Educational Leadership with Technology Focus

Evolution Phase Reflection - Week 5

6/29/2016

Evolution Phase Reflection

Last week, in module 4, we analyzed a lot of the feedback and edited our prototype, so this week was spent on reflecting on the entire process. We decided to reflect on each of the questions individually and wrote our thinking onto our collaborative doc. We then met on Monday, June 27 at 6:00 pm to discuss our individual answers and identify any overlaps or differences we had between us. Overall, I believe all of us found the process to be a valuable experience, but it was a challenging process. We all agreed that DT is a great way to learn how to collaborate, communicate, think critically and be creative. We worked together for multiple hours to continuously refine our project and we watched our idea evolve over the five modules into something we can be really proud of. My understanding of DT has significantly changed over the course of this class. My initial impression was that the process was going to be a lot of work and I was unsure what the final outcome would be or what learning would occur. My final impression of the process was that it was a lot of work, but we came up with a final outcome that I am proud to show off and I’d like to suggest using it at my site. I learned how the DT process works and how I would change it if I had my students go through the process. Our group discussed this point and everyone agreed. Although each member in our group has different positions and teaches different age groups this ended up working to our benefit because everyone’s unique perspective enhanced our final product. I have emailed our project idea to four of my colleagues at my site and they all really liked the idea. They asked me to email my principal about it. I have reached out to my principal but have not gotten much feedback yet.

My individual contribution was the same as the group contribution, we each reflected independently and documented our thoughts and then we met to discuss our reflections. There weren’t too many challenges this week because we had already edited our prototype in module 4. We had to spend some time reflecting independently and then collaborated on our join reflection, but this was not too difficult.

I think I would implement the reflection process with students and staff the same way our group decided to reflect. First, each team member reflects on each component of the process throughout the project. Then, team members would get together to discuss their individual thoughts after the evolution phase and identify any overlapping ideas or differences. After the evolution phase each member would write a reflection based on the group’s discussion and their own thoughts. Making even the last component of the process a collaborative effort makes it much more meaningful.

Using asynchronous and asynchronous communication was one of the most challenging parts of this project. Scheduling time to meet and being able to work for multiple hours at a time through a virtual meeting was difficult and not much of the project could be done independently. It is much easier to work on a project when everyone is in the same room and can dedicate a few hours to meeting. If everyone is at home on their computers, various distractions are present and it makes it difficult to concentrate for a long period of time. I think it would be better for an online class to have two scheduled meeting times each week to have groups work on their project. For example, Tuesday and Thursday nights from 6:00 - 7:30 would be our designated class time in which groups could work on their projects. Although it may seem easier to let teams decide when they will meet, it actually makes it more difficult. Luckily my group was amazing at being available and scheduling time for collaboration. However, if I were to do this same project with people I was not as familiar with or if students were to do it, it would be far more challenging. The way the course was set up, your group had to all be present for collaborations to make decisions and not much could be done independently. This is not a bad thing, but it is challenging.

I now have a far better understanding of what Design Thinking is since I have been through the process myself. I understand the importance of each of the steps and how it can be a great way for students and teachers to develop their 21st century skills. I am still hesitant to use this process in my classroom because it is such a huge commitment. With all the other demands placed on teachers I’m not sure how I could schedule time for such a large project. I have done a little research and it looks like John Spencer and A.J. Juliani have come up with a way to use DT in any K-12 classroom. They have written a book called Launch that walks teachers through the DT process and how they can have their students do it in their classrooms. I’m interested in reading this book to find out more about how I can do DT with my students.

The independent project at Monument Mountain Regional High School is an amazing program, but a different academic program than what we are used to. It allows students to work independently and collectively to develop their own curriculum and decide what they would like to learn. It is a program that uses the DT process but students are in charge of their own learning. Students hold themselves accountable for their learning by answering weekly questions and completing an independent endeavor and a collective endeavor. There were only 9 students in the program. They all loved the program and felt their learning experience was much better than it would have been in a traditional classroom (Tsai, 2013). This would be one way students can use Design Thinking to enhance their 21st century skills. Students are critically thinking about topics they are interested in, communicating with their peers about their learning, and collaborating creatively with their group to solve real world problems. This example was for high school students who already had the basic foundational skills to accomplish work independently and who were motivated to learn this way. What happens if all students were given this model - would it be successful for all students?

Tony Wagner believes that there are seven survival skills for college, career and citizenship. Many of these survival skills are addressed using the DT process. His seven survival skills are:

Critical thinking and problem solving
Collaboration across networks and leading by influence
Agility and adaptability
Initiative and entrepreneurialism
Effective oral and written communication
Accessing and analyzing information
Curiosity and imagination (Wagner, 2016)

Through the DT process students are practicing all of these skills. Students empathize with end users and collect information about their topic which accomplishes skill 6. Students define their problem by working with their group which accomplishes skills 1 and 2. Students then brainstorm as many solutions to their problem as possible which accomplishes skills 1, 4 and 7. When students create their prototype and a presentation to explain their prototype they are accomplishing skill 5. And lastly when they seek feedback from end users and edit their prototype based on the information they collect they are accomplishing skill 3. All of Wagner’s survival skills are addressed in the DT process, so why wouldn’t schools use this process?

Resources
Tsai, C. (February 13, 2013). If students designed their own schools…. YouTube video. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RElUmGI5gLc&feature=youtu.be

Wagner, T. (2016). Tony wagner’s seven survival skills. Tony Wagner: Transforming Education. Retrieved from http://www.tonywagner.com/7-survival-skills

21st Century Skill Memes

1 Comment

Experimentation Phase Reflection- Week 4

6/21/2016

1 Comment

Experimentation Phase Reflection

Our group met first after class on Wednesday, June 15 to discuss our experimentation phase and how we would accomplish the goals for the week. We met at 5:30 pm, asked our professor to join us and answer a few questions and ended up working together until 8:00 pm. We worked out the basic plan for our prototype on a google doc and then decided how we would present our prototype for feedback. We decided to combine individual pieces of our prototype into a blendspace. We included our interpretation phase iMovie, we decided to make our main presentation in a powtoon to engage our audience, then we did a screencast of student work samples, a list of resources for teachers to help plan projects, a template for planning and then we created a google form to collect feedback from end users about our prototype. This took quite a bit of time but we all collectively worked on the presentation (that we turned into a powtoon) together. After we decided what we wanted to include in our prototype we split up the responsibilities so each of us would contribute to the final product. My responsibilities were to draft the table on a google doc for the template of our prototype, I typed out a lot of information on our DT process doc of the parts for the experimentation phase, I created the blendspace to add all our resources and I created a list of resources for teachers who will be looking for project ideas. Once we had our prototype finished, we shared it with our cohort mates and some fellow teachers for feedback. We then met on Monday, June 20 from 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm to discuss the feedback and edit our prototype. We decided to add a rationale as to why students should learn about 21st century skills, we included a suggested timeline for rolling out our plan, more details about how the projects should be linked to CCSS and that teachers should include rubrics. We ended up making a separate blendspace to add our new edited versions of our powtoon video, an additional video and extra resources.

Some of the challenges our group faced this week were finding time to individually complete our parts in a timely manner so we could receive feedback from end users. We all got our parts completed, but with the time constraint we had to set aside time to work on it.

This part of the DT process is exciting because you get to actually put your idea into a presentation and ask for feedback. You get to see how well others receive your idea and get suggestions on how to make it better. I can see this working with students or teachers at my site by having them take their idea and creating an engaging presentation to showcase their idea and ask for feedback. I especially like the questions on our checklist that ask for specific feedback including: What did participants value the most? What got them excited? What parts did they want to change? What did not work? What needs further investigation? These questions are extremely informative and will guide all groups to edit their prototypes no matter how well developed they are in the first draft. I think asking students and teachers to present their findings (whether it’s a project in the classroom or a staff project to enhance the school) and ask for feedback is a great way to experiment with their ideas.

If this process were to be implemented with actual end users there would need to be more time and more explanation of each phase. While working on our DT process I have felt like we are rushing through the assignments and scrambling to make sure we cover everything we should in one week. It is a really difficult process to do through an online class where groups are not sitting together or don’t have designated time set aside to meet and work together. If you are doing it with students you have them all together in one class and can take as much time as you need to complete the work. It would be the same with teachers as end users. If you want teachers to work together, you would set aside time for them to work together after school to accomplish a task so they could have more flexibility with time constraints. Additionally, the process would need to be described in detail before end users begin the process so they know what to expect. Each phase would need to be described in a way that end users can picture the end product and the reason behind each piece of their group work.

Figuring out how to ensure groups are collaborating and not simply working in groups is difficult. If groups are expected to document all of their work and discussions on a running google doc, that helps ensure that more than one person is doing all the work. However, it does not ensure that all group members are engaged. This will always be a struggle, but if all participants are motivated to do well then that helps ensure everyone collaborates. Allowing groups to choose their topic and work to solve a problem that they all are passionate about will keep them motivated to collaborate. It also depends on the group you are working with. Younger students would need more defined roles or more practice working collaboratively before doing a DT process. While older students and adults would be fine working collaboratively with less defined roles. However it is always important that the teacher or facilitator monitor group work to ensure everyone is engaged and collaboration is running smoothly.

Collaboration Discussion

Andrea Currier and I decided to do the first option for our collaborative reflection this week. We agreed to meet on Saturday, June 18 at 10:00 am and discuss the questions we each came up with when reading If I Had a Hammer: Technology in the Language Arts Classroom (Jester, 2002). The questions we discussed were:

How can students use multimedia during the reading and writing process and focus on the content they are creating without getting caught up with the appearance of it?
Presentation tools and multimedia software make it easier to edit, however how can one see how far they have come when deleting a word or a sentence is so easily done?
Are computers more catalysts for learning or tools of production?
“Multimedia presentations allow for natural divisions to help students organize ideas” But is this always true? Students need to be taught how to organize their ideas into slides. This is not a natural concept for students.
Language on computers is more malleable compared to on a poster, but do students always correct their grammar when using a computer? I still have students who leave “i” lowercase. Author points out this fact too.

For Question 1, we discussed how students can get distracted with formatting their writing using technology instead of focusing on the content. Andrea and I have both seen this in our classrooms with our students. They will focus on changing the font, font size, and font color before they are finished writing their piece. We discussed how teachers should set ground rules before students begin writing using technology. Students will be told they are not allowed to edit the font at all until they are done with their piece and it has been edited. This will keep their focus on the content and away from formatting.

For Question 2, we discussed how this is a challenge for using technology for writing. You cannot see multiple versions of the same piece of writing because the version the student is working on will be the same version they started with. On paper you can compare the first draft to the second. With technology, editing is so simple, which is great, but it makes it difficult for teachers to assess how far the student has come or if they are moving in the right direction. Current writing tools (such as google docs) allows you to look at the revision history of documents, but it isn’t always as accurate as it should be.

For Question 3, we discussed how technology is used more as a tool for production right now than a catalyst for learning. Students still need to learn fundamental skills about how to use technology and how to read and write before they can use technology as a catalyst for learning. It’s similar to how students start out learning how to read and then when they get older they read to learn. When students are younger they will use technology to simply learn how to use it and to use it as a tool for production. As students get older they can begin using technology as a catalyst for learning. This may not be due to student age, though. It may be due to the fact that technology is only recently been added into schools. Maybe in 10 years when students use computers starting at age 3 they will be able to use it as a catalyst for change in younger grades.

For Question 4, we discussed the author’s point that digital presentations allow for natural divisions to help students organize ideas. We didn’t agree with the author on this. We believe students need to be taught how to divide their ideas, convert them into bullet points and organize them to add to a digital presentation. Simply placing an empty presentation in front of students does not ensure they will naturally figure out how to use them.

For Question 5, we discussed how language on computers is more malleable. The author points out that this allows students to edit their language easier than on paper, where they have to cross out or erase their thoughts. We agree it is easier for students to edit their writing, but we don’t think that the simplicity of editing ensures students will edit correctly. Students still need to learn the correct spelling of words and correct grammar to be able to apply it to editing their work online. The responsibility of teaching students editing grammar and spelling is the teacher’s responsibility, but online editing does make it easier.

Andrea and I went onto discuss other key points from the article. Basically, we agree with the author that technology allows students to write and edit their work much easier than on paper. However, some of his points about how technology takes away some of the responsibility of teachers to teach content about editing and writing is something we haven’t experienced yet. Right now we feel that most technology is used as a tool. This is probably because it is still new to have in schools. In order for students to use technology as a catalyst for learning, we need more time with technology being in schools. We don’t see online presentation software as a part of the writing process, we see it as a tool for presentations, and students need to be taught how to do this, it is not a natural occurrence. We do agree with the author that technology allows teachers to check in with students easier, it keeps students engaged, and that technology is a part of students’ everyday lives. We just need to remember that “multimedia can look good without being good” (p. 86).

Here are the notes we took during our discussion

Resources
Jester, R. (March 2002). If I had a hammer: Technology in the language arts classroom. The English Journal, 91(4). p. 85-88

1 Comment

Ideation Phase Reflection - Week 3

6/11/2016

1 Comment

Ideation Phase Reflection

This week our team met for over three and a half hours to work through the ideation phase. We added the checklist to our google doc and went through it step by step together. We first met on Wednesday after class for two hours to begin brainstorming. We did a pre-brainstorming activity, discussed our end goals and our brainstorming rules. We decided to make a padlet and take some time to brainstorm as many ideas as we could about our topic - how do teachers increase their efficacy of teaching 21st century skills? After we came up with a lot of ideas we organized them into three categories: teacher-centered, student-centered and teacher and student-centered ideas. We then had a discussion about the ideas we came up with and the questions we still had about our topic. This took about 2 hours so we decided to take a break and work on our own to decide which ideas we liked the most individually. Then we met again the following night to look over everyone’s preferred choices and came up with the top two promising ideas. From here we answered all the questions on the checklist about each of our two ideas such as: the value of the ideas, the constraints, and evidence of brainstorming about how it would work in a school setting. We all felt that these two ideas were very promising and came to a consensus that they were the best two ideas we had collectively come up with.

My individual contribution this week was the same as everyone else's. We all worked together the entire time to come up with as many ideas as we could as well as collectively deciding which would be the top two choices. All our work this week was done collaboratively. This is not an easy task. I have to say my group members worked very hard to move their schedules around to accommodate our long meeting sessions. As we were discussing ideas and questions I typed our thoughts onto the doc while also contributing to the discussion. I added quite a few ideas to our brainstorming session on padlet and I picked my favorite ideas and added them to our doc before we met for the second time.

This week the challenges were the amount of time we had to spend meeting together to collaborate. We spent two hours on Wednesday and an hour and a half on Thursday brainstorming together. We also had to spend time individually looking over the ideas we brainstormed and picking our favorite ones. After completing the checklist and explaining our ideas, the value, the constraints and providing evidence we felt like we had done a great job of describing everything in detail. We were excited about our two possible ideas and how it could make a difference in the lives of teachers.

I’ve done this type of brainstorming with my students before. They did genius hour projects this year and brainstorming was one of the beginning steps. Students had to work on a project that they were passionate about for one hour every week to develop a product that would show their learning. In order for the students to come up with their project idea we did something called The Bad Idea Factory. Students had to come up with as many bad ideas for their projects as they could. They were given a certain amount of time and worked in groups to list as many bad ideas as possible on a google doc. The class then shared their lists with me and we discussed them as a class. This is similar to what we did in the ideation phase but not exactly the same since we were brainstorming good ideas instead of bad ideas. However, I have seen it work with students and it is a fun activity that allows students to be creative and wild with their ideas.

Tim Brown discusses creativity as a way of thinking that has no bounds. He points out that creativity is stifled by judgement and societal expectations. No one wants to be judged so people are not as willing to be creative. Fear of being judged keeps people conservative in their thinking (Brown, 2008). I have to say I agree with this statement. I see myself doing the same thing when I am asked to be creative. I want my idea to be a good idea so I only share a few of my ideas instead of all of them. Brown (2008) then points out that children are not this way. Children have not yet developed the fear that adults have of being judged so they are far more open about their ideas and therefore are more creative than adults. Students who are in a safe environment are more free to play and this applies to adults as well. If adults are in a safe environment and they won’t be judged they can be more open about their ideas (Brown, 2008). This points to the fact that brainstorming sessions need to have ground rules where participants won’t feel judged so they can be open about their ideas. This applies to the ideation phase and the DT process overall because you never know the direction that the conversation will go. Ignoring one idea may stifle the creativity of the group. Groups need to feel that whatever they say will be safe in order to allow brainstorming to reach its full potential.

Resources
Brown, T. (November 10, 2008). Ted Talks. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/RjwUn-aA0VY

BYOD Reflection

My response to whether I would support the integration of BYOD into my school will be slightly biased because my site is already 1:1 with chromebooks for each student. I’ve seen how effective it is to have students use devices that are school provided and if I had a choice this would be the type of program I would like to use at my school site. BYOD can be a good program at schools if school-provided devices are not already in place, but I think there are obstacles that make it less effective than 1:1 school-provided programs. I agree with Imazeki (2014)that a BYOD program can keep students engaged, reduce grading time, provide instant feedback and allow for open ended responses (that clickers cannot). I also like the fact that BYOD allows for distance learning because students can respond to questions or engage with class materials outside school hours on their own devices (Imazeki, 2014). However, all of this can be accomplished on 1:1 programs with school-provided devices as well. Additionally, with school-provided programs you don’t have to use web tools that work on various operating systems like you would in BYOD programs. If students all use the same school-provided devices then teachers can use apps that work for one specific operating system.

Some ways that BYOD programs would be more beneficial than school-provided programs are the potential for it to be lower cost (Imazeki, 2014). Right now my district has paid for the initial purchase of student devices and the upkeep. BYOD programs would cost a fraction of the amount that my district is paying because students would be supplying their own devices. Nevertheless, my school student demographic is 67% socioeconomically disadvantaged so I cannot say that many students have their own devices that they can bring to school. It is also different at an elementary school. Students that are under the age of 11 don’t have devices like students who are in middle or high school. This would be another obstacle to integrating it at my school site. Overall, I think BYOD is a decent enough program, but schools have come a long way and I don’t think is the best program out there for students. Imazeki (2014) points out a lot of positives for BYOD but the overall tone of the article is as if teachers are first starting out using technology in the classroom. If I were at a school that was just beginning to look at using technology in the classroom and the district did not have the funding to provide devices for students then BYOD would be a good option but I think most districts are heading in a different direction at this point.

Schrum and Levin (2015) point out that using devices in any 1:1 configuration can positively impact student achievement when properly used. Therefore, one other determining factor for deciding between a BYOD program or a 1:1 school-provided program would be how teachers would use it. If teachers are flexible and able to manage a class of student-owned devices then it would be a good program to use. If teachers are less flexible or less able to manage a class of student-owned devices: because they don’t know how to prevent students from being distracted on cell phones or they don’t know how to manage different operating systems then a 1:1 school provided program would be best. Imazeki (2014) points out the same thing by explaining that teachers have to be patient and flexible when integrating BYOD into their classroom. They have to anticipate glitches and other small problems to occur. This can be difficult for some teachers and would be another reason why I’d prefer a school-provided program.

Resources
Imazeki, J. (2014). Bring-your-own-device: Turning cellphones into forces for good. The Journal for Economic Education, 45 (3), 240 - 250. Routledge: Taylor & Francis Group.

Schrum, L. & Levin, B.B. (2015). Leading 21st century schools. (2nd ed). London, United Kingdom: SAGE Publications Ltd.

1 Comment

Interpretation Phase Reflection - Week 2

6/5/2016

1 Comment

Interpretation Phase Reflection

This week we organized and synthesized all the information collected from the discovery phase. We conducted three interviews (two with teacher leaders and one expert), an observation and surveyed teachers. Each one of us either interviewed or observed someone and we collaboratively worked to create the survey to send out to teachers. We worked to collect as much information as we could about our topic to decide what our final design thinking question was going to be. Our group worked really well together to get these pieces finished. Once we had all our information and data collected we created mind maps for each of the pieces to provide visuals for each piece of data. From here, we collaboratively came up with one synthesized mind map of all the data collected. This allowed us to see what problems teachers were facing as well as the viewpoints of teacher leaders and experts on the same topic. With this information we can plan what our next steps should be in the ideation phase. We decided that our question was still a valid one and many of the end users have the same question. Our group then came up with a plan on how we would present our synthesized information in iMovie. We divided the tasks for the movie and came up with a timeline to ensure that we complete our assignment by the due date.

My individual contribution this week was to create a mind map of my interview and to summarize the information collected from the surveys. I then worked with my group to synthesize the information and I was the one who created the final mind map while my other team members told me what pieces I should add. We did this using google hangouts and I shared my screen. We got a lot done! When we discussed how we were going to divide up the tasks for the video I offered to take the information we collected and put it together on iMovie. My team members said they would find the images (that had appropriate copyright permissions) and edit the phrasing of the presentation and I would put it all together into iMovie. Then I would send it to another team member to add music and upload it to YouTube.

Some of the challenges we faced this week were being able to include everyone in all the decisions. This is a continuation from our challenges from last week but it is difficult to find time to meet and collaborate with everyone’s busy schedules. I have had to give up quite a few things this week in order to finish my assignments and make time to meet with my group. These are going to be challenges I face as an administrator as well so I need to work to use my time wisely.

I really liked the process of synthesizing the data we collected this week. Organizing it using a mind map ended up being a positive and interesting process because themes emerged that I was unaware of before. I didn’t realize how many teachers valued 21st century skills, but 100% of the teachers surveyed thought students should learn 21st century skills in their schooling. I also liked the idea of creating a presentation of the information gathered and synthesized in the interpretation phase. It’s a great way for the group to present their findings. I can see this being used with students or colleagues at my site. The interpretation phase is a good check-in point for groups. It allows them to collect information to see if their design thinking question needs adjustments and it allows groups to narrow their focus if needed. Using a presentation would be a great way for groups of students or teachers to present their findings and allow their peers to ask questions to further support their learning process.

Emily Pilloton's Project in Bertie County inspired me. I liked that her team uses Design Thinking to design solutions with other people, not for them. They allowed students to use design thinking to create actual solutions to community issues. It’s real-world learning for students and their team shows how far you can take design thinking within schools. If I could teach the class they created I would feel so fulfilled as a teacher knowing my students were getting that type of learning experience. Her story gave me an example of how design thinking can be used in schools. I’m still unsure how it would be used in elementary schools, because their plan is for high school students, but I’d love to find out and attempt to bring it to my school.

Principal's Message

Dear Parents and Guardians,

We hope you are ready for a new school year! We are extremely excited to have your child at our school and can’t wait for all the learning to begin. One way we can support your child this year is by having them use technology. We are lucky enough to have 1:1 devices for each student. Each student will have a chromebook to use on a daily basis. Children love using technology in the classroom. Technology allows us to meet your child’s individual needs while also giving them a unique learning experience. It allows students to practice 21st century skills like collaborating, communicating and being creative which will keep them actively engaged in learning and will prepare them for college and careers by the end of their schooling.

An additional 21st century skill students will practice when using technology is critical thinking. Critical thinking is the core skill for the 21st century. Critical thinking is when students analyze and evaluate information to make good decisions. Technology allows students to practice critical thinking because they can gather information through research, summarize the information without preconceived assumptions and then come to an unbiased conclusion. Students will practice discipline of mind, open mindedness, deferring judgement, metacognitive thinking, empathy, humility, asking questions, reflection and healthy skepticism when researching online. They will have to determine whether information is biased or credible and critically think about whether they are making judgements when gathering information or if they are practicing humility and empathy and seeing the point of view of others. These skills will prepare students for college or their careers and technology will help them practice these skills because they will have an infinite amount of information at their fingertips that they can evaluate.

In order for your child to have the best experience with technology, we need to ensure they are safe and know to how use the technology appropriately. Our teachers have set aside time to teach students about digital citizenship to keep everyone safe while online. Your child will learn about netiquette (online etiquette), cyberbullying, copyright infringement, crediting online sources, privacy, reporting inappropriate online behavior, and digital footprints. Please go over the following guidelines with your child to ensure they understand their responsibility when using technology:

Be respectful with anyone you are communicating with online.
Only sign up for websites or apps after getting permission from your parents or your teachers.
Be careful what type of information you share with people online.
Remember that pictures and posts can be saved forever online.
Have a positive online presence.
Share all passwords with your parents.
If you use images or ideas from websites always give proper credit.
Always tell an adult if someone is being inappropriate online.

Below are some resources that can be used to go over digital citizenship with your child at home. The more information your child knows, the safer they will be.
Appropriate and inappropriate online behavior
Family tip sheet for digital citizenship
Etiquette on what to share online
Digital Citizenship Pledge
Digital Etiquette Video

Thank you for taking the time to look over this information and share it with your child. We believe that parents can support student achievement just as much as teachers can. With your help we will prepare your children with 21st century skills by using technology safely and appropriately. If you have any questions please feel free to contact the school.

Sincerely,
Andrea Jacobs
Principal

Sarah, a hard working girl scout, also found this fantastic resource: A Guide to Digital Citizenship and Cyber-Laws. Thanks for sharing, Sarah!

1 Comment

Discovery Phase Reflection - Week 1

5/23/2016

1 Comment

Discovery Phase Reflection

This week for the discovery phase of our design thinking project our group met to discuss our design thinking question and outlined how we would begin collecting data about our problem. We discussed various topics that all revolved around 1:1 programs in schools including: student self-assessment, student engagement, and increasing student achievement. After discussing various topics we started to realize that the overarching problem was that teachers are scared to integrate technology in certain ways due to the confusion over whether we should be teaching traditional content or 21st century skills in the classroom. Using technology in the clasroom can be powerful but teachers don’t always focus on it because of the pressure to get through all the standards to prepare students for the state test. Therefore, we focused on the problem of finding a balance in education between teaching traditional content and teaching 21st century skills. This is a problem that all four of our group members face and it has been something we have discussed quite a bit in this program so we thought it would be a good focus.

For my individual contribution this week I met with my group members and discussed various topics and we came to a mutually agreed upon topic. After we came to our topic idea we discussed that we would each develop some sub-questions for our topic and do research. I contributed quite a few questions for the topic and some questions for the end user to use in a survey to collect information. I did some research on the SDSU database about 21st century skills to understand what has already been researched on our topic and the outcomes. I also came up with an idea for an outline of the visual we could use for our guiding questions. During this time I met with another group member and we discussed possible questions and a calendar to make sure we all stayed on track with this week’s assignments. We all have been responding in an email thread about our next meeting time and are getting things done well. One challenge I see for my group are going to be the deadlines. With all of our hectic schedules working full time and with other commitments it is difficult to find a time for all of us to meet together and work on the project. Additionally, I am in two classes right now and working full time with a lot of coordinating and planning to do by the end of the school year. I am struggling to find the time to get assignments done while also honoring my outside work commitments. I am good at time management but this is one challenge I see myself and my group having.

I think this model of problem solving is a great way for students and/or teachers to work together to collectively solve a problem. As an administrator I think it would be valuable to start a committee at a site and have them go through the design thinking process to solve a problem they see is the largest one our school is facing. This committee could work on something as big as determining the school focus or as simple as improving school attendance. Following a detailed process would be helpful and I can see a lot of value in allowing teachers to problem solve. The same would go for students. If students are given the choice to solve a given problem and are allowed to work together to determine their path, they would learn much more than content but other skills as well: collaboration, communication, creativity and critical thinking.

Technology Vision and Action Steps

Vision: Students will become successful contributors to our global society through learning and practicing critical thinking and problem solving. Students will utilize all available technology tools to make their learning relevant while collaboratively working with their peers. Their learning will be personalized, self-constructed and self-assessed so students can see the value in their accomplishments

The following are three action steps to move towards this vision:

Steps:

Teachers will ensure that students are engage in collaborative group work to solve complex problems at least once a month using Google Apps for Education.
Teachers will allow students choices in assignments to allow them to construct their own learning that is personalized for their needs.
Teachers will allow students time every week to assess and reflect on their own learning to determine where they need extra support.

Systems of Sharing Technology

The systems in place at my school and district are well organized and comprehensive. All students have 1:1 devices and most schools allow students to take these devices home. Students are expected to be on their devices throughout the day using various programs to support their learning. Blended learning has become an integral part of teaching in each classroom. When there are problems with devices there is a quick and orderly process that happens in order to fix them. Students may be without their device for as short as an hour to as long as a few days. Internet connectivity has some problems occasionally but typically students can log on without problems 95% of the time. If problems arise with internet connectivity it is typically fixed within a few hours. The district first released chromebooks into the classroom three years ago so it has taken some time to work out all the problems but now it is efficient and works well.

Although technology is available for all students and teachers to use throughout the day I do not think all teachers are using it to the same degree. One advancement I’d like to see is more professional development on how to use technology in the classroom. Some teachers are willing to take the time on their own to experiment and find out what works for their students. However, many teachers don’t know where to begin and therefore don’t use it. Students will get different experiences depending on which teacher they get each year. I’d like to see my district focus more on supporting teachers use technology consistently from class to class.

1 Comment

Communication, problem solving and Decision Making

Evolution Phase Reflection - Week 5

Experimentation Phase Reflection- Week 4

Ideation Phase Reflection - Week 3

Interpretation Phase Reflection - Week 2

Discovery Phase Reflection - Week 1

Author

Archives

Categories