ISTE Standard #5
Professional Learning Facilitator
Coaches plan, provide and evaluate the impact of professional learning for educators and leaders to use technology to advance teaching and learning.
ISTE Indicators for Standard 5 5a. Design professional learning based on needs assessments and frameworks for working with adults to support their cultural, social-emotional and learning needs. 5b. Build the capacity of educators, leaders and instructional teams to put the ISTE Standards into practice by facilitating active learning and providing meaningful feedback. 5c. Evaluate the impact of professional learning and continually make improvements in order to meet the schoolwide vision for using technology for high-impact teaching and learning.
Work Samples
Presentation: Using SAMR for Collaboration
ISTE Indicators Addressed:
5a, 5b, & 5c
Artifact Description:
As part of the Technology Professional Development Plan, I co-developed and co-facilitated a two-hour synchronous P.D. with my graduate school partner. We based it off a needs analysis conducted in order to gauge what would be best for that particular point in the school year. We also factored in the Career and Technical Pathways that her high school features. We determined that “Using SAMR for Collaboration” would be the most helpful topic, where SAMR stands for Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, and Redefinition. This slideshow includes all of the activities done over Zoom. For a more extensive look at the supporting materials, please see the Appendix of our TPDP on the Technology Plan page of this portfolio.
Implementation:
In order to get experience with various forms of professional development, another member of my graduate school cohort and I created this synchronous PD. We began with a needs analysis and used frameworks for working with adults to support their cultural, social-emotional, and learning needs as the backbone for our PD (5a). In other words, we worked hard to ensure that we used pedagogically sound methods for our particular adult learners. Furthermore, we facilitated active learning and multiple opportunities to provide meaningful feedback through our use of Padlets, Canvas discussion boards, and a Jamboard. In designing those activities that emphasized interaction between participants and facilitators, we built their capacity to put the ISTE Standards into practice (5b). We also included two ways to evaluate the impact of professional learning–by having the participants complete a post-PD survey and by posting their implementation plans for technology integration on a Canvas discussion board (5c). The survey gave us insight into their self-assessed comprehension of how to use SAMR for collaboration, their intentions and concerns for implementation, and any other comments they wished to provide about the PD. With the final discussion board, we could further measure the success of our PD by analyzing the educator-participants’ plans for implementing technology-based collaboration in their classrooms and contexts. Ultimately, these evaluations affirmed that we did help uphold the schoolwide vision for using technology for high-impact teaching and learning, specifically within the school’s focus on CTE (Career Technical Education) Pathways.
Impact:
Because this was a PD that my partner and I conducted, it directly and immediately impacted the educators in attendance. They were able to learn about the SAMR model for technology integration (Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, Redefinition) and then apply it to their own instructional practices and contexts. We were able to see how they all had a better understanding of SAMR by the end of the session, and the templates that we provided allowed them to think about how to deliver their instruction in new, technology-integrated ways. They really liked that the templates included a range of tools, including Google Slides, Google Sheets, Padlet, Jamboard, and OneNote/Class Notebook. Those templates lowered barriers to implementation by allowing them to easily copy and modify instead of starting from scratch, which meant there was much less of a demand on their time to plan and design new technology-integrated, collaborative activities for their students.
Online Course on Canvas LMS:
Giving Formative Feedback through Technology
ISTE Indicators Addressed:
5a, 5b, & 5c
Artifact Description:
Another key component of my Technology Professional Development Plan was the online PD module that, again, I designed and developed with the educator who was my partner throughout graduate school. We built the module within Canvas, entirely from scratch, with well-established research and the needs of the teachers at her school in mind. Our topic was “Giving Formative Feedback through Technology,” and since the synchronous PD focused on SAMR, for the online PD we introduced TPACK (Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge framework).
Implementation:
My partner and I designed this online professional development module based on the extensive needs analysis that we conducted among educators at her school site. Similarly to the synchronous PD, we strove to carry out best practices for working with adult learners by relying on frameworks (such as PURPOSE, as defined by Green, Donovan, and Green) in order to support their cultural, social-emotional, and learning needs (5a). We also utilized Canvas discussion boards, Padlets, Jamboards, and a Flipgrid to facilitate active learning and provide meaningful feedback to our teacher-participants (5b). That was established with the very first learning activity, a discussion board, and carried through both the practice and the wrap-up phases of our PD. Finally, we included three ways to evaluate the impact of our professional development, through which we could make improvements in order to meet the schoolwide vision for using technology for high-impact teaching and learning, particularly with the scope of the school’s CTE Pathways (5c). The first opportunity for evaluation was the journal entry, in which participants could brainstorm about how they would implement giving formative feedback through technology. My partner and I, as facilitators/coaches, could comment on those submissions and offer suggestions as needed. The second opportunity for evaluation was the Flipgrid activity, in which educators could share what that implementation actually looked and sounded like in their teaching context. That would allow my partner and I to provide further coaching based on those concrete actions taken. Finally, the post-PD survey would allow participants to share their self-ratings on comprehension of the topic, feelings toward using technology to give formative feedback, and any other questions, concerns, or comments about both the topic and how we conducted the PD.
Impact:
Because our online PD module is not yet available to my partner’s colleagues (for whom it was designed and developed), the impact on them cannot be evaluated at this time. However, we did impact our peers in the MS in Educational Technology program. Specifically, we saw how our use of Bitmoji inspired them to also include Bitmoji in their module, making it more visually appealing, fun, and engaging. They also gave us positive feedback for the varied and numerous opportunities for participants to interact asynchronously. Through their constructive feedback, we were able to improve aspects of our online PD, such as modifying the Flipgrid to be a follow-up activity focusing on evidence of implementation. From the PURPOSE Framework, we know that follow-up is vital to professional development, as it can allow for difficulties encountered during implementation to be addressed by the facilitators/coaches, and that can lead to improvements in future iterations of the PD. I would love to see a more direct impact on our intended participants in the near future.
Reflection:
Due to the Technology Professional Development Plan, of which both the synchronous PD and the online PD are a part, I have demonstrated full competency in Standard 5 “Professional Learning Facilitator.” I was able to fully implement indicators 5a, 5b, and 5c in the synchronous PD and completely implement 5a and 5b again for the online PD module. I hope that my partner can make the online PD module available to her colleagues so that we can more fully implement indicator 5c. Both PDs informed the practices of other educators. They will inform my future work, as well, because prior to them, I had not conducted a complete PD for educators (only a mini session, with no needs analysis or follow-up), nor had I built an entire course for adult learners using a Learning Management System (LMS). It showed me that Canvas has a much wider range of capabilities than Google Classroom, which is what I had used with my K-12 students. Now I know how to manipulate and customize the HTML code to make Canvas look entirely different from its default settings. As a result, I cannot wait to apply my skills to instructional design and eLearning opportunities!