Facebook and the Court of Public Opinion: Lessons Learned from School Law

I have thoroughly enjoyed, thus far, the experience of graduate school, in large part because I have had the privilege of focusing on topics that were of direct interest and benefit to my future career. While I can say that my current course has been incredibly informative, its practical application has been at times less clear. This is particularly true in terms of teacher evaluation and remediation. Because it has never been my intention to pursue a position as a campus principal, my focus has not been on how to develop such particular skills of personnel management as evaluation and remediation of staff. Rather, as a peer leader, I see the knowledge gained as a responsibility to lead by example. This course has, more than anything else, changed how I conduct my online personal life, and thereby the guidance that I give to others. For the 2010-2011 school year my district implemented new policies for employees regarding social networking sites. Prior to my investigation of the coursework and current case law in this area, the new policies gave me little pause. That has all changed. I now cast a much wider net as I consider the implications of any item that is posted not only on my site, but on other’s sites that reference me by name. While in certain circumstances I still maintain my rights to constitutionally protected free speech, U.S. Courts have given school districts broad discretion in governing the public perception a teacher presents. This line is generally drawn along two fronts: one, is the public speech a matter of public concern (Pickering v. Board of Education, 1968); and two, have I shown competence and professionalism in other areas of my position? (Mt. Healthy v. Doyle, 1977) The implications for me are then twofold. On the one hand, a Facebook post announcing my support of the Rally to Restore Sanity is protected as a pronouncement of public concern, so long as my job performance has not otherwise be compromised. On the other hand, a tagged photo of me wearing a risqué Halloween costume will not be protected regardless of my other work circumstances. Where I falter is in the gray area of off-campus activities. (Bissonette, 2009, p. 31) Generally the advice for teachers is that for any person living in the public eye: the appearance of impropriety is as damaging as the fact of it. Much of teacher’s life is lived in the court of public opinion, and the discrepancy between what ought to be allowable conduct and what is in fact allowable conduct is a foggy hollow.
Works Cited:
Bissonette, A. (2009). Cyber Law: Maximizing Saftey and Minimizing Risk in Classrooms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Mt. Healthy Independent School District v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274 (1977)
Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563 (1968)

Student Speech in Discussion Groups: The Safety Net of the Limited Forum

Recently I completed a second round of professional development for use of the Moodle online course platform, which included a segment on developing discussion forums as part of the coursework. It is an amazing interface between teacher and students where students can receive resources, submit assignments, and share ideas with their peers. Throughout the training, however, I found myself considering issues of student speech and of my role in balancing student rights and an appropriate student learning environment. Prior to my coursework in school law, I would not have given such issues more than brief consideration. Now I realize that this area is still a battleground for determining boundaries for school accountability and student freedom, and those of us who jump into the breach must keep our eyes on that constantly moving target. In particular, the concept of ‘open’ vs. ‘limited’ forum is a vital one, addressed in the Supreme Court decision in Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988). As I work to develop discussion groups in my coursework, this decision guides me in framing the expectations for my students in this limited classroom forum. In her book, Cyber Law, Aimee Bissonette underscores the need for proactive steps to alleviate problems with inappropriate student online conduct before it starts: “Schools need to draft and enforce school policies regarding appropriate conduct on campus. In fact, such policies are critical for schools that do not want to be held liable for inappropriate use of the school Internet system.” (Bissonette, 2009, p. 25) I realize that because my campus has not previously utilized online discussion forums with students, I will be trailblazing this new area of technology integration. My successes, and failures, in maintaining a healthy, respectful online classroom environment will set the path for many of my colleagues.

Works Cited:
Bissonette, A. (2009). Cyber law: maximizing saftey and minimizing risk in classrooms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988)

Weighing In on Boobies, Wristbands, and Symbolic Speech

School districts all over the country are banning "I Love Boobies" wristbands. Students all over the country are howling in outrage. Many of my colleagues both a school and in my graduate course are firmly on the side of the school districts. Well . . .
At the risk of showing my stripes a bit, I’m afraid I’m going to have to side largely with students on this issue. While some might believe the word ‘boobies’ is not in the best possible taste, I think that as educators we are crossing a thin but civilly important line. I talked with my mother, who recalls in detail the controversy surrounding the black armbands of the late 1960’s and early 1970’s, who reminded me that, like any other distinctive clothing statement, some students wore the armbands for more superficial reasons than higher ethical or moral ones. This did not in any way diminish the intention of many to speak a cherished truth, and it did not diminish the rights of students to express their belief systems as such.
These bracelets have a clear message to those who subscribe to it, and the simple wearing of a band, whose font is approximately 14 point, on the wrist is not of itself disruptive to learning. I also believe that within the bounds of our society, this statement does not qualify as ‘lewd’ or ‘vulgar’, regardless of whether we think the wording is ideal. In my mind, the wearing of these bands by students passes both prongs of the Tinker test. I think that there are moments when the disruption to learning is caused not by students, but by us.
Works Cited:
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503, 506 (1969).

Not Good Enough

While I believe that the idea that 100% of students will meet a particular level of proficiency regardless of LEP or special education status is statistically unsound, I believe wholeheartedly in the idea that all children can make significant gains, and that education can, and should, have accountability to student success. I think that at times in the dialogue and even legistatively, we confuse the idea of achievement to standard with one of closing the achievement gap that exists in US education. A study conducted by research fellows at John Hopkins University revealed shocking, sobering results: “There are currently between 900 and 1,000 high schools in the country in which graduating is at best a 50/50 proposition. In 2,000 high schools, a typical freshman class shrinks by 40% or more by the time the students reach their senior year. This represents nearly one in five regular or vocational high schools in the U.S. that enroll 300 or more students.” (Balfanz & Legters, 2004) As a nation, we are failing these students. Student populations will always have a percentage that are not achieving to the level of their peer group, but the idea that outside factors determine this is, to me, fatalistic. Certainly home situations are immensely challenging for some of our students, but this cannot be the hill upon which education dies. In a report out of Columbia University, authors highlight this distinction: “'Proficiency for all,' which implies the elimination of variation within socioeconomic groups, is inconceivable. Closing the achievement gap, which implies elimination of variation between socioeconomic groups, is extraordinarily difficult, but worth striving for.” (Rothstein, Jacobsen, & Wilder, 2006) While it may be true that doctors, lawyers, and CEO's cannot achieve perfection, this continues to be the standard for which they strive. A doctor endeavors his career, not to settle for acceptable losses, but to preserve the health and quality of life for every patient. A CEO is expected to maximize his results using every available resource, and is not rewarded for mediocrity. Newark mayor Cory Booker stated that, “We cannot have a superior democracy with an inferior education system.” (Salata, 2010) Will I have 100% of my students every year achieve to state standards? Mostly likely I will not. But as educators, none of us can shy away from the goal of student success in every case. I am not ever going to be the educator that says to a parent, “I’m so sorry, but your child’s life up to this moment has just been too difficult. His failure to meet standards is guaranteed.”

Works Cited:
Balfanz, R., & Legters, N. (2004). Locating the Dropout Crisis. Baltimore: Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed At Risk, Johns Hopkins University.
Rothstein, R., Jacobsen, R., & Wilder, T. (2006). Proficiency for All - an Oxymoron. New York: Campaign for Educational Equity, Teachers College, Columbia University.
Salata, S. (Executive Producer). (2010, September 24). The Oprah Winfrey Show [Television broadcast]. Chicago: Harpo Studios.

Measure of Success

I believe that the alignment to standards that lies at the heart of NCLB has great value. I believe that every child deserves academic rigor in their grade-level content areas, suited to their particular strengths and weaknesses. As a teacher committed to my craft and to the mission of academic success for all students, I do not quail at the idea of student, teacher, and school accountability. As a parent of a special-needs child, I see every day an academic world available to my son that would have been unthinkable ten years ago. And yet, I also see a system that fails the individual by focusing on the group. Year after year I am frustrated by the basic statistical flaws of our standards-based accountability. We speak to our stakeholders about growth, about adequate yearly progress; yet, we base the public assessment of school success on a “snapshot” that is not only inconsistent statistically from one year to the next, but lacks the vital growth component that assesses true academic progress at a student level:

Current state accountability systems rely heavily upon performance standards to make judgments about the quality of education. Specifically, accountability systems constructed according to federal adequate yearly progress (AYP) requirements use annual “snap-shots” of student achievement relative to state performance standards to make judgments about education quality. . . Though appropriate for making judgments about the achievement level of students, they are inappropriate for judgments about educational effectiveness. (Betebrenner, 2009)

I teach fifth grade math and science, and few places feel the real-time stressors of NCLB as acutely as teachers in my position. I do worry about whether or not we sacrifice depth for breadth in content, and I do worry about reaching the many at the sacrifice of truly teaching the one: the one who needs the most pulling or the one who needs the most pushing. Mostly, however, I worry about how the accountability system might be self-defeating - for schools, teachers, students - that strive year after year against unbelievable obstacles. If a student improves 150 points on an assessment scale score, how do we in good conscience tell that child, that parent, that teacher, that it is simply not enough? Who, really, has failed?

Works Cited:
Betebrenner, D. W. (2009, April 6). Growth, Standards, and Accountability. Retrieved October 6, 2010, from The National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment: http://www.nciea.org/publications/growthandStandard_DB09.pdf

On the agenda this week in EDLD 5344: School Law - IDEA 2005: ARD and IEP. Please take a moment and add your thoughts to the mix!

It's a Wrap

School Bonds Q & A is out in the cybersphere, and I feel proud of the product we created. My team members and I come from school districts of varying size throughout the state and have professional backgrounds that range from elementary science and math to secondary tech ed to district administration. This diversity of experiences brings depth and perspective to our work, but also presents challenges to collaboration. The professionalism of my colleagues overcame those obstacles in fine style. We used a variety of collaboration tools during our process, including Google Docs and a Google Site. We found that, although the real-time editing functions of Google Docs had their uses, the multi-level platform of the Google site was more in line with the variety of uses needed for project completion. Through the site, we compiled video footage and audio tracks, archived transcripts of online conferencing, collaborated on assignment and proposal documentation, and tracked tasks and timeline status. Please feel free to take a look at our process at the EDLD 5363 PSA Video Project Google Site. My primary responsibility was to work with another team member to complete research and background on our selected topic and to develop the voice-over script. This was a humbling process; one forgets after years of being accountable only to her own judgement and discretion that all roads do not end at one's own opinion. I tend to oververbalize, and collaborating with a peer helped me to make my point more succinctly. Each team member contributed either voice-over templates or video footage, or a combination of the two, to the project. In the end, I felt privileged to have a small piece of each in the final product.
Collaboration has not generally been my strength in the past, and I quailed at the idea of a majority of my course grade being dependent on the result of not only a collaborative effort, but a long-distance one. I simply cannot be more delighted to be proven wrong. This experience has shown me how fulfilling, enlightening, educational, and how fun a group project can be when a group of true collaborators work towards a common goal. My profound thanks to Lynne, Shannon, Russell, and Janet for time well spent and a job very well done.

The Tech Teacher's Corner: Windows Live Movie Maker Tutorial

My first foray into podcasting!  It was a great opportunity to learn about both Windows Live Movie Maker and Audacity.  My podcast is embedded on the blog, or you can follow the link:
The Tech Teacher's Corner: Windows Live Movie Maker Tutorial

Web Conference August 28-29: Quite Disappointing

The web conference experiences of this course have been short, largely uninformative, and immensely frustrating.  
The technology itself was a significant obstacle on the August 28 conference.  I logged onto the conference, but was unable to activate voice and camera.  As I attempted to use the help function through Adobe, the browser navigated away from the conference instead of opening a new window.  This disconnected me from the conference.  Although the conference had been closed when it reached a certain number of members, I expected to be able to log back on because the conference host can see the names of those who try to join, and my name had already been listed.  However, I was denied access for the remainder of the conference.
Although my conference host contacted me after the conference to tell me that I would receive credit for attendance, I logged onto the next day's conference in the hopes of gaining some insight into the next week's assignments.  That was not the case:  the course material for the next week was still being developed, and was not open for questions at that time.  The questions mostly revolved around using video for the PhotoStory assignment: the conference host seemed frustrated and mentioned that she was anxious to end the conference quickly.  
Because the Week Two assignment has been quite confusing, it is a disappointment indeed to have received so little information from the web conferences.  

What's In a Name? WMM versus WLMM

     I must confess, I have never used video editing software prior to this week.  I've always been a fan of still photos - I did not even have a wedding video made.  So it was with no small amount of panic that I began my first tentative steps, starting with the software closest:  in my case, Windows Live Movie Maker, which is installed on my Dell netbook.  I began importing video footage and trying out the various editing tools, building a basic storyboard that I saved on a flash drive in hopes of completing some more polishing during my lunch the following day.  Sure enough, about 12 minutes presented themselves and I blithely plugged in my flash drive, ready to continue the process.  Alas, it was not to be.  Here is what may be a little-known fact among those who are new to video editing:  Windows Live Movie Maker is a complete redesign of Windows Movie Maker software available with Windows XP and earlier.  For schoolteachers who are working with newer Microsoft operating systems in one location than another, this is a vital distinction.  In fact, the two applications have some fundamental differences.  Defenders of the earlier version cite that many of the features available in WMM are no longer present in WLMM, including many of the custom plug-ins for captions and titles. (Dolcourt, 2009)  However, from my perspective this is a small price to pay for a program that has a much more intuitive interface.  As a teacher, I found the WLMM editing tools much more user-friendly, which would support the idea that technology integration should not supercede curriculum in the classroom. (New, 2005)  In particular, WLMM features an "AutoMovie" function that allows users to go from clips to finish movie in literally minutes.  This could enable students to work with the software and come up with work product in a single class period.       Sadly, WLMM is not compatible with Windows XP, so my dreams of instant multimedia will have to be scaled back a bit.  However, the process has reminded me that experience is the best teacher when it comes to technology.  Students get as much out of process as they do out of product, and movie making with Movie Maker will be no exception.
Works Cited:
Dolcourt, J. (2009, August 24). Windows Live Movie Maker Verdict: So-So. Retrieved September 3, 2010, from cnet.com: http://download.cnet.com/8301-2007_4-10313682-12.html
New, J. (2005, 12 2). How to Use Digital Storytelling in Your Classroom. Retrieved August 24, 2010, from Edutopia.org: http://www.edutopia.org/use-digital-storytelling-classroom

The Power of Connection

     This week I was asked to create a personal digital story for my multimedia course.  It seemed clear to me right away that my story would deal with my sons, who are the center of my life and the most powerful teachers I have ever had.  Joe Lambert of the Digital Storytelling Center describes relationships as a rich source of storytelling:  "How we love, are inspired by, want to recognize, and find meaning in our relationships are all aspects of our lives that are deeply important to us. Perhaps the majority of the stories created in our workshops are about a relationship, and in the best stories they tell us more about ourselves than the details of our own life story."  (Lambert, 2010)  As I began the project I had the advantage of a large, well organized catalogue of photographs, as many mothers do, and some prior experience with PhotoStory in my classroom.  My topic, while very close to my heart, exists as a part of my everyday life.  I expected this project to be entertaining, a bit sentimental, and benign. 
     In fact, the experience of putting a narrative to my emotions and memories was challenging as a writer and editor, and achingly lovely as a mother.  As I delved into the relationship between my sons, I had an opportunity to look at our family memories through completely new eyes.  Pictures that never left the computer's hard drive, deemed too rough or unflattering, suddenly became the true heart of the story.  Listening to the conversations between the boys, I heard tried and true words that suddenly spoke a completely new message.  In telling about what I knew the best, I found that I learned brand new lessons.
     This should be the learning expectations for our students when they use media to communicate.  Students who must create the narrative of their learning are forced to approach their knowledge from new perspectives.  Learning becomes personal, relational; and it is in this relationship that we gain our true education.  Marco Torres of San Fernando High School understood this well:  "What Torres remembers about his own education are the things he made in school: the plaster cast of his hand in kindergarten, the spouting volcano in third grade, the model of a California mission in fourth grade. His students, he finds, enjoy coming up with a tangible product as much as he did.” (Edutopia Staff, 2002)  Quite simply, children who do, learn.
Please take a moment to view my digital story, "The Way Brothers Do," in the Multimedia Gallery.
Works Cited:
Edutopia Staff. (2002, July 1). Students Find Their Voices Through Multimedia. Retrieved August 23, 2010, from Edutopia: http://www.edutopia.org/students-find-their-voices-through-multimedia
Lambert, J. (2010, January). Digital Storytelling Cookbook. Retrieved August 27, 2010 from the Center for Digital Storytelling: http://www.storycenter.org/cookbook.pdf

Multimedia and Higher Order Thinking

     In his explanation of the SFETT (San Fernando Education Technology Team) at San Fernando High School, Marco Torres describes the connection multimedia creates between students and content:  "Media is the language of kids," Torres adds, saying that students who may not take to learning by reading a textbook or listening to a lecture often jump at the chance to understand complex concepts by presenting finished products in the form of a film or a Web documentary or a Microsoft PowerPoint presentation.” (Edutopia Staff, 2002)  A teacher can look at a student’s PhotoStory project and gain significant insight into her reasoning, perspective, and higher order thinking skills.   While the uses of multimedia tools for language arts and social studies assessment might be more evident at first blush, the implications for evaluating critical thinking in math and science are equally powerful.  One of the primary functions of an elementary science and math teacher is to show students how to merge process with product.  Educational technology advocate Marc Prensky shares, “As students share works in progress with the class for critical evaluation from both teacher and students, the teacher takes on the valuable roles of explainer, context provider, meaning maker, and evaluator/coach.” (Prensky, 2008, p. 45)  ISTE Indicator/task III.A.5 involves “us[ing] methods and strategies for teaching concepts and skills that support use of media-based tools such as television, audio, print media, and graphics,” and Indicator/task III.C.1 calls for facilitators to “use methods and facilitate strategies for teaching problem-solving principles and skills using technology resources.” (Williamson & Redish, 2009, pp. 227-228)  A significant number of my action research and internship goals involve making technology more accessible for all teachers, and therefore all students on my campus.  Because I realize that the catalyst for technology integration on my campus is ease of use, this PhotoStory project will act as a template to create a “try this” professional development for my faculty.  This speaks to ISTE Indicator/task V.C.2: “facilitate activities to help others in locating, selecting, capturing, and integrating video and digital images, in varying formats for use in presentations, publications and/or other products.”   I am a firm believer in the idea that teachers are most likely to integrate technology if they begin the journey with "one good lesson".  If I can bring that baseline of confidence and readiness to the truly excellent educators on my campus, student access and engagement with technology are sure to follow.

Works Cited

Edutopia Staff. (2002, July 1). Students Find Their Voices Through Multimedia. Retrieved August 23, 2010, from Edutopia: http://www.edutopia.org/students-find-their-voices-through-multimedia

Prensky, M. (2008, March). Turning On the Lights. Educational Leadership, 65 (6), pp. 40-45.

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.

Ed Tech Goes Back to School

     Ready or not, the year has begun.  I am ready - my technology is not.

     Sadly, for want of approximately 12 inches of ethernet cable, my amazing interactive learning technology is dead in the water.  Projected completion?  One to two weeks.  Now, considering that quality control began final processing of my campus the second week of July, and only this Friday realized the infrastructure would not support "go live" on Monday, I'm definitely refining Plan B.  However, even the awkward introduction of Plan to Reality doesn't dampen my spirit.  I have ideas swirling around like a kaleidoscope:  I can hardly get them all committed to the page.      In the development of my PhotoStory project, I was reminded that the personal and the professional, the academic and the emotional often overlap.  This is not an obstacle to learning, but rather an avenue towards it.  When we take what we know and push it in new directions, we can find either a depth or a transparency of knowledge that might otherwise have never been brought out into the light.  Giving our knowledge life and perspective forces us to utilize not simply what we know, but what we understand.  What a powerful lesson for educators.  And so, I begin 2010-2011 ready to learn and grow with my students and my faculty.  In the heart of a learner, enthusiasm for a new year never wanes.  Welcome back to school!

.

Web Conference - August 9: Time for Action

     The final web conference of the course did not disappoint. Dr. Jenkins was, as always, incredibly informative and supportive, and the group had a dynamic discussion. In the course of the conference, we learned that our action research projects would be monitored via either blogs or wikis that would be created for each cohort group; with an assigned professor that will monitor our progress during the course of our action research and provide feedback and assistance should we have the need. I’m pleased to hear that we will have an avenue for ongoing dialogue with a mentor who is familiar with our project. I strongly encouraged Dr. Jenkins to select a wiki format for this process; the linear nature of blogging does not create the kind of multi-faceted collaboration that I believe the professors hope occurs. Dr. Jenkins solicited participants’ thoughts and reflections on the course, and reassured those people who expressed concern about not yet meeting with their mentors or administrators to finalize their projects. I feel fortunate that I have had excellent collaboration with both my mentor and my principal, and I know that they will continue to support both my research and my internship.

     Although my action research will be ongoing, this blog post is the final formal task for 5301. My next stop – video and multimedia. I have high expectations for the course, and I think it will be a fantastic way to start the school year. “All right, Mr. DeMille, I'm ready for my close-up.”1

1.  Brackett, C. (Producer), & Wilder, B. (Director). (1950). Sunset Boulevard [Motion picture]. United States: Paramount Pictures.

Bring on the Natives

     I walked into my classroom today - WOW.  On my desk was a shiny new docking station. On my shiny new laptop, interactive technology software and the registration key for the district Moodle platform.  On the wall, a brand new interactive whiteboard.  At the front table, a brand new ultra-high resolution document camera with remote and an interactive response system.  And sprouting from the ceiling, a fully integrated projector with 3-D capability and a digital surround sound speaker system.  


     My classroom is techno-glam, people, and I am ready to use it.  Welcome to the revolution.

Ready to Get My Feet Wet!

     I had the opportunity yesterday to meet with my mentor and finalize my research plan.  It was a validating experience to have Dee Ann look over my plans and support my goals and activities so wholeheartedly.  I discovered that the district has already begun to develop a lesson exchange forum through HEB Learning (the district’s Moodle environment) and will providing access to any teachers interested in participating.  The presence of the Moodle environment streamlines much of the logistical component of my plan.  Dee Ann also advised me to consider use of the interactive response system that is being implemented as part of our SMART system.  There are some significant disadvantages to using Survey Monkey as a data collection technique, including the size limitations of the surveys (on a basic membership) and the difficulty ensuring maximum participation in the survey.  Creating ‘quick questions’ for the response system ensures that every faculty member to participate in a survey while they attend a faculty meeting.  Results can quickly be shared during the meeting, or I can simply collect the data for later analysis.   Most importantly, it models the technology in a way that is engaging and non-threatening for faculty members. 

     My colleagues have also given me much to consider over the past weeks, and I owe them a debt of gratitude for their additions to the scope, depth, and overall quality of my research plan.  Sarah A. touched on the experiences of her campus, where the technology facilitator offered ongoing training that highlighted different features of the technology.  I hope to work together with my mentor, who is the technology facilitator for my campus, to supplement our PLC meetings with campus professional development that focuses on exploring the technology itself.  Sharron B. commented that success of the PLC might depend on the interest level of the teachers, and that the age/experience level of the teachers might have bearing on their willingness to incorporate the new technology. This is such an excellent point: there is no question that the makeup of the PLC will have a significant impact on the goals and pacing of the group.  If my initial presentation to the campus is received as I hope, I will have a wide spectrum of experience both in the classroom and with the technology.  This will afford opportunities for members of the PLC to coach each other on both integration of the technology and instructional best practices.  Sarah’s suggestion to offer ongoing training, taken in conjunction with Sharron’s suggestion to work closely with members who are reluctant to take chances with the technology, creates an entirely new action step in my plan: to organize and facilitate professional development for the faculty to feature various features of SMART Notebook, then work with the PLC to develop lesson templates that use those particular features. 

     I attended district facilitator training today, and the enthusiasm of the group for this technology and its vast potential has energized me.  I can hardly wait to return on August 13 and share my vision with the campus.  Enough planning – let’s jump in!

The Path to Inquiry Never Did Run Smooth

My campus held registration this week, and it gave me the opportunity to visit with some of my colleagues for the first time since they attended SMART Board training over the summer.  I sensed both excitement and trepidation, which is to be expected.  What I didn’t expect was the level of confidence on the part of some of my faculty members that this technology would come “ready-to-use”, meaning the district curriculum would be fully updated to include SMART Board lessons for every objective.  Since I know emphatically that this is not the case, I’m concerned about the moment of hard realization that those colleagues will face in a very short time.  There is a very real chance that this will have a souring effect on some of the enthusiasm for the technology and for my PLC initiative.  I realize, even more so than before, the need for effective communication and building of a shared vision.  If I can show convincing evidence that the PLC’s are, in fact, a practical way to develop this technology, it will go a long way toward building up trust and confidence in the process.  My background research and justifications will be critical.

      As I facilitate this learning community, I must also remain sensitive to the realities of time:  the teachers on my campus, myself included, have many irons in the fire.  Most tutor after school two to three days a week, many attend goal team meetings or professional development of some kind at least once a week, and all have the ongoing demands of parent communication, planning and grading, classroom management, and personal lives.  In order for the PLC to be a successful tool for the faculty, it must be seen as a benefit and not a hindrance.  That will require organization, preparedness, and responsiveness on my part to keep the online mechanisms and the meetings running efficiently. 

     I believe the need for this initiative is real, and I believe that the PLC will prove supportive to teaching and learning with this new technology.  My challenge:  to get, and keep, Wilshire on the bandwagon!

Web Conference July 28, 2010: Persistence Pays Off

The web conference that I participated in this evening was just excellent – I can’t say enough good things about Dr. Jenkins’ support of students through this intimidating process of developing a research plan.  While the conference still had its share of technical difficulties, the flow of the conference never seemed affected.  Early in the conference some dialogue occurred relating to creating a writeable document, embedding the document into a blog, contacting site mentors, and the nuances between sections of the weekly assignment.  These questions were resolved, and Dr. Jenkins set minds at ease about the logistics of plan development.  (Please feel free to go to http://wilsoneduwiki.wikispaces.com if you need a writable copy of the SIP/PIP document.)  As a result, the conference theme was able to move effectively past the ‘nuts and bolts’ of the assignment particulars and into content. 

     I had the privilege of hearing some truly fascinating research topics: from parent involvement in Pre-K to PDAS, many stakeholders will be benefiting from the efforts of these professionals in the coming months.  I had some concerns about how to articulate my plans to share my research data this early in the process; during the conference Dr. Jenkins discussed the need to create a framework for the plan that could be updated as information and guidance became available.   As I read through the class texts this week, I had some questions about how to utilize my campus professional learning community to collect data via peer observations.  Dr. Jenkins advised us to look into some current research that is being conducted on peer-to-peer observations and evaluations, which I hope will help me to formulate a template for our PLC observations. 

     All in all, I feel much more comfortable with my inquiry progress than I did two hours ago.   Hopefully I will be able to meet with my mentor and principal in the next week;  then, it should be all systems go for the project.  It’s exhilarating to get started!

Web Conference July 23, 2010 - Whew!

I must confess, I found myself signing off from today's internship web conference feeling frustrated.  The conferences are incredibly crowded, so generally true conferencing with voice and video is out of the question.  So instead, the process is much more like the chatrooms from times gone by.  However, although the flow of information requires some diligence to follow, I don't find that particularly challenging.


What I do find exasperating is the repetition of questions, not only within a single conference, but over the course of several conferences, and between the written course material and the conferences.  I suspect some of this stems from having several different cohort groups conferencing at the same time, and some of it comes from the few-second delay that we all experience as we essentially IM back and forth on the conference board.  We had multiple questions about whether or not to purchase TK20, our new assessment and portfolio platform; about whether or not to blog on our web conferences;  about whether to include said documentation in our wikis; and about the due date for this week's assignment.  Dr. Abernathy seemed generally unruffled by the repetitiveness, and was exceedingly respectful in her responses, even those that were asked and answered more than once.  I was not so placid.  Although I did get an opportunity to ask two questions about our action research project that I had developed for the conference, I walked away from the conference feeling that we spent far too much time on "nuts and bolts" logistical information, much of which is answered in our written coursework.  


The questions that developed as I conferenced today are; first, "How could the web conferencing system in the Lamar Academic Partnerships Program be made more valid for different groups of students?"; second, "How could the web conference schedule for the Academic Partnerships program enable more students to participate with both voice and video?"; and third, "How is the dissemination of logistical information affecting student outcomes in the Lamar Academic Partnerships program?"  Although I'm not in a position to complete action research on these questions, I find it helpful for me to look at all professional functions with an eye towards inquiry.  I will join in the web conference on July 31, and collect more data on the web conferencing process.  In the meantime, on with my research.  

One Amazing Day - Be a Part of It!

Tomorrow, each of us has the opportunity to participate in something unique and quite special.  On July 24th, Hollywood producer Ridley Scott and director Kevin Macdonald are challenging the entire world to reveal their lives for the documentary project YouTube Life in a Day.  A quote from the site:


I want you to chronicle your world, your life, your neighborhood on a single day.  You could shoot the  journey you take to work, the visit you make to your son, your mother, your grandmother. Ultimately, this is a unique experiment in social filmmaking, and a time capsule that will forever tell future generations what it was like to be alive on July 24,  2010.


Kevin Macdonald has posed four questions to the world:  "What do you love?", "What do you fear?", "What makes you laugh?", and "What's in your pocket?"  These are questions of the sublime and the mundane, and they are the questions of us all.  We all love, laugh, fear, and walk through life picking up the souvenirs of living on the way.  We see the tiny triumphs of everyday, and the tragedies that scar a nation.  As a teacher, I have seen how moments can bind together children who might otherwise never receive the gift of each other.  I have watched the world around me sprout wings and fly, falter and fall, scream and cry and sing; and I have done all of these things side by side with 6 billion others who have done the same.  How much we all have to say, if only we could truly hear each other.  
So pull out your cameras and get ready!  You have 24 hours to make the everyday amazing. Moms, dads, get your children to do the filming.  Children of the digital age, help everyone who wants to participate to make it happen. This day is a moment for digital natives and digital immigrants (Prensky, 2001) to speak the same language, and to be a part of the change.  Cameras up . . .


  
Works Cited:
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants: part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6.