.A.1 and CCSS.Math.Content.K.OA.A.2 by using a pan balance to represent subtraction equations. As children take away pasta shapes they are performing a subtraction equation. The lesson addresses CCSS.Math.Content.K.OA.A.5 when the children are given time to make several combinations of subtraction numbers. The children add and subtract the pasta shapes to balance the scale.

Implementing this lesson would depend on how many pan balances are available to the teacher. If there are only two or three balances, this would probably be limited to six or less children at a time simply to avoid sharing issues. I would most likely do this at a individual center option. However, for the most part, I think this lesson could be successful. I think the main problem with this activity is that everyone would want to do it and there would only be a limited amount of materials. I think most children would not have a problem understanding this activity. I would even try doing more then ten pasta shapes, seeing if the children can subtract using 20 or less.

http://illuminations.nctm.org/Lesson.aspx?id=686