Re: connecting and co-construction part 6

From: mary bryson (brys@unixg.ubc.ca)
Date: Mon Dec 20 1999 - 10:09:40 PST


http://www.educ.ubc.ca/faculty/bryson/gentech/Luddites.html

for folks interested in the questions concerning the culture/s of schooling,
and attempts to "implement" new information technologies....

mb

----------
>From: Bill Barowy <wbarowy@mail.lesley.edu>
>To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>Subject: connecting and co-construction part 6
>Date: Mon, Dec 20, 1999, 5:41 AM
>

> Conscience tells me that some cultural and historical perspective is due.
> Here is some material then, roughly cut from a primary artifact -- a draft
> of a report to the funder written by my predecessor, Dr. J, to form the
> basic pattern of a quilted history. "[...]" represents text snipped out
> and replacements. I've left out other elements such as the descriptions of
> the trajectories of the schools and communities for length and time
> considerations. The report was not sent to the funder. most of it
> appears here.
>
>
> A Report of Progress to Date
> April 1998
> _____________________________________
>
> In August of 1996, Lesley College received a [...] grant [...],to support a
> new direction for Project BEST (Better Elementary Science, Mathematics, and
> Technology), a very successful program the company had been supporting for
> a number of years. This new direction was intended to draw technology into
> elementary schools in ways that would significantly impact both the
> delivery of the mathematics and science curriculum and new approaches to
> instructions supportive of such curriculum. To that end, a partnership
> between Lesley College and the school districts of [A] and [B] was
> established. The purpose of the partnership was to develop a viable model
> to support the integration of technology into the classroom and,
> simultaneously, build leadership capacities among teachers and
> administrators around technology. This report will document progress to
> date around this overall goal.
>
> School Sites
> Initially three elementary schools were invited into the Project BEST.
> [...] Preliminary meetings convened in September of 1996 brought together
> representatives from each partner group to discuss partnership activities,
> goals, communication strategies, and technology capacity at each school.
> These meetings were held at each of the participating elementary schools.
> During the initial months of the project, Dr. X was appointed project
> coordinator by [...], dean of Lesley's School of Education. At the time,
> Dr. X was the faculty liaison to the [B1]School. She also taught
> mathematics methods courses at Lesley.
>
> At the first meeting of the Project NEXT partnership group, it was
> announced that the current principal at [school B1] had taken early
> retirement and that an interim principal was in place. The interim
> principal did not attend any of the organizational meetings for Project
> BEST: Next Steps, while principals from the two elementary schools in
> [school A] did attend.
>
> Another difficulty encountered [...] had to do with the varying level of
> technology capacity among the participating schools. While [the B1] school
> is a newly-constructed building that is wired for Internet access and has a
> state-of-the-art computer lab, the elementary school buildings at [A] are
> not yet wired for Internet access. Instead, computers with modems are
> accessible to [...] teachers and students in the schools' library media
> centers and in working "pods" where four computers are clustered together
> for small group use outside of the classroom. [...] has a technology plan
> in place that calls for wiring all schools. To date, however, this has not
> occurred.
>
> Project Activities
> Initial project activities focused on identifying ways in which the two
> school districts could collaborate around technology and curriculum, since
> both were engaged in using a similar mathematics curriculum. For this
> reason, Lesley anticipated that the curriculum connection might be a good
> place to build collaboration and appointed Ms. Y to serve as a technology
> resource person for the project, with the expectation that she would spend
> time at each of the participating elementary schools. Ms. Y assumed that
> role in October 1996 and immediately began efforts to set up a schedule
> with each school that would support school and teachers' schedules and move
> the goals of the project forward.
>
> The number of teachers who volunteered to participate in the grant varied.
> At the [B1] school, only four second- and third-grade teachers volunteered.
> In [A], the participation level was much higher; with 12 participants in
> the initial group, including principals and a library media specialist. As
> expected, technology skills among teachers and administrators varied a
> great deal. A small number of teachers at [A] were familiar with computers
> and had used them to enhance their regular curricular activities; however,
> most of the [B1] teachers and the remainder of the [A] project teachers had
> no experience with technology.
>
> Implementation
> Though quite critical to the overall goals of the project, the technology
> resource person (Ms. Y) had difficulty completing a regular schedule of
> visits to each of the schools. The [B1] teachers were experiencing
> uncertain leadership from the interim principal and were therefore
> reluctant to commit time to a project that did not appear to be a priority
> for the school. In [A], the scheduling difficulties had more to do with
> the day-to-day demands and realities of working in elementary schools. Ms.
> Y's visits often had to be canceled due to changes in school scheduling.
>
> Another obstacle to progress appeared as both Dr. X and Ms. Y had to leave
> the project. Dr. X went on a leave of absence from Lesley and Ms Y accepted
> a full-time position as technology coordinator at the [...] School. Both
> roles became vacant in June 1997.
>
> Since that time, the technology resource role has been filled on a
> part-time basis by Z. Ms. Z is the administrator for the Center for
> Mathematics, Science and Technology at Lesley and also a resident expert at
> Web construction and desktop publishing.
>
> Current Status of Project
> Currently, the project is at a point of re-examining its goals and
> personnel needs. The [B1] school has elected not to continue with the
> program. The [...] schools in [A] continue to be enthusiastic about their
> involvement, however, and see the growth in technological literacy among
> their teachers as the key to strengthening both curriculum and instruction.
> Ms. Z has been meeting with [A] teachers on a consistent basis, helping
> them to develop their expertise with building Web pages and in working with
> different software applications to support Web page construction,
> especially in a hardware environment were direct access to the Internet is
> still not possible.
>
> Several meetings have been held between [A] and Lesley personnel to
> discuss, among other things, the selection of a new urban school partner
> for [A]. The meetings have been chaired by D who is temporarily
> coordinating project planning until a new Lesley-based project coordinator
> is identified. The School of Education assumed responsibility for Project
> BEST: Next Steps in August of 1997 when Dr. J, Director of the Mathematics,
> Science and Technology Center at Lesley, went on a leave of absence to work
> in a project advisory role with the [...] Foundation.
>
>
>
> Bill Barowy, Associate Professor
> Lesley College, 31 Everett Street, Cambridge, MA 02138-2790
> Phone: 617-349-8168 / Fax: 617-349-8169
> http://www.lesley.edu/faculty/wbarowy/Barowy.html
> _______________________
> "One of life's quiet excitements is to stand somewhat apart from yourself
> and watch yourself softly become the author of something beautiful."
> [Norman Maclean in "A river runs through it."]
>
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 11 2000 - 14:04:08 PST