Blog Post 4: Technology Leadership Role of School Librarians

The landscape of learning has changed in recent years.  No longer are students passively listening to or reading for knowledge acquisition.  With the advent of the internet and the advancement of digital media and related technologies, learning has the potential to be engaging and interactive, with students not only receiving information, but also creating knowledge and sharing what they’ve learned with the world.   According to the American Association of School Librarians (2007), students have multiple needs in today’s world.  Access to so much information brings with it the need to learn a framework of questioning that leads to effective learning, as well as ethical behaviors necessary when utilizing information (AASL, 2007).  The skills students need to function as members of society include an understanding of technology and information literacy that crosses multiple forms and platforms (AASL, 2007; ISTE, 2016).  The International Society for Technology in Education (2016) recently released their newest student standards to include strands that focus on digital citizenship, knowledge construction, computational thinking, communication, innovation, and collaboration.  The question for today’s educators should not be whether or not technology should be integrated into the classroom, but rather how to integrate it effectively so as to enable students to succeed.

There are still people who have a hard time envisioning a different type of learning environment, and North America is not the only country struggling with the transition the role of educators and more specifically, school librarians, play in this change (Lo and Chiu, 2015).  Still, there is an undeniable change in the way people interact with reading these days- a radical change (Wine, 2016).  According to Wine (2016), the role of teacher-librarian has evolved from one of simply keeper of the library collection into something much more.  With all the skills students must develop, teacher-librarians should be able to model the skills of collaboration, working with teachers and students alike to learn how to access and utilize information responsibly, both in and out of the library.  The skills of technology extend beyond the devices and into one’s way of thinking.  Students need help learning about the resources available to them, as well as learning how to evaluate the resources and organize the information they learn for later use.  

Technology is available to students whether given access by schools or not.  They will find ways to use the technology regardless of whether we help them or hinder them.  Now, more than ever before, the need for teacher-librarians to facilitate the learning of efficient use of technology is imperative.  Ideally, teachers would be integrating technology into everything they do in the classroom, and while more schools are moving this way, the transition is slow.  This is why the teacher-librarians who have a grasp on the world of technology and everything it encompasses is so important.  Teacher-librarians must lead the way in the navigation of our real and digital worlds, helping the community find a balance between the two.

Resources

American Association of School Librarians. (2007). Standards for the 21st-century
            learner. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/aasl/sites/ala.org.aasl/files/

content/guidelinesandstandards/learningstandards/AASL_Learning_Standards_2
            007.pdf

International Society for Technology in Education. (2016). ISTE standards: ISTE

standards for teachers. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/standards/
            iste-standards/ standards-for-teachers

Lo, P., & Chiu, D. W. (2015). Enhanced and changing roles of school librarians
           under the digital age. New Library World, 116(11/12), 696-710.

Wine, L. l. (2016). School Librarians as Technology Leaders: An Evolution in Practice.
            Journal Of Education For Library & Information Science, 57(2), 207-220.0

Blog Post 3: Technology Implementation Strategies

There are many buzz words in the world of education, among them rigor, common core, and STEM.  As a campus instructional technologist and a future librarian/media specialist, I am particularly aware of the last term.  My district continues to push toward a fully STEM aligned district, boasting specific learning opportunities and tools geared towards these fields from preK all the way through 12^th grade.  While I feel their goals are admirable, I’ve always preferred a more balanced approach towards life and learning, as opposed to jumping on and pushing just one wagon until a bigger and better one comes along.  In addition, I find one area of STEM far less emphasized than others, and it happens to be the one to which I am most responsible for on my campus- the “T” in STEM….technology.

Part of the issue, I suppose, is that technology encompasses so much, and yet many dismiss it as just a device.  More than once, my class has been referred to as the computer class, but that undervalues so much of what I do with my students.  Initially as a word, technology referred to the knowledge of a particular area and the practice of that knowledge.  It dealt more with the thinking aspect and the actual application.  Later, it began to encompass the tools that allowed for more efficient practice, and today, some think it is simply the device, typically electronic in nature.  If something plugs in, that means technology is involved.  In regards to my district’s STEM labs, there are computers in them, so that must mean technology is involved, right?

I would disagree.  Technology comprises not only of the device, but also the creation of things with the device and the creation of new devices itself.  It incorporates the way of thinking and innovation the devices facilitate, as well as the collaboration and communication they require, not to mention the knowledge necessary to best understand and utilize them.  Recently, I came across an article about a district in Wisconsin that had made it a district initiative to change the way they viewed their libraries, technology, and learning in a way that I feel truly embraces technology as a whole.

One thing that impressed me about the district’s decision to transform their traditional libraries into learning commons was that the district created a team of stakeholders to reflect upon the current state of the spaces and the learning taking place in them, as well as to consider what the future needs of students and teachers would be (“Exciting Times,” 2014).  As opposed to saying iPads are the hot thing right now, so let’s buy iPads, the district really looked at all aspects of learning.  Technology was a tool that was considered, and spaces were created and adapted to be more flexible, but this was to accommodate the learner, not necessarily the technology.  The decisions were not made quickly, and everyone was asked to buy in.  The district supported the decisions initiative in words, actions, and finances, even creating a motto that lent itself to global learning.

As the physical spaces of the libraries transformed, so did the digital spaces.  Media specialists shifted gears from focusing not only on print collections, but also on training students to search through databases and the internet (“Exciting Times,” 2014).  Students weren’t the only focus for training, either.  Media specialists became teachers to the teachers, guiding them through platforms they were unfamiliar with (“Exciting Times,” 2014).  The media specialists also took it upon themselves to become Google certified, as their district became a Google Apps for Education district.  Instead of just asking their students and faculty to continue their learning, the media specialists modeled collaboration and continued learning.  They used the skills they learned and passed them onto students and teachers.  The students and teachers, in turn, were able to create amazing digital portfolios and lessons that before would not have been achieved.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of this article, to me, was the fact that the article itself circumscribed to the philosophy of the district to extend learning to all spaces.  In addition to mentioning that teachers and media specialists collaborated together to curate digital spaces for students to learn outside of the learning commons and classroom, the article started with the mention that two videos had been created to accompany the article and better explain the changes the district had undergone (“Exciting Times,” 2014).  The need to instill students with a desire to become independent learners was now being extended to me, the reader of the article.  This simple addition of technology added another layer of connection was added, as I listened to the media specialists document the changes, physically, mentally, and academically that had taken place. 

One of the media specialists mentioned that as she was teaching more technology to her students, her goal wasn’t for them to learn the specific program.  Chances are, the program will change.  However, she wants to develop in her students the recognition of patterns in program so that when they encounter something similar, they are able adapt and figure it out (“Exciting Times,” 2014).  This is one strategy I plan to embrace.  Technology is ever evolving.  This is what makes it so scary for some people.  However, if I can show my students how to find things they are familiar with from one program to another, they will be better able to adapt in any technology situation, regardless of what platform they are using on whatever device.

Another takeaway I have from the Kettle Moraine District is more of a program development piece than the actual working with students, but I think it is extremely important to look at all the components of the space in which we are working and make sure all the pieces are necessary and essential to our acquisition of knowledge.  The flexibility of spaces that so many schools are moving towards allows for easier incorporation of technology within the library or learning commons.  It’s difficult to utilize technology if the equipment isn’t accessible and the students are unaware of the programs.  Evaluating the way things are set up and presented to students is essential.

I might have a more global interpretation of technology than some, but I genuinely feel that these 21^st Century Skills we are insisting our students develop (there’s another buzz word) are the embodiment of technology, itself.  By changing the spaces to facilitate the communication and the collaboration and the student empowerment and the utilization of devices and programs, we are giving them all the pieces of technology they need to survive in this digitally driven world.  The actions of the Kettle Moraine District serve as an inspiration and hopefully a model I can bring to my own district, even if it means starting the shift at my campus level.  Taking a look at the library as a whole is key to technology integration.

References:

Exciting Times. (2014). Teacher Librarian, 41(4), 21-25.

Kettle Moraine School District (2013, November 20). Library media in the 21^st century- Part 1 of 2: Physical spaces and student projects [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REN8hAw1mhA

Kettle Moraine School District (2013, November 27). Library media in the 21^st century- Part 2 of 2: Technology and outreach [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REN8hAw1mhA

Blog Post 2: Handheld Devices

              As the landscape of society’s interaction with technology continues to shift and grow, so too, does the relationship of technology within the world of education.  The reality that today’s students will be interacting with devices in unprecedented ways is juxtaposed by the simultaneous reality that many schools are having a difficult time keeping up with the new technological demands.  The world is transitioning faster than most schools can keep up, bound by financial constraints and limited resources.  One way to combat this issue is to allow students bring their own devices from home, commonly referred to as Bring Your Own Device (or BYOD).  I’ve never been a fan of the acronym, fearing I am going to say another acronym quite close but quite different in meaning to my 5^th and 6^th grade students.  Still, I am intrigued with this concept, and have been looking for ways to try and bring such an initiative to my own campus.

                Recently, I read a study conducted by David Parsons and Janak Adhikari (2016) which follows the implementation of a BYOD initiative at a secondary school in New Zealand from the initial public inquiries of starting such a program to the full implementation 5 years later. The specific paper covered perceptions of three of the main stakeholders in the initiative over the first three years- the teachers, the students, and the parents (Parsons & Adhikari, 2016).  Their study discussed the positive and negative views from all three groups concerning the areas of structure, agency, and cultural practices. 

                According to Parsons & Adhikari, teachers seemed to be most receptive of the initiative, despite some being more resistant to the change than others.  The study noted that, with regards to structure, most teachers were encouraged by the direction classes took toward being more student centered. The agency of students and teachers, as perceived by the teachers, improved with time, though it required much more guidance to train students in technical programs than many teachers anticipated (Parsons & Adhikari, 2016).  The researchers observed cultural practices shifted under implementation, and teachers found they were able to provide more immediate feedback to their students, even if this resulted in less face to face interactions.  There were concerns that the traditional curriculum and the state standardized testing was not necessarily in line with such formatting, and Parsons & Adhikari noted there were also concerns expressed about some students having devices while others did not.  The researchers determined that overall, teachers’ perception of the initiative was a positive one.  Despite concerns, most teachers remained optimistic that the initiative would continue to be refined and improved with positive outcomes (Parsons & Adhikari, 2016). 

                According to the research, students had a surprisingly balanced perception of the initiative, shedding light on the mature stance many teenagers take toward the responsibilities that living in a digital world demands, even if they might not yet be fully equipped to deal with such responsibilities.  While most students were eager about the initiative, they were not unaware of its shortcomings.  Structurally, students were concerned about the mix of devices (some students had iPads, while others had tablets, etc.) (Parsons & Adhikari, 2016).   The researchers pointed out that this sometimes produced issues when a program worked on one device, but not another.  Students also mentioned the possibility for off task behavior, both by themselves and others in the class (Parsons & Adhikari, 2016).    Another student concern, according to the researchers. was their desire to still create things outside a digital space- just because students had access to a device all the time did not mean they wanted to use it all the time.  At the same time, students felt their handwriting skills were faltering due to the increased use of technology (Parsons & Adhikari, 2016).  One of the biggest positives for the students was their access to resources and their ability to communicate, including communication with classmates when they were sick or absent (Parsons & Adhikari, 2016).  For an age group motivated by peer interaction, this was a huge advantage.   Another positive uncovered in the study was a feeling students had of being more productive.  Overall, the researchers found that the students felt the initiative was beneficial; however, they felt it was in need of some adaptations.

                Perhaps the least receptive to the initiative, according to Parsons and Adhikari’s findings, were the parents.  Structurally speaking, parents realized that there was a need for their children to be well versed in technology as it is paramount to today’s society (Parsons & Adhikari, 2016).  Parents did note some positives with the initiative, not the least of which being the increased motivation many of the students had, even those with learning disabilities (Parsons & Adhikari, 2016).  The researchers observed that parents were encouraged by the students’ growth and independence as learners, as well as their increased computer literacy and self-management.  A common concern throughout the study, though, was the decrease in parent engagement, as parents were not always aware of how to function within the programs and students were not always open to sharing.  Another concern was the decrease in traditional learning and retention of knowledge, as students always had access to information at their fingertips (Parsons & Adhikari, 2016).  Parents were concerned that their students were always connected to devices, and they also perceived a decrease in verbal communication and less interest in outdoor activities (Parsons & Adhikari, 2016). One thing noted by the researchers is that the students in the study were 13-14 years old, and such a time is already full of transition for parents and children.  Parents seemed to struggle with the knowledge that their children needed a different kind of education than the one they received and the desire for their children to have the same kind of education that they received (Parsons & Adhikari, 2016). 

As someone who is determined to start a BYOD initiative at my own school, these insights were invaluable to me.  Considering the viewpoints of all stakeholders, as well as researching successful implementations of others is a great starting point.  There were some things that Parsons and Adhikari noted in their study that might not have even entered my mind- for instance, the feelings a parent might have that they are less connected to their student because of using devices more, or the concern a student might have of losing their handwriting ability.  I find myself ready to learn from their successes and shortcomings as I look to introduce this to my own school community.  I also feel that initiating such a program in the library might be a good way to introduce it to teachers and students.

Ideally, a BYOD initiative would encompass the whole school.  However, strong utilization of such a program within the library would not only strengthen the abilities of students within the library walls, but it would also transfer to their other classrooms and areas of life.  One of the main goals of a good librarian should be to create self-directed learners, and our students need to know how to direct themselves utilizing real world tools.  Students who can effectively use their own devices for research or for reading or for collaboration, being able to determine appropriate uses of programs and how to create and communicate the things they are thinking- these are the kinds of learners we should be striving to produce.  While some teachers might be reluctant to embrace such a program in their own classrooms, seeing what students are capable of doing when using their own devices within the library will hopefully help to assuage such fears.  There is the added benefit of all students coming to the library (at least at my school campus), so all students would have an opportunity to learn in such an environment, despite any hesitation their classroom teachers might have. Using the library as a learning laboratory, in which not only students but also teachers are learning and growing, is key to a successful school.  Making the space a place where students and teachers and teacher librarians and administration can learn and fail and reevaluate and learn and grow is something I aspire to. 

The school in New Zealand did not get everything perfect when they started their BYOD implementation.  However, they didn’t give up when things didn’t go as planned, either.  Through feedback, reflection, and refinement, they continue to improve the program for the entire community. I am inspired by their actions, and hope to someday soon follow in their footsteps.

References:

Parsons, D., & Adhikari, J. (2016). Bring your own device to secondary school: The perceptions of teachers, students and parents. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 14(1), 66-79. Retrieved from http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2200/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=58c31a57-668d-4e72-83cd-57a3a7dc54bb%40sessionmgr105&vid=3&hid=128

Blog Post 1: Technology Strengths and Weakness

I am not so much a digital native as I am a digital immigrant.  I can remember going to a computer class every week where we learned to program a Logo turtle or ventured on the treacherous journey across the country in Oregon Trail.  The graphics were crude.  Aside from the bright neon green, our screens did not have color, much less the web and 2.0 capabilities. 

Within my lifetime, our world has simultaneously become so small and yet so vast with the advent of the internet and its use in the lives of everyday civilians.  As a teacher of technology, I still hear people refer to my class as the “computer class,” but technology envelops so much more than just computers, and the current standards for teachers from the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) reflect this reality.  Spanning from the facilitation of student learning experiences that utilize technology and creative thinking to the necessity for teachers to collaborate with other professionals to promote personal learning and growth, the range of skills necessary to be a successful teacher in today’s digital landscape is as broad and complex as the digital world they encompass (ISTE, 2016).  

As I reflect upon my own teaching practices, there are areas of the ISTE standards in which I excel and others that require more effort.  By virtue of my taking the plunge and heading back to school to pursue new learning and options, I would say that I am achieving standard 5, which relates to growing through pursuing new knowledge in a variety of learning communities and evaluating and reflecting on the research to ultimately support student learning and growth (ISTE, 2016).  I often collaborate with other teachers in online platforms (Twitter, Webchats, etc.), and I enjoy going to trainings and edcamps when possible.  The more diverse my background knowledge is, as well as the knowledge of the people I connect with, the better abled I am to support my own students.  There is also a comfort in knowing that other educators have similar concerns and difficulties.  Sometimes, just being able to talk to someone else who has experienced what I’ve experienced and come out on the other side elevates my confidence in knowing that I can get through the struggles of learning.  Sometimes, though, I don’t have to connect to someone across the world.  Connecting to people just across the hall can be just as rewarding.

Another standard in which I feel I excel is the first standard, dealing with providing authentic opportunities for students to create and innovate (ISTE, 2016).  My classroom often centers around projects that allow students a wide range of options, rarely ending in yes or no, right or wrong answer.  There are times when we start out creating one thing, but as a class, discover something else and venture into new territories together.  It is not uncommon for me to be learning a program right alongside my students.  That being said, I think this strength is the root of my biggest weakness, as well.

Standard 2 deals with the assessment and evaluation of student work (ISTE, 2016).  As an individual, I am creative and not so structured.  An area I need to work on is providing more concrete feedback and assessment to my students so that they are able to see where they are excelling and where they need to work.  I teach Technology Applications, and my class is considered an elective.  For many of my students, this is the only opportunity they have to get away from STAAR related instruction.  I find myself trying to give them an outlet, and while I have high expectations, I think I do them a disservice by not having set rubrics in place.  Technology has so many directions to go in, and I think I sometimes get lost in it all, myself.  The newest version of the technology TEKS are more organic in fashion, as well, and as I have no curriculum or scope and sequence, I find it difficult to narrow in on what my goal, and ultimately my students’ goal, should be.

       My next step for myself to improve my teaching and enhance my students’ learning is to sit down and map out my own scope and sequence.  I need to have a basic structure in place.  I know it might change and evolve throughout the year, but I need to have a goal for my students and myself.  With technology ever changing, I wish I had more knowledge on how to keep up with it all.  I want to swim…or at least float, instead of feeling like I’m drowning.  I’ve been teaching in the area of technology for three years, and I feel like I’ve grown so much.  Still, the more I teach, the more I see that my students are missing out on.  Unfortunately, there aren’t many classes where they are being taught how to utilize technology efficiently.  They need to know how to use the devices, how to navigate the information, how to represent themselves, how to create, and how to communicate.  If there were one thing that would help me most, it would be information on how to balance it all and give my students the most I can.  These digital natives need to learn how to survive in the digital world they’ve inherited.

References

International Society for Technology in Education. (2016). ISTE standards: ISTE

standards for teachers. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/standards/iste-standards/standards-for-teachers