Well, twice during this EDLD5352 course, I tried to participate in an online discussion in real time. In previous courses, I have participated successfully several times. In this course, however, things have been more problematic. In the originally scheduled web conference, I logged in successfully and everything was fine. However, the more than 100 participants made the experience very challenging. With so many people, the text chat flew by faster than anyone could reasonably be expected to read it. Dr. Abernathy herself was clearly losing patience with the whole experience. In fact, after about twenty minutes, she ended the conversation.
This evening, a couple of new conferences were scheduled to make up for the unfortunate experience we had earlier. To prevent another exercise in frustration, Dr. Abernathy limited each conference to twenty-five participants. I must not have been one of the twenty-five because I was not able to get in.
Nevertheless, I have participated in other web conferences and had wonderful experiences. These web conferences can be valuable in assisting students separated by distance. It allows for the interaction in real time and even to see facial expressions and tone of voice. Text-only communication cannot adequately convey tone while a video/audio conversation can.
Who Do I Think I Am?
- David M. DeLuca
- I am pursuing a M. Ed. in Education Administration at Lamar University.
Sunday, March 27, 2011
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Goal: Implement the use of hand-held digital devices in instruction at La Grange Middle School.
| Strategy/Activity | Person(s) Responsible | Timeline | Assessment/Evaluation |
| Research schools/districts that already integrate hand-held devices in the classroom | Grade-level team leaders | April, 2011 | A collection of district and campus plans/rules for use of hand-held devices is collected. |
| Using data uncovered in surveying other schools, cull "critical" attributes for a La Grange ISD plan. | Grade-level committees | April, 2011 | A list of attributes for the plan can be presented to the faculty. |
| Survey teachers regarding issues/concerns in using hand-held devices in class. | Campus counselors | May, 2011 | Each item identified in the previous step can be ranked in importance to the faculty. In addition, a list of pitfalls or concerns can be created. |
| Work with local businesses to acquire devices for students who otherwise cannot afford them. | PTO President | June-August, 2011 | 100% of students have and use hand-held devices in class. |
| Infrastructure (primarily wi-fi access points) is installed to support student use of hand-held devices. | District Technology Coordinator | June-August, 2011 | Students and teachers can successfully join a secure wi-fi network while at school. |
| Present an in-service session on the effective use of hand-held devices in the classroom. | District Technology Coordinator | August, 2011 | Implementation of hand-held devices will be documented via teacher lesson plans, classroom observations, and student work products. |
| Implement the use of hand-held devices in instruction at La Grange Middle School. | Classroom teachers | 2011-12 school year | Lesson plans, classroom observations, student work products. |
Sunday, March 6, 2011
Tranforming American Education: Learning Powered by Technology
Transforming American Education: Learning Powered by Technology is the draft of the National Educational Technology Plan 2010. The Obama administration believes that “Education is the key to America’s economic growth and prosperity and to our ability to compete in the global economy.” ("Transforming american education:," 2010) The plan presents a model of learning that is powered by technology. It breaks down the goals and recommendations into five essential areas: learning, assessment, teaching, infrastructure, and productivity.
• Learning: The education system must find a way to bring learning and technology together in a way to create engaging, relevant, and personalized learning experiences. This must take advantage of the limitless, borderless, and instantaneous technology that students use in their daily lives.
• Assessment: Learning must be assessed, including 21st century competencies such as critical thinking, complex problem solving, collaboration, and multimedia communication. With these assessments, data can be used to drive continuous improvement.
• Teaching: “The expectation of effective teaching and accountability for professional educators is a critical component of transforming our education system, but equally important is recognizing that we need to strengthen and elevate the teaching profession.” ("Transforming american education:," 2010) Technology can help build the capacity of educators by allowing them to connect in new ways. Professional development becomes collaborative, coherent, and continuous.
• Infrastructure: The infrastructure for technology has been dramatically improved over the last forty years.
• Productivity: Basic assumptions about education need to be confronted. We can begin organizing around students’ individual needs rather than traditional academic periods and lockstep pacing. Technology can be an important tool in this advancement.
The National Educational Technology Plan 2010 goes on to make many recommendations for the “improvement” of the American educational system. Many of the suggestions have much merit to them. However, I am not confident that the nation is ready to accept a federalization of our educational system. Public education has been a function of the states and subdivided into local school districts. The recommendations of the NETP may be laudable, but I am quite hesitant to remove the function of public education from the states. This would have the effect of moving the educational bureaucracy even farther away from the citizens it serves.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. (2010). Transforming american education: learning powered by technology. Washington, DC:
• Learning: The education system must find a way to bring learning and technology together in a way to create engaging, relevant, and personalized learning experiences. This must take advantage of the limitless, borderless, and instantaneous technology that students use in their daily lives.
• Assessment: Learning must be assessed, including 21st century competencies such as critical thinking, complex problem solving, collaboration, and multimedia communication. With these assessments, data can be used to drive continuous improvement.
• Teaching: “The expectation of effective teaching and accountability for professional educators is a critical component of transforming our education system, but equally important is recognizing that we need to strengthen and elevate the teaching profession.” ("Transforming american education:," 2010) Technology can help build the capacity of educators by allowing them to connect in new ways. Professional development becomes collaborative, coherent, and continuous.
• Infrastructure: The infrastructure for technology has been dramatically improved over the last forty years.
• Productivity: Basic assumptions about education need to be confronted. We can begin organizing around students’ individual needs rather than traditional academic periods and lockstep pacing. Technology can be an important tool in this advancement.
The National Educational Technology Plan 2010 goes on to make many recommendations for the “improvement” of the American educational system. Many of the suggestions have much merit to them. However, I am not confident that the nation is ready to accept a federalization of our educational system. Public education has been a function of the states and subdivided into local school districts. The recommendations of the NETP may be laudable, but I am quite hesitant to remove the function of public education from the states. This would have the effect of moving the educational bureaucracy even farther away from the citizens it serves.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. (2010). Transforming american education: learning powered by technology. Washington, DC:
Thursday, March 3, 2011
2010 Progress Report on the Texas Long Range Plan for Technology, 2006-2020
In 2006, the Texas Education Agency issued a report to the legislature and the people of Texas outlining a plan for technology’s role and implementation in education. The resulting Texas Long Range Plan for Technology, 2006-2020, addresses for areas for technology: Teaching and Learning; Educator Preparation and Development; Leadership, Administration and Instructional Support; and Infrastructure for Technology.
It is the infrastructure that makes the other three areas possible. The plan itself says, “The infrastructure of a school is the critical element of support for all four areas of this plan: teaching and learning; educator preparation and development; leadership, administration and instructional support; and infrastructure for technology” (2006, p.35)
Investment in infrastructure pays dividends for many years. A robust, scalable infrastructure will allow students and teachers to access online information and research in new, exciting, and engaging ways. It will also allow collaboration with students and educators in their own school as well as in schools far away. The students’ world can broaden in real and significant ways. A strong tech infrastructure can bring all of this to our students and teachers in a very cost-effective way.
However, technology does not bring these benefits in a cost-free way. As schools across Texas have to wield the budget-cutting knife, technology infrastructure can present itself as among the first items to be cut. Texas has made strides in implementing a robust infrastructure, but it may be abandoned in the name of fiscal responsibility. Of course, this may not truly be a wise move as investing in infrastructure in the future may cost even more.
The cost of technology infrastructure also presents a challenge in insuring that all stakeholders have equitable access. Technology has a unique way of separating the “haves” from the “have-nots”. Care must be taken to make sure that the quality of the technology a student has is not solely dependent on his/her ZIP code.
Texas Education Agency, (2006). texas long range plan for technology, 2006-2020. Austin, Texas:
It is the infrastructure that makes the other three areas possible. The plan itself says, “The infrastructure of a school is the critical element of support for all four areas of this plan: teaching and learning; educator preparation and development; leadership, administration and instructional support; and infrastructure for technology” (2006, p.35)
Investment in infrastructure pays dividends for many years. A robust, scalable infrastructure will allow students and teachers to access online information and research in new, exciting, and engaging ways. It will also allow collaboration with students and educators in their own school as well as in schools far away. The students’ world can broaden in real and significant ways. A strong tech infrastructure can bring all of this to our students and teachers in a very cost-effective way.
However, technology does not bring these benefits in a cost-free way. As schools across Texas have to wield the budget-cutting knife, technology infrastructure can present itself as among the first items to be cut. Texas has made strides in implementing a robust infrastructure, but it may be abandoned in the name of fiscal responsibility. Of course, this may not truly be a wise move as investing in infrastructure in the future may cost even more.
The cost of technology infrastructure also presents a challenge in insuring that all stakeholders have equitable access. Technology has a unique way of separating the “haves” from the “have-nots”. Care must be taken to make sure that the quality of the technology a student has is not solely dependent on his/her ZIP code.
Texas Education Agency, (2006). texas long range plan for technology, 2006-2020. Austin, Texas:
The Texas Long Range Plan for Technology, 2006-2020
In 2006, the Texas Education Agency issued a report to the legislature and the people of Texas outlining a plan for technology’s role and implementation in education. The resulting Texas Long Range Plan for Technology, 2006-2020, addresses for areas for technology: Teaching and Learning; Educator Preparation and Development; Leadership, Administration and Instructional Support; and Infrastructure for Technology.
It is the infrastructure that makes the other three areas possible. The plan itself says, “The infrastructure of a school is the critical element of support for all four areas of this plan: teaching and learning; educator preparation and development; leadership, administration and instructional support; and infrastructure for technology” (2006, p.35)
Investment in infrastructure pays dividends for many years. A robust, scalable infrastructure will allow students and teachers to access online information and research in new, exciting, and engaging ways. It will also allow collaboration with students and educators in their own school as well as in schools far away. The students’ world can broaden in real and significant ways. A strong tech infrastructure can bring all of this to our students and teachers in a very cost-effective way.
However, technology does not bring these benefits in a cost-free way. As schools across Texas have to wield the budget-cutting knife, technology infrastructure can present itself as among the first items to be cut. Texas has made strides in implementing a robust infrastructure, but it may be abandoned in the name of fiscal responsibility. Of course, this may not truly be a wise move as investing in infrastructure in the future may cost even more.
The cost of technology infrastructure also presents a challenge in insuring that all stakeholders have equitable access. Technology has a unique way of separating the “haves” from the “have-nots”. Care must be taken to make sure that the quality of the technology a student has is not solely dependent on his/her ZIP code.
Texas Education Agency, (2006). texas long range plan for technology, 2006-2020. Austin, Texas:
It is the infrastructure that makes the other three areas possible. The plan itself says, “The infrastructure of a school is the critical element of support for all four areas of this plan: teaching and learning; educator preparation and development; leadership, administration and instructional support; and infrastructure for technology” (2006, p.35)
Investment in infrastructure pays dividends for many years. A robust, scalable infrastructure will allow students and teachers to access online information and research in new, exciting, and engaging ways. It will also allow collaboration with students and educators in their own school as well as in schools far away. The students’ world can broaden in real and significant ways. A strong tech infrastructure can bring all of this to our students and teachers in a very cost-effective way.
However, technology does not bring these benefits in a cost-free way. As schools across Texas have to wield the budget-cutting knife, technology infrastructure can present itself as among the first items to be cut. Texas has made strides in implementing a robust infrastructure, but it may be abandoned in the name of fiscal responsibility. Of course, this may not truly be a wise move as investing in infrastructure in the future may cost even more.
The cost of technology infrastructure also presents a challenge in insuring that all stakeholders have equitable access. Technology has a unique way of separating the “haves” from the “have-nots”. Care must be taken to make sure that the quality of the technology a student has is not solely dependent on his/her ZIP code.
Texas Education Agency, (2006). texas long range plan for technology, 2006-2020. Austin, Texas:
Sunday, November 14, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)