At my district we are beginning the process of tech comp expectations, but there are many stakeholders that need to be involved. We are starting with an attempt to bring together union and admin to recognize the importance of change. Well aware of the crucial role parents and students play we would then reach out to them for input. We would follow with a curricular re-alignment allowing ample time and opportunity for trainings.

Easy right? Maybe we are making this more complicated than it actually is, but adding tech competency really is a new vision for the entire district. Teachers and equipment will get moved around. Career decisions will have to be made by or for some people. It will take some time and there are definitely going to be ruffled feathers; however, in the end we see an unbroken line of education/communication from K-12.

That is a monumental task.

It would make a great reality show. Call me, well talk.

Here is the language for the three discussion points of our administrator evaluation (these apply to central office and building administrators):

1. Facilitate the use of technologies to support and enhance instructional methods that develop higher-level thinking, decision-making, and problem-solving skills.

2. Assist teachers in using technology to access, analyze, and interpret student performance data, and in using results to appropriately design, assess, and modify student instruction.

3. Ensure that budget priorities reflect an understanding of the total cost of ownership concept and focus on technology and its relationships to enhanced learning and teaching.

These become part of an ongoing conversation (formative) and, in-part, summative of a year’s recap and reflection during the evaluation process for administrators (we use a modified 360 evaluation where I contribute to the evaluations of the technology component and they in turn contribute to components of my administrative evaluation).

District Program Director Profile on the NETS*A site:
http://cnets.iste.org/administrators/a_profile-pd.html
…with corresponding scenarios

Principal Profile:
http://cnets.iste.org/administrators/a_profile-prin.html

Superintendent Profile:
http://cnets.iste.org/administrators/a_profile-sup.html

…each with scenarios

there is also a great resource from ISTE: Electronic Briefcase for Admins… nice templates for technology supported lesson planning and observations of tech lessons..

how is that XO lesson development coming?
cheers to the cyclones…(
ande

verification on this site once a post is made reminded me of a great Wired Science episode talking about Captchas

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captcha
http://www.captcha.net/

Should they be able to use an electronic grade book? I think so. Should they be able to create a PowerPoint, use a SmartBoard, plug in an ELMO? I think, yes.

Let’s face it, it’s the information age. Those skills have become essential to life. How do you run a classroom without them? The question is not rhetorical; you do it in a manner that fails to prepare students for the future…

Why can that one not work? It leaves the district and the state the opportunity to change the qualifications and the assessment at appropriate times. Sort of falls under the any and all other duties deal, but I think it draws attention to the fact that they need to be prepared to face the evaluation on tech skills at any time. If they fear technology, then they should not apply for the job of teaching kids of today. Can they be effective as teachers still? Probably. Will the students miss out on important job and life skills due to the lack of technology integration? I would say yes. They need to use the tools they will use to manipulate the data once they leave the classroom.

Here in New South Wales there is a move towards accrediting teachers,and the NSW Teacher’s Institute expect;

Knowledge of information and communication technologies (ICT) in the following areas:

• Basic operational Skills
• Information technology skills
• Software evaluation skills
• Effective use of the internet
• Pedagogical skills for classroom management

and in their teaching strategies

• Demonstrate current knowledge and proficiency in the use of ICT:

• Use a range of teaching strategies and resources including ICT and other technologies to foster interest and support learning.

They then vary the depth of the role expectations according to various bands from Graduate to Competent to Accomplished to Leader.

The full document is available from http://www.nswteachers.nsw.edu.au/Main-Professional-Teaching-Standards.html

It may add to the discussion, but I’d be interested in your and your readers views

Each district within the state can interpret these standards specifically to what we have and use (i.e., the specific type of student information system, productivity software, etc.).

Each time a teacher goes through a renewal process for licesensure, we must evaluate them along these standards.

On the other hand–it is not so much the job description that governs what is possible–it’s the contract. In my district the contract is longer than Moby Dick and the union feels that they have a job well done if they come out of every negotiation with a few new chapters.

It’s what is either in, or believed to be in, the contract (which nobody has the time to actually read through) that is frequently a barrier. Even such things as providing the needed training to use technology are hampered by the fact that the contract gives teachers the right to choose their own professional development.