Instructions for Using The Learning and Technology Framework

LEARNING TECHNOLOGY FRAMEWORK

CHAPTER 5

The following charts enable school decision makers to use the Technology Effectiveness Framework. Completing them will help you identify your goals in the effective use of technology to increase engaged learning.

Tables I and II cover Current Realities and Future Goals. By following the instructions that accompany them, you can graphically depict the learning and technology practices and policies that are in place now in your classroom, school, or district against your vision of learning and technology for the future. This information can help you decide where to invest additional resources or where to strengthen your present school practices and policies.

Table III, Comparing Technology Programs, is a step-by-step guide to examining technology programs according to features that contribute to engaged learning and high technology performance.

Tables I and II: Current Realities and Future Goals

You will be using two tables and a grid to compare your current practices and future goals. Table I asks you to reflect on the 26 indicators for engaged learning described in this document, ranking your current and desired practices and policies for each indicator on a scale from 0 through 3. Table II asks you to rank your current and desired practices and policies for each of the 22 indicators of high technology performance.

Practice scores reflect what is actually in place in classrooms and schools now and where you want to see growth.
Policy scores refer to what your school or community thinks is important now and where you think there is a need for more emphasis in the future. For an indicator to be part of current policy, it must appear in some kind of policy document such as a mission statement, curriculum framework, assessment system, building organization plan, or some other plan that has been accepted in a school or community.

Finally, plot your scores on Graph 1. This will show you where your school is now in terms of ideal engaged learning and high technology performance and how close your school's vision of the future is to that ideal.

Completing Table I

Current Realities in Engaged Learning. In the first two boxes next to each engaged learning indicator, score your school's current learning practices and policies. When you have filled in all your scores in the first two columns, add them up and write the totals in the column totals boxes at the bottom.

Engaged Learning Practices Engaged Learning Policies 0 = Not in place at this time 0 = Not in place 1 = Some users/teachers exploring/piloting/developing 1 = Not so important 2 = Many users/teachers have good skills in these areas; 2 = Somewhat important practice is effective 3 = Very important 3 = Most users/teachers have mastery, and practice is very widespread; it is a major strength for the school

Future Goals in Engaged Learning . Refer to your scores in the Current Realities boxes to determine your scores for Future Goals. Look for imbalances between your practice scores and your policy scores to identify priorities for future growth. For example, if you marked a 3 in both the policy and practice box of the "responsibility for learning" indicator, students in your school are already achieving this important policy goal and you are better off putting your emphasis elsewhere. A policy score of 3 and a practice score of 0 or 1 on the same indicator clearly shows an imbalance, as does a practice score of 2 and a policy score of 1.

Next, decide how important each imbalance is to improving practice in your school. Fill in the boxes opposite those indicators where you think your school or district should concentrate on growth using the scale below. Do the same thing in the policy column. When you have filled in all of your scores, add them up and write the total in the column totals box.

Future Goals

0 = not a priority for improvement at this time/not being considered
1 = will concentrate on improvement but a low priority
2 = will concentrate on improvement, medium priority
3 = will concentrate on improvement and high priority

Table I: Current Realities & Future Goals in Engaged Learning Practices and Policies

Engaged Learning Indicators	Current Realities		Future Goals
Engaged Learning Indicators	Practice	Policy	Practice	Policy
Vision of Learning
Responsible for learning	_______	_______	_______	_______
Strategic	_______	_______	_______	_______
Energized by learning	_______	_______	_______	_______
Collaborative	_______	_______	_______	_______
Tasks
Authentic	_______	_______	_______	_______
Challenging	_______	_______	_______	_______
Multidisciplinary	_______	_______	_______	_______
Assessment
Performance-based	_______	_______	_______	_______
Generative	_______	_______	_______	_______
Seamless and ongoing	_______	_______	_______	_______
Equitable	_______	_______	_______	_______
Instructional Model
Interactive	_______	_______	_______	_______
Generative	_______	_______	_______	_______
Learning Context
Collaborative	_______	_______	_______	_______
Knowledge-building	_______	_______	_______	_______
Empathetic	_______	_______	_______	_______
Grouping
Heterogeneous	_______	_______	_______	_______
Equitable	_______	_______	_______	_______
Flexible	_______	_______	_______	_______
Teacher Roles
Facilitator	_______	_______	_______	_______
Guide	_______	_______	_______	_______
Co-learner/Co-investigator	_______	_______	_______	_______
Student Roles
Explorer	_______	_______	_______	_______
Cognitive apprentice	_______	_______	_______	_______
Teacher	_______	_______	_______	_______
Producer	_______	_______	_______	_______
Column Totals	_______	_______	_______	_______
Grand Totals	_______		_______

Completing Table II

Current Realities in High Performance Technology. In the first two boxes opposite each high technology performance indicator, score your school's current technology practices and policies using the scale below. When you have filled in all your scores, add them up and write the totals in the column totals box at the bottom.

High Performance Technology Practice             High Performance Technology Policies

0 = Not in place at this time                               0 = Not in place

1 = Some users/teachers have equipment and are              1 = Not so important

      exploring/piloting/developing                         2 = Somewhat important

2 = Many users/teachers have good computer and technology   3 = Very important

      skills and are actively engaged with the technology

3 = Most users/teachers have mastered complex technologies

      (hardware and software) and effectively use technology to promote

      engaged learning; is a major strength in the school or district

Future Goals in High Performance Technology. Determine your Future Goals scores for technology practice and policy in the same way you determined Future Goals in Table I. Refer back to the Current Practices columns and identify the imbalances between technology practices and policies. Then decide which imbalances are the most important to bring into alignment. Mark the practice and policy columns of each indicator, using a scale of 1 for low priority and 3 for high priority.

In deciding where to place your technology priorities, also take practicality into account. Be realistic about what your school or district can afford at this time. Also, if your school, district, or state is developing a new technology plan or policy, you may want to put off investing in some areas until you know more about those plans. When you have filled in all your scores, add them up and write the total in the column totals boxes at the bottom.

Table II: Current Realities and Future Goals in High Performance Technology

High Performance Technology Indicators	Current Realities		Future Goals
High Performance Technology Indicators	Practice	Policy	Practice	Policy
Access
Connective	_______	_______	_______	_______
Ubiquitious	_______	_______	_______	_______
Interconnective	_______	_______	_______	_______
Designed for equitable use	_______	_______	_______	_______
Operability
Interoperable	_______	_______	_______	_______
Open architecture	_______	_______	_______	_______
Transparent	_______	_______	_______	_______
Organization
Distributed	_______	_______	_______	_______
Designed for user contributions	_______	_______	_______	_______
Designed for collaborative projects	_______	_______	_______	_______
Engagability
Access to challenging tasks	_______	_______	_______	_______
Enables learning by doing	_______	_______	_______	_______
Provides guided participation	_______	_______	_______	_______
Ease of Use
Effective helps	_______	_______	_______	_______
User friendliness/user control	_______	_______	_______	_______
Fast	_______	_______	_______	_______
Available training & support	_______	_______	_______	_______
Provides just enough information just in time	_______	_______	_______	_______
Functionality
Diverse tools	_______	_______	_______	_______
Media use	_______	_______	_______	_______
Promotes programming and authoring	_______	_______	_______	_______
Supports project design skills	_______	_______	_______	_______
Column Totals	_______	_______	_______	_______
Grand Totals	_______		_______

_________________________________________________________________________

PLOTTING GRAPH 1

Plotting Current Realities. Add your Current Realities practice and policy scores for engaged learning and enter the total in the Grand Totals box. Draw a solid vertical line on the horizontal learning axis to indicate the grand total. Then add your Current Realities practice and policy scores for technology performance and enter the total in the Grand Totals box. Draw a solid horizontal line on the vertical technology performance axis to indicate the grand total.

Mark the intersection of the horizontal and vertical solid lines as point A. This indicates where your school or district is currently with regard to using high performance technology to enhance engaged learning.

Plotting Future Goals. Add your Future Goals policy and practice scores for engaged learning and enter the total in the Grand Totals box. Then add the Future Goals grand total to the Current Realities grand total for engaged learning and draw a vertical dashed line on the horizontal learning axis to indicate the new total.

Add your Future Goals policy and practice scores for technology performance and enter the total in the Grand Totals box. Then add the Future Goals grand total to the Current Realities grand total for technology performance and draw a dashed horizontal line on the vertical technology performance axis to indicate the grand total.

Mark the intersection of the two dashed lines as point B. This indicates where your school or district will be with regard to using high performance technology to enhance learning if you were to implement your desired goals. Notice which quadrant your two intersections fall into. Point A indicates whether your current practices and policies are at the high end of engaged learning and high technology performance (Quadrant A) or at the low end (Quadrant D). Or perhaps they are somewhere in between (Quadrants B or C). Point B tells you where your school or district's goals fall in relation to the ideal of high engaged learning and high technology performance.

Table III: Comparing Technology Programs

The table in this section helps you compare technology and technology-enhanced programs in promoting engaged learning. You will be able to evaluate programs as they were designed and as they actually perform in practice. First, complete the two charts in Table III - one for engaged learning indicators (chart 1) and one for high performance technology indicators (chart 2) - and then use your scores to plot the program profiles in Graph 2.

For each program, you will be placing two numbers opposite each indicator in each chart. The first number refers to features that are present in the design of the technology or technology-enhanced program, as stated in formal descriptions of the program such as articles, profiles, and promotional materials. Place this number in the Design column for each indicator in each chart.

Sometimes there is a discrepancy between what the manual or description says about a given technology or program and what teachers who actually use it say it does. The second column, marked Practice, allows you to evaluate this aspect of the technology. To fill in this column, you will need to talk to teachers who have used the technology in the classroom or attend demonstrations of the technology. Place this number in the Practice column for each indicator in each chart.

Design Scores for Learning and Technology

0 = Not in place at this time/not applicable

1 = Design definition in place but feature in program falls short of

    potential stated in the definition (e.g., program has an encyclopedia for

    students to explore but it is of very poor quality)

2 = Design definition in place and corresponds clearly to one or more

    features in the program  (e.g., program has an encyclopedia and it is

    functioning as described in literature but it is not outstanding)

3 = Design definition in place and is a major appeal of the program (e.g.,

    program has an encyclopedia and it is a major strength of the program)

Practice Scores for Learning and Technology

0 = Not in place at this time/not applicable

1 = Feature in place with no data to support

2 = Feature clearly in place but only preliminary or limited data available

3 = Strong empirical evidence that this feature of the program

    is in place and effective

When you have filled in all your scores, add each column and write the total for each at the bottom of the column. You are now ready to compare the two programs on the graph.

Table III: Comparing Technology Programs

Chart 1					Chart 2
Engaged Learning Indicators	Program A		Program B		High Performance Technology Indicators	Program A		Program B
Engaged Learning Indicators	Design	Practice	Design	Practice	High Performance Technology Indicators	Design	Practice	Design	Practice
Vision of Learning					Access
Responsible for learning	_______	_______	_______	_______	Connective	_______	_______	_______	_______
Strategic	_______	_______	_______	_______	Ubiquitious	_______	_______	_______	_______
Energized by learning	_______	_______	_______	_______	Interconnective	_______	_______	_______	_______
Collaborative	_______	_______	_______	_______	Designed for equitable use	_______	_______	_______	_______
Tasks					Operability
Authentic	_______	_______	_______	_______	Interoperable	_______	_______	_______	_______
Challenging	_______	_______	_______	_______	Open architecture	_______	_______	_______	_______
Multidisciplinary	_______	_______	_______	_______	Transparent	_______	_______	_______	_______
Assessment					Organization
Performance-based	_______	_______	_______	_______	Distributed	_______	_______	_______	_______
Generative	_______	_______	_______	© 2011 Ser Professor Universitário. Todos os Direitos Reservados.

Ser Professor Universitário

Menu primário

Buscar