Clements' Reflections on Education
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Technology Staff Development Plan and Evaluation Process
Sunday, February 5, 2012
Reflection on Web Conferences for EDLD 5352
During the Sunday conference, I discovered the value of having real-time communication with the course professors and fellow students. Being able to make a comment or ask a question and receive immediate feedback saves time and allows for further comment or investigation. It also provides the opportunity to ask questions that others may also need to know the answers to.
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Thoughts on the Texas Long Range Plan for Technology 2006-2020
After recently reviewing the long-range plan, I find one area particularly interesting and concerning. It is the same area that I tend to migrate to anytime the question is posed of "what would you improve on your campus?" That is the area of Educator Preparation and Staff Development.
Far too often, I fear, educators get comfortable in their current routines and methods. Administrators may also find a comfort zone and allow others to remain in theirs. However, campus climate, staff and students stagnate when this occurs. The remedy for this stagnation is educator preparation and professional development. This area is crucial in the realm of technological advancements in the world of education and learning. Campus administrators must take the lead and provide the example in this area. Principals and other campus leaders must seek the latest technology training and begin using it on a daily basis. In this area, as others, principals should not expect others to do what they are not willing to do themselves. The principals must then drive the training through the ranks of staff and faculty who, in turn, drive the training to the students.
Without first ensuring a fully trained staff that is well versed in all aspects of technology that may be used on campus, how can we expect any more of our students? The technology TEKS are beginning to have as much weight as that of the other content areas. Relevance and priority has to be given to educating staff and administrators in the vast realm of technology.
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Concerns and challenges involving my proposed Action Research Project
Another challenge that I believe I will face will be during the feedback gathering stage in which feedback from teachers, students and parents on reading interventions is solicited. Effective communication and ensuring good, reliable information is given will be a must.
My best opportunity for addressing these challenges will be in working closely with my Site Supervisor. She is also the Assistant Principal and I will be able to seek her assistance on many of the issues I mentioned above.
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Action Research Project Planning Template
Tool 7.1 Action Planning Template
| Goal: | In what ways do interventions impact struggling readers in the Resource program? How can direct instruction be used even more to help students struggling to achieve/maintain grade level performance? What effects would implementing a full inclusion/collaborative teaching setting have on struggling students, as well as those who are on grade level? | |||
| | | | | |
| Action Step(s) | Person(s) Responsible | Timeline: Start/End | Needed Resources | Evaluation |
| 1. Analyze baseline reading levels and assessment scores for students in Resource | Principal, testing coordinator, LA Resource teacher | Mid-September 2010 / October 2010 | Data from AIMSweb benchmark after school startup; AWARE scores from baseline reading benchmark, AWARE scores from previous year | Scores obtained, reading levels and scores are determined for current year, data compared to previous year as appropriate |
| 2. Interview reading teachers on each grade level to discuss specific students and interventions being used in class | Principal, A/P, LA Resource Teacher | October 2010 / November 2010 | Access to teachers during conference period or other designated time | Notes and comments from interviews. |
| 3. Consult with teachers participating in collaborative teaching strategies this year | Principal, A/P, Reading/LA Gen. Ed. Teachers, LA Resource teacher | Late August 2010 / September 2010 | Time for discussion with teachers either individually or in a group | Field notes obtained from discussion |
| 4. Research and gather information on best practices and intervention methods | Principal, Diagnostician, Coordinator for Sp. Ed./Admin. | October 2010 / December 2010 | Internet sites, journal articles, personal interviews, consultation with “sister” campuses within district | Bank of information obtained from research and collaboration and brainstorming on ways to implement appropriate portions for our campus |
| 5.Research and gather information on the successful implementation of collaborative teaching strategies | Principal, LA Resource teacher, Coordinator for Sp. Ed. | August 2010 / October 2010 | Interviews with campuses in our district currently using such strategies, journal articles, documentation on proper strategies for collaborative teaching, interviews with administration staff | Information obtained to begin comparing and analyzing NSE’s efforts for co-teaching implementation and determine focus for continued improvement |
| 6. Gather mid-year data for comparison to baseline data | Principal, Testing coordinator, LA Resource teacher | December 2010 / January 2011 | Mid-year benchmark data and AIMSweb Winter benchmark data | Data compared to initial benchmarks and determination of progress or lack of made |
| 7. Interview teachers participating in collaborative teaching classrooms for mid-year feedback | Principal, A/P, LA Resource teacher, participating teachers | November 2010 / December 2010 to early January 2011 | Time and availability of teachers for interviewing | Field notes on teacher feedback on progress, success, concerns of collaborative teaching |
| 8. Interview select students (Resource and those on grade level) for their perspective on interventions and/or collaborative teaching setting, and their individual progress | Principal, LA Resource teacher, A/P, Gen. Ed. Teachers, target students | November 2010 / January 2011 | Recommendation for which students to interview, access to students for interviews, is permission from parents needed? | Field notes recording student feedback on interventions and/or collaborative teaching |
| 9. Interview parents of resource students receiving interventions and/or gen ed. assigned to collaborative teaching classroom | Principal, A/P, Gen. Ed. and Resource teachers, parents of target students | November 2010 / February 2011 | Parents willing to be interviewed either individually or in a panel to discuss what is working and what is not, and brainstorm future efforts | Field notes from interviews on parents feedback on interventions and co-teach classroom |
| 10. Gather post-TAKS assessment data and compare to last year (if appropriate) and to baseline benchmarks this year, as well as AIMSweb Spring benchmarks | Principal, A/P, testing coordinator, LA Resource teacher | April 2011 / May 2011 (June if 2nd assessment is needed for 5th gr.) | Scores from TAKS, and end of year benchmark assessment, AIMSweb Spring benchmark scores, | TAKS Scores obtained for target students, as well as benchmark and AIMSweb results for comparison to prior testing data |
| 11. Reflect on results of data comparison and feedback from stakeholders, and determine what the next step in the process will be, including who should be involved in the initial planning stages moving forward | Principal, A/P, Testing coordinator, diagnostician, LA Resource teacher, Gen. Ed. Reading and LA teachers, Reading specialist, Coordinator for Spec. Ed. / Admin. | End of May 2011 | Findings from this action plan | Results of committee brainstorming efforts to target the next phase of action for ensuring campus and student improvement. |