The Texas STaR Chart

Here is my SlideShare Presentation:

The Texas STaR Chart

View more presentations from avandev.

STaR Chart: Educator Preparation and Development is a Must

Texas has created the STaR (School Technology and Readiness) Chart which is a self-assessment of campus and districts use of technology. This assessment is aligned with the Long-Range Plan for Technology and is used by campuses and districts for planning, budgeting, and evaluating technology progress. The STaR Chart asks questions in four domains. They are Teaching and Learning, Educator Preparation and Development, Leadership, Administration and Instructional Support, and Infrastructure for Technology. This chart provides summaries in all 4 domains and provides a percentage amount and level of progress for each of the domains. Levels of progress are divided into Early Tech, Developing Tech, Advanced Tech, and Target Tech. The last Tech being the one that needs to be met in order to meet the needs of the Long-Range Plan for Technology and No Child Left Behind.

In my opinion the domain that needs the most work if we are to reach our goal is Educator Preparation and Development. This domain covers six areas with questions having to do with content and models of professional development, access to online learning and professional development, educator capabilities, and levels of understanding. There must be some extreme changes and re-teaching to all educators if we are to teach in this era and to meet the target tech level.

My campus scored 11% under this domain in the 2008-2009 STaR Chart summary and did not score any better in the previous 2 years. One area that was surveyed as and early stage for all three years was Access to Professional Development. Models of Professional Development showed up in the advanced stage in the year 2007-2009, but went back down to Developing in 2008-2009. The reason I think this happened was because in this year the district was bringing in lots of new Professional Development sessions for teachers. This year the sessions repeated themselves, like they have in previous years and teachers feel that they are hearing the same information over and over again and that it is a waste of their time. I feel that this survey does not reflect the level of Educator Preparation and Development at our school level, but at the district level. Most teachers think about the opportunities provided to them by the district when we thing about Preparation and Development.

The State Level scored 5.4% under Early Tech, 74.2% under Developing Tech, 19.9% under Advanced Tech, and a small .6% under Target Tech. Most people taking the STaR Chart assessment felt that technology is mainly used for Administrative tasks, online resources, and classroom management. Administrators expect their teachers to be able to use technology and allocated anywhere between 6-24% of their budget towards purchasing tools and resources to accomplish this task.

My recommendations for improving this area starts at the district level. The district needs to provide staff development on technology that is not only interesting and interactive, but useful. These staff developments need to cover how to use different technology tools and resources in the classroom. These staff development sessions need to show teachers how to effectively integrate technology into their everyday lessons in order to produce students that can function in the 21st century. After this happens, there must be follow-up sessions that continue to support teachers in their new role.

Districts are not the only ones responsible for Educator

Preparation and Development, campuses also have a role to play. Administrators must support their teachers and ensure that they have the necessary tools needed in order to integrate technology into their lessons. They must also provide on site training sessions with continuous follow-ups in order to support their teachers. Campuses also need to ensure that they allocate enough of their budget towards purchasing tools and resources needed to reach the Long-Range Plan for Technology and if we are to be on target.


Work Cited:

Texas STaR Chart. Retrieved November 2009 from the Texas Education Agency Site: http://starchart.esc12.net/

Technology Applications Pre-Kindergarten TEKS Summary

Pre-kindergarten guidelines were created in 2008 that provided students with the foundations needed to be successful in school. Laying a strong foundation in the early years influence students and guides them emotionally, socially, and academically. The Pre-kindergarten guidelines covers 10 different skill domains. One of these domains is technology.

All students have much to learn and gain by using technology regularly, especially in today's world, where technology is so prominent. Students at this early age are expected to learn and use age appropriate and challenging technology tools in their classrooms. The expectation by the end of Pre-kindergarten is that all students are able to use basic computer functions and specific age appropriate tools with confidence and independence.

The Pre-kindergarten tools students are expected to use and know are
*Open, use, and close a variety of software programs
*Be able to use different input devices
*Use technology terminology
*Use voice/sound recorders and touch screens
*Use software with audio, video, and graphics
*Know that information can be accessed by using technology


What is a spiraling and scaffolding curriculum?

Using a spiraling or scaffolding curriculum in the classroom is an excellent way to ensure students understand and master the concepts being taught. A spiraling curriculum introduces a topic and ideas over and over again. It moves in a circular pattern and is tied to the student level of readiness. For example, when fractions are introduced for the first time, mastery for the concept might not be achieved by all since not everyone in your class is ready to master the concept. a few students master the concept on this first level, then more will master it when the concept comes up again or spirals. The reason that this works is because the concept becomes more familiar and comprehensible to students each time it is introduced.
Scaffolding curriculum works in a different way. This is a sequence of content, materials, tasks, teacher and peer support. Scaffolding provides students with the support needed until they are able to independently use the new skill and strategy on their own. Think about scaffolding as if you were constructing a building. You need to have a temporary framework that holds us the building during construction and this framework or scaffold is removed when the building is strong enough to stand on its own.

How do the TEKS create opportunities for student mastery?

The TEKS are built using a scaffolding and spiraling curriculum methods. For example in the Pre-kindergarten TEKS, students are expected to use software applications to create and express ideas. The kinder-2nd grade TEKS spirals and scaffolds off of the Pre-kindergarten ones by re-introducing some of the same concepts and adding new ones. They also use software to create ideas, but they add creating and modifying solutions to problems. The TEKS spiral in 3rd-5th grades, teaching the same thing that was taught in kinder -2nd grade. The 6th-8th grade TEKS scaffolds upon the previous TEKS by adding more student expectations. They need to be able to use the appropriate software, but also be able to plan, create, edit, use interactive virtual environment, and integrate productivity tools and much more. 9th-12th grade TEKS continues to scaffold by adding many more expectations. Some examples: creating libraries, creating and using algorithms, and applying problem solving strategies.


Work Cited:

Curriculum Technology Applications: Student Standards. (2005, March 15). Retrieved November 2009 from the Texas Education Agency Site: http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/technology/ta/stustd.html

Long Range Plan for Technology

The Long Range Plan is listed under Texas Education Code, Section 32.001. The plan was adopted by the State Board of Education in 1996 and discusses the ongoing changes in the areas of Teaching, Learning, Educator Preparation and Development, Administration and Support Services, and the Infrastructure for Technology and how students and education are affected by each. The original plan adopted only encompassed the years 1996-2010, but because of all of the changes in technology, No Child Left Behind, and the new 2004 National Educational Technology Plan, revisions were made and the plan now extends to the year 2020.

The plan offers in depth explanations for why there was a need for change and how to go about ensuring that this change happens. The plan covers an in depth Vision for each of the following groups:

• Students will be able to access tools and resources 24 hours, 7 days a week depending on their strengths, weaknesses, and different learning styles.

• Parents will become more involved in their child’s education and communication will increase through the use of resources and student information.

• Teachers will be able to better individualize instruction by accessing and using student information. They will have staff development, digital tools, and resources available to them and collaboration between home, school, and community will be enhanced through communication.

• Community and board members will increase communication and participation in the decision making process through digital tools and resources and will use the fiscal resources and human capital more efficiently.

As an educator, I was not aware of this Long Range Plan. I was always using technology in and out of my classroom, but not to the extent that the plan describes. The plan is extremely useful and an eye opener for me. I am not sure if we will reach all of the goals that the plan wants us to fulfill by 2020, but at least now I know what is out there and can work towards trying to fulfill them to the best of my abilities.

As an aspiring administrator, this information is also useful and helps me see what is expected and what the vision is for our students, parents, teachers, and community. It helps me see that everyone plays and important role in the process. I, as an administrator, am expected to use technology to its fullest capacity and should also expect the same from the staff on my campus. This means that I will need to ensure that everyone on my campus has the appropriate training and tools needed to integrate technology to its fullest in and out of their classrooms. If we are expected to produce active and productive citizens in this world filled with technology, I will need to appropriate the necessary funds to cover our campus needs and ensure that my building and staff is well equipped and trained with the tools and resources necessary to accomplish this daunting task.


Work Cited:

Education Technology Long-Range Plan for Technology. (2006, December 8). Retrieved November 2009 from the Texas Education Agency Site: http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/technology/lrpt/lrpt_lrpt.html

Technology Assessment: Week 1 Part A and B

Many of us use technology in our everyday lives and feel comfortable with it, but how much do we really know? I am seen in my school as being technologically savvy. I thought that my knowledge of technology and how to use it was fairly advanced, but after taking these surveys, I found that my knowledge is very minimal.

I took the Technology Applications Inventory and found myself seriously lacking in all of the four domains given. As I took the survey, I kept stopping and asking my husband "Do I know how to do this?" His response was "Annabell, if you are asking me, you don't know how to do it." Needless to say that I ended up with more nos than yeses. The closest I came to be fairly even in is the Communication Domain. After taking this assessment, I knew that I had much to learn in all four domains.

The second assessment I took was the SETDA (State Educational Technology Directors Association) Building Survey. I took the Building Survey and not the Teachers version since I am no longer in the classroom. I know that my school has more technology than most schools. Every classroom has four student computers, one teacher computer, and a projector. We also have a computer lab, a cart of Alpha-smart boards, e-instruction systems, smart boards, and lots of software. Even though we have lots of technology, I have realized that it is not utilized to its fullest. We only have a hand full of teachers that use the technology that is available to them in our school.

After taking the surveys I came up with several frightening conclusions. The first one is that I am considered to be an expert on technology on my campus. If this is true and I am lacking much knowledge, then many on my campus are also lacking. The second one is that even though our Principal has made it a point to purchase technological tools for teachers to use, they are not being utilized to their fullest ability.

The staff at my school needs to have more training on technology and how to use it in their classrooms. Their crippling ability or lack of knowledge when it comes to technology is not all their fault. The district has not provided opportunity for staff development in the use of technology and when they do it is limited to a few and in a district as large as our, that is not even a drop in the bucket. At our campus, our principal has arranged for teachers to be trained in the different tools and software that has been purchased, but because of time, the trainings have been few. If we want to teach our students, then we as teachers must take it upon ourselves to become more knowledgeable when it comes to technology.

Work Cited:

Teaching Applications Inventory. Retrieved November 2009 from the Texas Education Agency site: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/technology/techapp/assess/teksurv.pdf

SETDA Teacher Survey. Retrieved November 2009 from SETDA Site: http://www.setda-peti.org/tools.html