Earlier this week I attended the Consortium of School Networking (CoSN) CTO Clinic in Santa Clara, CA. A theme that kept emerging for me throughout the day was the concept of the silos we have built in education that act as barriers in using educational technology to help students learn.
A lot of silos emerged in the question and answer session following the opening keynote given by Gavin Payne, the Chief Deputy of the Superintendent for the California Department of Education.
Keith Kruger, CEO of CoSN opened the Q & A session addressing the silo of NCLB.
Q: I have recently traveled to countries such as Singapore and Hong Kong both of which do really well on their test scores. In spite of this, they realize they do not have enough creativity and innovation in their instruction. Yet with NCLB we do not have policies in the U.S. that are addressing that.
A: We are starting to look at other measures.
Tim Forester, the director of facilities for the Antioch School District addressed the silos that exist between educators and students.
Q: Are students involved in the planning at the state level?
A: No.
Patrick Simon from the Hayward School District brought up the silos we set up in funding education.
Q: We never addressed our infrastructure needs in the past. No funding, no policies, no support. Now we have ubiquitous computing, 24/7 access, and emerging technologies now converging at a rapid rate. At the end of the day technology is at the bottom of the funding after teacher salaries, books… there is no money.
A: I couldn’t agree more. We under fund education in California by 40%. Jack O'Connell, (the California State Superintendent of Public Instruction Superintendent) is a proponent of technology. There is a chance we may see more money next year. He sees the chance for technology to save districts and impact learning.
Patrick Simon has found ways to fund technology in his district using a process he calls Simonization. He breaks down funding silos by getting funding from multiple sources in the school district budget that benefit from technology. These sources include things such as utilities and curriculum. He also requires vendors go through a process where they learn about the unique needs of his district before doing business with them. Patrick is also working to bringing down silos that exist between educators and the community when planning for technology with the School 2.0 initiative in Washington D.C.. School 2.0 provides a framework and resources that assists school districts with involving stakeholders in the planning process for technology.
Peggy Ericson, the director of CTAP1 asked about silos that exist in the way we deliver education.
Q: What is being done similar to Florida’s Virtual Schools in California to address declining enrollment?
A: We are pushing for a bigger pipeline. We are far behind in California. We keep trying.
Following the Q & A session, Linda Sharp , the CoSN Project Director for Accessible Technologies for All Students, presented on Using Technology to Raise the Achievement of ALL Students. This silo is a lot less about technology and a lot more about a shift in the way we teach. Technology has the potential to help us meet individual needs of students, but the pedagogy has to be there first. David Swart, the Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum & Instruction for the Rescue Union School District talked about how in some ways these tools can almost be used as survival for teachers trying to meet all the range of needs in their classrooms. He also talked about the importance of formative assessments and how to him this is the future of teachers. Technology can help in responding to the needs that are identified through this process.
Swart also talked about the need to stop silo funding! 12-15% of students are identified as having special needs, yet 40% are achieving below proficiency. Instead of funding things through Title I and Special Ed we need to look at things in total through the lens of standards.
Special education teachers are master teachers at differentiation. Sharp talked about the importance of tapping into this resource to help ALL students. The key to this is coordination between special education, technology and curriculum. She showed us an online self-assessment that stakeholders in a district can take to see how their district is doing in this area. Individuals can then bring their results to the table to start the conversation by talking about differing perceptions that may exist on this topic in their district.
Another problem is that regular education teachers are simply unaware of simple assistive technology tools such as text to speech that are already included in their operating systems that can help them meet student needs. Linda shared an Assistive Technology Consideration Resource Guide that includes standard tools and assistive technology solutions to meet different instructional areas. Another great resource is the WestEd web site.
Participants in this session also talked about how they are removing silos by dismantling their computer labs. They feel that this is helping in better differentiate instruction as opposed to the “lab mentality” where everyone works on the same thing at the same time. In the Franklin McKinley School District they are moving to Computers on Wheels (COWs) instead of computer labs. Another important component in using technology to differentiate instruction is having LCD projectors in every room. Richard Kebo from the Clovis Unified School District talked about how their district is using tablets that wirelessly connect to the projectors instead of Smartboards. This makes it possible for the teacher to move around the room untethered.
More silos came up in the presentation Using Data for Targeted Interventions by Karen Henke from Nimble Press. One of the silos addressed by participants is the interoperability of data systems. School districts really need the ability to pull data together from three or four places (i.e. HR, SIS, test data banks) in order to draw meaningful conclusions and make comparisons. A representative from SAS brought up the point that when evaluating these systems you want to make sure the system can read and write to every file type you have.
CoSN is addressing some of its own silos as well and is making plans to combine the its Data-Driven Decision Making initiative with the Accessible for All students initiative. It makes sense that these two conversations really go together because once you have accessible data to target our needs the next step is to find the strategies to help meet these needs.
Another important component is that the interface design is teacher-friendly. David Swart said that “inside classroom interventions make the biggest difference”. In order for this to happen we need to get usable data to the teacher level. The Poway School District added filters, reports and tools to their data warehouse system based on teacher feedback to make this process easier.
Trust is another important component in implementing data warehousing systems. Henke said, “in order to implement a successful program, it requires a collaborative team based approach”. In the Rescue Union School District, teachers meet in grade level teams and discuss pacing based on standards. They use the data to start the conversations and share strategies. Swart says, “education is really a collaborative profession”.
Participants also talked about the importance in allowing students access to their own data as a guide to help them in reflect on their own personal educational goals.
My favorite quote of the day came from Linda Sharp who said, “technology is only as strong as the people using it”. In the field of education we have some very complex silos- NCLB, involving students in decision making, silo funding, breaking down barriers between special and regular education, differentiating instruction, creating interoperable teacher-friendly datawarehouse systems and developing collaborative environments based on trust. As Ed Tech leaders we need to be actively involved in breaking down these barriers both on a local and national level so that we can empower people to use technology in transformational ways. The CoSN CTO workshop was a great way to talk with other leaders and find resources and ideas for working toward bringing down these silos.
A lot of silos emerged in the question and answer session following the opening keynote given by Gavin Payne, the Chief Deputy of the Superintendent for the California Department of Education.
Keith Kruger, CEO of CoSN opened the Q & A session addressing the silo of NCLB.
Q: I have recently traveled to countries such as Singapore and Hong Kong both of which do really well on their test scores. In spite of this, they realize they do not have enough creativity and innovation in their instruction. Yet with NCLB we do not have policies in the U.S. that are addressing that.
A: We are starting to look at other measures.
Tim Forester, the director of facilities for the Antioch School District addressed the silos that exist between educators and students.
Q: Are students involved in the planning at the state level?
A: No.
Patrick Simon from the Hayward School District brought up the silos we set up in funding education.
Q: We never addressed our infrastructure needs in the past. No funding, no policies, no support. Now we have ubiquitous computing, 24/7 access, and emerging technologies now converging at a rapid rate. At the end of the day technology is at the bottom of the funding after teacher salaries, books… there is no money.
A: I couldn’t agree more. We under fund education in California by 40%. Jack O'Connell, (the California State Superintendent of Public Instruction Superintendent) is a proponent of technology. There is a chance we may see more money next year. He sees the chance for technology to save districts and impact learning.
Patrick Simon has found ways to fund technology in his district using a process he calls Simonization. He breaks down funding silos by getting funding from multiple sources in the school district budget that benefit from technology. These sources include things such as utilities and curriculum. He also requires vendors go through a process where they learn about the unique needs of his district before doing business with them. Patrick is also working to bringing down silos that exist between educators and the community when planning for technology with the School 2.0 initiative in Washington D.C.. School 2.0 provides a framework and resources that assists school districts with involving stakeholders in the planning process for technology.
Peggy Ericson, the director of CTAP1 asked about silos that exist in the way we deliver education.
Q: What is being done similar to Florida’s Virtual Schools in California to address declining enrollment?
A: We are pushing for a bigger pipeline. We are far behind in California. We keep trying.
Following the Q & A session, Linda Sharp , the CoSN Project Director for Accessible Technologies for All Students, presented on Using Technology to Raise the Achievement of ALL Students. This silo is a lot less about technology and a lot more about a shift in the way we teach. Technology has the potential to help us meet individual needs of students, but the pedagogy has to be there first. David Swart, the Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum & Instruction for the Rescue Union School District talked about how in some ways these tools can almost be used as survival for teachers trying to meet all the range of needs in their classrooms. He also talked about the importance of formative assessments and how to him this is the future of teachers. Technology can help in responding to the needs that are identified through this process.
Swart also talked about the need to stop silo funding! 12-15% of students are identified as having special needs, yet 40% are achieving below proficiency. Instead of funding things through Title I and Special Ed we need to look at things in total through the lens of standards.
Special education teachers are master teachers at differentiation. Sharp talked about the importance of tapping into this resource to help ALL students. The key to this is coordination between special education, technology and curriculum. She showed us an online self-assessment that stakeholders in a district can take to see how their district is doing in this area. Individuals can then bring their results to the table to start the conversation by talking about differing perceptions that may exist on this topic in their district.
Another problem is that regular education teachers are simply unaware of simple assistive technology tools such as text to speech that are already included in their operating systems that can help them meet student needs. Linda shared an Assistive Technology Consideration Resource Guide that includes standard tools and assistive technology solutions to meet different instructional areas. Another great resource is the WestEd web site.
Participants in this session also talked about how they are removing silos by dismantling their computer labs. They feel that this is helping in better differentiate instruction as opposed to the “lab mentality” where everyone works on the same thing at the same time. In the Franklin McKinley School District they are moving to Computers on Wheels (COWs) instead of computer labs. Another important component in using technology to differentiate instruction is having LCD projectors in every room. Richard Kebo from the Clovis Unified School District talked about how their district is using tablets that wirelessly connect to the projectors instead of Smartboards. This makes it possible for the teacher to move around the room untethered.
More silos came up in the presentation Using Data for Targeted Interventions by Karen Henke from Nimble Press. One of the silos addressed by participants is the interoperability of data systems. School districts really need the ability to pull data together from three or four places (i.e. HR, SIS, test data banks) in order to draw meaningful conclusions and make comparisons. A representative from SAS brought up the point that when evaluating these systems you want to make sure the system can read and write to every file type you have.
CoSN is addressing some of its own silos as well and is making plans to combine the its Data-Driven Decision Making initiative with the Accessible for All students initiative. It makes sense that these two conversations really go together because once you have accessible data to target our needs the next step is to find the strategies to help meet these needs.
Another important component is that the interface design is teacher-friendly. David Swart said that “inside classroom interventions make the biggest difference”. In order for this to happen we need to get usable data to the teacher level. The Poway School District added filters, reports and tools to their data warehouse system based on teacher feedback to make this process easier.
Trust is another important component in implementing data warehousing systems. Henke said, “in order to implement a successful program, it requires a collaborative team based approach”. In the Rescue Union School District, teachers meet in grade level teams and discuss pacing based on standards. They use the data to start the conversations and share strategies. Swart says, “education is really a collaborative profession”.
Participants also talked about the importance in allowing students access to their own data as a guide to help them in reflect on their own personal educational goals.
My favorite quote of the day came from Linda Sharp who said, “technology is only as strong as the people using it”. In the field of education we have some very complex silos- NCLB, involving students in decision making, silo funding, breaking down barriers between special and regular education, differentiating instruction, creating interoperable teacher-friendly datawarehouse systems and developing collaborative environments based on trust. As Ed Tech leaders we need to be actively involved in breaking down these barriers both on a local and national level so that we can empower people to use technology in transformational ways. The CoSN CTO workshop was a great way to talk with other leaders and find resources and ideas for working toward bringing down these silos.
Posts
1 comment:
Tammy really captured one of the key themes of the day. We have to move beyond the collection of numbers to using them effectively to improve.
Post a Comment