ISTE+Standard+II+Reflection

Standard II: Planning and Designing Learning Environments and Experiences

Willamson & Redish (2009) warn that an increased level of complexity hinders teachers who strive to embed technology into lesson content (p.37). I have found this to be true in my own teaching, and I have continued to come up against this obstacle again and again. My experiences in EDLD 5363 proved invaluable in providing me with a framework that I could provide teachers to ease them into this new style of planning. I teach fifth grade science, and as the only member of my project team currently teaching in a K-12 classroom, we decided to focus on curriculum with which I was already familiar. My background knowledge in the fifth grade science content standards gave us more freedom to focus on development of technology integration into existing district curriculum, and exercise we felt was more authentic to a real-life facilitation environment. I was also able to segue this project into real-time as I worked toward developing a UDL framework for science teachers on my campus. We took an existing unit on Earth Science and used it as the basis of our scenario response. I utilized a variety of technological integrations that I already use in my classroom, particularly the use of productivity tools from Microsoft Office, digital video, and interactive whiteboard technology from SMART Technologies. One of the activities, the creation of a graphic organizer using productivity tools and interactive graphic organizers/formative assessment using SMART Notebook and SMART Response applications, offers students the opportunity to create combination notes. These style of notes, which employ outlining, webbing, and pictographs in addition to words, have been shown to be effective: "Graphic representation has been shown to produce a percentile gain of 39 points in student achievement" (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski, 2007, p. 124). Our overall approach was to create a constructivist style that would not be overwhelming or threatening to a classroom teacher with minimal technological experience and skill. As a part of this implementation, we also solicited regular reporting of successes and obstacles from teachers who implemented the curriculum changes. We encouraged this practice because teacher self-evaluation gives educators and opportunity to identify both what instructional strategies are working effectively and what areas might need review and change (Taylor, 1994).

Overall, we implemented what we believed were a range of opportunities for the classroom teachers to develop, display, and share their expertise as they integrate technology into their instruction. Additionally, I had the pleasure of working with two overlapping groups: my professional cohort within the campus and a professional learning community among my fellow master's students. Communities of practice bring their collective knowledge to solve problems and develop collaboration through interaction while working toward similar goals (Solomon & Schrum, 2007, pp. 104-105). Not only did both groups utilize continuous improvement processes in order to most effectively collaborate on our lessons and activities, I had the opportunity throughout the process to "model technology integration using resources that reflect contenct standards" (Williamson & Redish, 2009, p. 45). Instead of a random, distanced professional development on the new unit, regular communication, sharing of ideas, and modeling made for more depth and breadth of grade level customization and transferrence to other content areas. These professional learning communities acted as a mechanism to help teachers on my campus develop the confidence and the resource framework to bring authentic technology learning experiences to their classrooms (Williamson & Redish, 2009), and I plan to continue fostering this level of collaboration and data-driven decision making on my campus.

References: Edutopia.org. (Producer). (2007, December 10). //The collaborative classroom: An interview with Linda Darling-Hammond.// [Video Webcast]. Retrieved from [] Pitler, H., Hubbell, E. R., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). //Using technology with classroom instruction that works.// Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. (2002). //Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for learning.// Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Retrieved from [] Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2007). //Web 2.0: New tools, new schools.// Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education. Taylor, L. (1994, August). Reflecting on teaching: The benefits of self-evaluation. //Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education////, 19// (2), 109-120 Williamson, J., & Redish, T. (2009). //ISTE's Technology Facilitation and// //Leadership Standards: What Every K-12 Leader Should Know and Be Able to// //Do.// Washington: International Society for Technology in Education.