In my last post, Piece of the Pie, I suggested adding a teacher to the elementary program in order to better utilize technology as a tool for learning. I have had a number of requests to expand on that idea. I have never been an elementary teacher, so I am not sure I have the clearest picture of how to make the right changes, but I can frame the problem and offer a suggestion which can be changed accordingly.
When we talk about reform in education there are no easy solutions. There are layers of problems intertwined with more layers of problems. Often a solution in one area may ripple out and cause problems in other areas. This is a primary reason many people would like to blow up the system and start from scratch.
In order to appreciate my suggestion for change, I think I might best start by addressing the problems that I am attempting to address. It is not a single issue but, again, a layer of intertwined conditions preventing or at least obstructing our ability to create the best environment for learning for our kids.
The first part of this problem involves teachers and Technology. For a myriad of reasons the advance of technology development is out pacing our teachers’ ability, or understanding as to how to use it effectively as a tool for learning. We need not explore the reasons for this gap, but we must acknowledge that for a huge number of our teachers this gap exists.
The second part of this problem is the need for our kids to understand the advantages as well, as the pitfalls, in the use of technology in order to prepare for a technology driven society. Yes, there are those who feel that people should reject the fact that we are becoming a technology driven society and they have that right. They don’t have the right to make that decision for others however. In order to decide about any choice, one needs to understand the choices and their implications. That being said, technology does have a place in education as a tool for learning.
Of course I am making a recommendation to add teachers in an era of cutbacks and layoffs, so this entire idea may be a non-starter. I would like to see an elementary teaching position created for the purpose of integrating technology into the elementary classroom. This is not an IT position, but a classroom teacher position. This would be a revolving teacher, one who schedules visits to many classrooms as a support person. This Tech teacher would enter classes one or two times a week for a period of time to work with kids using technology as tools for learning in support of the curriculum that is being taught by the primary teacher.
This Tech teacher will be responsible for planning with the primary teacher in order to integrate technology in a meaningful way to the class environment. This can be done with applications or websites. Skyping in experts and authors can be an activity for this Tech teacher. The introduction of Social Media and responsible digital citizenship could be added to the list. Tech tools for the creation of content are another area the Tech teacher could explore. She/he would also be the Go-to person for Parent Workshops for technology in the classroom sessions. A teacher offering to be a source parent support.
It would need to be mandated with required a schedule for this Tech teacher to enter these classrooms on a regular basis. There is an argument for this to be applicable at every grade level, but at the very least it should happen from fourth grade, and continue through sixth.
The addition of this Tech teacher is the best form of Professional Development in technology for the entire staff. Teachers, who are not now using tech for whatever reason, will see its benefits in their own class without needing to do it themselves. They will also have a say in how to incorporate it in what they want to do. This increases their understanding and guides them through its use. It will also increase collaboration with all teachers since the Tech Teacher revolving from class to class will be making connections with teachers with similar interests, goals and lessons.
Every Tech teacher should have a COW. That would be a cart with a class set of laptops, Computers On Wheels. Being able to have a person responsible to guide the students to the best sites and the best free web 2.0 tools will be a great help to the primary teacher. It also allows the primary teacher to explore the benefits of student, and class blogging. That opens the door to responsible digital citizenship, critical thinking, reflective thinking, creation of content, collaboration, communication, and enhancement of self-esteem.
Using the push-in teacher model enables the primary teacher the time and incentive to learn and grow with the students. Hopefully, the more they learn and share, the more they will venture forward. Both teachers and students may begin to develop connections with others who have similar likes and interests, as well as people who are experts in various areas. We know this a Personal Learning Network. Imagine what could happen if kids learned to responsibly create their own PLN’s as elementary students and develop and grow that PLN throughout their academic career.
There are many pluses in this plan, at least as I have laid it out, but there are huge obstacles to make it happen. When it comes to education reform, many wants reform, but few want change. Out of the Box innovation does not come from in the box regulation. I proposed an idea that addresses many issues and may offer solutions to persisting problems in Professional Development and use of Technology. I am only a Shaker, I am not a Mover. If we are to ever get Education Reform, we need educators, not only discussing reform, but making changes as well. The alternative will be business mandated labor reforms couched in the cloak of Education Reform for the sake of privatization and profit.
I now need to post a similar idea for the secondary Level.
Comments and ratings welcomed
Sounds ideal to me, but as you mentioned, in this time of dwindling budgets, this is the first position to go (or to never be initiated in the first place.) Through the Classrooms for the Future grant in our state, “coaches” were instituted in high schools for this purpose, but the elementary levels went neglected. I agree this additional personnel would be hugely beneficial. I was hiring someone to fulfill this position, I would desire that the person was an excellent communicator and had the collaborative skills and personality necessary to make planning purposeful. The tech skills, to me, are secondary. That is very much a “people-person” position, not a tech position.
I definitely like your thinking, although ultimately I’d like to see more administrators and teachers step up and take a leadership role in this area, to create environments where teachers team together to integrate technology into daily learning activities, and also for schools to utilize teams of students to lead the way with integrating and supporting initiatives!
This is a great post. We have such positions in our district. I am a technology integration specialist for a K-8 system. I try to do much of what you describe above. I need the support of administration to make it mandated that I can work with every class, with the teacher present. There’s a gap amongst our teachers and teachers everywhere. Some fight technology- thus making the decision for others that you describe in your post. Some embrace it, but don’t know where to begin. Others still- dive in and then get overwhelmed. I’d love to have conversations with others in this role in elementary schools. Great post- I’ll be sharing it with others!
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Tom Whitby, Tom Whitby, Shelly S Terrell, Henrick Oprea, Elizabeth Wellburn and others. Elizabeth Wellburn said: RT @tomwhitby: I urge Admins & Elementary Teachers to comment on my latest Post: An Elementary Idea. http://bit.ly/f27np3 #Edchat […]
Good thoughts, if implemented systemically in a district. I work in a district that has had an ‘Instructional Technology Specialist’ at every campus (30+ campuses) for over a decade. The on-demand, one-on-one instruction that is possible (like you describe) is powerful. Tough times (and poor state planning) are dwindling our resources in TX, though, despite our district being in good shape. You can guess where the cuts are…
This position, one that I have had at a campus and district level, is wonderful – but… it must keep instruction at the forefront. It is easy to get wrapped up on system support and not building instruction with teachers or in classrooms. Keep the goals in line with what you describe (and with what the campus administration supports) and you end up with a powerful, site-based change agent.
I am glad you are discussing this topic. I have the job you described above. I love my job, but it is being cut and my district will no longer support this program. I am called a TIS, Technology Integration Specialist. It is my job to help the teachers learn how to integrate technology in their classrooms. It has been my experience that many teachers want to learn how to use technology in their classrooms and with their students. They either don’t know or understand how or the stuff doesn’t work correctly. Getting teachers to effectively use technology requires you to not only teacher them, but to also build a trusting relationship that you are their to help them be better and more successful teachers. Sometimes that means they need more than 1 year with a TIS. I hope the EdTech community and those who are looking at ed reform will look closely at the value of a TIS. If effective PD is a key to teacher success then we are in great need of TIS’.
I think the person you are looking for already works in the schools–the Library Media Specialist. If given a support staff and teachers willing to collaborate, they would be able to get out of the stacks and into the classroom.
Many of the skills required of these two positions are similar, but the position I describe will require a full time dedication to research,planning and teaching, and it must not be an add on to a Library media specialist’s duties.
I do like the general concept, and think it’s worth pursuing. Besides the comments above, my biggest hesitation about this model, though, is the likelihood that many “tech-phobic” (for lack of a better term) teachers will see this as the “computer special” (like art, music, and phys ed) and take the one hour a week as an extra planning period while the “computer teacher” does a lesson with the class.
I think modeling lessons could be a powerful part of this role, but it shouldn’t be the primary function. What if instead of being scheduled one hour a week in the teacher’s classroom, the tech specialist’s schedule was built around the teacher’s prep periods? Each week, one of the classroom teacher’s planning periods would be to collaborate with the tech teacher to co-plan units, talk about integration ideas, sort out problems, etc..
I think the modeling part is essential for change. That is a missing element from what we have as PD now. It is the safety net or hand-holding stage that affords the comfort many teachers will need to get up that mountain.
[…] via An Elementary Idea. « My Island View. […]
I LOVE this idea. As an Elementary Technology Specialist AND the Technology coach for my district, I completely see the need for this. It is difficult to accomplish much while doing both of these jobs. However, since the beginning of the year I’ve since an increase in the use of technology in the classroom, especially in the rooms where I’ve worked on some coaching. Unfortunately, I think for this idea to TRULY work, each building should have its own coach. The coaching needs to much more consistent for it to work.
It is a great Idea. and in the Netherlands every school for Primary Education has one or more teachers with extra knowledge of technology, extra knowledge of coaching his colleagues. And time to teach and coach the colleagues.
The progress is slow, but it works.
One of the main causes of the slow progress is teachers. Teachers choose their jobs for different reasons. One of the main reasons is they want to avoid technical courses. Most teachers like language and reading and dislike technology.
Mentioning the pitfalls of technology is so typical for teachers. We live in a technology but most teachers do not like that.
The plan for extra technology in schools is great. Our government wants more students choosing technology courses, that is why money is available for these technology teachers.
Tom, we’re doing this now at a high school.there are 3 instructional leaders who have content and process expertise and work directly with teachers and students. They are expert teachers, not technicians. I hope to feature work at the NJTeachMeet unconfernece that was generated through a collaboration of Eng teacher, students, and instructional leader. A lot can change quickly. 18 months ago the high school’s technology was sorely antiquated: spotty Intenert service via hardwired desktops. Today the building is wireless, COWS are in play, policy allows for anyone to bring and use any Internet ready device, 1 to 1 iPad project just started and we are looking at expanding it to all 2500 kids in middle and high school, use of moodle and web assign, and so on. Innovation is happening at the classroom level.
My district had this person, but the position was cut for this year due to budget. She’s back in the classroom.
I really think the key here is not necessarily a dedicated tech teacher, but two other things: a district or site-level mandate that tech must be integrated, and several days of teacher training on exactly how to do that.
I worked in a 1-1 laptop classroom. I was resistant to the hours of training that were required of me at first, but now realize that the training and being forced to use the tech were the key. If I’d had a choice, it never would have happened. Now I can’t imagine teaching without heavy integration of technology.
Can you imagine teachers expecting to be effective without teaching children how to use dictionaries, hold a pencil, or use a piece of paper? Tech is now just as important as these things and should be as integral in the classroom.
I should add that each site had a “mentor teacher” who had been given extra “train the trainer” development. There was extra-duty extra-pay. I think that’s more effective than a roving teacher.
Just a side note–many of us who were given two years of tech training for the 1-1 laptops had been teaching for 5 years or less. All laid off. Many of the others were moved to grade levels without 1-1, leaving untrained teachers in their places. Tech is now often sitting unused.
I love this idea (although I think the budget will be the barrier). Often times teachers are reluctant to try the technology because they are nervous or are unsure of what do do or what resources to use. Having someone nearby advising, encouraging might be all that is need to prompt that individual to begin using technology on a regular basis.
I would love to do this…sign me up!
Currently, I am enrolled in a graduate program where I am learning to teach with technology. Prior to this program one of my obstacles in integrating technology was that I didn’t know what was out there or how I would use it in the classroom. I suppose I was ‘techno-fobic”. Truly, I stumbled into the course – I had little interest in technology before this. Part of my first term was spent learning about what was out there, which was very valuable and ‘hooked’ me into wanting to know more about how to effectively integrate the technology I was learning about. I think the type of position you describe would be an especially great way of introducing technology into the classrooms of teachers who don’t know where to begin.
A more realistic approach given budget considerations is to give small stipends to high tech teachers and expect them to help teachers will less skill. In my district each school has two such teachers and this seems to be working rather well. Teachers help each other with technology and everything else anyway.
That may be cheaper, but not necessarily better. With your model it is still voluntary on the part of teacher’s request for the help. If an additional teacher must enter a class each week with technology methods to supplement and support the primary teacher, there is no choice. That forced exposure may be the difference in enabling a hesitant or resistant teacher through exposure to these methods.
Hi Tom,
I would love the job you describe because integrating technology is my passion. However, in the reality of budget cuts it is not going to happen in my district. The number of TIS (technology integration specialists) has already been cut and I’m afraid even more cuts are in store.
How about some merit pay being given to those of us who go out on our own to learn how to integrate technology? I do PD on my own each week by attending Classroom 2.0 Live webinars, reading blog posts, interacting with my PLN on Twitter, Skyping with people I can learn from etc. I believe as an educator it is my duty to learn how to integrate technology, and if it isn’t spoon-fed to me then I seek it on my own. I have spent countless hours since 2004 (the first year I attended NECC) learning about technology. I am very committed to being a life-long learner.
Really, look at how you embarked on this journey, Tom. How much did you learn from PD in your district? You took the bull by the horns and built a PLN that could help you learn the lessons you needed. I think each and every teacher should be required to do a certain number of hours of PD on their own. Don’t most other professionals do this? If we want to be treated like professional, then we should start acting as such.
Your post mirrors a similar discussion I’ve had with a colleague over the development of a this position in our board. Like your first commenter said, that person needs to have “people skills”. Some teachers are reluctant to bring technology into the classroom, but will be driven to do so by their admin. The person taking on the position of Tech coach will need to be sensitive and respectful of this attitude. They will need to “sell” the teacher on the benefits.
Secondly, I strongly disagree that this position should be “prep coverage”. The teacher needs to be in the classroom with the Tech coach in order to learn and independently move forward. The Tech coach should be just that, a coach that helps scaffold the practice of using technology to engage students in learning the concepts of the lesson.
This idea is great — please someone like this to my kids and my classroom!
Hi Tom, You have basically described my job. When the last “computer teacher”(K-5) left our school, I was approached to apply for the position because I frequently used tech tools in my 2nd grade class. My school realized a pull out computer class was not what they wanted anymore but they weren’t sure what direction to take. I wrote a 5 year plan/ job description to move from computer teacher to Tech integrator. They liked the plan and gave me the job.
I should note, that like @plnaugle, I did all my PD either on my own or went to workshops I found. I find it amusing that I am seen as an expert when I don’t have one credit of formal education related to tech. Some of us are just learners, we pursue the company of other passionate educators. We connect, collaborate and learn together.
I’m in year 3 of my plan and I teach 2-3 classes a day in my lab and spend the rest of the time pushing into the classrooms or modeling for the teachers in my lab. By year 5, I will no longer teach any classes on my own, but plan interdisciplinary units which I will help facilitate using tech tools.
The issue that most of the classroom teachers have with my position moving out of the lab is that it is very difficult to teach with the laptop carts in classrooms below grade 3. It simply takes too much time to set up each laptop. The iPad cart is easier but the management piece still needs to be addressed.
I’m thinking I may need to keep using the lab for K-3 students. I’m on the fence about the argument that I should be the one teaching the basics (log-in, network space, basic word processing,…). I understand and do teach those skills in context, but for the classroom teachers just getting everyone logged in and ready to start can take up to 15 minutes of precious learning time.
Either way, in the lab or in the classroom, best practice depends on collaboration. The classroom teachers should be learning along with the kids when and if it is necessary. When I Skype to Uganda with my 3rd grade students, their teachers ought to know how and why this is happening!
What are your thoughts about K-3 going to a computer lab for basic instruction? Should any keyboarding lessons be taught? By whom?
Our school continues to struggle with the format of technology integration. We still have teachers who view technology as an instructional pull-out program: students go to a lab to learn to keyboard and use various computer programs (word processor, spreadsheet, search engines, etc.).
The first step in changing this model was to dictate that a certain portion of planning time would be dedicated to meeting with the technology teacher, now technology integration specialist. In a time when planning time was in short supply and the requirements for data reporting and implementation of new curricula are increased, this became an additional stress as teachers tried to either explain what tech they wanted integrated or gave existing plans to the TIS and told him/her to figure it out. Again, this tended to support the pull-out, do a lesson in the lab, model and generated a lot of push-back from teachers.
An added difficulty has been that our technology teachers have historically had little classroom curriculum experience. If I ask for assistance in adding interactive technology to my unit on fractions, it is essential that the person helping me understands what fraction concepts are associated with my grade level appropriate to the developmental level of my students.
I believe we are moving in the right direction. The hope is that our TIS will embed himself in classrooms and look for ways to support the curriculum using technology alongside the classroom teacher, rather like a co-teaching position but within a number of classes. With someone conversant with technology, the curriculum, and student learning, this can happen fluidly. We are doing a mini-trial later this month when the school receives a class set of iPads to borrow for an extended time. Next year, we hope to extend this model so that the specialist becomes a more integrated member of the classroom and grade-level teams.
I should mention that our school has an unfair advantage over all others – our Technology Integration Specialist is #edcamp co-founder Dan Callahan (Twitter: @dancallahan)!