home

Welcome to our groups Wiki page. Our group members are LaToya Claiborne, Gib Lucas, and Georganna Milner. You will find our paper right here on the main page of the Wiki.

Technology is ever changing in today’s society. Technology has made much advancement throughout the years. Through this project, we have found that school districts across the United States have different levels of technology. LaToya Claiborne is a second grade teacher with Fulton County in Georgia; Georganna is a home school teacher with previous experience with Greenville County in South Carolina; and Gib is a special education teacher with Benzie County in Michigan. Each schooling experience has technology opportunities for their students. This paper will show that districts have some of the same options but could collaborate with each other to make technology experiences better for all students learning.

Even though our group is pretty diverse, consisting of an elementary teacher, a high school teacher and a home school teacher, there are many similarities in the hardware available to us. We all use laptop and/or desktop computers running Microsoft Windows 7 or Windows XP. Add on devices used by the group include printers, scanners, CD-Roms, digital projectors, digital cameras and cable modems. A group member reports that Mobi's have recently been purchased for some teachers, but training and usage is incomplete.

Two out of the three group members have access to wireless network for their classrooms. The one member, who does not have wireless, reports that it is one of the major items on the school's technology wish list. The computer configurations used include Intel (R) Pentium (R)CPU B940 @ 2.00 GHz processor and 4 GB of RAM and an AMD Turion II Ultra dual core microprocessor, 4 GB of installed memory. Some group members report many of the available computers are older and close to being obsolete. High-speed connections used to access the internet include Charter, T1, and Intel 82567V-2 Gigabit Net Connections.

Software is the computer programs which students and teachers can use to increase the educational experience. The software programs in all districts tend to be updated often. All three districts try to have the software updated on a daily or yearly basis. It would be easier for software to be updated daily in the home school environment because Georganna has the most control with updates. Gib and LaToya have to wait on their school districts to set updates or for funds to become available to update software. We all have different multimedia programs. Microsoft PowerPoint is used in the two big districts in Georgia and Michigan. There are many other programs such as Movie Maker, Story Maker, Moodle, Prezi, Adobe Photoshop, and Microsoft Publisher which are used as multimedia programs. Prezi is a program which is similar to PowerPoint, but has more features and graphics. Photoshop, Story Maker, and Movie Maker are great for combining photos to create a story. Publisher is a source which can be used to create brochures, certificates, and other publication items. Internet Explorer and Mozilla Firefox are the most used internet programs. As a special education teacher, Gib also uses EasyIEP. Khan Academy, igoogle, and Weebly are great programs to aide in instruction. The most used processing programs are the programs with Microsoft Office Suites. In addition, through this course we have all learned to use GoogleDocs. Most Computer Assisted Instruction (CAI) programs are used with children who have special needs. Programs such as Read 180, Kahn Academy, Board Maker, Write Outloud, and Solo are used to help children with their learning. Lastly, statistical programs Data Director, PowerSchool, and EasyIEP help teachers to organizer data collected for IEP’s (individual education plans). Also, OpenGeoDa is freeware that is used to organize data allowing students to observe a concrete representation of statistical information.

In view of technology training in the workforce, Gib Lucas and Latoya Claiborne have very similar experiences. Both Benzie Central High and Love T. Nolan Elementary schools have had only one in-service in at least the past year. Both schools have a similar size teacher body all of which have received appropriate training for the applications available to them in the classroom. A similar number of administrators and staff have received training whether inside or outside of the school. Teachers, staff, and administrators have computers in their home.

All three teachers, Gib, Latoya, and Georganna have access to a computer that they can use for work-related purposes. Latoya and Gib agree that teachers in their schools also have individual computers or laptops. Although, Gib describes a sense of frustration in the teacher body at Benzie Central High School due to the inadequate speed required for downloading web-related applications like Google Docs.

All three teachers take an independent initiative for expanding their technology experiences and expertise. Teachers at Gib’s school have the option of taking classes offered through the ISD. Latoya relates a sense of frustration on the part of teachers at Love T. Nolan Elementary because their demand for more technology classes has not been heard by administrators. At the district in South Carolina where Georganna has previous experience, teachers are required to complete a graduate level certification program created by the district technology department in conjunction with a local college. After completion of the certification, teachers must complete 3 hours of graduate coursework in technology every five years. As with teachers in Gib’s school, teachers in Greenville County (SC) have the option of taking classes offered by the district office. Administrators and staff also have the option of taking several of these classes, but are not required to take them. When requested, the district will also send personnel to hold workshops within its local schools.

The evaluation process for measuring learning achievement and evaluating the success of pedagogical techniques is quite varied. Gib's school has a student/computer ratio of 1:3.4 (one computer available in the school for every 3.4 students), Latoya relates that, in her school, there are 4 computers in each classroom along with 23 computers in one computer lab and 24 available in a second lab. In Georganna's previous school district, each school has 12 mobile computer labs available to teachers to use with their classes. In addition, 75% of classes have interactive white boards. In Latoya's district, Technology Services evaluates technology effectiveness using a survey every 5-7 years. Georganna's previous district uses surveys, course completion rates, classroom observations, online site monitoring, teacher use of available technologies (through sign in/out logs), and review of lesson plans to evaluate on an ongoing basis and to be updated annually. Gib's district has not yet developed a plan that specifically evaluates the effectiveness of using technology in the classroom. Of course, the anecdotal evidence reported by teachers and students implies that technology greatly enhances the educational experience for students as well as teachers. Latoya and Gib both report that that the number of up-to-date computers available to students and the level of training and support in their respective schools is insufficient. Whereas, Georganna feels that the technology and support/training is adequate for the needs of her classroom. She is able to provide her daughter with personalized instruction and interaction with technology.

In an ideal world, each student’s home would be equipped with an up-to-date computer that is connected to high-speed internet. Students and parents would both be conscientious of their online actions and interested in Web 2.0 as a means to collaborate, increase learning, and develop creativity. Investors would be lining up at school doors waiting to donate the funds needed to provide students with a rich learning experience in the twenty-first century. Alas, such is not the case. Districts and schools must do the best they can with what they have.

But, as we have learned in our coursework for Advanced Technology and Education, districts and schools must have a technology plan that has been created with careful thought. While cost is important, the plan must be practical in its components and configuration, thorough in its development of training initiatives and evaluation methods, and include ongoing input from all of the individuals that have a part in its daily use. Training is the key. Without training, districts and schools will not extract the complete worth of their technology purchases. Teachers will see potential but lack the time to develop it. With proper training, teachers will have the confidence to creatively meld technology into their pedagogy and classroom practices; administrators will have the tools to support teachers, students, and parents; and educational leaders will have the vision to explore alternative avenues of funding, application, and collaboration within their schools.