individualteach -...

Running head: INDIVIDUAL TEACHER TECHONOLOGY ASSESSMENT

Individual Teacher Technology Assessment Narrative

Anastasia W. Caphart v1

Kennesaw State University


The subject of this assessment Mrs. O is a seventeen-year veteran and second grade

teacher at Clayton County Schools. Mrs. O has been with the district for ten years. Prior to

meeting with Mrs. O, she submitted to my request to complete two surveys intended to determine

levels to which she implements technology and her willingness to adopt technology.

Currently, there are 26 students in her homeroom and she teaches all subjects. Her room

is equipped with a Promethean Board, six desktop computers, one document camera, a DVD

player, a VCR, and a cassette player. In addition to these, she has access to check-out grade level

laptops and iPod carts (30 per cart) assigned to the primary grade level. Students operate on an

alternate schedule to attend computer and smart table labs twice a week for 40 minutes. There are

50 desktop computers in the computer lab.

Levels of Technology Use and Adoption

Based on Mrs. O’s response to the Level of Technology Implementation survey, she

considers herself proficient. She indicates her proficiency in using laptop, taking attendance

online, lesson planning, uploading and downloading data/documents, Promethean Board,

Microsoft Word, PowerPoint, math manipulatives, email, e-books, and online assessments. In

further interview with Mrs. O regarding her proficiency, she indicated “First of all, I won’t be

able to survive this system if I were not proficient in using technology. Everything we do is done

online-attendance, lesson plans, communication with administration, require technology.

Every day, I use the whiteboard to project charts that I prepare from PowerPoint or charts from e-

book and other resources for teaching. I am proficient in what I do” (O, personal communication,

February 2017). At this point, I was convinced that technology plays an integral role in her duties

and responsibilities as a teacher. However, when analyzing her response to the survey question,

she indicated that she “Strongly disagree” that technology plays an essential part in her daily


activities. Meanwhile, when asked whether she uses digital presentation during instruction, she

responded that she uses charts, PowerPoint videos and interactive websites. Further in the survey

when asked about how often she uses standard-based digital resources, she responded “never”.

Based on these responses, I deduced, that they were contradictory and did not reflect previous

responses and activities stated.

When asked about specific technology resources she used across the curriculum to

address students varied needs, Mrs. O mentioned that the system purchased programs such as

Clever Georgia reading program that includes leveled assessment which students can access on

the laptops, math diagnostic and formative assessments, ixl reading and math online, My

Own, Edu Track Science and Math unit test, e-books for math, reading, social studies and Brain

Pop. She further stated that she is grateful to have these resources, as they provide needed data

for planning, redirecting instruction, and differentiated activities that would support students’

varied needs. Data collected also helps her in grouping her students and selecting appropriate

strategies to meet their needs. While, she is grateful for these resources, she is also concerned

that she has not engaged her students in collaborative online projects which she believes will be

beneficial for her students in promoting higher-order thinking, problem solving and decision-

making skills.

In addressing her use of productivity and collaborative tools Ms. O stated that she

“dropped the ball”, despite using technology daily with her students. She further revealed that she

used Edmodo last year, but chose to use Class Dojo this year. Although she set up Class Dojo,

but has been unable to implement due to her busy schedule. Furthermore, in the survey, she

provided no response to whether she provides opportunities for students to collaborate using

digital resources, neither did she identify collaborative projects students were engaged in. Her


response indicated limited use of digital resources. Consequently, she seeks to increase her level

of technology implementation.

Mrs. O is proficient in her use of technology. She uses technology quite well in her day-

to- day activities. According to her, the students are independent in their use of technology in

completing daily tasks. Based on the survey and interview, Mrs. O would likely be placed on

LoTi Level 2 (Exploration) which indicates the instructional focus emphasizes content

understanding and supports mastery learning and direct instruction. While, it is evident that

students use technology, it was done on routine basis. Meanwhile, based on Ms. O’s proficiency

on the use of technology, she is classified on LoTi Level 3 (Infusion) which indicates that digital

and/or environmental resources are used by the teacher to execute teacher-directed tasks that

emphasize higher levels of student cognitive processing relating to the content standards.

In addressing questions about embracing new technology, Mrs. O specified that she

embraces new innovations and is willing to integrate into her lessons. She further indicated

willingness to try new apps that would meet the needs of her students. Mrs. O is aware of her

shortcomings which she attributes to her workload and other school related activities which

sometimes do not allow her to do as much as she would like to. However, she is excited about

trying new innovations. Based on the survey, Ms. O is receptive toward technology and will

improve on goals to use apps in class and to engage students in collaborative projects.

Mrs. O is an active participant at professional development which she attends once a month

covering topics that include technology integration, Edmodo, software, etc. She also participants in

grade level meetings and shares new technologies with her team. Ms. O’s willingness to embrace

technology without persuasion clearly indicates that she is an early adopter. “Early adopters use the

data provided by the innovators’ implementation and confirmation of the innovation to make their


own adoption decisions” (Orr, 2003). She recognizes the benefits of the innovation and the impact

it will have on her students based on the statistics, helped her formed an opinion toward the

innovation. Hence, she made the decision to engage in the coaching exercise that will allow her to

embrace the innovation.

Already, Ms. O has undergone 3 of 5 steps in the Mechanism of Diffusion (Orr, 2003).

Technology Perspective

During my interview with Mrs. O, I learned that she fully understands and is committed to

providing opportunities for her students to engage in collaborative projects while utilizing digital

resources. She is also aware that her students need to collaborate online with audiences outside the

classroom. She wants to use apps in her classroom to meet the varied needs of her students. She is

convinced that although proficient in other areas of technology, it is important that she focuses on

professional development that would train her in using collaboration tools.

Besides training, time management is also a concern of hers. She needs to manage her time

well so that she will be able to plan and implement the activities. She acknowledges that she must

make time for technology to work. Then when asked if she still believes that technology does not

play an integral role in her duties and responsibilities as a teacher, she affirmed that technology is

very important. She said it must have been an oversight, as she would not downplay the importance

of technology especially in the 21st century classroom.

Technology Training Needs and Coaching

Mrs. O communicated that her most pressing need for coaching is to learn more about

doing a collaborative online project with her class. When asked her to provide her understanding

of an online collaborative project, she explained that she wants her students to engage in online

projects like some of the ones in the wikis I shared. We discussed and shared ideas about the


topic. Regarding her preference for coaching, she expressed preference for one-to-one coaching

that would take place after school. Because she is a visual learner, she prefers pictorial

representation and modeling that will help her in “enduring understanding”. Clearly, Ms. O

would benefit from coaching that is collaborative and offers one-on-one coaching, while utilizing

advance and post organizers, modeling, high- level questioning, and quality assignment (Knight,

2007). The plan would then be to work with Ms. O in using the advanced organizer to map out

targets, digital tools and activities for the wiki. I will model expected skills for her to emulate,

and practice, while engaging her in high-level questioning. Opportunities for independent

practice will be provided to establish understanding, while quality assignment will be used “to

enhance impact of instruction”. The finished product- wiki will represent post organizer and

reflection piece. Mrs. Osanu and I will reflect on the process of creating a wiki, lessons learned

and way forward. She will be encouraged to outline plan for working with team members in

creating class wikis for collaboration. Lastly, Ms. O will work share the wiki with her class and

they will work together to create pages for wikis and to collaborate with grade level team on

completing an online class project.


References

Knight, J. (2007). Focusing on the big four. In Instructional coaching: a partnership approach to

improving instruction (p. 162). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Orr, G. (2003). Diffusion of innovations, by everett rogers (1995). Retrieved from

https://teamlead.dukenus.edu.sg/vapfiles_ocs/2011/edu/Diffusion_of_Innovations_by_Ev

erett_Rogers_1995.p

df C. Osanu, personal interview, February 2017

individualteach -...

Documents