Category: Uncategorized

So it’s that time of year – time to look back and reflect on the past, and hopefully gain some insight for the future! Here’s my “top ten” post list for 2009. It’s a completely non-scientific combination of Post-rank and Google Analytics. I wanted to focus on the meaty posts, so I also removed the posts about “free stuff” and contests that always get good traffic.

1. Circle of Life: the technology-using educator edition – I think this particular post struck a nerve, which is a nice place for a blog to strike. Reaching an audience is about heart as much as head.
2. Students are not the enemy and
3. Students are not the enemy part 2 – these two posts started a bit of a tempest in a teapot about a NYSCATE vendor session with a horrible title. It that implied that students were an enemy to be fought in a battle of school network supremacy. It ended up that the vendor changed the title of the session and a whitepaper of the same name. A small victory in the effort to treat students as allies in schools, not adversaries.
4. Educational Technology Doesn’t Work? – Doing things that don’t work DOESN’T WORK. How much simpler can this be? The headlines about this research SHOULD read, “Bad Educational Practice Proved Ineffective, Again!”
5. Constructivism in practice – making lectures work – this is a post that tackles making educational theory work in real classrooms. People often think that constructivist teaching “doesn’t allow” lectures, but this is not true.
6. The Gift – What a gift that society actually thinks that children are competent at technology. How can advocates for educational technology leverage this societal belief to advance the cause?
7. Dr. Gerald Bracey can rest in peace – the rest of us need to get busy – Dr. Bracey bridged an important gap for those of us who question research but can’t do the analysis. His courage was an inspiration and he will be sorely missed in this era of “accountability” that really means, “do it my way.”
8. What Works: Effective Technology Professional Development – four research-based indicators of effective technology professional development.
9. ‘Teach Naked’ and complacency natives – this post addresses issues of both teaching and learning, how sloppy our language is about educational technology, and our sometimes conflicting expectations for students.
10. Only the Developed World Lacks Women in Computing – why are there more women in computing in countries that have seemingly repressive social policies for women? Do we really know what keeps women and girls from taking STEM courses?

These posts do a nice job reflecting the common themes that I return to often: student empowerment and voice, gender issues in computing and technology, research about learning and educational technology, identifying good teaching practices using technology, and pointing out that all educational technologies are not created equal.

Google analytics shows that this blog enjoyed a 42% increase in both visits and pageviews. Both the average visits per day increased, and the most popular posts spiked much higher than last year. However, incoming links were down – most likely due to the rise of Twitter as the way people “talk” about interesting posts.

Of course, the traffic to this blog is still small in the grand scheme of things. It still surprises me when people say they read this blog. I’m deeply grateful for your attention and conversation, it enriches me and the work I do with schools.

Perhaps my biggest reflection for 2009 is the fact that the number one visited post is the Circle of Life post. It’s probably the most “touchy-feely” post I’ve ever done. It sat in my draft folder for a long time, while I wondered if I really wanted to share it. I’m glad I did. And in fact, one comment gave me chills. Could I have really written something that touched such an emotional nerve?

Ok..I’m going to get all sappy on you about this, but it honestly choked me up to see my professional life captured so succinctly here. I took a job as an instructional technology coach, and have been wondering lately if I made the biggest mistake of my life…The “circle of life” and two snow days in a row might just get me back on my feet! THANK YOU! (by Lynn)

Perhaps that’s the lesson of 2009 – heart trumps head. Off to find photos of cute puppies!

Just wanted to share an email from Leanne Grandjean, a Computer Technology Teacher at Granville Elementary School in Granville, New York.

Last year, I started a NYSSTL (New York State Student Technology Leaders) club, based on the Generation YES model, for middle school students in our district who were interested in helping members of our school community with the use of technology. I trained the students to be peer mentors and to work with teachers.  The STLs (Student Technology Leaders) help students achieve their technology literacy requirements and help teachers with software and hardware questions, issues and projects.

Leanne is part of the NYSSTL (New York State Student Technology Leaders) program, where students (called STLs) learn technology skills so they can support teachers and other students at their own schools. The HFM and WSWHE BOCES are implementing this model, which next year will expand outside the boundaries of these two BOCES (regional service centers) and create an expansion toolkit so that other schools can easily join NYSSTL.

The STLs help teachers and coaches with projects that facilitate learning in their classrooms and on the field.  That may involve sharing knowledge and guidance or creating a project that they can use to enhance learning and to infuse technology into their lessons. Sometimes they help the teachers with hardware problems or using their new Smart Boards. This year, they helped our tech guy set up new computers in our new computer lab even though he was extremely busy due to our building construction project.

I personally count on the STLs for help in many ways.  For instance, I use the TechYES technology literacy curriculum with my 6th grade students.  Through this program our 6th graders are able to complete student choice projects in which they can pick any topic and any software or hardware that they are interested in learning to use or that they would like to learn more about.  This is an enormous undertaking and a great leap of faith for a teacher because it involves giving up control of 100 projects and sometimes learning how to  use something new on the fly! If we don’t know how to use a new program or peripheral device, the STLs will help do the necessary research, leading the charge and teaching us all along the way.

The 6th grade students plan their TechYES projects online using accounts which link to our help desk.  The STLs can review the project plans on the site and help students fine tune their plans.  When the plans are defined, the STLs support the students with the necessary technology assistance along their learning journey.

Later the STLs assist me in the evaluation of the student tech projects.  The evaluation is a 3-step process involving students self-evaluation, STL evaluation and finally my evaluation.  In most cases, the evaluation is a one-on-one, but the entire process is documented online. In this way, we can all see where the students are in the process.  Through their evaluation the STLs guide students through a sort of editing process challenging the students to do their best work and to try new things before submitting the projects to me for their final evaluation.

The STLs also maintain our inventory of flash drives and digital cameras through our online help desk, documenting who has what and when it’s due back.

And when I have a lab full of kids at the end of the day, the STLs are instrumental in helping me to help the many students who require assistance on the various technology related projects that they are working on for school.  With the STLs around, our students don’t have to wait for help as long as they used to.

The STLs also serve as role models to their peers and our younger students.  Our young students love learning how to use technology from our STLs.  They look up to the STLs and look forward to having the opportunity to serve their community as STLs themselves one day.

The program is only in its infancy in Granville.  We are a small, rural community with a big heart.  I am trying to nourish our little program in hopes that it will continue to grow because it really has had a tremendous impact on everyone involved.

I had the pleasure of presenting with Leanne at NYSCATE and another teacher from another NYSSTL school, Denise Krohn from Lynch Literacy Academy in Amsterdam, NY. Actually, my part was easy. I just introduced them and they wowed the audience with videos and stories about how their students are making a difference at their schools.

Students are making a difference at these NYSSTL schools – thanks to teachers like Leanne and Denise who jump in with enthusiasm and a “yes we can!” attitude.

Sylvia

I’ve mentioned before that I’ve been serving on the NAEP Technology Literacy Assessment Planning Committee. (Post: NAEP Technology Assessment 2012)

Now it’s your turn.

The current draft of the framework is available for public review and feedback at www.naeptech2012.org. You can download the framework from the Outreach section of the website and provide feedback using the online survey link.

In addition to feedback on the framework as a whole, the project is asking for specific input on a title for the assessment. It has been suggested that “Technological Literacy” may not appropriately represent the contents of this framework. The Governing Board will be considering a title change on top of all the other feedback from this survey and other public meetings held this past year.

There has been some controversy over the content and name of the assessment. In K-12 schools, the most common use of the term “technology literacy” is for computer, information, and digital media literacy. This test covers much more. (Post: THE Journal: NAEP Gets It One-Third Right)

The NAEP Technology Literacy Framework defines technology as anything in the “developed world” – meaning forms of engineering, medicine, and other scientific and mathematical disciplines beyond the traditional science and math covered in their respective NAEP frameworks.

There is, in my opinion, a huge potential for confusion with the current title, since “technology literacy” in most K-12 schools, districts, and state department of education offices means something very different than the definition found in this assessment.

While it would be wonderful if K-12 schools actually taught engineering concepts and post 19th century math, it’s a rare occurrence. That combined with the fact that “technology literacy” has multiple meanings will cause confusion over this assessment. The last thing I want is for kids (and teachers) to be blamed and falsely labeled over silly semantics.

A name change, such as calling it a “Technology Assessment”, or “Technology and Engineering Assessment” might be a small step towards avoiding this inevitable confusion.

Comments and suggestions on the framework (and name) are being accepted through January 15, 2010. The National Assessment Governing Board is scheduled to take action on the recommended framework in March 2010.

Voice your opinion!

Sylvia