tkt8763-01: Lacey's third experience (fwd)

["Larry S. Anderson -- NCTP" <lsa1@ra.msstate.edu>]

I think you will find Lacey's comments VERRRRY interesting.  Please feel
free to email her your comments, but send a copy of your comments to the
class list.  OK?

Here we go.....

Larry S. Anderson, Ed.D.                              LSA1@Ra.MsState.Edu
Assoc. Prof., Dept. of Technology & Education       Voice: (601) 325-2281
Founder, National Center for Technology Planning      Fax: (601) 325-7599
                    Mississippi State University
Chair, Council for Education Technology              State of Mississippi
         My personal home page URL-- http://www2.msstate.edu/~lsa1
                    NCTP web page -- http://www.nctp.com

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 14:27:43 +0000
From: Mark Benno <benno@tenet.edu>
To: Larry Anderson <lsa1@ra.msstate.edu>
Subject: Lacey's third experience

Please forward this to SIP and ASIP as you see fit. - Thanks, Mark


Subject: Experience #3 
   Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 15:32:28 -0600 
  From:  Lacey_Turberville@baylor.edu  

     Here is my latest experience....

Experience #3

My third meeting with Lifegate on November 23, 1998, went much better than I
had anticipated.  I returned to a committee that was extremely excited about
creating a technology plan.  However, the evening was jaded by the fact that
several of the committee members could not meet that evening due to several
family and personal problems.  Nonetheless, the meeting went as scheduled.

To my amazement, the principal said that the school already had some of the
computer programs that I had demonstrated in our previous meeting, but he and
all of the other members were unaware that the school had such assets.  What I
discovered later made me extremely angry, but I will explain how the rest of
the meeting proceeded before I begin to preach on my soapbox.

The committee began immediately by asking questions that they had developed
concerning the information packets I had given them in our previous  meeting.
Mostly, the committee was worried about the technical language that many of
the plans included.  I simply told them that we are not as concerned about
the language in the document as we are with the content and the direction that
we want our school to go.  Many of the members had developed some thoughts
about what they thought should be included in the plan.   At this point in the
discussion, I felt like we were finally going in the right direction.  The
committee was concerned with their ability to create a clear and defined
mission statement about their hopes and aspirations.  Several of the defining
words they chose to concentrate on included:  implementation, innovation,
active learning, awareness, and conceptualization.  I felt that this was a
very good start to some real thinking about the future.

I provided the committee with several catalogs that included numerous types of
software and hardware components. In speaking with the group, I discovered
that they are relatively lost in the technology world.   There are several
committee members that are familiar with the hardware aspects, but their
knowledge of educational technology is limited.  I also suggested that the
committee have the teachers review the catalogs.  In addition to that I
suggested to the principal that the teachers in the school as well as the
committee should read "Great teaching in the one computer classroom" published
by Tom Snyder Productions.  I thought that this book could provide the
committee with some vision as to how technology can enhance traditional
instruction.  The major concern among all of the members is that the
technology will take away from the traditional teaching time and in some cases
distract the students so much that little learning is accomplished.  I can
understand why they have this fear coming from this school environment.  The
computers have always sat over in a corner and they were always viewed as a
necessary technical tool, rather than a useful tool.

Lastly, the committee began to ask questions about what types of concepts are
we looking at when designing curriculum.  The only way I knew to answer the
question was to discuss with them the four domains of educational technology:
Communication, Video, Mathetics, Pedagogy, and Data.  This idea that
technology can be used in these four ways seemed to clear the minds of several
of the members.  Rather than being concerned with just data and computers, the
members began to see that instructional technology can also include email,
video tapes, and conventional cameras.

The committee has agreed to meet again before the Christmas Holidays.  At this
next meeting, we plan to begin out initial phases of writing a mission
statement.  However, at this particular time, the committee seems to be stuck
in the research phase, which I must say is crucial because of  the lack of
knowledge about educational technology.

Now I must begin to speak about my experience the following day at the school.
I am extremely frustrated on one score.  The technology specialist that is on
the Lifegate campus is a very nice person, but I have discovered that she is
not really willing to help in any manner associated with the technology
planning.  The committee has met twice now, and she has not been present to
either meeting.  Also, I was amazed as I said before that the school had many
of the educational programs that I demonstrated for them, but no one in the
administration nor among the teachers knew that the school had any of these
resources.  As I looked into the closet in room 216, I was amazed.  The
software programs are new, but none of them are being used.  I discovered that
there are at least 5 computers that have Windows 95 and are capable of using
all of the programs in the closet.  I made the mistake of suggesting the the
technologist that the elementary school could really use one of the computers
to share, so that they could begin using some of the software programs that
were in the closet.  My thinking is that if the teachers become familiar with
the equipment and the programs that are available now, the transition to
faster, newer equipment will be easier to adjust to.  However, I was quickly
aware that she did not share in my enthusiam about sharing technology.  She
explain to me that she could not give up one computer to anyone, because her
design class needed every single computer so that every student would be sure
to have access to a computer.  I did not know what to say.  I guess I assume
that people who are involved in the technology world are aware that 1 computer
for every student is no longer the message.  I guess I was wrong.

After speaking with several of the high school students, I discovered that
once again the students viewed the computers as toys and game machines that
are only used if you need to type an english paper or if you are taking
computer design.  After snooping around for several hours, I approached the
principal once again.  I told him that I was concerned about what I had
discovered, and he and I discussed the possibility of moving one of the
computers to the elementary grades for use.

The principal and the other committee members are ready to begin implementing
the resources that they currently have, now that they know they exist.  But I
am afraid that the friction with the campus technologist may become a sore
spot.

Several of you have given me some great advice about web sites to consult and
possible questions to pose to the committee.  Your suggestions and support
have really made this job easier.  It has been a great help to know that I am
going in the right direction.

******* TKT 8763 Seminar in Planning for Instructional Technology  *******
   To subscribe or unsubscribe, e-mail to "majordomo@msstate.edu"
   with the message "subscribe tkt8763-01" or "unsubscribe tkt8763-01".
       Subscribers may post messages to "tkt8763-01@msstate.edu".