FY2008 EETT Overview

From Shifted Learning

Much to our surprise, the request for proposals for FY 2008 EETT "Enhancing Education Through Technology" grant was released by the DPI. What has traditionally been an April/May process now comes a bit early! I had carved out a majority of April to solicit input, write, and revise. Submissions are due March 31, 2008. While this timeframe will hopefully get us a "Is our project accepted?" answer before school gets out, it hampers our ability to effectively schedule meaningful face-to-face collaborative planning.

I'm going to weave my thoughts into a story that starts way up in the clouds and eventually hits a runway.

Contents 1 Big Picture 2 Where Do We Go? 3 On the Ground 4 What's In It For Your... 5 Action Items for iTASC Contacts 6 Questions, Comments, Thoughts, Random Bits

[edit] Big Picture

Each year the DPI and an advisory group meet to revise and craft the RFP for the upcoming grant cycle. There are two types of revisions made, patching holes and aligning initiatives. The DPI takes what they learned from previous implementations and make modifications. Some take the form of rules such as what can and can't be done with grant funds, %'s dedicated to certain tasks, and procedures involving accountability. They also toss in and highlight a few suggestions along the lines of "successful projects will involve teams of teachers, library media specialists, and administrators". These patches are a combination of tying loose ends and stretching the impact of the dollars allocated.

The DPI also makes modifications to the RFP each year to help align with DPI sponsored state initiatives.

• FY2006 saw the introduction of language encouraging building online learning communities and measuring 8th grade technology literacy.
• FY2007 saw the introduction of aligning effort with the Partnership for 21st Century Skills
• FY2008 criteria highly encourage the adoption of two DPI sponsored initiatives, Intel Teach to the Future and Thinkfinity.

[edit] Where Do We Go?

The FY2008 RFP essentially says "Use the money whatever way you want, as long as you..."

1. Implement the Intel Teach to the Future program
2. Implement the Thinkfinity program
3. Align everything with the standards and skills mentioned by the Partnership for 21st Century Skills
4. Include administrators, library media specialists, and teachers as participants
5. Provide the exact same professional development to all participants
6. Build and online learning community

[edit] On the Ground

Image:Runway.jpg

The RFP specifies a content requirement. Thinkfinity is an excellent source of "stuff" that teachers can take, use, and modify for their curriculum.
The RFP specifies a skills requirement. We need to address "21st century skills" of both our teachers and students. This includes both technical skills and learning skills ranging from building a quick slideshow to collaborating digitally on a piece of writing.
I want to extend ourselves another step. We could get by writing a "Here is stuff and how to use it..." grant, but that is weak. We need a pedagogical layer that experiments with questions of "How do we teach online?" and "What works and what doesn't with online teaching and learning?" I've had this conversation with all of your districts over the past two years. Some are or have tried, but have lacked a) technical infrastructure, b) instructional support, and/or c) time.

Content (Stuff) + Skills (Technical and Collaboration) + Pedagogical (How to Teach in an Online Environment)

The basic pitch (which needs much more work) is that we take secondary educators and have them build out the second semester of a course online. The purpose is not to create "new" or "other". We adapt current curriculum to fit a blended face-to-face and online environment.

• We start with a training on Thinkfinity to introduce and familiarize teachers with subject specific content.
• We follow with familiarizing teachers with the technical skills necessary to move online. "How to Use Moodle and Google Apps for Education are a good start.
• Before going live with the online piece we bring in expert online teachers to discuss both technical and pedagogical strategies for teaching and learning online.
• During the second half of the project we provide instructional and technical support. Gather the entire group face-to-face in the spring (once or twice) to debrief, share, and reflect.

The project provides a cadre of lead teachers the technical and pedagogical infrastructure and support to test teaching and learning online. We share what works well, ditch or refine what doesn't work, and take a giant step towards a more formal system of blended online learning in the region.

[edit] What's In It For Your...

Teachers

• A Moodle server for the region to use as a platform for teachers to develop online courses. I've created a mockup of what a generic United States History course could look like. Visit http://www.shiftedlearning.org/moodle and follow the directions to see it from either a teacher or student perspective
• Accounts through Google Apps for Education. This gives teachers a suite of tools including...
  • Email
  • Building Websites
  • Calendaring
  • Word Processing, Spreadsheets, and Presentations
• A one-day Thinkfinity workshop. The Thinkfinity program takes teachers deep into subject specific, online content that can be used in their classroom
• Skills training and support for Moodle and Google Apps for Education
• Pedagogical training on teaching and learning in blended online environments
• Networking days through the spring implementation for teachers to refresh skills, share what works and doesn't, and reflect on the process

Library Media Specialists

• LMC specialists could build an Online Library Resource center or an Information Literacy/Fluency curriculum online
• LMC specialists could pair with grade level or content specific teachers to supplement materials collaboratively online

Students

• Online learning experience

Districts

• A model and step towards implementing online learning

[edit] Action Items for iTASC Contacts

1. I'm scheduling a meeting here at CESA #3 on Friday, March 14th from 1:00 - 4:00 to bat this idea around face-to-face, answer questions, gather feedback, and show a few concrete examples including Thinkfinity, Moodle, and Google Apps for Education. Click here to register for this event.
2. I need a bit of push back. Instructions for editing this document here are linked below. Feel free to ask questions, elaborate, etc. If you prefer email, hit me. I'm desperately seeking online feedback. I'm gathering a bit of face-to-face as I'm out in your schools over these past few weeks, but we need to be firing on multiple cylinders.
3. We'll be working the "grant signature" circuit with your administrators.

[edit] Questions, Comments, Thoughts, Random Bits

Q: Is this taking us in a different direction?
A: In short, yes. I love the student project focus of past initiatives. I strongly believe that developing quality assessments of student digital projects is good. My gut instinct over the past few years, however, is more in line with this line of thought, particularly this quote.

"Which leads to the second question which is how in god’s name can we talk seriously about 21st Century skills for kids if we’re not talking 21st Century skills for educators first? The more I listened, the less I heard in terms of how we make the teaching profession as a whole even capable of teaching these “skills” to kids. Sure, there were mentions of upgrading teacher preparation programs and giving teachers additional time in the school day to collaborate, etc. But the URGENCY was all around the kids. Shouldn’t the URGENCY be all about the teachers right now?"

Q: What's the long range outlook?
A: FY2008 is the frame. FY2009 is the drywall. FY2010 is the completed product. It's a three year exercise in scaling to put CESA #3 schools in the position to teach and learn online.

FY2008
Image:Frame.jpg

FY2009
Image:Drywall.jpg

FY2010
Image:Furnished.jpg

Q: Who is our target audience?
A: A few thoughts.

• Secondary teachers (7-12) are probably the best. I'm looking for an argument on this one though.
• Good teachers are essential, especially in the early phases. Don't default to the best technology users.
• Content area doesn't matter.
• Library Media Specialists are highly encouraged to participate. I see two models for opportunities.
  • LMC Specialist as co-teacher, collaborator, creator with a teacher
  • LMC Specialist developing their own Information Literacy curriculum or moving all of their resources online

Q: What does the "final product" look like?
A: See the US History example that I've sketched out inside Moodle. Obviously there will be more content included. This is a "back of the napkin" mock up.

Q: Will teachers be able to register for credit?
A:

Q: What technical issues will we encounter?
A: Minimum technical requirements: Teachers need access to the consortium's Moodle environment, Google Apps for Education, and Thinkfinity. It's all low level technology requirements. Two hurdles are a) allowing access to Gmail for teachers and b) having the necessary requirements to access Thinkfinity content.

Q: What policy issues need to be addressed regarding online learning and Acceptable Use of the Internet?
A:

Q: Will students have access to this?
A: The goal is to use this with students. It's up to the teachers and districts to decide how far they want to carry the student interaction with the content on the site. It could range from "student as observer" to "student as content creator" within the course, all depending on what the teacher is interested in accomplishing.

Q: How do we assess/evaluate? Is there a way to quantify?
A: See these rubrics for how we can assess teachers pre and post experience. It's not perfect, the rubrics are currently being revised, but it's solid enough. Your thoughts?

Q: Are teachers creating online lesson plans?
A: No. Think "online curriculum map with content".

Q: How does this compare and/or integrate with initiatives such as Link for Learning and Eclipse?
A: Excellent question. Imagine Eclipse and Moodle side by side. It's largely the same stuff being built online. Eclipse is "administrative" facing. It's about curriculum alignment, documentation, addressing standards, etc. Moodle is "instruction" facing. It's the part teachers instruct from, teach with, and students interact with.

Image:Online curriculum containers.jpg