Texas S Ta R Chart Presentation

Check out this SlideShare Presentation: It explains STaR, its four key measurement areas, rating levels, reviews Matatagorda Elementary's past three years of STaR results, and concludes with suggestions and a focus.

Texas S Ta R Chart

View more presentations from Susan Phillips.

Week 2, Part 2: Using a Blog - STaR Analysis

Under the STaR category that I find most interesting at this point is, “Teaching and Learning,” with the ultimate rating being “Target Tech” charges teachers to serve as facilitators, mentors, and co-learners as they help students stay focused on inquiry as technology assists their learning process. Collaboration is used to suggest, assess, and implement solutions for real world problems, as well as communicate effectively. Technology is integrated into all subjects and lessons.

When I analyzed local data for my school, I realized that I have a strong disagreement with the “Advanced Tech” rating under “Teaching and Learning.” I know for a fact, as the District and Campus Curriculum Director and Testing Coordinator, teachers rely on our technology curriculum, TechWorks (2001), to cover the TEKS and believe that by setting aside a little time here and there for “computer work”; they are taking care of this responsibility. Another obvious indicator that proves that my district and campus isn’t accurately rated in that area can be found by listening to staff conversations in our Professional Learning Communities; I too am guilty. Technology TEKS haven’t been on any agenda since we formed our PLC’s two years ago. No one is talking about them. So for someone to read this report and think “Wow, Matagorda ISD, is close to being on target in this area,” is a false statement.

Our campus in comparison to statewide progress shows MISD with a rating above the state average, “Developing Tech.” Statewide 69.7% of campuses were at this level. Only 25.5% were at “Advance Tech.” I have to question the validity of those results after analyzing the data for my own campus.

I will create the STaR PowerPoint and schedule a staff development to facilitate awareness of the purpose of the STaR assessment, review MISD’s results from the last three years, and then provide everyone with a fresh copy of their grade appropriate Technology TEKS. I’ll schedule follow up trainings in conjunction with our Education Service Center to help foster technology integration into all subjects to a point at which teachers are comfortable with and using technology to foster student learning.

Week 1 Part 4 Technology TEKS Summary

Week 1 Part 4 Technology TEKS Summary

The TEKS for Pre-K students the focus is on teaching them the basic computer functions, methods for handling and managing input devices, and helping them gain confidence so they can move into an independent stage of software user. Pre-K students learn to:
· Start, use, and properly exit software programs,
· Use different input devices such as the keyboard, mouse, touch screen, and voice recorders,
· Learn and use academic technology vocabulary such as, “keyboard,” “mouse,” “printer.”
· Learn to like to use interactive programs such as using a storyboard and other informational texts,
· Effectively uses software programs targeted to assist with vocabulary development, math level, phonemic awareness, and
· Follow oral directions and/or picture cues to navigate programs.

These foundation skills will prepare the students in a purposeful, playful, and playful way for the technology TEKS that follow year after year. The technology TEKS take a child from an introductory level, to an applied level, and finally a mastery level as demonstrated through scope and sequence documents. For instance under the foundation domain, a Pre-K student is introduced to (1) Foundations: The student demonstrates knowledge and appropriate use of hardware components, software programs, and their connections. The student (A) uses technology terminology appropriate to task and grade level. This expectation is taught at an introductory level in Pre-K and Kindergarten, but during the 1st and 2nd grade year the student is expected to work move from the introductory level to an applied level. The same is for the other TEKS. The TEKS don’t change, what changes is the level in which the student is expected to perform as he or she advances grade levels.

Week 1 Part 3 Key Ideas of the Long-Range Plan for Technology Reflection

The most amazing learning experience I enjoyed through the analysis of the Long-Range Plan occurred when I realized that such a plan existed. I realized that as an interning Assistant Principal I need to share this information. I don’t expect each staff member to analyze it to the extent that I did, but it lays out the path that we are heading down and gives meaning to changes that we, as teachers, have experienced. Some of the present infrastructure issues we are experiencing with very basic operations became even more important when considering where we are headed. I see now that we need to prepare our campus by establishing a faster response to technological difficulties, establishing ongoing professional development for staff on tech tools such as digital cameras, scanners, downloading videos, incorporating PowerPoint lessons, integrating technology effectively into lessons, creating evaluations of technology in the classroom, and staying on top of cutting edge technological developments. Not knowing where we are heading with the Long-Range Plan allows us to trivialize current technological situations. As a teacher, I recognize that I am in desperate need of developing my own professional development plan. As curriculum director, I recognize that I need to help staff develop one to meet their needs so that they can take the time to prepare and learn what they need to learn instead of waiting until the last minute and being overwhelmed.

Week 1 Part 2 Reflection on the Technology Assessments

Both assessments showed that although I know how to use technology to fit my needs for student instruction, staff training, and various tasks such as creating newsletters; I am not comfortable enough nor have the proper technological vocabulary to expand on student instruction past my current curriculum. TEA’s Technology Applications Inventory revealed that I need instruction in the areas of virtual environment, graphic files, project management tools, and designing rubrics. The SETDA teacher survey supported that conclusion and elaborated that my technological inadequacies, along with most of our teachers, is negatively impacting student learning. Although we are provided year round state of the art laptops, Verizon wireless cards, and multitudes of other technology; it’s not being carried over to the students. The SETDA results also pointed out a need for data collection so that we can identify and address our weaknesses and create a technological vision. Most shockingly, as the SETDA showed, our administration supports, recognizes, and rewards teachers who pursue using technology for teaching and learning. This evaluation tool is going to be a huge asset to our campus. It’s much more in-depth than the STAR survey we complete each year. As curriculum director, I am going to use it at our next staff meeting and then plan our January – May professional development plan around the results. It will also provide me with a tool to present administration showing where we need to use our resources the most. My opinion is that administrators will see that although they are providing the resources and support for teachers, it’s not trickling down to impact student learning. The assessments are excellent sources for analysis both on the personal and school-wide technological occurrences.