WRAPPING-UP
ETEC 623 is a course in Technology for Educational Leaders. The course seeks to assist educational leaders in the development of the knowledge and skills necessary and then apply these to educational settings. The purpose of the course is to engage scholars in a variety of activities related to the use of telecommunications in an educational setting. Scholar engagement in the course is accomplished by the provision of frameworks and activity structures that can be adapted to a variety of educational settings.
ETEC 623 covered a range of topics. The topics discussed touched on subjects from Management and Leadership, all the way to Professional Development. In retrospect, I can summarize that at the individual level and as a result of taking this course, I have become more technological literate. The exercises in the course provided me with opportunities to apply thinking, analysis, management, assessment as well as an understanding of the advantages and limitations of educational technology, as these opportunities are observed from the perspectives of both management and leadership.
Etec 623 has provided a path by which I as an individual, can walk on and get closer to reaching the phylosophically "ideal technology-literate individual" I seek to become. Such characteristics can be described as the necessary knowledge, mentality, behavior and the capacity necessary to confidently continue on my journey as a professional educator. As such, ETC 623 has served these puposes well.
In the area of knowledge, I have learned to recognize the wide range of options available to me that I can use, implement, adopt or adapt, to further refine and thus, improve my teaching techniques. I shall always seek to demonstrate myself as a highly-qualified technology educator. Further, my knowledge of technology shall help me in the appreciation, development and use of the technologies available to me while involved in the technology-education field.
As far as professional behavior is concerned, I shall commit myself to maintain abreast of the latest technological developments. I shall as well, inquire about these technological developments. I shall also assess the risks and benefits, so as to make wise decisions regarding the use of such technologies, while simultaneously keeping the maximum benefit to the student in mind.
In the area of capability, I must maintain good hands-on skills. Some of these can be in the form of blogs, websites, etc. Another demonstration of capability comes in the form of using the latest software to plan and organize training sessions. Lastly, another way to show capability is by the use of good and well-informed judgement when dealing with technology risks versus benefit situations.
ETEC 623 has been a course that provided a great opportunity for the exercise of ability, capacity and professional behaviors that are relevant to the field of Technology Education. Furthermore, the course has provided the scholar opportunities for professional management, leadership and professional development, within the student's present educational environment. Ultimately, the course is expected to provide the scholar with a more solid foundation from which the scholar can depart and become a true educational leader.
WEEKLY ACTIVITY LOG
- Downloaded Session 10 podcast
- Listened to Session 10 podcast
- Formulated response to Session 10 podcast
- Posted response to Session 10 podcast
- Read scholar's Session 10 postings
- Posted comments on scholar's Session 10 blogs
- Worked on last-minute final details to improve Project two presentation
Monday, March 12, 2007
Sunday, March 11, 2007
SESSION 9
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
It appears as though the phrase "...not another training sessiom" is becoming an integral part in everybody's daily work vocabulary. My employer is great at scheduling training for things we never get to see again. One can not help but wonder the purpose of such training, when we employees can not determine what the connection between the training and our job is. Perhaps some clarification coming fom the employer's end would help bridge the confusion gap.
One example of poor training is when the employer schedules training for employees on subjects that do not pertain to what we employees normally do. For example, we routinely train for subjects that pertain to the Sales Department. We are trained on these, because we in Technical Services, happen to fall under the umbrella of the sales department. I am not sure about the logic behind this type of "shotgun" approach; however, the result is that we employees simply exchange questioning stares among ourselves, for we already know well in advance this training will be an utter waste of our time. Our employer might think he is doing us a favor by providing all this training; we however, believe this is useless training if we are not going to apply the knowledge we just learned. Somehow, a piece of the puzzle is missing in this picture.
I have worked for other employers, where the training is directly applied to the tasks we perform on a daily basis. The employees are anxious to learn and then apply the knowledge just gained. The employees have been struggling with nagging work situations and they know that the training they are about to receive will make them more efficient. The training the employees receive will also make their jobs easier and the training will remove a lot of the stress associated with the prior lack of training. This is an example where the employee and employer both benefit; when the training provided is properly tageted to a mission, as Dr. Newberry explained in his podcast.
I believe professional development is a good thing when prior planning has been done. It is important to asses the needs as these pertain to both employee and employer as well. One-sided assessment of needs tends to alienate the party left unatended. Employee alienation results in lack of interest on the part of the employee; this in turn creates other undesirable consequences, such as lack of employee interest, loss of loyalty, motivation and even sometimes, loss of employee morale. therefore, in order to avoid training misguidance, careful planing of training and and a relevance assessment are of utmost importance.
WEEKLY LOG:
- Downloaded and listened to Session 9 podcast
- Formulated response to Session 9
- Posted response to Session 9 in my blog
- Read scholar's blog responses to Session 9
- Posted my comments on scholar's blog response to Session 9
It appears as though the phrase "...not another training sessiom" is becoming an integral part in everybody's daily work vocabulary. My employer is great at scheduling training for things we never get to see again. One can not help but wonder the purpose of such training, when we employees can not determine what the connection between the training and our job is. Perhaps some clarification coming fom the employer's end would help bridge the confusion gap.
One example of poor training is when the employer schedules training for employees on subjects that do not pertain to what we employees normally do. For example, we routinely train for subjects that pertain to the Sales Department. We are trained on these, because we in Technical Services, happen to fall under the umbrella of the sales department. I am not sure about the logic behind this type of "shotgun" approach; however, the result is that we employees simply exchange questioning stares among ourselves, for we already know well in advance this training will be an utter waste of our time. Our employer might think he is doing us a favor by providing all this training; we however, believe this is useless training if we are not going to apply the knowledge we just learned. Somehow, a piece of the puzzle is missing in this picture.
I have worked for other employers, where the training is directly applied to the tasks we perform on a daily basis. The employees are anxious to learn and then apply the knowledge just gained. The employees have been struggling with nagging work situations and they know that the training they are about to receive will make them more efficient. The training the employees receive will also make their jobs easier and the training will remove a lot of the stress associated with the prior lack of training. This is an example where the employee and employer both benefit; when the training provided is properly tageted to a mission, as Dr. Newberry explained in his podcast.
I believe professional development is a good thing when prior planning has been done. It is important to asses the needs as these pertain to both employee and employer as well. One-sided assessment of needs tends to alienate the party left unatended. Employee alienation results in lack of interest on the part of the employee; this in turn creates other undesirable consequences, such as lack of employee interest, loss of loyalty, motivation and even sometimes, loss of employee morale. therefore, in order to avoid training misguidance, careful planing of training and and a relevance assessment are of utmost importance.
WEEKLY LOG:
- Downloaded and listened to Session 9 podcast
- Formulated response to Session 9
- Posted response to Session 9 in my blog
- Read scholar's blog responses to Session 9
- Posted my comments on scholar's blog response to Session 9
Thursday, March 1, 2007
SESSION 8
DATA-DRIVEN-DECISION-MAKING
1) Discuss a way Data-Driven Decision could be used in my world:
In my personal life, I commonly make Data-Driven-Decisions. I gather all the facts, paint a picture and then decide which items are competing for the same amount of time. Finally, I decide which of those items will be placed in the back-burner, in order to favor the items I deemed to be the most important. I find Data-Driven-Decision-Making a very valuable tool; for it places things within a manageable context that helps properly assess a situation. Once the picture is clear, Data-Driven Decision-Making is a snap.
2) What would be a positive use of Data-Driven Decision-Making?
My present employer is a hard-core user of Data-Driven-Decision-Making. The company uses this technique as a management tool. My employer tracks a multitude of data. For example, they track product failures by model, serial number, failed part location and failure frequency of parts. The company then analyzes this data and by using Data-Driven-Decision, a judgement call is made as to whether to examine the design for further refinement or to live with the problem. I consider this to be a positive use of Data-Driven-Decision-Making, because my employer is being proactive, which is a much better appoach to solving problems, as opposed to being reactive to these.
3) What would be a negative use of Data-Driven-Decision-Making?
I believe that the use of "pure" Data-Driven-Decision-Making on employee assessment is a very coarse way to assess weaknesses and strenghts on an individual. By its very nature, Data-Driven-Decision-Making is very harsh. Data-Driven-Decision-Making does not take into account the humanity of the individual and the circumstances that otherwise could offer a picture that is more representative of the individual being assessed. Therefore, skewing of data results. The skewing of data results in incorrect Data-Driven-Decision-Making, because it could either present facts in a light that makes someone appear far better than the person truly is; on the other hand, it can also make a person appear far worse. Either way, Data-Driven-Decision-Making alone does not provide enough information to properly assess individuals.
How does leadership factor into each of these?
Leadership must have the wisdom to understand the capabilities and limitations of the Data-Driven-Decision-Making tool. I have witnessed this tool applied in its "raw" form to evaluate individuals, with it resulting in unfair, inaccurate and disastrous results. I have also witnessed managers use this tool to make very significant, critical decisions; and have seen astonishing, awesome results. Data-Driven-Decision-Making is just what it is - a tool. Just as it is with any tool, its use can bring very good as well as very bad results. It is ultimately up to the skill and intentions of the user, what determines the outcome when using Data-Driven-Decision-Making. Prudence of use must be observed.
WEEKLY ACTIVITIES:
- Downloaded and listened to Session 8 podcast
- Formulated Session 8 blog response
- Posted Session 8 response in my blog
- Continued working on remaining projects
- Read scholar's blog postings
- Posted comments on scholar's blogs
1) Discuss a way Data-Driven Decision could be used in my world:
In my personal life, I commonly make Data-Driven-Decisions. I gather all the facts, paint a picture and then decide which items are competing for the same amount of time. Finally, I decide which of those items will be placed in the back-burner, in order to favor the items I deemed to be the most important. I find Data-Driven-Decision-Making a very valuable tool; for it places things within a manageable context that helps properly assess a situation. Once the picture is clear, Data-Driven Decision-Making is a snap.
2) What would be a positive use of Data-Driven Decision-Making?
My present employer is a hard-core user of Data-Driven-Decision-Making. The company uses this technique as a management tool. My employer tracks a multitude of data. For example, they track product failures by model, serial number, failed part location and failure frequency of parts. The company then analyzes this data and by using Data-Driven-Decision, a judgement call is made as to whether to examine the design for further refinement or to live with the problem. I consider this to be a positive use of Data-Driven-Decision-Making, because my employer is being proactive, which is a much better appoach to solving problems, as opposed to being reactive to these.
3) What would be a negative use of Data-Driven-Decision-Making?
I believe that the use of "pure" Data-Driven-Decision-Making on employee assessment is a very coarse way to assess weaknesses and strenghts on an individual. By its very nature, Data-Driven-Decision-Making is very harsh. Data-Driven-Decision-Making does not take into account the humanity of the individual and the circumstances that otherwise could offer a picture that is more representative of the individual being assessed. Therefore, skewing of data results. The skewing of data results in incorrect Data-Driven-Decision-Making, because it could either present facts in a light that makes someone appear far better than the person truly is; on the other hand, it can also make a person appear far worse. Either way, Data-Driven-Decision-Making alone does not provide enough information to properly assess individuals.
How does leadership factor into each of these?
Leadership must have the wisdom to understand the capabilities and limitations of the Data-Driven-Decision-Making tool. I have witnessed this tool applied in its "raw" form to evaluate individuals, with it resulting in unfair, inaccurate and disastrous results. I have also witnessed managers use this tool to make very significant, critical decisions; and have seen astonishing, awesome results. Data-Driven-Decision-Making is just what it is - a tool. Just as it is with any tool, its use can bring very good as well as very bad results. It is ultimately up to the skill and intentions of the user, what determines the outcome when using Data-Driven-Decision-Making. Prudence of use must be observed.
WEEKLY ACTIVITIES:
- Downloaded and listened to Session 8 podcast
- Formulated Session 8 blog response
- Posted Session 8 response in my blog
- Continued working on remaining projects
- Read scholar's blog postings
- Posted comments on scholar's blogs
Thursday, February 22, 2007
SESSION 7
The Ed Norman Syndrome
Unfortunately, I must say I have indeed experienced this sort of situation in which having top-notch computer equipment is rendered useless by the over-zealous Manager of Information Systems (MIS); for his mission in life, is to prevent or slow you down as much as he can in order to protect the equipment and ensure that no one breaks the rigid rules he has placed on technology usage. Lord MIS rules in his technology kingdom. You must bow to his wishes and desires if you remotely expect to be able to utilize his equipment with some degree of efficiency.
On the other hand, I have also had the opportunity to witness the complete opposite scenario. I have worked at companies where equipment usage rules are virtually non-existent. In this case, the results are pretty similar to the anecdote I described in the previous paragraph. The technology system is running amok, and the environment resembles the wild west: chaos can and will emerge at any moment. In such environment, people are not able to perform their tasks, because law and order are absent. Lack of leadership and organization, sets the stage for horrible things to take place with software and hardware as well. The result is the inability for anyone to make any significant, efficient use of the available technology.
From my personal experience with these two extreme styles of technology maintenance and management, I concluded that moderation is the way to go. On the one hand, one would like to have someone who is in charge of safeguarding the technology for maintenance-related reasons and to prevent abuse from individuals who lack common sense. On the other hand, one must also ensure that the person who has been vested with the responsibility of managing such technology, does not become imperialistic to the point that he now becomes everyone's abuser. I believe that moderate overseeing of technology is the best compromise, for it benefits the manager as well as the user. In summary, moderation brings the most efficiency out of the technology being discussed, while it also allows the technology manager the highest degree of safeguarding without encroaching into effective, efficient use of technology.
WEEKLY ACTIVITY LOG
- Downloaded and listened to Session 7 blog
- Formulated response to Session 7 blog
- Posted response to Session 7 blog
- Continued working on projects 2 and 3
- Read scholar's blog postings
- Posted comments on scholar's postings
Unfortunately, I must say I have indeed experienced this sort of situation in which having top-notch computer equipment is rendered useless by the over-zealous Manager of Information Systems (MIS); for his mission in life, is to prevent or slow you down as much as he can in order to protect the equipment and ensure that no one breaks the rigid rules he has placed on technology usage. Lord MIS rules in his technology kingdom. You must bow to his wishes and desires if you remotely expect to be able to utilize his equipment with some degree of efficiency.
On the other hand, I have also had the opportunity to witness the complete opposite scenario. I have worked at companies where equipment usage rules are virtually non-existent. In this case, the results are pretty similar to the anecdote I described in the previous paragraph. The technology system is running amok, and the environment resembles the wild west: chaos can and will emerge at any moment. In such environment, people are not able to perform their tasks, because law and order are absent. Lack of leadership and organization, sets the stage for horrible things to take place with software and hardware as well. The result is the inability for anyone to make any significant, efficient use of the available technology.
From my personal experience with these two extreme styles of technology maintenance and management, I concluded that moderation is the way to go. On the one hand, one would like to have someone who is in charge of safeguarding the technology for maintenance-related reasons and to prevent abuse from individuals who lack common sense. On the other hand, one must also ensure that the person who has been vested with the responsibility of managing such technology, does not become imperialistic to the point that he now becomes everyone's abuser. I believe that moderate overseeing of technology is the best compromise, for it benefits the manager as well as the user. In summary, moderation brings the most efficiency out of the technology being discussed, while it also allows the technology manager the highest degree of safeguarding without encroaching into effective, efficient use of technology.
WEEKLY ACTIVITY LOG
- Downloaded and listened to Session 7 blog
- Formulated response to Session 7 blog
- Posted response to Session 7 blog
- Continued working on projects 2 and 3
- Read scholar's blog postings
- Posted comments on scholar's postings
Thursday, February 15, 2007
SESSION 6
BARRIERS TO TECHNOLOGY:
What are the common barriers to technology I see and/or hear in my area?
I work in an area that is perceived in some ways as a leading-edge technology area: Electronics.
Despite of this fact, a common barrier to technology integration I hear and see is the lack of funding due to fiscal budgets. Just like any typical company, our fiscal budget is planned, reviewed, adjusted and adopted; very little room if any is provided for unforseen events. This is particularly true during austerity periods. Ocassionaly, things will change within the budget that will provide for an opportunity for technology integration, provided no other more pressing needs await. Every department within the company has a budget, which usually does not have a built-in discretionary fund; sometimes we have to wait several years to be able to purchase a much-needed piece of technology, because the finances are not in place to make such a purchase possible.
Everyone I talk to, has my personal perception that time has become quite a scarce commodity. I frequently face the same ailment; I have learned to deal with this situation by compressing time. Unfortunately, nothing comes free; time-compression comes with stress as an undesirable side-effect. Hopefully someday soon, we will find a solution to time shortages; such solution should allow us the time we need to more effectively remove bariers to technology integration.
Real Barriers and Proxy Barriers:
It is my opinion that time and money barriers to technology integration are real barriers.
Maintaining a sense of leadership at every level is of paramount importance, for it flows throughout every organization when used appropriately. The gift of creativity is also of utmost importance, because its use will successfully result in the overcoming of technology integration challenges, regardless of the setting. Perseverance is also a key element in the fight for technology integration, for it will allow us to continue forging ahead, even when the going is not going well; perseverance most always results in the attainment of a goal, in this instance it allows us to successfully break barriers impeding the integration of technology.
WEEKLY ACTIVITY LOG:
- Downloaded and listened to Session 6 podcast
- Formulated appropriate response to Session 6 podcast
- Posted response to Session 6 podcast on my blog
- Continued working on my projects
- Read scholar's blogs
- Posted comments on scholar's blogs
-
What are the common barriers to technology I see and/or hear in my area?
I work in an area that is perceived in some ways as a leading-edge technology area: Electronics.
Despite of this fact, a common barrier to technology integration I hear and see is the lack of funding due to fiscal budgets. Just like any typical company, our fiscal budget is planned, reviewed, adjusted and adopted; very little room if any is provided for unforseen events. This is particularly true during austerity periods. Ocassionaly, things will change within the budget that will provide for an opportunity for technology integration, provided no other more pressing needs await. Every department within the company has a budget, which usually does not have a built-in discretionary fund; sometimes we have to wait several years to be able to purchase a much-needed piece of technology, because the finances are not in place to make such a purchase possible.
Everyone I talk to, has my personal perception that time has become quite a scarce commodity. I frequently face the same ailment; I have learned to deal with this situation by compressing time. Unfortunately, nothing comes free; time-compression comes with stress as an undesirable side-effect. Hopefully someday soon, we will find a solution to time shortages; such solution should allow us the time we need to more effectively remove bariers to technology integration.
Real Barriers and Proxy Barriers:
It is my opinion that time and money barriers to technology integration are real barriers.
Maintaining a sense of leadership at every level is of paramount importance, for it flows throughout every organization when used appropriately. The gift of creativity is also of utmost importance, because its use will successfully result in the overcoming of technology integration challenges, regardless of the setting. Perseverance is also a key element in the fight for technology integration, for it will allow us to continue forging ahead, even when the going is not going well; perseverance most always results in the attainment of a goal, in this instance it allows us to successfully break barriers impeding the integration of technology.
WEEKLY ACTIVITY LOG:
- Downloaded and listened to Session 6 podcast
- Formulated appropriate response to Session 6 podcast
- Posted response to Session 6 podcast on my blog
- Continued working on my projects
- Read scholar's blogs
- Posted comments on scholar's blogs
-
Friday, February 9, 2007
SESSION 5 - BEST PRACTICES
RESPONSE ITEM:
As Dr. Newberry explained in his Session 5 podcast, Technology Integration can take many forms. The selection of Best Technology practices is shaped by a number of factors, some of these could be the instructor's approach, the level the instructor is teaching, the subject matter the instructor is teaching, etc. Ultimately, the determining factor as to the selection of a best practice rests in the mind of the beholder, for what to one instructor may appear to be as the best practice when it comes to delivery of knowledge, may not make any sense at all to another instructor. Once again, the answer to the question of what is a best practice rests within the mentality of the instructor given a particular educational setting.
There are indeed, many ways to integrate technology in every educational setting. I believe that the best practice is that which successfully reaches the students and ultimately succeeds at conveying accross to the students the materials and knowledge goals of the lessons. It is very possible to succeed by using many approaches. The decision of which best practice to utilize lies within the instructor's realm and capability. Thus, there is no right or wrong approach to best practice, for its approach is relative.
As part of my response to this assignment, I will cite Power Point as a case of Best Practice. I became gradually acquainted to Power Point, first as a student while attending Junior College. Some of my instructors used this practice to present their lessons to the class. I felt the presentations were very good and I became interested in learning how to use this technology, so that I could integrate it to my personal knowledge base. Thus, my curiosity led me to tinker with power Point, until I reached a level of proficiency where I was able to create simple, but concise presentations.
Eventually, I transfered to this university and my classes actually required me to create Power Point presentations. Thus, I was the able to utilize the skills I learned. I have sucessfully used power point many times. Although I do not consider myself a professional at hanling Power Point, I feel comfortable with this technology. I feel I have integrated this technology to my best practices personal knowledge base.
I really like Power Point because of it's flexibility of application. For example, one can use power point to display text. Power Point can be used as an outline for purposes of a presentation; the outline is presented, while the instructor fills-in the titles with additional details and information. Power Point can also serve as a presentation by itself, because one can add a number of slides that can be run like a mini-movie.
In Power Point, one can also insert sound in every slide. Lastly, depending on your level of expertise, Power Point can be utilized so that it approaches movie quality. By using Power Point in a way that is presented as seamless slides, in which one can add video and sound. When used in this manner, one gets the best out of Power Point.
Power Point is not state-of-the-art technology; it has been around for several years now. I believe it is a very useful technology to use, for it can be used in so many different ways to satisfy almost any imaginable application in the educational setting. Power Point is as flexible as the user's capabilities.
Despite the fact that this is not a new technology, I am amazed at how many people know very little about it. People's level of knowledge about this and other technologies varies, depending on the setting discussed. This explains the knowledge disparity. perhaps more time is needed before more people discover the technological value of Power Point, and incorporate it in their personal knowledge base as a best practice.
WEEKLY LOG:
- Downloaded and listened to Session 5 podcast.
- Formulated a response for Session 5 blog.
- Posted response in blog.
- Posted Project 1 podcast.
- Finished Project 1.
- E-mailed instructor and advised of Project 1 status.
- Continued working on Project 2.
- Continued working on Project 3.
- Read scholar's blogs.
- Posted comments on scholar's blogs.
As Dr. Newberry explained in his Session 5 podcast, Technology Integration can take many forms. The selection of Best Technology practices is shaped by a number of factors, some of these could be the instructor's approach, the level the instructor is teaching, the subject matter the instructor is teaching, etc. Ultimately, the determining factor as to the selection of a best practice rests in the mind of the beholder, for what to one instructor may appear to be as the best practice when it comes to delivery of knowledge, may not make any sense at all to another instructor. Once again, the answer to the question of what is a best practice rests within the mentality of the instructor given a particular educational setting.
There are indeed, many ways to integrate technology in every educational setting. I believe that the best practice is that which successfully reaches the students and ultimately succeeds at conveying accross to the students the materials and knowledge goals of the lessons. It is very possible to succeed by using many approaches. The decision of which best practice to utilize lies within the instructor's realm and capability. Thus, there is no right or wrong approach to best practice, for its approach is relative.
As part of my response to this assignment, I will cite Power Point as a case of Best Practice. I became gradually acquainted to Power Point, first as a student while attending Junior College. Some of my instructors used this practice to present their lessons to the class. I felt the presentations were very good and I became interested in learning how to use this technology, so that I could integrate it to my personal knowledge base. Thus, my curiosity led me to tinker with power Point, until I reached a level of proficiency where I was able to create simple, but concise presentations.
Eventually, I transfered to this university and my classes actually required me to create Power Point presentations. Thus, I was the able to utilize the skills I learned. I have sucessfully used power point many times. Although I do not consider myself a professional at hanling Power Point, I feel comfortable with this technology. I feel I have integrated this technology to my best practices personal knowledge base.
I really like Power Point because of it's flexibility of application. For example, one can use power point to display text. Power Point can be used as an outline for purposes of a presentation; the outline is presented, while the instructor fills-in the titles with additional details and information. Power Point can also serve as a presentation by itself, because one can add a number of slides that can be run like a mini-movie.
In Power Point, one can also insert sound in every slide. Lastly, depending on your level of expertise, Power Point can be utilized so that it approaches movie quality. By using Power Point in a way that is presented as seamless slides, in which one can add video and sound. When used in this manner, one gets the best out of Power Point.
Power Point is not state-of-the-art technology; it has been around for several years now. I believe it is a very useful technology to use, for it can be used in so many different ways to satisfy almost any imaginable application in the educational setting. Power Point is as flexible as the user's capabilities.
Despite the fact that this is not a new technology, I am amazed at how many people know very little about it. People's level of knowledge about this and other technologies varies, depending on the setting discussed. This explains the knowledge disparity. perhaps more time is needed before more people discover the technological value of Power Point, and incorporate it in their personal knowledge base as a best practice.
WEEKLY LOG:
- Downloaded and listened to Session 5 podcast.
- Formulated a response for Session 5 blog.
- Posted response in blog.
- Posted Project 1 podcast.
- Finished Project 1.
- E-mailed instructor and advised of Project 1 status.
- Continued working on Project 2.
- Continued working on Project 3.
- Read scholar's blogs.
- Posted comments on scholar's blogs.
Thursday, February 1, 2007
Weekly Activities
- Downloaded and listened to Session 4 podcast.
- Took podcast notes.
- Began work on data-gathering for projects one, two and three.
- posted response items.
- Read scholars postings.
- Posted comments on scholars blogs.
- Made some necessary changes on this blog.
- Took podcast notes.
- Began work on data-gathering for projects one, two and three.
- posted response items.
- Read scholars postings.
- Posted comments on scholars blogs.
- Made some necessary changes on this blog.
SESSION 4
Session four podcast addresses the concept of "Diffusion of Innovation."
In his book, Mr. Rogers discusses how the adaptation of a new idea flows thru a group of individuals. The rate at which new ideas are accepted by society is determined by their willingness to adapt to a new idea. Individuals are always somewhere within the five levels Mr. Rogers described: Innovators, Early Adapters, Early Majority, Late Majority and Lagers. In our society, everyone is at a different level of comfort when it comes to technology. Naturally and by extension, organizations of every conceivable type are also afflicted by this relative willingness of society to adapt to new technological ideas.
After some soul searching, I determined that I fall in the category of the Early Majority group of individuals. I was able to make such determination by analyzing how I determine when it is time to acquire new technology. I found that since I have experience in electronic design, I also know that when a new product is released in the market it is overpriced: from the business standpoint, this is when the big money is made; there is no competition and the demand for new products is usually high. New product introduction is also the time when all the Research and Development that went into creating the new product must be recovered. Just as important, newly released products have the inherent tendency to have bugs, glitches and/or design flaws. These facts are enough for me to prevent me from purchasing new technology as soon as it appears. In my view, it is better to wait until a product has proven itself to be reliable, problem-free and available at a reasonable price.
I will use cell phone technology as an example: when cell phones first appeared in the market, these were a true novelty, a technological breakthrough, a product which looked quite promising. I also found out how expensive these devices were and how the customer was not only being charged for outgoing calls, but for incoming ones as well; the product had coverage in very limited areas at the time and calls were very frequently dropped. I decided to wait a few years to allow these problems to go away; I knew the technology would become more reliable, the prices would drop and the features would also be more plentiful. I finally decided to purchase a cell phone for myself and my wife and daughter. As I anticipated, there were indeed more features built into these phones: movie recorder, photo camera, sound recorder, internet access, calendar, calculator, notepad, etc. I was very pleased with the prices as well as the service fees. I am still not happy with area reception: my calls are still sometimes dropped.
I must admit that the reason I decided to purchase these phones for myself and my family, was because of necessity; we needed to maintain frequent communication due to ever-changing time schedules among us. Cell phone purchase then became a reasonable thing to do to solve our time scheduling problems. I do not believe I hesitate to change; I welcome technological change, because of the nature of the work I do as an electronics technician. In my field, things are never the same; new products appear all the time. Products that survive on the market, simply come back with more features, more powerful and smaller than before; sometimes the fast pace of technology can be unsettling.
In his book, Mr. Rogers discusses how the adaptation of a new idea flows thru a group of individuals. The rate at which new ideas are accepted by society is determined by their willingness to adapt to a new idea. Individuals are always somewhere within the five levels Mr. Rogers described: Innovators, Early Adapters, Early Majority, Late Majority and Lagers. In our society, everyone is at a different level of comfort when it comes to technology. Naturally and by extension, organizations of every conceivable type are also afflicted by this relative willingness of society to adapt to new technological ideas.
After some soul searching, I determined that I fall in the category of the Early Majority group of individuals. I was able to make such determination by analyzing how I determine when it is time to acquire new technology. I found that since I have experience in electronic design, I also know that when a new product is released in the market it is overpriced: from the business standpoint, this is when the big money is made; there is no competition and the demand for new products is usually high. New product introduction is also the time when all the Research and Development that went into creating the new product must be recovered. Just as important, newly released products have the inherent tendency to have bugs, glitches and/or design flaws. These facts are enough for me to prevent me from purchasing new technology as soon as it appears. In my view, it is better to wait until a product has proven itself to be reliable, problem-free and available at a reasonable price.
I will use cell phone technology as an example: when cell phones first appeared in the market, these were a true novelty, a technological breakthrough, a product which looked quite promising. I also found out how expensive these devices were and how the customer was not only being charged for outgoing calls, but for incoming ones as well; the product had coverage in very limited areas at the time and calls were very frequently dropped. I decided to wait a few years to allow these problems to go away; I knew the technology would become more reliable, the prices would drop and the features would also be more plentiful. I finally decided to purchase a cell phone for myself and my wife and daughter. As I anticipated, there were indeed more features built into these phones: movie recorder, photo camera, sound recorder, internet access, calendar, calculator, notepad, etc. I was very pleased with the prices as well as the service fees. I am still not happy with area reception: my calls are still sometimes dropped.
I must admit that the reason I decided to purchase these phones for myself and my family, was because of necessity; we needed to maintain frequent communication due to ever-changing time schedules among us. Cell phone purchase then became a reasonable thing to do to solve our time scheduling problems. I do not believe I hesitate to change; I welcome technological change, because of the nature of the work I do as an electronics technician. In my field, things are never the same; new products appear all the time. Products that survive on the market, simply come back with more features, more powerful and smaller than before; sometimes the fast pace of technology can be unsettling.
Friday, January 26, 2007
PROJECT PROPOSALS POSTING
I finally got my project proposals approved by Dr. Newberry. As per his suggestion, he asked to post these in my blog and solicit peer feedback as well as suggestions; thus, I hereby present to all of you scholars, my project proposals for your evaluation.
BACKGROUND:
Presently, I do not teach under the umbrella of the State of California. Rather, I conduct Corporate Training as needed for my employer, QSC Audio, Inc. which is a professional audio manufacturer located in Costa Mesa, California. My corporate training sessions consist of lectures aimed to Authorized Service Center's technical staff. These individuals come to our manufacturing plant to become familiar with the repair and maintenance of our electronic products. The training available at our plant varies, ranging from basic troubleshooting and repair, to very intricate subjects, such as lectures on amplifier architecture, amplifier design theory, amplifier power parameters, the understanding of engineering specifications, sound system design, audio distribution system design, audio distribution layouts, etc.. Consequently, my projects are based on the present teaching environment I find myself in. Please, follow the links to my projects and provide some feedback. Thank you.
BACKGROUND:
Presently, I do not teach under the umbrella of the State of California. Rather, I conduct Corporate Training as needed for my employer, QSC Audio, Inc. which is a professional audio manufacturer located in Costa Mesa, California. My corporate training sessions consist of lectures aimed to Authorized Service Center's technical staff. These individuals come to our manufacturing plant to become familiar with the repair and maintenance of our electronic products. The training available at our plant varies, ranging from basic troubleshooting and repair, to very intricate subjects, such as lectures on amplifier architecture, amplifier design theory, amplifier power parameters, the understanding of engineering specifications, sound system design, audio distribution system design, audio distribution layouts, etc.. Consequently, my projects are based on the present teaching environment I find myself in. Please, follow the links to my projects and provide some feedback. Thank you.
Thursday, January 25, 2007
Weekly Activities
- Downloaded and listened to session 3 podcast.
- Took podcast notes.
- Read other scholar's responses.
- Posted comments on other scholar's blogs.
- Worked to develop project ideas.
- Submitted project ideas to Dr. Newberry and solicited feedback.
- After some e-mail exchanges, my project ideas were clear to be posted in my blog.
- posted response to Session 3 questions.
- Finalized project proposals.
- Published project proposals.
- Took podcast notes.
- Read other scholar's responses.
- Posted comments on other scholar's blogs.
- Worked to develop project ideas.
- Submitted project ideas to Dr. Newberry and solicited feedback.
- After some e-mail exchanges, my project ideas were clear to be posted in my blog.
- posted response to Session 3 questions.
- Finalized project proposals.
- Published project proposals.
SESSION 3
Can Technology Integration in American classrooms adequately and correctly be expressed as a hierarchy?
I downloaded and listened to Dr. Newberry's podcast regarding what he termed his technology integration "hierarchy". In his podcast, Dr. Newberry explained what he preceived to be five ascending levels of technology integration in the American classroom. Dr. Newberry described these levels, starting with the lowest as the Adjunt or Peripheral State of Technology Integration, followed by the next level in this case termed as the Use of Computers by Teachers as a Tool. The next level of technology integration was the Non-Integrated Use of Computers. The fourth level was called the Integrated Use of computers as a Student Tool. The highest level of technolgy integration was termed Transformation.
My answer to Dr. Newberry's question as to whether technology integration in American classrooms adequately and correctly be expressed as a hierarchy, is the following:
First of all, the question of adequacy is to a large degree a subjective one; by that I mean to say that as long as the concept Dr. Newberry is trying to get accross does make sense to the receiving party, namely the students, that makes it right for the idea to be termed adequate.
Secondly, the question of correctness is of no consequence, since there is no right or wrong way to express technology integration. The key point to remember here is that the analogy gives the student a reference point by which the student can grasp the concept Dr. Newberry is trying to get accross to everyone in his lectures. If this method is successful, then it can be deemed correct.
Since there is no right or wrong way to adequately and correctly express technology integration, then any expression that serves the purpose is also just as adequate and correct; therefore, we could conceivably say that technology integration can also be represented as a bell-shaped curve, that technology integration can be represented as a pyramid, a ladder, as different levels of strata, etc.
In conclusion, what someone chooses to describe technology integration is not important; rather, whether the type of imagery used that successfully conveys the key idea is what makes it adequate and or correct.
We scholars see different things to represent the same thing; as long as we end up with the same mental conclusion, we all are in the same page; for there is an underlying common denominator we all can converge to.
In conclusion, to answer Dr. Newberry's question: you perceive a hierarchy and I perceive a strata; nevertheless, we both understand the underlying concept. Dr. Newberry, based on the aforementioned facts, it is POSSIBLE for Technology Integration in the American classroom to be adequately and correctly expressed as a hierarchy.
I downloaded and listened to Dr. Newberry's podcast regarding what he termed his technology integration "hierarchy". In his podcast, Dr. Newberry explained what he preceived to be five ascending levels of technology integration in the American classroom. Dr. Newberry described these levels, starting with the lowest as the Adjunt or Peripheral State of Technology Integration, followed by the next level in this case termed as the Use of Computers by Teachers as a Tool. The next level of technology integration was the Non-Integrated Use of Computers. The fourth level was called the Integrated Use of computers as a Student Tool. The highest level of technolgy integration was termed Transformation.
My answer to Dr. Newberry's question as to whether technology integration in American classrooms adequately and correctly be expressed as a hierarchy, is the following:
First of all, the question of adequacy is to a large degree a subjective one; by that I mean to say that as long as the concept Dr. Newberry is trying to get accross does make sense to the receiving party, namely the students, that makes it right for the idea to be termed adequate.
Secondly, the question of correctness is of no consequence, since there is no right or wrong way to express technology integration. The key point to remember here is that the analogy gives the student a reference point by which the student can grasp the concept Dr. Newberry is trying to get accross to everyone in his lectures. If this method is successful, then it can be deemed correct.
Since there is no right or wrong way to adequately and correctly express technology integration, then any expression that serves the purpose is also just as adequate and correct; therefore, we could conceivably say that technology integration can also be represented as a bell-shaped curve, that technology integration can be represented as a pyramid, a ladder, as different levels of strata, etc.
In conclusion, what someone chooses to describe technology integration is not important; rather, whether the type of imagery used that successfully conveys the key idea is what makes it adequate and or correct.
We scholars see different things to represent the same thing; as long as we end up with the same mental conclusion, we all are in the same page; for there is an underlying common denominator we all can converge to.
In conclusion, to answer Dr. Newberry's question: you perceive a hierarchy and I perceive a strata; nevertheless, we both understand the underlying concept. Dr. Newberry, based on the aforementioned facts, it is POSSIBLE for Technology Integration in the American classroom to be adequately and correctly expressed as a hierarchy.
Sunday, January 21, 2007
SESSION 2
I listened to Dr. Newberry's podcast; in it, he discussed the difference between management and leadership. Despite the fact that I was not expecting this subject to emerge out of his podcast I listened to the material presented anyhow.
After listening to Dr. Newberry's lecture, I concluded that managers are mostly interested in the maintenance and control of the daily affairs of the group of people they have been entrusted with; this is the manager's way to reach the objectives of the particular organization in question. Leaders on the other hand, are more apt to think outside the box; these individuals contantly dream up of ways to improve things, procedures, plans, products etc. Leaders by nature are not very interested in the way things are now; rather, they are focused on the way things could be, guided by this relentless vision that constantly whispers to them that things can always be improved, that there is a better way to do something.
Everyone has in themselves the qualities of both a manager and a leader; the ratios of these two qualities however, vary quite a bit from one individual to another: sometimes someone comes accross as an excellent leader, while such individual could also come accross as a lousy manager; other times, another individual comes accross as just the opposite. We must also entertain the idea of all the possible combinations in between these two extremes.
There is a multitude of reasons as to why someone makes a good manger and less of a good leader; perhaps the main reason has to do with the individual's level of commitment to the position entrusted in him; with the idea that management simply consists of just making sure things run smoothly. It is possible that the individual is quite content with the way things are and the initiative to work past his circle of control is simply not there. Or perhaps, working outside the box, working outside the "comfort zone" is theatening to the manager.
I believe most people make good managers; leaders on the other hand are harder to come by. This is because most of us are not comfortable pushing the envelope; let's face it, it requires far more energy and effort to be a good leader, it also requires for the leader to feel that he is fulfilling a natural calling in him. Most people tend to naturally do no more than the absolute minimum required of them. Perhaps this is natural instinct, perhaps it is plain laziness; the point is: it is out there.
The study of Economics is based on the concept that there is a finite amount of economic resources that must be distributed by some sort of efficient system. Based on such concept, the manager's aim is to utilize the limited resources to efficiently run the business operation; the leader on the other hand, strives to come up with new, creative ways to maximize the efficiency with which the resources can be allocated to extract the maximum amount of benefit possible out of the same amount of resources.
It is obvious to note that the leader is looking farther than the manager into how the scarce resources can be more efficiently utilized by the research of never-before used ideas, concepts and newly-emerging theories and procedures. Perhaps the main difference from a manager and a leader is that whereas the manager's goal is to maintain a balance and control of the way things are by being conservative, the leader is a visionary who is capable of developing new concepts, calculates risk and is not as averse to risk-taking to the extent the manager is.
In my anecdotal example, I will compare and contrast my last employer versus my present employer's business styles: my previous employer was a mammoth company that took a very long time to change and implement new ideas; this was because of the firmly-entrenched management culture which resisted change of any type; these individuals were quite content with maintaining the status quo. You will notice that at the beginning of this paragraph I mentioned the word "was"; this is because shortly after I left the job, they were bought out by their competition; thus, the company is now out of business. My present employer on the other hand, is a very dynamic company; management changes rapidly to meet the customer's demands, they quickly react to market changes and they also put lots of effort to anticipate adverse market changes while they also take advantage of positive market changes. Since my present employer is made up of a group of managers who spend most of their time acting as leaders, this has resulted in the company becoming a success as well as a major player in their particular niche.
Weekly Activities:
- Still working hard to catch up with the rest of the class.
- Struggling with photo post in my blog.
- Busily responding to response items on weekly log.
- Reading blog posts.
- Posting comments on blog posts.
- Trying to come up with project ideas; nothing specific yet.
- Downloading podcast for session three.
I listened to Dr. Newberry's podcast; in it, he discussed the difference between management and leadership. Despite the fact that I was not expecting this subject to emerge out of his podcast I listened to the material presented anyhow.
After listening to Dr. Newberry's lecture, I concluded that managers are mostly interested in the maintenance and control of the daily affairs of the group of people they have been entrusted with; this is the manager's way to reach the objectives of the particular organization in question. Leaders on the other hand, are more apt to think outside the box; these individuals contantly dream up of ways to improve things, procedures, plans, products etc. Leaders by nature are not very interested in the way things are now; rather, they are focused on the way things could be, guided by this relentless vision that constantly whispers to them that things can always be improved, that there is a better way to do something.
Everyone has in themselves the qualities of both a manager and a leader; the ratios of these two qualities however, vary quite a bit from one individual to another: sometimes someone comes accross as an excellent leader, while such individual could also come accross as a lousy manager; other times, another individual comes accross as just the opposite. We must also entertain the idea of all the possible combinations in between these two extremes.
There is a multitude of reasons as to why someone makes a good manger and less of a good leader; perhaps the main reason has to do with the individual's level of commitment to the position entrusted in him; with the idea that management simply consists of just making sure things run smoothly. It is possible that the individual is quite content with the way things are and the initiative to work past his circle of control is simply not there. Or perhaps, working outside the box, working outside the "comfort zone" is theatening to the manager.
I believe most people make good managers; leaders on the other hand are harder to come by. This is because most of us are not comfortable pushing the envelope; let's face it, it requires far more energy and effort to be a good leader, it also requires for the leader to feel that he is fulfilling a natural calling in him. Most people tend to naturally do no more than the absolute minimum required of them. Perhaps this is natural instinct, perhaps it is plain laziness; the point is: it is out there.
The study of Economics is based on the concept that there is a finite amount of economic resources that must be distributed by some sort of efficient system. Based on such concept, the manager's aim is to utilize the limited resources to efficiently run the business operation; the leader on the other hand, strives to come up with new, creative ways to maximize the efficiency with which the resources can be allocated to extract the maximum amount of benefit possible out of the same amount of resources.
It is obvious to note that the leader is looking farther than the manager into how the scarce resources can be more efficiently utilized by the research of never-before used ideas, concepts and newly-emerging theories and procedures. Perhaps the main difference from a manager and a leader is that whereas the manager's goal is to maintain a balance and control of the way things are by being conservative, the leader is a visionary who is capable of developing new concepts, calculates risk and is not as averse to risk-taking to the extent the manager is.
In my anecdotal example, I will compare and contrast my last employer versus my present employer's business styles: my previous employer was a mammoth company that took a very long time to change and implement new ideas; this was because of the firmly-entrenched management culture which resisted change of any type; these individuals were quite content with maintaining the status quo. You will notice that at the beginning of this paragraph I mentioned the word "was"; this is because shortly after I left the job, they were bought out by their competition; thus, the company is now out of business. My present employer on the other hand, is a very dynamic company; management changes rapidly to meet the customer's demands, they quickly react to market changes and they also put lots of effort to anticipate adverse market changes while they also take advantage of positive market changes. Since my present employer is made up of a group of managers who spend most of their time acting as leaders, this has resulted in the company becoming a success as well as a major player in their particular niche.
Weekly Activities:
- Still working hard to catch up with the rest of the class.
- Struggling with photo post in my blog.
- Busily responding to response items on weekly log.
- Reading blog posts.
- Posting comments on blog posts.
- Trying to come up with project ideas; nothing specific yet.
- Downloading podcast for session three.
Monday, January 15, 2007
Hello ETEC 623 class,
I am very glad to be part of this class for the Winter quarter; I am looking forward to the knowledge that might be acquired by taking this course.
Thus far, learning has been quite edifying; I use computers frequently. Nevertheless, the term "Blog" and its use are foreign to me.
Because of a course scheduling conflict, it turned out I had to take this course over the original prescribed one, as directed by my graduation schedule. Consequently I lost time; thus, I enrolled late in this course.
Figuring out all the ins and outs of the alleged "Blog", plus a really tight schedule have resulted in me falling slightly behind; nevertheless, I still believe I will be able to work everything out and successfully finish this course (in theory at least, this is what my crystal ball is telling me; its been known to lie to me a few times).
Putting all fears aside and bravely hoping for the best, I have decided to close my eyes and do all three project Dr. Newberry is requesting in order to obtain the letter grade of "A". (Please, do not ask me yet what those projects will be, for I do not have the slightest idea at this moment).
I am very glad to be part of this class for the Winter quarter; I am looking forward to the knowledge that might be acquired by taking this course.
Thus far, learning has been quite edifying; I use computers frequently. Nevertheless, the term "Blog" and its use are foreign to me.
Because of a course scheduling conflict, it turned out I had to take this course over the original prescribed one, as directed by my graduation schedule. Consequently I lost time; thus, I enrolled late in this course.
Figuring out all the ins and outs of the alleged "Blog", plus a really tight schedule have resulted in me falling slightly behind; nevertheless, I still believe I will be able to work everything out and successfully finish this course (in theory at least, this is what my crystal ball is telling me; its been known to lie to me a few times).
Putting all fears aside and bravely hoping for the best, I have decided to close my eyes and do all three project Dr. Newberry is requesting in order to obtain the letter grade of "A". (Please, do not ask me yet what those projects will be, for I do not have the slightest idea at this moment).
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
