On-line Learning: Counting the Costs

With the changing pace of the educational system in the state of North Carolina, on-line classes are growing in popularity. Traditional school concepts are morphing into modern learning communities via increased use of the internet. However, despite the benefits of on-line learning, several concerns continue to plague the system. One of these concerns is the developmental readiness of the students participating in such classes. Are the students’ reading skills proficient enough to handle the expectations of the coursework? Do students possess enough self-discipline to successfully complete the course requirements? Can an auditory learner be successful in an on-line class? Can subjects such as math, chemistry, or theater arts be effectively taught on-line?

When considering the use of educational technology, teaching, and learning, school leaders must consider several implications. Not all stakeholders can or will be successful in on-line classes due to the level of commitment, structure, and self-discipline that is required. Educators teaching on-line classes must buy in to the concept of on-line teaching, and receive an adequate amount of training in order to make the program successful. Students must be carefully selected to make sure that their academic needs are fully realized. Finally, parents must commit to providing support and direction needed to guide student learning. In short, for on-line classes to be successful in the public school setting there must be collaboration and dedication from all parties involved.

Technology Plans

Our group believes it is imperative the school implement a strategic technology plan before implementing technology standards within the school.

• The plan should be aligned with the county strategic plan.
• The plan should be coherent and explain how the technology will be beneficial to the student’s learning process.
• There needs to be a measurable assessment for the student’s achievement.
• Timelines for replacing and replenishing outdated materials and equipment.
• Relevant professional development for accessible technology within the school.
• The plan should include a detailed budget for all technology needs.

We need to determine how technology is being facilitating student achievement and productivity. Instead of placing the emphasis on how much technology is in the school, administrators should focus on how the technology is influencing the learning process.

Implications for educational technology

Implications for educational technology, teaching and learning, and school leadership 

After reflecting on the content and assignments covered so far in class we have come to the consensus that:

• Technology is an educational tool that enhances teaching and learning
• Information literacy is a 21^st century skill
• Technology allows for differentiated learning experiences
• Technology facilitates communication between school and the community
• Technology facilitates professional learning communities
• Technology enables effective management of data
• School leaders need to ensure that technology plans have clear and measurable objectives with regards to student learning
• School leaders must continually evaluate how well the school is meeting the objectives of the tech plan

In conclusion, the school leader is the most important factor in determining the success of the integration of technology into the school culture.

Online Staff Development

Online staff development provides new avenues for educational technology, teaching and learning, and school leadership. It allows educators more flexibility to participate in staff development opportunities. Instead of having to be at a certain location at a scheduled time, staff members can complete development at their convenience. Individuals, who may be more reluctant to participate in a group setting, would be more inclined to contribute due to anonymity. Retention of information increases when staff members are actively engaged in their learning. The staff is motivated to complete training when given the option to choose their focus.

Educational Technology, Teaching and Learning, and School Leadership

Based on course content, assignments and discussions so far, what are some implications for educational technology, teaching and learning, and school leadership?

Standardized Testing and the EC Student

I have often wondered why students identified with learning disabilities are expected to demonstrate mastery of grade level skills at the same time as non-disabled students. What is the rationale in expecing children, who don’t learn at the same rate as others, to take the same standardized test, at the same time? Yes, accomodations are made (i.e. extended time, multiple testing sessions, separate room, read aloud, etc.) but it doesn’t change the fact that these students are being tested on the same material as their non-disabled peers. They, in essence, have had the same amount of time to learn the same amount of material as other, non-identified students. Does that make any sense? Here are these children, who require different instructional techniques, different pacing, and different assessments in the classroom, who are often faced with failure at the end of the year when they are assessed in the same way as those not identified with disablities. If we as teachers are struggling to teach all the material to “regular ed” students before the test, think of what teachers of EC students are faced with. They, too, are expected to follow the same pacing guide, and yield the same results as those whose students are not identified. For the first time, I am teaching an inclusion class. I am amazed at the levels of disabilities that are grouped together. I have students who struggle to write their name on a piece of paper, can not yet add or subtract fluently (I teach 5th grade), and who read on a 1st grade level. They have taken the EOG each year, and are expected to take it again this year. These students have never passed the EOG, and, despite the progress they have made in their personal academics (IEP goals), do not recognize themselves as successful. Regardless of the praise they recieve for their progress or efforts, they are faced with the disappointment of failing the “big” test. As if that weren’t enough, they get to endure the treacherous burden of remediation and retesting that comes after they fail the test the first time. (Just think… they get to look forward to taking it 2 more times!) I really don’t know what the answers are. I do know that there must be other ways to test these children. The “one size fits all” approach we have for testing is just not working.

Technology in the 21st Century

As an educator, it is truly amazing to see how involved technology is in education. Just about every workshop & staff development I’ve attended in the past few years has been centered around methods to intregrate technology use.

This change is exciting. I enjoy using technology devices to enhance a lesson. Anytime I use a different technology device with a lesson, the students seem more engaged. They love anything & everything about technology. I especially enjoy the promethean board. You can really use it for any lesson. It allows the teacher and students to interact together, while meeting the 21st century skills.

Academic Integrity

One of the biggest concerns that I have been dealing with is the issue of academic integrity. I have dealt with kids who think nothing of sharing answers and homework assignments with each other. I attribute this, in some ways, to the trend towards cooperative learning. Students think that its perfectly acceptable for a group to get together and for them all to have the same answers. Then, I talked to a number of colleagues who were facing the same thing. They and I agree that the other issue here is lack of integrity period. In this society, we have reached a point where many people (kids and adults) view the rules as applying to everybody but them. This is called situational ethics. Unfortunately, this is not going away in our culture. My question for those leaving comments is this:

In as much as you can’t change the whole culture, or what a family does, what can we do as educators and administrators to improve the eroding academic integrity of our students?

Addendum: Just viewed a news article (saw the news piece on tv) which discussed a scandal in NH regarding this subject. The town has swung the other way and are charging the kids. the kids are facing charges which could bring them prison time. Surely the answer lies somewhere beteen the nothing we have been doing and this extreme.

Article taken from CNN.com is below

nh-cheating-scandal.docnh-cheating-scandal.doc

Highly Qualified in Whose Book?

Under the guidelines of No Child Left Behind, a public elementary or secondary school teacher is considered to be Highly Qualified if he or she has (1) obtained full state certification or passed the state teacher licensing examination, (2) holds a license to teach in the state, and (3) not had a certificate or license requirement waived under emergency, temporary or provisional conditions. If a teacher meets the aforementioned requirements, he/she is deemed highly qualified by Congress. However, while these attributes might satisfy federal guidelines, they fall a long ways shy of meeting the needs students?

If a teacher meets the criteria of the federal government, but is not effective with the students or valued by the parents, can she really be considered “highly qualified?” If an administrator finds the teacher critical of students and unwilling to work well or accommodate the needs of others, will he deem her as a “highly qualified” member of the staff? Research indicates that the quality of teaching impacts student achievement. With high standards and accountability being such a strong focus in the state of North Carolina, school administrators are not only looking to meet the federal guidelines when they hire a teacher, but they also have a personal agenda, as well.

In my career as a school administrator, I’ve served on various interview panels and spoken with quite a few teacher applicants. More times than not, the personal attributes of the applicant outweighed their professional accomplishments. We didn’t look for full state certification or a current state license. We looked for a love of children and a passion to teach. We didn’t look to see whether or not a license requirement had been waived, but rather a willingness to grow as an educational professional, learn new strategies, and adapt to the needs of students. If a teacher is missing any or all of those traits, as a school administrator, I would be hesitant to hire her to work as a member of my staff. Achieving “highly qualified” status under federal guidelines, in my opinion, is only half the requirement. It takes an individual who’s committed to the profession of education and helping children achieve their absolute best to be “highly qualified” in my book.

Should school administrators lose National Board pay?

North Carolina currently leads the nation with the most National Board Certified teachers, 11, 300 to be exact.  Part of the reason for this is that the state of North Carolina pays the majority of the $2,300 application fee and offers a salary increase of 12% for earning this certification. Teachers earning a master’s degree in this state receive only a 9% increase.   Recent studies have shown that Nationally Board Certified teachers show more gains in student acheivment than non-certified teachers, particularly in regards to young children and low-income students (CRPE, 2004).  It seems logical that teachers who earn this certification be utilized as school leaders, particularly in low-performing schools.  The North Carolina Department of Public Instruction has developed guidelines stating that National Board Certified teachers must spend 70% of their work day in classroom instruction to be eligible for the 12% salary increase.  NC DPI clearly states that nationally certified teachers working as coordinators or principals are not eligible for this pay unless the majority of their day is spent in classroom instruction.  Isn’t one of the functions of a school administrator to be an instructional leader for teachers?  I understand that the purpose of recruiting teachers to become nationally board certified is to keep qualified teachers in the classroom, but what happens when these teachers are called to fill leadership roles?  Is it fair to take away the 12% raise for teachers who want to serve as curriculum specialists or school administrators?  The National Education Association published a report recently that listed ideas and policy recommendations that evolved from a summit which included national board certified teachers from across the state of North Carolina. One of the recommendations listed was to “develop NBCTs as leaders for high-needs schools.” It only makes sense that if research has shown that national board certified teachers are more effective in raising the achievement of low-income students that they would make effective leaders in a high-needs school.  As the need for school administrators rises, the state should be doing everything they can to encourage NBCTs to take on school leadership positions, not penalize them for it.

References

www.dpi.state.nc.us/recruitment/nationalboardcertification/

“National Board Certification Successfully Identifies Effective Teachers” March 2004 www.crpe.org

“Every Child Deserves Our Best: Recommendations from North Carolina’s National Board Certified Teachers” www.nea.org/nationalboard/nc-everychild.html