TF+Standards

ISTE/NCATE Technology Facilitator Standards:
Reflections of each standard...


 * TF-I Demostration of an advanced understanding of technology operations and concepts.**

This standard really stands out to me as a technical one. There has to be an understanding of the computers and equipment to be successful with the use of them. The need to know and understand what concepts need to be applied to each technical use. This is where the facilitators become the experts or any technolical person. Many individuals think you have saved the world when you have made the equipment function. You are almost placed on a pedalstal for that reason and it should not be that way. The Technology Facilitators should educate them to check items on a checklist.With working with creating online courses, it has forced me to evaluate what teachers have access to and what they will use. The More than Googling course has created questions of this nature. I had to create a list of student access versues teacher use with accessiblity. This is diffcult to do, with time constraints and other school items that come into play. From the ISTE's Technology Facilitation and Leadership Standards book, that technology competency is not a skill that is set (p. 21). This really brought it to the most simpliest form and that is with technology changing and upgrading as quickly as you can learn yesterday's equipment it is difficult to help educators keep up. I have found that choosing choice items and focus on those areas has helped with this transition. The book also focused on changing the training methods to adapt to this ever changing curriculum. As a technology faciltitator, I have changed our staff development to bring in the integration and modeling areas. With the help of the Instructional Technology Coordinator in my district, we have set up training workshops that flow over two to three days. Teachers have requested a change instead of the "sit and get" sessions that seemed to be that static environment that was created. Now we have re-teach opportunities, homework that is checked and writing lesson plans with the technology TEKS included in the classes as More than Googling, Cool Web Tools and Web 2.0 Tools for Language Arts and Social Studies teachers. This focused our attention on how to troubleshoot programs, bringing in their knowledge and focusing on small technology pieces instead of large project-based curriculum integration. The expectation of facilitators is different depending on the districts's expectations and that of the person, but all are the same in the theory of that technology facilitators "demostrate an in-depth understanding of technology operations and concepts" (p. 23). This is the basis of all learning in today's 21st century learner. Now I feel that I am meeting the performance standards with the one-to-one coaching and training with the focus on using the skills that the educator already has and then building on that for their confort level. Having educators comfortable with what they are trying to bring in the classroom helps with the integration of technology. It is a management piece that if they are unaware of the operations of how the equipment works then they do not focus on the instruction but on why the equipment will not work.

Williamson, J., Redish, T. (2009). //Iste's technology facilitation and leadership standards//. Washington, DC: Interanational Society for Technology in Education.

 * TF-II. Planning, designing, and modeling effective learning environments and multiple experiences supported by technology.**

The Technology Facilitator Standard II is more of the Staff Development piece that I have just finished working on for my district's summer training. This is the standard that needs the most focus on, because of how to bring the new style of teaching into the classroom. Understanding all aspects of this standard was another learning experience to where I have reworked all of my training to bring more small group training, being available in the classroom, and teaching teachers how to plan technology into already created lessons. What I noticed that I needed to focus more of is the research side and examples of learning environments and lesson planning. The changes that I have made with modeling, mulitple day learning sessions, teaching lesson plan design and creating technology management teaching examples. Just this past year, I was able to be in the classroom while a teacher integrated a new technology lesson for her 5th graders. It was a great experience which I have been focusing on for more than two years. many teachers do not see the need placing me there, but this teacher has shown to others why it was important and how comfortable she felt with my presence. She also figured out that she knew more than she thought capable. I area that I have gained knowledge on, is the fact that if the teacher is still the main focus of the class they will take ownership. My goal is to not take over but guide and lead them to integrating technology. From Williamson and Redish, technologists should serve as facilitators and guides (p. 41). This is a statement I live by and try to model and be an example of. The next area is linking what technology can do into other areas of curriculum, which can be a challenging area if there is not a support system there. I have seen this in two different ways; the science team has brought me in and has discussed areas of need of assistance but the Language Arts team has not and thinks that I am taking over their area. I created classes for integrating science with technology that could be used as a tool with the topics they gave me for struggling learners.To bring in classroom ideas, I started working with different teachers to get a broad view of integration and how to implement the ideas. A technology teacher and myself worked together to create two seperate courses that we will presnet at TCEA. We looked at simplifying the work for a fifth to eight grade student. This is important when teachers need to beusing technology at an eighth grade level. There has to be a building block of learning and the trainings go over multiple days to test knowledge and skills. Even at the administrative offices there are differences of integration and the ideas behind it. The Performance tasks were broken down to many areas of creating, supporting and assisting teachers with the collaboration of technology tools with core curriculum. There was a statement that really struck me because it is not the focus of my district. "Because technology facilitators are located in school buildings, the facilitators' proximity to practice affords them greater opportunities to plan and design technology-supported learning environments and experiences with teachers." (Williamson & Redish, 2009). This statement is hard to envision when I have all of my 19 campuses K-12. It is difficult to focus and work one to one with teachers, so I focus on ones that want to inegrate and hope that what they learn will spread. This is not my vision of how I want integration to work but my reality right now. There are only two of us in my department and other duties that are assigned. Now that I see what this standard is gearing facilitators for I will work at getting this accomplished differently than what I am doing right now.


 * TF-III Modeling, designing, and disseminating curriculum plans that include methods and strategies for applying technology to maximize student learning.**

This standard was the most difficult because it is very similar to Standard II but the difference is the breaking down of the Technology TEKS and activties. The idea that struck me with this Stahnard is the focus of writing the curriculum that includes integration of technology. Designing, Modeling and disseminating curriculum has the facilitator focus on the aligning of the lessons with activities that the teachers are wanting the students to create. This is where I lack the time to focus my attention. This year I started working with campuses with grades 5-8 to bring up their technology terminology and skills. The struggle to get time to work with the teachers and many did not know they were required by state law to teach Technology TEKS. Teachers have thought that they go to the computer lab and that should cover it. This has become a learning curve for some teachers that have difficulty problem solving technical issues and are closed-mouth about expressing what they do not know or understand (TF-III.D.1).Since then most of the comments I have recieved brought in the administrators of the campus so they understand and help push this requirement. Modeling will be the largest change with how technology training will be conducted. Teachers and staff need to see what an actual classroom will work with the daily integration of technology. During an eInstruction/MOBI training for teachers at an intemediate campus, it was important to model and help design lesson that will be used within the classroom. Technology has been placed on the back burner for integration but addedd as a reteach tool for students behind in skills. The focus is teaching the 21st Century learner with all available tools for the content area required. In education schools seem to fall short of meeting the learning needs of the digital-age learners (Williamson & Redish, p. 59). I have been working these last two years on teaching teachers how to incorporate technology into their curriculum without a huge project undertaking. With this change, it reminded me of a quote from Failure Is Not an Option, "changing the overall structure across the board can be the necessary support for preventing potential problems" (p. 128). This is a huge task because the teachers' thinking is not integrating little bits into everyday activities but taking them to a lab where all are on the computer. Taking the view of how to conduct training has been a change in our setup of workshops for the summer staff development. There has to be an "ongoing professional learning opportunities" which is my focus for this summer. (Williamson & Redish, 2009). For my department, we offer more than 30 learning opportunities during the summer, and we still recieve comments nothing available in technology to register for. My focus and strategy for change was to re-write our curriculum to include multiple day sessions, lesson planning and sending out a technology flyer. The content is on TF-III.A.1 & 3 to support integration with research tools that are available. The writing of lesson plans or updating one with incorporating the Technology TEKS and objectives that line up with what they are creating. This has helped them look at their lesson differently and I am there to guide them if the websites or program will cause them more problems or not. This is a slow start because I have to meet the needs of all K-12 teachers but I am hoping that the approach and demeaner I have will promote them to share what they have learned. I have had terrific feedback from what they have done so it is still a step in the right direction.


 * TF-IV Communicating research on the use of technology to implement effective assessment and evaluation strategies.**

Technology Facilitator Standard IV focused on how assessments affect learning and the future of technology within the assessment realm. The state does not have a standard test for how technology skills for 8th graders will be evaluated. This makes it difficult to compare where the district lies within technology levels. It is a blank slate and all conduct thier testing differently with a wide range of questioning. As the Instructional Technology department we have focused our attention on 6th grade pre-testing to 8th grade post testing. We have seen gaps with in these age groups. Students' must be able to use technology in an ethical, accurate and insightful ways within modern society (Williamson & Redfish, p. 81). Very difficult to measure but not unattainable. There is a need to show the research of technology advancement into the educational area. How it helps to bring scores up in the classroom, is the true question. Technology can help administrators manipulate data in ways never could before and now that the state has set the standard of vertical and horizontal alignment which districts have been doing on their own for quite a while. Even though the district levels have been using technology this way, now teachers have more access to information than ever before. In the district that I work for, we use Eduphoria- Aware, which has brought the assessment data to everyones' finger tips. Data has never been this easy and there is not a delayed timeframe to view it as well TF-IV.B. Once it is at the district level it is then uploaded for the teacher view, and as an administrator over the program, it has been a great experience. Staff have rights and roles set that are required for necessary position. All of this makes the evaluation of the data more in the present instead of the past. Teachers have felt that they can help students with what they have access to because it is not 3 months after the exam. Technology has also stepped in the area of online testing. This may take more work because of the amount of computers ditricts have available but teaching the students how to test on the computer. This is a new skill and not all can accomplish this. It is stated, that if tests were administered online, the results would be faster in most cases (Williamson & Redish, 2009). This may be true, but having all the technology pieces worked out beforehand is the challenge. We piloted pieces on EOY (End of Year) for a company and there was always another download that was missed or the site was down or slow. All areas have to be considered before true online testing is for all. I do believe that many student can test this way and be able to have their scores when they finished the test, but there is still a bumpy road ahead to accomplish this goal. Now we have the assessment of technology skills for teachers and students to be technology literate on the 8th grade level. The skills of the 8th grader are challenging for a district to accomplish but under Title II part D this is a requirement that must be met. It is difficult to see this going forward when the state has now taken back the technology credit for High school, so are we moving forward or backwards? Students do know what they are doing on the computer but the terminology is slightly skewed. From what I have seen on test results, the students know outside of school material but do not understand what application to apply to certain assignments. Many believe that the technology assessment should be project-based, TF-IV.A. This is not true either, we want to test what they understand about the computer, programs, internet and citzenship not if they can create a project. Many can and I see this happening in the classroom, but what is lacking is the teacher knowledge of teaching the terminology of the computer and programs that are being used. There are many great programs and web 2.0 tools out there but how are they being used int he classroom?(Williamson & Redish, p. 85). The thought is not as they should be to educate the 21st Century learner. The More than Googling workshop that I have been working on with a Technology teacher for 7th and 8th graders, we are taking assessment information form the 8th grade assessment and having them create a lesson using google tools available. Teachers need to understand what students struggle with and how they can guide them. It will be interesting to see what they create and how the assessment information guides them.


 * TF-V Designing, developing, evaluating, and modeling products created using technology resources to improve and enhance your productivity and professional practice.**

This standard is the core of Staff Development no matter what curriculum your focus is under. As an educator there has to be an eternal need to promote life long learning. Under this standard the facilitator is promoting a building block for technology learning or building on what the learner already understands. One statement that stood out to me is the fact that "students benefit indirectly when educators use technology", incredible statement (Williamson & Redish, 2009). Teachers do not see what they instill or model for students that merges their own knowledge to the classroom. There is a fear for teachers of feeling out of place or look uneducated in front of their students, and this is a justified fear for many. Using this as a hurdle to turn it around and have the students show their knowledge is the essence of teaching. Integration is the key to bringing in technology, changing the way many have been teaching is easier said than accomplished. Staff development or professional practices have to be modeled where facilitators can help and guide educators with equipment needed for productive classroom environment. Teaching contextualization is a complex topic which is understood in the corporate world not educational one. I believe this is stated by Williamson and Redish because it is easier to teach adults how to use something for themselves but how to teach educators to contextualize technology for student application? It is a challenge that technology has faced for a few years now and will in the future. We need to bring the so called "learning curve" down for educators to realize how technology can benefit them by using it as a tool by evaluating different tools available, TF-V.C. I am continually evaluating websites and products for educational use and value, but I question, how do I know or understand the teacher's use of the product? Where am I to say yes or no to what value they hold to it? This is where I decide to discuss the plan or design for the item and see their vision for the technology tool. Teachers need to feel value in what they need to teach and promote student achievement. The known phrase is that students "power down" when entering school, and this to me is a true statement. We check cell phones at the door, cannot use your ipod or iphone, and lock down to where access to sites is limited, even for teacher use. The need to bring innovative teaching with technology is what is driving me to change my teaching strategies for teachers in staff development. The power of this readily accessible technology may not be obvious to all teachers or to those at the site or district level who make decisions about allocating technology, professional development, and other resources (Duffield & Wahl, 2005). Focusing on modeling a technology enriched classroom with promoting small pieces of technology integration as a tool for learning. We can still use the project-based approach but in smaller bits then building on the areas. I have been involved recently with a couple of teachers who needed assistance with thier classes in a lab setting. Under the standard, TF-V.A and B, facilitators have to be the expert but with the respect of the teacher of the class. I set back as a support system and guided them but never took control of the class. With that support they felt capable of what they already knew and now feel confident to take the class to the lab and bring in the students' knowledge. Being able to ask them questions of what they know and have them show the class. Using this skill and teaching teachers how to design appropriate lessons that facilitate the learning environment will build a greater learning community for all. With performance indicator, TF-V.D, there is the concern of meeting with community, parents and other educators on the direction of technology. Also how the vision and guidance of how all the technology available is being utilized in the classroom. A couple of schools have Parent night or Community awareness night, where I am invited to promote internet safety and how they can help their child with school and what access they have to web-based programs in use. Parents want to help and know what is going on, but building the relationship from the administrative level has been difficult to achieve but growing continually every year.


 * TF-VI Understanding the social, ethical, legal, and human issues surrounding the use of technology in P-12 school and develop program facilitating application of that understanding in practice throughout your district/region/state.**

This standard has been one that I have been working on within my district. I have implemented our Internet Safety Month for the month of May and all 19 campuses report what activities they will conduct or if I am needed at the campus for presentations. Conducted two sperate presentations for the same campus. One was to inform parents what children have access to in today's society but how we can better prepare them with the use of the internet. Parents seem to take in the fact that closing children off from social networking or cell phone use is not the answer but it is in how to educate them in the proper use and who they can go to for help. Cyberbullying has become a catalyst with students school and home environment that can lead to behavioral changes and life threatening decisions. From Shariff on Keeping Schools Out of Court, cyberbullying has become an integral part of teenage culture and socialization (2005). Social networks will not be going away but educators need to embrace it and use it to their advantage. Worked with the third and fourth graders of the same campus. This was my second year with this group of students, many said how they remembered me from the previous year. They were the best students that I had worked with, many asked pernet questions and had insightful things to say. I was truly proud of them and how they were thinking outside the classroom. The area of need is the teacher focus of AUA (Acceptable Use Agreeement) and copyright information. These areas fall under ethics and legality concerns and how the social networking has come into the school system. My site mentor came to me to add revamping the staff AUA to include texting and social networking with students. It is a growing concern with keeping teachers and students to have legal relationships with one another. There is always a need within technology to keep growing and updating because of the constant change it undergoes. From the ISTE's Technology Facilitation and Technology Leadership Standards, "developing, implementing, and revising...is an integral role for the school technology professional" (p.133). This is a challenging and touching area with how far is too far? Also, when it is after "work hours" teachers would not need to follow the same rules. To me this is a false sense or obscured way of thinking. Teachers should be held at a higher regard as a role model and mentor to students they teach and community. It is almost an oath, you are repsonsible for your actions at work or not. I can see where texting can be used and have seen it on school trips and extra-curricular activities, this is the way students talk and calling will not to get a hold of them. One of the trainings that I conducted was, Beyond the Stream, it instilled the need for creation of closed-captioning video. This is important for assistive technology with a learning curve for some individuals, but there is a strong initivaitve for pushing citation information. Within Discovery Education they have all the information available but part of the instruction was where to place the citation so it would be available when needed. This is critical for teachers and students to learn and use and everything off the internet is not free. Stressing all of these concerns is critical to everyone involved with educators pushing the equitable value of answering the question of why we need to understand these tools.


 * TF-VII Coordinating development and direct implementation of technology infrastructure procedures, policies, plans, and budgets for P-12 schools.**

Technology Facilitator Standard VII is one that I have less famarility with, because of the duties that I have been assigned. This standard is about the infrastructure of the technology department working together with the district guidelines and policies. If all of these areas do not work together then supporting the teacher use of technology would not happen (TF VII.B). Clearly bringing in all areas of a technology budgeting to the forefront lets all "outsiders" understand what it takes to run and maintain the equipment for the district. Equipment has to be maintained in order to function properly for teachers to integrate technology. If this is not included in the budgets, then the use of the equipment may not be updated to run certain programs or causes more problems that teachers will not deal with. Having available updated technology equipment creates ease for teachers to apply and use the necessary equipment for the classroom. Having the Facilitator's position for Instructional Technology does not mean that I oversee budgets, district policies or the technology infrastructure. Reading Standard VII, there is a better understanding of what is expected of the position. Solomon and Schrum states, targeted, sustained investment in research and development is required to promote 21st century skills (p. 18). Bringing in the research with understanding new developments creates an idea of what is needed for budgeting. The concerning issue with budgets and policies is now in sight, which I have discussed with the Instructional Technology Coordinator to help and work together on. She has been the one who organizes and manages these areas. This will help our department run smoother if one of us is unavailable, to take over or answer questions. Teachers need to understand all of their areas to be successful so understanding the technology budget, all policies and plans will bring my learning closer to what teachers expect. One area that has benefited me in gaining confidence with the Technology Plan, was becoming a reviewer for Region IV. Having Region IV available for questions has gained my confidence in reviewing the very different plans. Without thier support, it would be difficult to answer them alone. From Williamson & Redish, hallmark of a good technology program is providing ongoing and continued technical support (p.160). Being able to view and anaylze other districts' plan guided my learning on expectations for a great plan and professional development areas. Educators should promote life long learning, having this opportunity has enlightened my education of how Technology Plans are put together for the state. Understanding state and federal laws and policies changes how districts plan and run their technology programs every year (TF VII.C). Taking the forward thinking approach to try technologies but also understanding what the equipment is able to handle makes a difference for all involved.


 * TF-VIII Facilitating development of a shared vision for comprehensive integration of technology and foster an environment and culture conducive to the realization of the vision.**

Creating a shared vision for a district size of thirteen thousand students with very diverse backgrounds and ethnicity can be challenging. A vision has to be clear with a general guidance of what the district goals would be. Understanding how to write a vision statement takes collaboration, time and research to move forward. Williamson and Redish state that a set back can be when "stakeholders have diffculty imagining how new technologies can support educational endeavors" (p. 179). This is happening in my current district, many of the community leaders, boardmembers and stakeholders place testing over technology. The vision is not set on technology as a tool but one where it can be used to take exams, reteaching programs, and teacher only use. This is discouraging as a technology leader for the district. In the Instructional Technology department created our own vision for the needs of the students, teachers and support staff. A survey with specific questions was sent out through Eduphoria-Formspace to understand what expectations were from us, what technologies were needed and which specialized trainings were expected so we could better guide them to the 21st century. This past year, it was the district's year to turn in the new Technology plan for the 2010-2013 school year. Three years prior, I assisted with the work involved but did not take a goal for the plan. Working with the infrastructure, staff development policies, future plans and the amount of budget helped in the direction of the district. Taking on the staff development goal for the technology plan gave me the leadership practice of working with a committee. The committee consisted of teachers, librarians and community members that guided discussions in very different directions. The creation of a professional community is built on respect, concern, reliability and commitment to the larger cause (Blankstein, p. 75-76). Keeping the committee on task created multiple meetings to iron out specific strategies. Having an open mind with everyone involved, helps with accomplishing the goals set forth in the planning phase. More is accomplished this way. The concerns that was gained during these experiences is how much many do not understand what aspects technology should be used. The integration of technology is still misunderstood by just adding more into the classroom for access is not helping matters but causing more uneasiness with what to do with it. The district seems to have lost the sight of the instructional aspect with the addition of more techicians to cover all the equipment issues. There are two in the department I work in and fifteen with the techician department. This is not equitable. Makes me question the future and what areas are more important? There is a need to push the district administrators into the 21st century with the realization that technology is a tool to be used within the classroom everyday.