COLLEGE OF EDUCATION AND LEADERSHIP 6801 N. Yates Road, Milwaukee Wisconsin, 53217

Transcription

1 COLLEGE OF EDUCATION AND LEADERSHIP 6801 N. Yates Road, Milwaukee Wisconsin, Department of Instructional Technology School of Education/College of Education and Leadership #92 Instructional Technology Coordinator December 12, 2011 Wisconsin License Code and Developmental Level Administration-Instructional Technology Coordinator G=Graduate Program Required Praxis II Content Test: N/A Contact Information: Louis Loeffler N. Yates Rd., Milwaukee, WI (414) Fax: (414) Certifying Officer: Joy Vodnik Tony Frontier, Ph.D, Director of Teacher Education Freda R. Russell Ph.D, Dean

2 Description of Program The Department of Instructional Technology at Cardinal Stritch University offers a program leading to Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI) #92 extended license as an Instructional Technology Coordinator. This licensure program is available to individuals who hold a Wisconsin teaching license and have at least three years of teaching experience. Because the license is administrative, students must hold a master s degree or its equivalent by program completion. The program assists the candidate to satisfy the Instructional Technology Coordinator and Administrator Standards (PI 34). All candidates prepare, with guidance, a portfolio to verify that they have met the standards. Supporting material is derived from a combination of course work, knowledge, skill and experience. Individuals currently holding the position of Instructional Technology Coordinator or a similar position may require little supporting course work and may base their portfolio largely on their experience. Students do not have to be enrolled in Stritch's Master of Education (M.E.) in Instructional Technology program, offered in a convenient online format, but have the option of doing so in order to meet the master s requirement. Courses taken in pursuit of the Instructional Technology Coordinator certification may apply to fulfillment of the M.E. in Instructional Technology and, depending upon the courses, may also apply towards Instructional Library Media Specialist licensure. Current Enrollment:

3 Instructional Technology Coordinator Program COURSE NUMBER OF STUDENTS ACADEMIC YEAR FALL 2009 CED CED CED CED CED Spring 2010 CED CED CED CED CED Summer 2010 CED CED CED CED CED ACADEMIC YEAR Fall 2010 CED CED CED CED CED Spring 2011 CED CED CED CED CED Summer 2011 CED CED CED CED CED ACADEMIC YEAR Fall 2011 CED CED CED CED CED 599 4

4 Delivery Model: The courses are online. Sites: Online Degree: Instructional Technology Coordinators License (#92). Define the Major, Minor, or Concentration Not applicable Define the Graduate Degree or Equivalent Course work and experience must satisfy the Wisconsin Department of Instruction s Instructional Technology Coordinator Content Standards and the Administrator Content Standards (PI-34.03). Specific requirements for each individual are determined by construction of a learning plan as outlined below. Program elements include completion of a professional portfolio, practicum experience and course work as determined by the learning plan. The following are designed to cover required areas of the Instructional Technology Coordinator and Administrator Content Standards and are required of all candidates. Waivers to some courses may be issued for individuals who hold Instructional Technology Coordinator or related positions based upon assessment of knowledge, skills and experience. CED 551 is required of all individuals seeking Instructional Technology Coordinator licensure and is an opportunity for self-assessment and gap analysis. It results in the construction of a learning plan which identifies areas of strength and those which may need to be strengthened through course work. Instructional Technology Coordinator (#92) Courses Required Courses CED 551 Introduction to Technology Leadership (1 cr.) This introductory course offers students the opportunity to assess their current leadership skills and knowledge and determine their learning needs for the Technology Leadership program that leads to administrative certification as a Technology Coordinator. Students will examine the facets of successful technology leadership, begin to develop a vision of leadership that meets the demands of increasingly technological learning society and begin to construct a professional portfolio. CED 597 Creating a Technology Leadership Portfolio (2 cr.) Candidates for the Instructional Technology Coordinator license will submit a portfolio that contains artifacts that demonstrate the candidate s experience, background and knowledge to qualify for the license. The DPI license requires that candidates meet four Administrative Standards and seventeen Instructional Technology Coordinator Content Standards. If the candidate has Administrative Certification they will complete only the seventeen Instructional Technology Coordinator Content Standards. All candidates prepare, with guidance, a portfolio

5 to verify that they have met the standards. Supporting material is derived from a combination of course work, knowledge, skill and experience. Each standard will include a reflection and at least two artifacts. The reflection should explain why each artifact was chosen and how it demonstrates meeting the requirements the Standard. Administration Courses CED 554 School Business and Technology (3 cr.) School Business and Technology will focus on the role of the technology coordinator in the creation of the Technology Plan as it relates to instruction and the purchase of appropriate hardware and software for applications. This course demonstrates the effective use of collaboration in the management of resources within the school district environment. Case studies will be used to simulate the complex tasks of technology planning and implementation in order to give students the practice and experience of the business end of technology leadership. CED 555 School Law and Technology (3 cr.) School law and its relationship to technology continue to emerge and evolve. School employees, school boards, and students all need to have an understanding of personal and district responsibilities related to electronic communications, access to the Internet, ADA compliance, security of equipment and networks, and intellectual property rights. In addition, liability issues, free speech, the Digital Millennium Act, and educational uses of technology are the reference points for student discussion. A review of existing school district technology policy will take place as well as the study of statutory and case law for technology issues. CEDO 565 Technology Leadership and Planning (3 cr.) Effective leadership today often incorporates a component of technology leadership in that leaders often need to implement new technology and guide its effective use. Thus it is essential that leaders understand how technology can transform schools, businesses and organizations of all kinds. This course explores strategies that a leader may use to create a vision and move that vision to reality. CED 599 Field Experience (3 cr.) A project-oriented capstone class usually taken at the end of one s graduate program. The nature of this study is determined by the student in conjunction with his or her advisor. Culminating experience options include practicum experiences, action research projects or a design and implementation project. Other Program Courses Other courses offered through the department may be chosen, with advisor consultation, in order to help complete technology standards requirements.

6 Component II Conceptual Framework and Standards Content Standards Addressed Instructional Technology Program Outcomes The ability to use computers and other modern technologies effectively as tools to enhance learning, teaching and training. The knowledge of how to effectively integrate the use of computers and other technologies into curriculum. An awareness of emerging technologies, including multimedia, communications and information access technologies, and the ability to plan for their implementation and management. The ability to assume a leadership role in planning, implementing and supporting instructional technology. The Instructional Technology Program integrates the Instructional Technology Coordinator Content Standards, the Wisconsin Educator Standards Administrators, and the Ten Standards for Teacher Development and Licensure into its program and courses. The standards are listed below along with a table showing the integration of the standards into the program s required courses. Also listed in the table are the major course assessments that relate to the standards. INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY COORDINATOR CONTENT STANDARDS A. Knowledge of the principles and theories of PK-12 curriculum development and teaching strategies. B. Ability to provide educational leadership, including visioning, strategic planning, goal-setting, curricular innovation, program evaluation, problem solving, and utilizing management theory and practice. C. Interpersonal and communication skills needed to work and interact effectively within the educational community (students, educators, parents, staff and the general public) by displaying a comprehensive competence that promotes reliability, balance, responsiveness and flexibility D. Knowledge of and ability to plan, manage, budget, make decisions and implement: o technology support for instruction o the selection, supervision, training and evaluation of staff o instructional technology systems o facility design o funding sources, including grants o instructional design< E. Ability to plan and manage the identification, evaluation, selection, acquisition, maintenance and use of instructional technology systems (voice, video, data, etc.) F. Ability to support and implement inclusive and comprehensive user access within and beyond the school. G. Ability to facilitate the integration of instructional technology into the curriculum through teaching and learning activities.

7 H. Ability to evaluate and implement appropriate, current and emerging trends and developments in instructional technologies, including information access and delivery systems, networking and telecommunications. I. Ability to oversee a reliable technology infrastructure and make appropriate decisions regarding that infrastructure in support of learning and teaching. J. Ability to develop, review, implement and evaluate policies and procedures governing instructional technology. K. Participate in local, regional, state, and national collaborative opportunities. L. Access resources through partnerships, organizations, consortia and educational institutions. M. Ability to facilitate and promote effective use of technology through the planning and implementation of appropriate staff development models. N. Ability to facilitate and promote the use of technology to meet identified academic standards. O. Awareness of and ability to apply federal, state and local regulations, laws and policies involving instructional technology and information access. P. Knowledge of societal and ethical issues related to technology, including the impact of technology on society, censorship, equity, access issues, rights to privacy, copyright laws, and fair use guidelines. Q. Awareness and use of resources for personal professional growth, including electronic and printed literature, professional organizations, and collegial avenues. Wisconsin Educator Standards - Administrators 1. The administrator has an understanding of and demonstrates competence in the Ten Teacher Standards. 2. The administrator leads by facilitating the development, articulation, implementation, and stewardship of a vision of learning that is shared by the school community. 3. The administrator manages by advocating, nurturing and sustaining a school culture and instructional program conducive to pupil learning and staff professional growth. 4. The administrator ensures management of the organization, operations, finances, and resources for a safe, efficient, and effective learning environment. 5. The administrator models collaborating with families and community members, responding to diverse community interests and needs, and mobilizing community resources. 6. The administrator acts with integrity, fairness, and in an ethical manner.

8 7. The administrator understands, responds to, and interacts with the larger political, social, economic, legal, and cultural context that affects schooling. Ten Standards for Teacher Development and Licensure 1. Teachers know the subjects they are teaching. The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the disciplines she or he teaches and can create learning experiences that make these aspects of subject matter meaningful for pupils. 2. Teachers know how children grow. The teacher understands how children with broad ranges of ability learn and provides instruction that supports their intellectual, social, and personal development. 3. Teachers understand that children learn differently. The teacher understands how pupils differ in their approaches to learning and the barriers that impede learning and can adapt instruction to meet the diverse needs of pupils, including those with disabilities and exceptionalities. 4. Teachers know how to teach. The teacher understands and uses a variety of instructional strategies, including the use of technology, to encourage children's development of critical thinking, problem solving, and performance skills. 5. Teachers know how to manage a classroom. The teacher uses an understanding of individual and group motivation and behavior to create a learning environment that encourages positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation. 6. Teachers communicate well. The teacher uses effective verbal and nonverbal communication techniques as well as instructional media and technology to foster active inquiry, collaboration, and supportive interaction in the classroom. 7. Teachers are able to plan different kinds of lessons. The teacher organizes and plans systematic instruction based upon knowledge of subject matter, pupils, the community, and curriculum goals. 8. Teachers know how to test for student progress. The teacher understands and uses formal and informal assessment strategies to evaluate and ensure the continuous intellectual, social, and physical development of the pupil. 9. Teachers are able to evaluate themselves. The teacher is a reflective practitioner who continually evaluates the effects of his or her choices and actions on pupils, parents, professionals in the learning community and others and who actively seeks out opportunities to grow professionally.

9 COURSE # CED 551 (1 cr.) 10. Teachers are connected with other teachers and the community. The teacher fosters relationships with school colleagues, parents, and agencies in the larger community to support pupil learning and well-being and acts with integrity, fairness and in an ethical manner. Integration of Standards Into Courses and Appropriate Assessments COURSE NAME Introduction to Technology Leadership INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY COORDINATOR CONTENT STANDARDS ADDRESSED IN COURSE Standards A-Q addressed in needs assessment WISCONSIN ADMINISTRATIVE STANDARDS WISCONSIN TEACHER STANDARDS ADDRESSED IN COURSE Standards 1, 2, 4, 5 Standards 1, 7, 8, ASSESSMENT OF STANDARD IN COURSE The student will complete an online analysis of technology leadership skills and knowledge based on PI-34 and the NETS-A standards and then perform a gap analysis comparing their current leadership level with that required for licensed Technology Coordinators and develop a learning plan to bridge those gaps. CED 597 (2 cr.) CED 554 (3 cr.) CED 555 (3 cr.) CED 565 (3 cr.) Creating a Technology Leadership Portfolio School Business and Technology School Law and Technology Technology Leadership and Planning Standards A-Q addressed in Portfolio Standards 1-7 Standards 1,4,6,7,10 Standards D, E Standard 4, 6, 7 Standards 1, 7, 8, 9, 10 Standards D, J, O, P Standards 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Standards 1, 4, 6, 7, 9 Standards C, D, M, Q Portfolio students prepare a portfolio with artifacts demonstrating their experience. The portfolio has at least 2 artifacts for the 17 ITC Content standards along with an explanation how the artifacts align. The student will review a technology plan for compliance in the area of finances. Then, the student will prepare a presentation of a district Technology Plan revised budget as a simulation of a plan presented to a school board. The student will post responses and analysis to the student blog regarding critical school law issues and will reflect on the impact and implementation of law principles in the K-12 environment. Standards 4, 6, 7 Standard 9 Students will investigate the data available in their district/school organization and prepare a summary indicating the types of data, accessibility, and how it is currently used. What area or subgroup is in need of improvement? What data indicates this need? What additional data do you have or could you collect (needs assessment) to support this need? CED 599 (3 cr.) Field Experience All standards are addressed with emphasis on those identified in the Gap Analysis and Learning Plan from CED 551 All 7 standards are addressed Standards 6, 9, 10 Based on deficiencies needed as discovered in the CED 551 course.

10 Component III Assessment System Comprehensive Assessment Plan Assessment System The College of Education and Leadership has designed an assessment system. As a member of this unit the Instructional Technology program utilizes this system Development of the Assessment System The importance of assessment is confirmed by one of the guiding principles that resulted from the University s visioning process: Success depends on systematic assessment and change. The unit assessment system for the unit was developed in 2001 as a collaborative effort across salaried and adjunct faculty in all programs in the College of Education and Leadership. All programs agreed to identify key assessments that would act as benchmarks across the duration of a program. They agreed to construct a visual matrix for each program using identical column headings. The assessment plan was then submitted to the unit Advisory Board and the University Assessment Committee and approved in Adjustments to the overall plan and to program components within the plan have been and continue to be shared with involved individuals such as adjunct faculty, clinical supervisors, site coordinators, and Advisory Board members. The plan has three components: assessment of candidate effectiveness, assessment of program and unit effectiveness, and assessment of faculty effectiveness. Candidate Effectiveness Candidate effectiveness is determined by key assessments that span the duration of each program. The key assessments in all programs are further described by program key assessment matrices that clarify the alignment of each assessment with the domains of the conceptual framework (knowledge, practice and service), the Wisconsin Teacher or Administrator Standards, and the outcomes of each program. See Part VII Assessment Matrix. The key assessments are used to monitor candidate performance in relation to the outcomes of each program. Key assessments take multiple forms which increases the overall validity of the assessment process. The validity of the process is also augmented by the careful alignment of the key assessments to the domains of the conceptual framework, to state standards and to program outcomes. This also insures that candidates have the necessary knowledge, skills and dispositions required by the profession, state, and institution. Data on each candidate are collected, maintained, and employed to evaluate individual proficiency at admission, at specific points during the course of the program, and at program completion. If candidates do not meet expectations, this is handled on an individual basis by advisors and/or the program chair. In many cases, candidates are allowed to re-do unsatisfactory work after consultation with faculty. Cardinal Stritch University s assessment plan is built around several key components. Each program delineates key assignments that extend across the duration of the program and address student performance at certain decision points. These key assignments are evaluated by rubrics that are carefully constructed to address validity and reliability. Rubrics are distributed prior to an assignment and specifically indicate how the student s performance will be evaluated thus providing the student with specific performance guidelines. The rubric is then returned to the student as part of the feedback process. Faculty members examine rubrics on an ongoing basis to insure fairness, accuracy, consistency, and the absence of bias. This is done in various ways such as using multiple scorers,

11 correlating candidate scores across several faculty, and correlating candidate scores across different assessments in order to establish predictive validity. Each course in the program is evaluated by students using a form mandated by the College and the University. Course surveys provide valuable data on program improvement. The first part of the course assessment form addresses faculty effectiveness; the second part evaluates the effectiveness of course content and structure. Students indicate if course outcomes were clearly communicated, whether attainment of course outcomes was appropriately facilitated, the adequacy of the feedback process, the extent to which the course enhanced the candidate s ability to facilitate K-12 earning and the extent to which the candidate increased his/her professional and content knowledge. The Office of Institutional Research analyzes the evaluation forms and returns a course summary to the department chair. The summary includes the number and percentage of candidates that rated each item as well as a graph that presents the data in visual form. The chair has several options for aggregating this data. Some courses are taught multiple times across an academic year. The chair may ask for combined summary data for all these courses. This allows the chair to examine individual course effectiveness across different sites and/or instructors. The department chair may request a combined summary of all courses in a program. These data span more than a single academic year. The chair can also request a summary of all courses taught by an individual instructor during a semester or academic year. Such data are used by the chair to evaluate course and program effectiveness. Data are shared with the Dean and Associate Dean and included in the Department Annual Report, a document shared with University administration and faculty. At the completion of an academic program, each student fills out an end-of-program evaluation form that assesses academic content. End of program evaluations are closely tied to the Wisconsin Teacher or Administrator Standards. Graduates are asked to rate their competence in each of the standards using a scale of five for strongly agree to one for strongly disagree. Course survey and end of program surveys are analyzed and summarized by the Office of Institutional Research. They are then returned to the department chair, the Dean, and the Associate Dean for further analysis as to course and program quality. Data from end-of-program surveys are also included in the department Annual Report. At the end of a program, students also fill out an end-of-program form that assesses satisfaction with service related components such as satisfaction with financial aid, the business office, library access, registration and other service areas of the University. One or two years after program completion, students are again surveyed as to their satisfaction with the program. They are asked to evaluate the extent to which the program prepared them to meet the Wisconsin Teacher or Administrator Standards Instructional Technology Coordinator #92 Assessment System Key assignments that extend across the duration of the program and address student performance at certain decision points are being developed. These key assignments are evaluated by rubrics that are carefully constructed to address validity and reliability. Rubrics are distributed prior to an assignment and specifically indicate how the student s performance will be evaluated thus providing the student with specific performance guidelines. The rubric is then returned to the student as part of the feedback process. Faculty members will examine rubrics on an ongoing basis to insure fairness, accuracy, consistency, and the absence of bias. This is done in various ways such as using multiple scorers, correlating candidate scores across several faculty, and correlating candidate scores across different

12 assessments in order to establish predictive validity. Below is a list of the benchmarks that are included in this program. Program Admission to University / Admission to Unit Ongoing Assessment through Key Assessments Transition: Entry to Clinical Practice or Practicum Transition: Exit from Clinical Practice or Practicum Program Completion

13 Course CED 551: Introduction to Technology Leadership CED 554: School Business and Technology CED 555: School Law and Technology CEDO 565: Technology Leadership and Planning CED 597: Creating a Technology Leadership Portfolio CED 599: Field Experience Performance Key Assessment Needs-Assessment Each student completes a needs assessment and technology vision statement which determines the courses needed to acquire the ITC. Budget Overview Review a technology plan for compliance in the area of finances. Prepare a presentation of a district Technology Planrevised budget and present a summary to the class of the plan as a simulation of a plan presented to a school board. Training Module Create a training module to use with board and/or staff in regards to legal issues related to Information Technology and its relationship to instruction. Data Retreat Investigate the data available in your district/school organization and prepare a summary indicating the types of data, accessibility, and how it is currently used. Technology Portfolio Candidates for the Instructional Technology Coordinator license will submit a portfolio that contains artifacts that demonstrate the candidate s experience, background and knowledge to qualify for the license. Practicum Students work for 90 hours in a K-12 technology setting and compile work samples to be included in an online portfolio which demonstrates their competencies. Culminating experience options include practicum experiences, action research projects or a design and implementation project