Tech-Minute_Classroom_Walk-Through

=** Draft: Classroom Walk-Through **= In //The Three-Minute Classroom Walk-Through//, Carolyn Downey advocates having principals, who are the campus instructional leaders, create a familiar, non-threatening presence through regular classroom visits. While trying to establish a presence in as many classrooms as possible during the 1960’s, she discovered the power that frequent, short, and focused classroom visits can have for gaining an in-depth and continuous understanding of the instructional environment each teacher creates throughout the school year.

Along with encouraging administrators to include technology awareness in each of the five steps of the Walk-Through process, a purpose of this addendum is to provide common understandings and vocabulary when determining what kind of impact the use (or lack of use) of technology is making on the campus learning environment. Although technology is a powerful tool that enriches and facilitates learning, its ineffective use has the potential to waste valuable instructional time and shift the focus away from the desired content and learning experience.

While facilitating effective technology integration with teachers of varying levels of comfort and experience with using technology, it has been helpful to identify three categories in which technology uses can be placed.
 * Literacy: The instructional focus is learning the technology and how to use it.
 * Adapting: An existing learning experience or student product is altered slightly so that it involves the use of technology. Students could achieve similar learning whether or not technology had been included.
 * Transforming: A learning experience was created that could not have taken place easily, or at such a high level, if the technology had not been available.

Although the transforming level is the goal of technology integration, each level has its place within a best practices classroom. Students cannot use a tool at a higher level until they first learn how to use it. Adapting an existing lesson to integrate technology is necessary for some teachers to establish a skill and comfort level from which they can grow.

The use of technology should be seen throughout the learning process and not just in the final student-created product. If the use of technology is not observed during the brief observation in the classroom, Ms. Downey’s suggestion to “walk the walls” is an excellent way to look for student products, teaching resources, and other evidence of a technology-rich learning environment.

Use the desirable ** J ** and “less than desirable” ** L ** extremes in the tables below to help determine if the technology observed during a walk-through added value and was worth using class time,

**Technology Environment** The technology shows evidence of damage and/or inappropriate use. ||
 * = **J** ||= **L** ||
 * Technology is used as a presentation tool to deliver instruction in a way that holds student interest, stimulates higher-level thinking, and facilitates content retention. || Technology is not used or is used as little more than another way to display teacher created notes. (i.e. used in a similar way as an overhead projector or chalkboard) ||
 * Technology is utilized as an integral part of the learning process and the classroom is arranged in a way so that all students in the classroom can have equal time and easy access to technology. || Technology is mainly available as a “reward” for students who have completed other work. ||
 * Classroom rules and routines for the appropriate use of the technology have been clearly communicated and are being enforced. || There is no evidence that rules and routines have been established.


 * Students have been instructed on how to evaluate online information for accuracy and authenticity. || No effort has been made to prevent students from believing everything they find on the Internet and accepting that information at face value no matter what the source. ||
 * Copyright and the district’s Acceptable Use Policy for the appropriate uses of the Internet have been clearly communicated and are being followed. || Students visit inappropriate sites, plagiarize, use information and material found on the Internet without permission, and do not document sources. ||


 * Instructional Delivery **


 * **J** || **L** ||
 * Technology use directly supports students’ mastery of TEKS/SE’s. ||  || Technology use in the classroom has little or no correlation to any appropriate TEKS/SE’s. ||
 * Technology is used to plan classroom instruction and locate professional resources in ways that enrich and extend classroom activities. ||  || If technology is used, it goes little beyond textbook driven instruction. ||


 * Technology is used to differentiate instruction to meet the needs of individual students. ||  || When technology projects are assigned, all students do similar activities and create identical final projects. ||

Students mainly use the technology for “drill and practice” activities. Technology is seen as a “reward” for use when students have completed other work. No technology was used to help students capture, record, and analyze data. ||
 * The technology supports the creation of authentic products in an inquiry-based and student-centered learning environment. || Technology had little or no part in creating an authentic learning environment.

Technology is used to help students research, brainstorm, organize, and communicate their ideas. Technology facilitates communication, collaboration, and sharing within and beyond the classroom ||  || The role technology played in facilitating cooperative learning was limited or none. Sharing and/or publishing of student products extend little beyond what could have been done with “pencil and paper.” ||
 * Students use technology to have access to current and timely authoritative resources.


 * Data Collection and Assessment **


 * **J** || **L** ||
 * Technology is consistently and regularly used to track student performance, analyze data, and provide feedback to students. ||  || Little or no technology is used as a productivity tool to establish and assess instructional goals. ||

Documents and other artifacts found in the student electronic portfolio show little or no correlation to the appropriate TEKS/SE’s. ||
 * Students use technology to maintain an electronic portfolio which contains work beyond just “final products.” (i.e. “rough drafts” containing feedback from teachers and/or peers, spreadsheet or comparable document with student-collected data for tracking own progress, etc.) ||  || Students keep little or no artifacts electronically.


 * Students are able to use technology to establish goals and track their own progress. || Students do not keep any documentation of educational growth and rely completely on the teacher to periodically provide that information. ||

**// 2004-2005 Texas Campus STaR Chart, __S__chool __T__echnology __a__nd __R__eadiness, A Tool for Planning and Self-Assessing aligned with the Long-Range Plan for Technology, 1996-2010 //**, Austin, TX: Texas Education Agency, 2004. **// 2004-2005 Texas Teacher STaR Chart, School Technology and Readiness, A Teacher Tool for Planning and Self-Assessing aligned with the Long-Range Plan for Technology, 1996-2010 //**, Austin, TX: Texas Education Agency, 2004. Downey, Carolyn, et. al., **//The Three-Minute Classroom Walk-Through, Changing Supervisory Practice One Teacher at a Time,//** Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2004. ** Evidence of Quality Teaching: Technology, Indicator Reference Guide, ** Cambridge, MA: Co-nect, 2005 ** Porter, Bernajean. ****// Evaluating Student Computer-based Products //**// : **Training and Resource Tools for Using Student Scoring Guides.** // Sedalia, CO: Bernajean Porter Consulting, 2001.
 * References **