[Year 12 IT Apps] RE: itapps Digest, Vol 62, Issue 10
Adrian Janson
janson.adrian.a at edumail.vic.gov.au
Tue Apr 6 20:06:20 EST 2010
Hi Sheryl,
Just wanted to say thanks for such a detailed and thoughtful response - it
was a great read!
Cheers,
Adrian Janson
VITTA President
Director of ICT,
Melbourne High School
From: itapps-bounces at edulists.com.au [mailto:itapps-bounces at edulists.com.au]
On Behalf Of Carnie, Sheryl M
Sent: Tuesday, 6 April 2010 2:34 PM
To: itapps at edulists.com.au
Subject: RE: itapps Digest, Vol 62, Issue 10
Hi all
I was going to continue be one of the "list lurkers" on this issue, but
since it is this topic that pushed me back from being an "emerging poster"
to a "lurker", it's an appropriate time to have a say.
There are many reasons why people value their membership of this forum, but
choose not to publicly post. In my case, I find it a rich source of
professional dialogue and it challenges me to think and move beyond the
frontiers of the discussion and practices occuring in my own school. I have
huge admiration for those who actively post and do so in a spirit of
collegiality and unselfish sharing, and with professionalism. I value the
diversity of views you express, the roburst discusssions and the interchange
of ideas - thank you for your contribution to both my professional and
personal growth. While I have not taught ITA during the life of the present
Study Design, nor any VCE IT at all, I continue to get enormous benefit from
my membership of this list. I consider many of the contributors to be
"transformative" in their impact on me, and I'm sure on many other listers,
and undoubtedly in their own schools.
While I have responded off-list to requests for information or assistance
over the past few years, it was a strongly worded response to my
contribution to an early discussion about ePotential and government schools
that persuaded me to make future responses privately.
Kevork, I think this is a really relevant discussion and I would be
interested in the experiences and views of other schools. So, here are
mine...
All our staff are expected to complete the ePotential survey as part of
their Performance & Development Plan. The results can be viewed only in
aggregated sub-sets (eg KLA area) by a few authorised people in the school.
The results of an individual cannot be accessed by anyone other than the
individual. Consequently, the survey data can be used for whole school
planning and gives a "snapshot" of where the whole staff is at in terms of
everyday application of eLearning strategies. Of course, like any survey of
this nature, the data is only as good as the input from survey takers, so if
they decide to "overstate" their application of strategies, there is no way
of identifying this (my observation is that people are more likely to
understate their use, due to a lack of confidence in their skills). We have
no "expected" levels for staff, nor is this reported or monitored for
individuals. The hope is that the "whole staff" profile shifts to the more
advanced levels over time. The whole staff data is used to identify some
common PD needs, but given the spread across the levels, PD needs to cater
for a wide range of skills, experience and confidence anyway.
An hour is provided for staff to complete the survey during designated
compulsory meeting time, but staff are free to complete the survey at any
time of their choice. It takes about 20minutes to do the survey and the
remainder of the meeting time can be used to explore the continuum, or not,
as staff choose.
We don't treat ePotential as a "strategy" for embedding eLearning. We use it
as an indicator/measure of whole staff application of eLearning across the
curriculum, and for a guide as to whether the strategies we are using for
embedding eLearning are having a positive impact ie moving us to the higher
levels. How those levels are established or named is less relevant than what
they indicate in terms of take-up of eLearning. It is accepted that within a
staff of 100 we will have people spread across the continuum, and there is
no expectation of a "minimum" level. There is an expectation that staff move
up the continuum levels over time. Staff are encouraged to access the
continuum to explore ideas for eLearning applications, and for support in
skill and task development. The goal for every staff member is to change
their current practice in some way to incorporate greater use of eLearning
strategies, so it's an individual goal rather than a whole school level of
achievement. It applies equally to me, as a high level user of eLearning
strategies, as it does to my colleagues who are emerging users. Verification
of change takes place informally in discussion with colleagues in what we
call "Professional Learning Groups". It's non-threatening, supportive and
not time intensive.
So, to strategies we are using to embed eLearning in the curriculum...
1. Each KLA has an eLearning Driver (hate the term but it does describe the
role). These people have access to intensive training with our Ultranet
Coach. This takes place during the school day and so far this year has
involved a full day and half day, with more days to come. These sessions
focus on eLearning pedagogy, not software skills (or the Ultranet). So, we
are constantly addressing the issue of how learning that can be facilitated
digitally, rather than focussing on what students can do with the equipment
or software. Time at KLA meetings is set aside for these people to share
the learning with KLA members, to promote discussion about eLearning and, in
particular, to encourage sharing of eLearning ideas within the group.
2. We have around 130 netbooks in use at the moment, courtesy of the Feds
money. 50+ of these are allocated to our Foundation VCAL students who have
1:1 access 24/7 and accept personal responsibility for them. 75 netbooks are
divided into 3x25 trolleys. These are used by 15 staff who successfully
applied to take part in a "pilot project" for their use at Years 7-10. These
staff are guaranteed access to the netbooks for all sessions with their
designated classes for the entire semester. So, all up we have 25-30 staff
delivering general curriculum programs knowing they have access to netbooks
every session (only one of these people is an IT specialist; none of the
classes assess the IT domain). These staff have all had at least one full
day's training during school time, mainly focussing on eLearning pedagogy.
Nings are used by all three groups (VCAL, pilot project, eLearning Drivers)
to discuss & document difficulties, share ideas etc, promote discussion
about pedagogy, maintain contact with the Ultranet Coach). There will
another round of "pilot projects" for Semester 2, so another group of staff
will have the opportunity to embed eLearning strategies in their classrooms.
They will benefit from the experiences of the first group, who are expected
to share their experience with the whole staff. Meeting time will be
provided for this and these staff are not expected to prepare lengthy or
overly formal presentations - more of a show case scenario really. More
netbooks are on the way, we have 300 desktop machines for students and 3
sets of laptops for classroom use (1,100 students), so we're overcoming some
of the access issues that have curtailed enthusiasm for embedding eLearning
strategies on a day-to-day basis.
3. We have spent one of our three start-of-year PD days both last year and
this year on eLearning. These sessions have involved both general
information/discussion sessions about eLearning and "hands on" sessions eg
familiarisation with netbooks, podcasting, moving beyond PowerPoint for
presentation of student work, wikis etc. The general info sessions have
generated huge discussion amongst staff, and again have focussed on
pedagogy, the ways students use technology in their out of school hours
lives, examples of class room applications across the curriculum. During the
year, optional afterschool workshops are offered by staff to other staff,
usually with a skill development focus. These are usually well attended,
promote sharing and build confidence.
4. As you might have gathered, we get great support from our Ultranet Coach,
who was formerly one of our own staff members. During the past few years, he
has been on site at least one day a week and has offered one to one
coaching to staff who want to implement a new eLearning strategy. This has
been with a "one step at a time" approach so people feel encouraged to take
a risk but not overwhelmed by taking on too much at once. We're really
fortunate that he is terrific at what he does, but the implementation of the
Ultranet shortly will probably mean less time for this sort of role. We've
also had two people take Teacher Professional Leave to coach other staff on
a one-to-one basis. This eLearing coaching was by teacher request when they
wished to implement something in their class rooms. The TPL staff worked
full time in the school on a 0.8 teaching load, plus "as needed" time
release, to facilitate this.
I agree that the secondary curriculum is under-represented in ePotential
work samples, and that examples of use with Later Years subjects are
particularly limited. I guess it is up to we secondary teachers to submit
examples for inclusion. However, I've still come across some examples that
have been of use to me and it pays to look both above and below your level
(hence your comment about appropriate levels for samples Kevork). I see
these more as idea starters, than ready made activities to take to my class
room.
Like a lot of schools, particularly rural ones, we have a staff profile with
many more people at the higher end of the age range than the lower end. We
do have compulsory IT for Year 7 students, multiple Year 8-10 IT electives
and run IT Apps, SD and VET Multimedia (can't remember the new name!) and on
occasions we run VET IT. I wouldn't say we're a "leading" school in the
embedding of eLearning across all curriculum areas, but we are making steady
progress with staff of all age groups willing to take on the challenge.
My role in all of this? I'm the eLearning Driver for the Humanities KLA and
was one of the TPL people, but other than that, I'm just a class room
teacher of Humanities and IT.
A lengthy response to make up for all the "lurking". Hope there was
something of interest...
Cheers
Sheryl Carnie
Bairnsdale Secondary College
_____
From: itapps-bounces at edulists.com.au on behalf of
itapps-request at edulists.com.au
Sent: Tue 4/6/2010 9:42 AM
To: itapps at edulists.com.au
Subject: itapps Digest, Vol 62, Issue 10
Send itapps mailing list submissions to
itapps at edulists.com.au
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://www.edulists.com.au/mailman/listinfo/itapps
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
itapps-request at edulists.com.au
You can reach the person managing the list at
itapps-owner at edulists.com.au
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of itapps digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. epotential feedback, opinion and ideas (Kevork Krozian)
2. epotential feedback and comment (Kent Beveridge)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 13:53:19 +1000
From: "Kevork Krozian" <kevork at edulists.com.au>
Subject: [Year 12 IT Apps] epotential feedback, opinion and ideas
To: "elearning Teachers' Mailing List" <elearning at edulists.com.au>,
"Year 12 IT Applications Teachers' Mailing List"
<itapps at edulists.com.au>
Message-ID: <360E0070961241E98F5C193C38B243F0 at NOTEBOOKKRO>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Hi Folks,
This is going to both elearning and itapps lists as many itapps teachers
would in all likelihood have an involvement with elearning in their schools.
You would all be aware of DEECD's efforts in scaffolding student, teacher
and school elearning and structuring ICT leadership etc.
The site showing the continuum, relevant documents and samples of work can
be accessed at http://epotential.education.vic.gov.au/continuum.php.
In fact there are parallel continuums or continua in many/most
jurisdictions. A statement recognising "partnerships" at least, is posted on
the Victorian site:
in partnership with:
Department of Education, Employment & Training, Northern Territory
Department of Education & Children Services, South Australia
I am told that the epotential continuum started life in the Northern
Territory and worked its way down and across to Vic where it was rebadged.
A colleague has also alerted me to a Florida equivalent " Technology
integration matrix" http://fcit.usf.edu/matrix/index.html . This is worth a
look.
Check out the comparison of levels between a few of these jurisdictions:
Jurisdiction
Levels of elearning integration
Victoria
Foundation , Emergent, Innovative, transformative
South Australia
Develop, Apply, Deliver, Transform
Florida ( USA)
Entry , Adoption, Adaptation, Infusion, Transformation
Here are some of the issues;
1. I am told Independent and Catholic schools as a system ( for various
reasons ) don't use the epotential continuum by choice. If roughly a third
of Victorian schools ( is that about the proportion ? ) don't use this tool
what does it say about standards across the state or agreement about what
anything means ?
2. Speaking over the water cooler with state school counterparts I hear a
number of state schools don't use the epotential continuum for various
reasons such as:
a) the continuum does not relate to what happens in their
schools
b) the continuum and the samples of work on the epotential
site do not adequately address secondary levels of ICT use or worse almost
totally have an absence of any VCE application.
c) Noone has seen what the transformative level looks like.
Therefore, how can one know if it has been achieved ?
d) A lack of agreement between some samples of work and where
it fits in a continuum.
e) Concerns regarding just what embedding elearning means.
Complaints that simply digitization of information is seen as elearning by
some without the connections with higher order critical thinking, analysis,
hypothesis testing and more. Is the technology being used to improve
learning, application or just occupy the students eg. Does animating a
character add anything different to a student's understanding or just give
them a visual or audio representation of what is already on paper ? Does
drawing a mind map diagram of what is already in written form add anything
to their understanding or knowledge ?
In view of some of these issues I was wondering if
1. Could I get some feedback on whether any schools are using the
epotential continuum as the scaffold upon which to build embedding of the
elearning in the curriculum ? If schools have chosen to not go with the
epotential continuum can I please ask their reasons ?
2. What other appraches are schools taking to the challenge of embedding
elearning in the curriculum and how is this being delivered, measured and
verified ?
With thanks
Kevork Krozian
kevork at edulists.com.au
www.edulists.com.au
Tel: 0419 356 034
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/itapps/attachments/20100405/c34ad819/at
tachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 23:38:59 +0000
From: Kent Beveridge <kbeveridge at stbc.vic.edu.au>
Subject: [Year 12 IT Apps] epotential feedback and comment
To: "Year 12 IT Applications Teachers' Mailing List"
<itapps at edulists.com.au>
Message-ID:
<64FBC7D59E9D6B4DA547B82B7F07665C02ED13B8 at garlic.stbc.vic.edu.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
I saw this elearning scaffold a short number of years back at a former(state
system) school. The initial impression I got was that the principal of that
venue was 'strongly encouraging' (take what you might from that) all staff
to go down this path as the 'decision had been taken' to persue this
strategy. Needless to say, the school was crowing about it being one of the
first to go this path.
My personal thoughts when this announcement was made was that many staff
thought the old 'here we go again' routine of gov't forcing change on its
state school system (and its employees)- like many of its well intentioned
but hard to implement strategies.
Issues seen at the time(and now?) included:
Costs of PD
Training, as opposed to PD, meaning new qualifications required?
Time for attending these PD sessions
Value to learning
Attitudes of staff to the strategies
Actual improvement to skillsets of staff
Terminology (new) to be learned and implemented
Strategies to implement the 4 stages within schools
Alienation, and castigation, of staff who dont participate actively(with
threats of formal or informal actions from hierarchy-they were subtle, but
nevertheless apparent)
Who on staff, actually, realistically and practically, has the skillsets
required to implement these strategies...
Job advancement and career opportunities opening for those who acquire these
levels? Or closing for those who dont! (tell me staff dont think about THIS
ONE).
etc.
I still can clearly remember when and exactly which room it was made, this
strategy was initiated to the staff on mass in a meeting held specifically
for the purpose of telling them.
My comment?
Whilst I did look through the necessary levels as I perceived they applied
to myself, I found it difficult to know if I had the skillset or even the
time to acquire the skillset, required to achieve these 4 levels.
The first 3 I strongly feel are what every teacher endeavours to offer their
pupils, themselves and the employers. The 4th(transformative) I feel is,
well, above many staff to achieve no matter how hard they try! To transform
is to change..that is often difficult to encourage students to do and many
teachers try doing this in their own way depending on their environments
anyway.
Me? I actively attempt to do the first 3 and will freely admit to a degree
of difficulty of the 4th!
Every year I teach, I try new stuff...yes EVERY year! I dont try to
transform myself, or 'morf', and I dont try for miracles..I just try to get
the message across in a way that hopefully my audience(the
students/learners) can relate to or make sense of.
A weakness of the 4 steps as I see them but is not discussed is that of how
adults(staff and teachers) relate to each other. To get this 4 step strategy
to work, I believe, you also need 100% support of ALL your colleagues and in
any workplace that is going to be difficult to achieve for many different
conscious/unconscious and cognitive reasons.
So, in summary?
Get yourself a Principal whom everyone supports, go grab a staff of Phd and
Masters trained people, add a dash of strong industry links, throw in a
bucket of money, find some land to build this fantastic school environment
and then try to see if everyone gets along and thinks alike. THEN, add
students and watch the whole plan evaporate!
WHY? Because we dont live in an ideal world and politicians like 'spin' and
'strategies' ('myschools website' and its statistical flaws etc).
I am happy to give things a go, but as those who know me know, I am also a
realist(some say pessimist). If I am so against all this, then before you
have a go at me, consider this..I went back to part time study recently and
gained 2 further qualifications in 3 years. If thats not trying to transform
myself and my learning strategies...what is? Oh, BTW, I am part way through
another qualification too right now! If thats not proactive then go fish!
Ok, thats my take on the 4 steps. They sound fantastic, in theory, but
practically? I'm not convinced they can be implemented in EVERY school. Some
perhaps? But not all.
Maybe in my next life I'll come back as a politician...hehehe.
Next comments????
Kent Beveridge.
ICT Co-ordinator
St.Brigids Catholic SC., Horsham.
________________________________
From: itapps-bounces at edulists.com.au [itapps-bounces at edulists.com.au] on
behalf of Kevork Krozian [kevork at edulists.com.au]
Sent: Monday, 5 April 2010 1:53 PM
To: elearning Teachers' Mailing List; Year 12 IT Applications Teachers'
Mailing List
Subject: [Year 12 IT Apps] epotential feedback, opinion and ideas
Hi Folks,
This is going to both elearning and itapps lists as many itapps teachers
would in all likelihood have an involvement with elearning in their schools.
You would all be aware of DEECD's efforts in scaffolding student, teacher
and school elearning and structuring ICT leadership etc.
The site showing the continuum, relevant documents and samples of work can
be accessed at http://epotential.education.vic.gov.au/continuum.php.
In fact there are parallel continuums or continua in many/most
jurisdictions. A statement recognising "partnerships" at least, is posted on
the Victorian site:
in partnership with:
Department of Education, Employment & Training, Northern Territory
Department of Education & Children Services, South Australia
I am told that the epotential continuum started life in the Northern
Territory and worked its way down and across to Vic where it was rebadged.
A colleague has also alerted me to a Florida equivalent " Technology
integration matrix" http://fcit.usf.edu/matrix/index.html . This is worth a
look.
Check out the comparison of levels between a few of these jurisdictions:
Jurisdiction
Levels of elearning integration
Victoria
Foundation , Emergent, Innovative, transformative
South Australia
Develop, Apply, Deliver, Transform
Florida ( USA)
Entry , Adoption, Adaptation, Infusion, Transformation
Here are some of the issues;
1. I am told Independent and Catholic schools as a system ( for various
reasons ) don't use the epotential continuum by choice. If roughly a third
of Victorian schools ( is that about the proportion ? ) don't use this tool
what does it say about standards across the state or agreement about what
anything means ?
2. Speaking over the water cooler with state school counterparts I hear a
number of state schools don't use the epotential continuum for various
reasons such as:
a) the continuum does not relate to what happens in their
schools
b) the continuum and the samples of work on the epotential
site do not adequately address secondary levels of ICT use or worse almost
totally have an absence of any VCE application.
c) Noone has seen what the transformative level looks like.
Therefore, how can one know if it has been achieved ?
d) A lack of agreement between some samples of work and where
it fits in a continuum.
e) Concerns regarding just what embedding elearning means.
Complaints that simply digitization of information is seen as elearning by
some without the connections with higher order critical thinking, analysis,
hypothesis testing and more. Is the technology being used to improve
learning, application or just occupy the students eg. Does animating a
character add anything different to a student's understanding or just give
them a visual or audio representation of what is already on paper ? Does
drawing a mind map diagram of what is already in written form add anything
to their understanding or knowledge ?
In view of some of these issues I was wondering if
1. Could I get some feedback on whether any schools are using the
epotential continuum as the scaffold upon which to build embedding of the
elearning in the curriculum ? If schools have chosen to not go with the
epotential continuum can I please ask their reasons ?
2. What other appraches are schools taking to the challenge of embedding
elearning in the curriculum and how is this being delivered, measured and
verified ?
With thanks
Kevork Krozian
kevork at edulists.com.au<mailto:kevork at edulists.com.au>
www.edulists.com.au<http://www.edulists.com.au <http://www.edulists.com.au/>
>
Tel: 0419 356 034
_______________________________________________
http://www.edulists.com.au <http://www.edulists.com.au/> - FAQ, resources,
subscribe, unsubscribe
IT Applications Mailing List kindly supported by
http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/vce/studies/infotech/infotechindex.html
<http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/vce/studies/infotech/itapplications3-4.html> -
Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority and
http://www.vitta.org.au <http://www.vitta.org.au/> - VITTA Victorian
Information Technology Teachers Association Inc
Click here<https://www.mailcontrol.com/sr/wQw0zmjPoHdJTZGyOCrrhg==> to
report this email as spam.
This message has been scanned for malware by Websense. www.websense.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/itapps/attachments/20100405/6dd95cfe/at
tachment.html
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
itapps mailing list
itapps at edulists.com.au
http://www.edulists.com.au/mailman/listinfo/itapps
End of itapps Digest, Vol 62, Issue 10
**************************************
Important - This email and any attachments may be confidential. If received in error, please contact us and delete all copies. Before opening or using attachments check them for viruses and defects. Regardless of any loss, damage or consequence, whether caused by the negligence of the sender or not, resulting directly or indirectly from the use of any attached files our liability is limited to resupplying any affected attachments. Any representations or opinions expressed are those of the individual sender, and not necessarily those of the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/itapps/attachments/20100406/951d48e9/attachment-0001.html
More information about the itapps
mailing list