Video Project Software

I am planning to use Camtasia Mac for my screen capture project and iMovie for my video project

Common Core Standards

Question:

What do you know about the common core standards? What scares you about them? How can you become more knowledgeable about them?

Response:

I like many of the other teachers in Oklahoma are learning on the fly when it comes to Common Core.  From what I have learned from professional development inservices and workshops is that Common Core standards are a set of national standards that allow every student in the U.S. to learn the same set of skills that will help them to be successful at a second level.  This could be college, vo-tech or on the job training.  However, from reading some of Patsy's blog (the resident Guru on Common Core) I found out exactly how Common Core relates to Oklahoma.  I remember hearing about most of these things over the past year, however, no one explained them with as much simplicity as Patsy.

From what I have learned, the Common Core Standards now only encompass English Langauge Arts, Literacy and Math.  At our school we have been working (probably not enough) with english teachers for how to best incorporate non-fiction texts into a science, history and math classrooms.  However, this is a hard process because it is hard to get a clear picture of what types of questions will be asked.  It is nice to hear that the testing company now has resources online that show the types of questions that students will be assessed on.

One of the things that scares me the most is the rapid change.  It seems that people higher up the ladder decided that we must change something in order to prepare our students in a better way and this is product.  The whole program seems rushed.  The standards are supposed to be in full implementation                                                                      for the 2014-15 school year and we are just now getting sample questions.  Most of the textbooks that we use for each subject were purchased before the shift to Common Core, so they offer little help to prepare students.  This leaves teachers with only one alternative, make their own material and when it comes down to it many teachers would rather use pre-made materials instead of making up an entire curriculum for an entire year of teaching to Common Core Standards.  This is probably why most of the training we have received has been on how to modify existing materials to meet CCS.  It seems unreasonable to ask teachers to change much of their teaching style and content within less than 2 years.  From experience I know that there are teachers out there that are very scared of the quick time table.

Another thing that scares is that they are now (January 2013) just getting around to publishing the first version of the "Next Generation Science Standards" (www.nextgenscience.org).  These are still in the development process and it is not known yet of a date for implementation.  However, once they do finish the standards it will be up to the states to adopt them as part of the CCS movement.  My guess is the only way to be prepared for CCS is to do the best to become educated on the standards themselves and the way they will be assessed (PARCC).  

Chapter 10 Response

Preventing Cyber Bullying

Sameer Hinduja and Justin Patchin

In chapter 10 the authors discuss a number of ways that teachers, administrators and parents can help prevent cyber bullying.  It starts by addressing the teachers role in preventing cyber bullying.  Teachers can do a number of things to prevent cyber bullying but first teachers must be aware of the level of cyber bulling at their school and the must educate students about examples of it.  The major step that educators can do to help decrease cyber bullying is to increase the awareness of acceptable uses of technology at school and at home.  With clear rules that are reinforced by the teacher, students will be more aware of classroom computer use and portable electronic use (cell phone).  Rules can also effectively be reinforced by peer mentoring that helps students relate to one another about cyber bullying issues.  Schools can also do much to change the climate by helping to maintain a safe and respectful school culture, limiting inappropriate web material with filtering software or even the implementation of a school wide anti-cyber bullying program.  The chapter then concludes by discussing the parents, students, and law enforcement's role in preventing cyber bullying. 

I have heard a number of teachers at my school say, "There have always been problems that with bullies at school...I made it through it, so will they."  However, as this chapter outlines, the major difference between then and now is...technology.  It seems to me that technology has given the word bully a new meaning.  Bullies no longer have the persona of being a big, bad person that is going to take your milk money.  Now bullies can hide behind computer screens or behind a facebook/twitter page.  For example, either this year at my school two students were suspended for making a twitter account making fun of some football players after a the team suffered a few losses in a row.  I read some of the tweets that these kids were posting and it horrified me the types of things kids will say about each other.  Schools must do something to help students see the harm these types of messages can do towards their peers.  I realize schools can only do so much, so when does some of the responsibility fall to the parent/guardian? 

Chapter 11 Reflection

Top Ten Rules That Govern School Authority Over Student Cyber Expressions

Jill Myers, Donna McCaw and Leaunda Hemphill

Chapter 11 discusses the majors principles brought about as the result of court rulings regarding cyber bullying.  Most of these deal with what student(s) can or cannot say about another student or group of students at a school.  Students still have 1st amendment rights much like any other person.  However, these rights are restricted to what is appropriate for the school environment.  Other rules that come up are as follows: #2 Censoring a student if they are a substantial disruption to school activities (threats of a shooting, etc.), #3 Censoring a student if they are distracting from the learning environment (racial/sexual comments), #4 Profane language not acceptable for a school setting (bullying language on campus), #5 Actions on school grounds and off (what is acceptable off school is not alway acceptable at school), #6 Schools may edit school-sponsored expressions (editing publications), #7 Regulation of school sponsored expressions based on pedagogical concerns (must be during school hours), #8 Off-campus expressions that have a direct tie to the school (must disrupt a school activity), #9 Expression restriction if it is not a shared value (school obligation to promote socially appropriate behavior), #10 True criminal threats (Must be reported).  The authors point out that if followed these rules will help assist in making appropriate boundaries in cyber expression. 

This chapter throws many laws out that I never knew existed and I am pretty sure that most teachers feel the same way.  However, after reading it is clear how most cyber bullying goes without being detected until it is way to late.  Many students, especially cyber bullying types, have an attitude that they can say whatever they want to whoever they want and the school cannot do anything about it due to the first amendment.  If more teachers were aware of the the limitations that students have regarding their 1st amendment rights it would be more clear to them when students do step over the line.  A good administrator should let teachers know of these kinds of laws and regulations, especially with the ever-deepening dependence on technology.  In light of the current national events, keeping students safe is the one of the highest goals of many school districts.  To make this a reality and really dampen school violence teachers must be informed of their duties to point out cyber bullying and stop it before it goes to far.  

Chapter 9 Reflection

Policies, Procedures, and Contracts

Communicating Expectations to Teachers, Students, and Parents

Aimee M. Bissonette

In chapter 9 Bissonette discusses the many policies that schools adopt to define the rights and responsibilities of students, teachers, and staff.  Some of the major policies she lines out are acceptable use policies (AUPs), bullying policies, parent permission slips, photographic releases, and disciplinary procedures.  The chapter defines all of these agreements as contracts that layout expectations, define rights and responsibilities, describe procedures, and detail consequences.  These contracts can be constantly amendable to adapt to the changing school climate.  Administrators can propose new policies, but they have to let all those affected know (students and parents).  Bissonette, then goes into great detail about schools AUPs.  She points out that for a school to have an effective Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) it must be under constant review and amending, because technology is constantly changing and new risks come up everyday.  Bissonette then ends the chapter by discussing the role of schools in effective policy adoption.  She outlines a five-step plan for policy adoption, in which communication is key (to students and parents).  

Last year at my school we underwent a massive student/teacher handbook revision.  Before last year no one could remember the last time major revisions were done to the student/teacher policies, so this was a major task that a group of teachers worked on for almost the entire year.  However, looking from the perspective of the information in this chapter, we still do not have a very specific AUP.  Our handbook most puts the terms of acceptable use squarely on the teachers judgement.  This is a scary fact based on the information in chapter 9.  I wonder if more schools are like ours?  I believe many schools are behind the times when it comes to adapting their rules to include new technology.  I wonder if other schools have gotten in major trouble from having very loose AUPs?

Chapter 8 Reflection

Assessment in the Partnership Pedagogy

Marc Prensky

Chapter 8 discusses assessment in both a traditional and in a partnering setting.  Prensky discusses the two types of assessment that are the most usual: summative and formative.  He points out that formative is the most useful of the two due to the fact that enables the student to receive feedback on their work.  Then however, Prensky, goes on to discuss the most useful types of assessment in a partnering setting, most of which fall under the formative umbrella.  One of the types of assessment he discusses is called Ipsative Assessment, in which the students try to beat or better their personal best.  Other types that are successful in a partnering setting are peer based feedback (Peer Assessment), evaluation from a real-world audience (real-word), students understanding their own assessment (self-assessment), allowing students to use tools familiar to them (21st century assessment) as well as the standardized test put forth by governing bodies (summative).  Prensky concludes the chapter by discussing major fears by teachers and administrators about partnering and new types of assessment which include, a fear of students not learning enough to be successful on standardized tests and a fear that the new activities/assignments students are doing in partnering classrooms will not count because they are not tested.  He concludes by pointing out how to assess how well an administrator supports partnering as well as the parents of the students and the school as a whole.

Chapter 8 deals will something that caused myself and another teacher much free time this past summer.  Early in that summer we both with to the "Flipped Classroom" conference in Chicago.  There we were introduced to the flipped classroom model as well as a standards based grading/mastery approach to student assessment.  In a flipped classroom teachers have more free time to move about the class and constantly assess what a student knows in a variety of ways.  For example, a teacher may ask the student questions about a lab, help them with practice problems, ask them to do an example problem for them, ask them to explain a concept to them...the possibilities are endless on how a teacher can assess a student.  However, not many of these are summative in which you can put a grade on.  For instance, why make a student do 20 practice problems when they can do 5 and then explain it to you perfectly.  A mastery grading scale allows you to assign a mastery score of 1-4 (4 being mastered) on a particular skill or objective in a unit.  Allow, like Prensky outlined in the chapter, it took our principle a little getting used to for him to get all the way on board.  

Chapter 3 Reflection

Strategic Leadership 

Lynne Schrum and Barbara B. Levin

In Chapter 3 Schrum and Levin discuss ways to promote technology integration with in a school district as well as discussing models for which the process can be promoted.  One of the current models for adoption of technology with in schools groups teachers into 5 major categories of tech adopters.  The innovators are the first group, which make up 2.5% of the whole.  These people are the ones forcing the change in the schools to use technology.  Next are the early adopters, 13.5%, who are early leaders that adopt new technology easily.  This group influences the next group, the early majority (34%), who accept the change, but carefully consider it first.  The last two groups are the late majority (34%) and the "Laggards" (16%).  These two groups are slow to enact a change or may not even change anything at all.  The other model that Schrum and Levin discuss is the Concerns Based Adoption Model (CBAM).  This model is an approach that anchors on individual reactions to change in a situation, by implementing a step-wise process that allows teachers to master smaller tasks that build on each other.  The rest of chapter 3 discusses steps toward a successful technology integration.  The success of any change depends on the support of the teachers that are using it.  Support described in the chapter comes in the form of PLCs, technology leadership/planning committees and teachers leaders.  The more support teachers have about using technology in the classroom the more apt they are to use it.

I have to admit I have found myself in similar situations.  I would consider myself an "innovator" at my school based on the fact that last year I probably bugged my principal nearly every month about getting classroom sets of iPads to use in the high school.  This paid off because right before school started this year he called me in and said here you go.  We have two carts that are for the entire high school (~400 enrollment) and the carts are mostly used for myself and one other science teacher.  Some of the other teachers have checked them out for a few days here and there (the early adopters), but for the most part I have them everyday.  Going off of what Schrum and Levin have outline, I would say that this is not a very successful technology integration.  There was not any support in place (professional development, technology coordinator, planning committee, system of teacher leaders), to ensure the success of the roll out.  We are in our 1st year of PLCs, but in order to really harness the power of the new technology steps must be taken toward the implementation of some sort of goal.  Sadly, this happens at many schools.