[Year 12 IT Apps] RE: itapps Digest, Vol 62, Issue 10
Kevork Krozian
kevork at edulists.com.au
Tue Apr 6 20:27:49 EST 2010
Hi Sheryl,
Thank you so much for an incredible reply. I think it more than makes up
for your time as a lurker.
I enjoyed reading your highly detailed response but was disturbed by:
> 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.
So perhaps it is true. The overwhelming majority of subscribers have been
silenced by strongly worded responses ? or aggressive language ??
I apologise for not picking this up but hope we can encourage more of our
colleagues to come forward in the same spirit with which you have Sheryl.
I would encourage any others with negative experiences to feel free to
contact me offline at kevork at edulists.com.au or the moderator of the
itapps list Mark Kelly at kel at mckinnonsc.vic.edu.au.
I am informed that around 75% of government schools are using the
epotential continuum ( subject to confirmation ) and it would be great to
hear of the experiences out there in as much detail as Sheryl has
generously provided here.
Kind Regards
Kevork Krozian
Mailing List Administrator
kevork at edulists.com.au
www.edulists.com.au
> 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/attachment-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/attachment.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.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/itapplications3-4.html -
> Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority and
> http://www.vitta.org.au - VITTA Victorian Information Technology Teachers
> Association Inc
More information about the itapps
mailing list