Reflection+5362+Information+System+Management

Home Back to Internship Course page Back to Course Reflections

Reflection – EDLD 5362 Information Systems Management
 The Information Systems Management course contained a variety of learning experiences. Until taking this course I had not seriously thought about the differences in the national, state and district technology plans. I also had the opportunity to compare various networks and explore resources I had been unaware of previously. Locating teacher network resources is a valuable tool for any teacher, especially a technology facilitator. The variety of information in this course on various technologies and infrastructure features forced me to think critically about the money spent by our district and the effectiveness of each of those dollars. “Too often school districts invest in technologies because of their high-tech, 21st century appeal without fully considering their impact on student learning and long-term total cost of ownership.” (Moore, 2006).

 The two embedded assignments of analyzing district technology and evaluating the district’s student information system generated an understanding of the magnitude of a district technology leader’s job in making sure the infrastructure is present where and when it is needed and providing training for the staff as well as giving me an understanding of the costs involved in the behind the scenes running of a school district. These assignments aligned with ISTE TF standards I, V, VI, and VII (Williamson & Redish, 2009). For Standard I, demonstrating understanding of technology operations, I did learn how the new SIS works and what was involved in the purchase. Standard V is about developing products to enhance productivity. The PowerPoint I developed comparing Diigo for Educators and Promethean Planet is something that I can share with other faculty members to help them be more productive in using their ActivBoards. Standard VI deals with understanding the legal, ethical and human issues regarding technology use in schools. The discussion of the national, state and local technology plans confirms my understanding of those issues and the needs of our district as it moves forward. By critically reflecting on the shortfalls in the program, I was able to see some of the impact of some of the choices the district has made on the human side. Standard VII deals with developing infrastructure, plans and budgets. As part of my work with my campus principal, I was able to get bids for the addition of ports to one of our computer labs and see first-hand how the process is accomplished in our district. I was also able to see the effect and costs associated with implementing a new SIS.

By reviewing the national and state technology plans and comparing them with the district plan, I was able not only to learn what was included in those plans, but critically compare the elements contained in each. I was a bit surprised to discover the different approaches used in the three plans, in particular, the two prong approach used by Spring Branch Independent School District that did not seem particularly compatible with the national or state plans. According to the National Technology Plan, “A transformed American education system would offer fully accessible online tools, content, collaborative spaces, and data, accessible from the home and community as well as in physical school buildings.” (US Department of Education, 2010). That contrasts with my local school district vision,“The Spring Branch Independent School District Technology Plan supports the district vision for a learning environment that uses technology seamlessly with instruction.” (Spring Branch ISD, 2008). I had believed that my district was one of the districts on the forefront of technology integration, but after reading the three documents and comparing them, it appears that our district plan is basically a set of loosely related objectives to be developed over a period of years. There does not appear to be an overriding structure to the plan to move the district in a specific direction. This was surprising and a bit disappointing as it appeared many of the goals were strictly for replacing outdated technologies and there was little in the way of student or teacher access and improvement beyond getting wireless routers into all of the campuses.

The interviews I conducted with my principal and the district technology staff member in charge of our student information system (SIS) were enlightening. The principal clarified how decisions are made on a campus basis for technology funds to be spent. The district staff member was able to provide me very good information about the new student information system that the district purchased this year. We discussed the training needs for the new system as well as its cost and capabilities. This made me more aware of some of the processes in place. It also made me appreciate how far in advance these items must be researched and purchased in order to have an effective switch over from an old system to a new one.

 I learned that I can understand information much better if I have time to review it and generate follow up questions. Fortunately, both of the people I interviewed were happy to answer additional questions. I am also a visual learner and being able to see the answers written down, or review documents and illustrations helped me in understanding the capacity of the new SIS. I wrote down my questions and in one case used a tape recorder to transcribe responses and in the other case was able to get email responses to a number of questions and that allowed me to document my impressions and understandings. In this case I was relieved that I had looked ahead to see the assignments for the course as it allowed me ample time to contact the district staff member and get the answers to the questions I had about our new district system. This made the completion of that particular assignment much simpler. The comparison PowerPoint assignment gave me an opportunity to translate the information I was trying to internalize into something easier to understand and while doing that, I realized I understood the similarities and differences in the national, state, and local technology plans.

In this particular course most of the input I received from fellow students was through the discussion board. On several occasions, the information I found there did clarify ideas on some of the learning systems we compared in the early assignment. I learned that if I approach new information carefully I am able to dissect it and find the advantages and disadvantages to it. I believe that will be an advantage as I move forward in becoming a technology facilitator on my campus. I will need to be able to see the advantages and disadvantages to different technologies in order to help teachers select the most appropriate tool for their learning objective. By building relationships with other students in these courses, I have developed a network of people I can count on for advice and ideas that will be of assistance to me in the future.

 References

Moore, R. (2006, August). The five best accelerators in school. //School Administrator, 63.//7, p. 8.

Spring Branch Independent School District. (2008). //Spring Branch Independent School District//  //technology plan 2008-2011//.

U.S. Department of Education. (2010), //Transforming American education// // learning powered by // // technology. //<span style="font-family: 'Bookman Old Style','serif'; font-size: 16px;"> (Executive Summary). Office of Educational Technology

<span style="font-family: 'Bookman Old Style','serif'; font-size: 16px;">Williamson, J. & Redish, T. (2009) //ISTE’s Technology facilitation and leadership standards.// <span style="font-family: 'Bookman Old Style','serif'; font-size: 16px;"> International Society for Technology in Education. Eugene: OR.