Texas Long-Range Plan

I have learned that the Long-Range Plan is unique and dynamic. I had no idea that Texas is leading this effort and pioneering the drive to better prepare and educate our youth for tomorrow's technological world. The goal of the Long-Range Plan for Technology, 2006-2020 is to support the Mission of Texas Public Education by preparing students "for success and productivity of a lifetime learner, a world class communicator, a competitive and knowledge worker, and an engaged and contributing member of the emerging global digital society" (LPRT, p. viii). When I read this, I can't help but think that this statement applies to ALL types of students - meaning, not just those students in K-12, but also the teachers, who are lifelong students as well. In order to prepare their students well, teachers must be constant learners.

The Educator Preparation and Development Area in the LRPT describes the goals, needs, and recommendations to increase technology skills with the teachers so that the teachers can then best teach their students. The emphasis is on not just pre-service teacher development, but also on continuous professional development during teachers' careers. According to the LRPT, the key goals of this area state that all educators will:

• graduate from teacher prep programs that model current technology instruction in PreK-12
• exit teacher prep programs knowing how to use technology effectively in the teaching and learning processes
• develop learning environments that uses technology as a flexible tool, where learning is collaborative, interactive, and individualized for students
• ensure appropriate technology integration in curricula

STaR chart data trends in this area show that most of the schools statewide from the '05-'06 to '07-'08 school years have been sitting stable at the "Developing Tech" classification. What is interesting is that the biggest percentages in the "Advanced Tech" and "Target Tech" labels in this area occurred in '05-'06, with scores of 32.3% and 2.4%, respectively. What was the difference then (compared to the most current percentages of 19.9% and 0.6%, respectively)? What is because the technology was not as prevalent or advanced and so mastery of it was easier? The converse could be true as well--the technology we have now is much more advanced and the learning curve is higher...?

My goal is to go back to the classroom and create more learner-centered lessons. I also recommend for this area of the state to continue to fund technology purchases and more importantly, ongoing professional development needed for training and instruction. At the campus level, it is vital that the leaders support training, formal or informal in nature. In addition, I want to integrate technology on a daily basis instead of occasionally. I want to integrate Physical Education and technology seamlessly.