<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: IT Integration Planning: Requirements for Success</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mscofino.edublogs.org/2007/05/04/it-integration-planning-requirements-for-success/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mscofino.edublogs.org/2007/05/04/it-integration-planning-requirements-for-success/</link>
	<description>teaching technology abroad</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Sep 2010 22:39:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: We Are All Technology Teachers</title>
		<link>http://mscofino.edublogs.org/2007/05/04/it-integration-planning-requirements-for-success/comment-page-1/#comment-3100</link>
		<dc:creator>We Are All Technology Teachers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 14:07:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mscofino.edublogs.org/2007/05/04/it-integration-planning-requirements-for-success/#comment-3100</guid>
		<description>[...] One interesting topic of discussion came up on Saturday: an administrator asked me if we should be expecting classroom teachers to teach technology, to be responsible for this additional subject along with their standard course material. Basically the question was about the value of technology as an integrated subject (with all teachers responsible for the instruction) versus a discrete course (with one or two specialists responsible for the instruction). Interestingly, I haven&#8217;t really had this conversation in a while, since ISB had adopted an integrated approach before I even arrived three years ago, but it certainly was a hot topic in both KL and Munich where I was part of the transition process from stand-alone IT courses to an integrated model. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] One interesting topic of discussion came up on Saturday: an administrator asked me if we should be expecting classroom teachers to teach technology, to be responsible for this additional subject along with their standard course material. Basically the question was about the value of technology as an integrated subject (with all teachers responsible for the instruction) versus a discrete course (with one or two specialists responsible for the instruction). Interestingly, I haven&#8217;t really had this conversation in a while, since ISB had adopted an integrated approach before I even arrived three years ago, but it certainly was a hot topic in both KL and Munich where I was part of the transition process from stand-alone IT courses to an integrated model. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: We Are All Technology Teachers &#124; always learning</title>
		<link>http://mscofino.edublogs.org/2007/05/04/it-integration-planning-requirements-for-success/comment-page-1/#comment-3090</link>
		<dc:creator>We Are All Technology Teachers &#124; always learning</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 09:39:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mscofino.edublogs.org/2007/05/04/it-integration-planning-requirements-for-success/#comment-3090</guid>
		<description>[...] One interesting topic of discussion came up on Saturday: an administrator asked me if we should be expecting classroom teachers to teach technology, to be responsible for this additional subject along with their standard course material. Basically the question was about the value of technology as an integrated subject (with all teachers responsible for the instruction) versus a discrete course (with one or two specialists responsible for the instruction). Interestingly, I haven&#8217;t really had this conversation in a while, since ISB had adopted an integrated approach before I even arrived three years ago, but it certainly was a hot topic in both KL and Munich where I was part of the transition process from stand-alone IT courses to an integrated model. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] One interesting topic of discussion came up on Saturday: an administrator asked me if we should be expecting classroom teachers to teach technology, to be responsible for this additional subject along with their standard course material. Basically the question was about the value of technology as an integrated subject (with all teachers responsible for the instruction) versus a discrete course (with one or two specialists responsible for the instruction). Interestingly, I haven&#8217;t really had this conversation in a while, since ISB had adopted an integrated approach before I even arrived three years ago, but it certainly was a hot topic in both KL and Munich where I was part of the transition process from stand-alone IT courses to an integrated model. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mscofino</title>
		<link>http://mscofino.edublogs.org/2007/05/04/it-integration-planning-requirements-for-success/comment-page-1/#comment-731</link>
		<dc:creator>mscofino</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2007 02:09:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mscofino.edublogs.org/2007/05/04/it-integration-planning-requirements-for-success/#comment-731</guid>
		<description>Julie,

Thanks for all your positive feedback and great questions! I hope that my post from yesterday clarified things a bit better :)

Paul,

Thank you for sharing your process! We should chat about how things went in each of our schools. I&#039;d be interested to hear about what you&#039;re going through and to compare it to what we&#039;re doing here.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Julie,</p>
<p>Thanks for all your positive feedback and great questions! I hope that my post from yesterday clarified things a bit better <img src='http://mscofino.edublogs.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Paul,</p>
<p>Thank you for sharing your process! We should chat about how things went in each of our schools. I&#8217;d be interested to hear about what you&#8217;re going through and to compare it to what we&#8217;re doing here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: always learning &#187; IT Integration Planning: The Role of the Facilitator</title>
		<link>http://mscofino.edublogs.org/2007/05/04/it-integration-planning-requirements-for-success/comment-page-1/#comment-714</link>
		<dc:creator>always learning &#187; IT Integration Planning: The Role of the Facilitator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 May 2007 02:36:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mscofino.edublogs.org/2007/05/04/it-integration-planning-requirements-for-success/#comment-714</guid>
		<description>[...] Julie left a great question on my last post about our tech integration framework: What sort of technology facilitator to teacher ratio are you advocating? One to 100 for example? One to a year level? One to a school section? Given that most schools, from what I can tell, have not embraced this position(s) as worthwhile&#8230;.(what, not have your own classes!) I suggest you could come up with some suggestions as to what the facilitator model can look like. How many classes/students do you cater for? Is it too many? Also, administration structure&#8230;who makes the decisions? How powerful are YOU in your school? It would be interesting to compare notes on this. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Julie left a great question on my last post about our tech integration framework: What sort of technology facilitator to teacher ratio are you advocating? One to 100 for example? One to a year level? One to a school section? Given that most schools, from what I can tell, have not embraced this position(s) as worthwhile&#8230;.(what, not have your own classes!) I suggest you could come up with some suggestions as to what the facilitator model can look like. How many classes/students do you cater for? Is it too many? Also, administration structure&#8230;who makes the decisions? How powerful are YOU in your school? It would be interesting to compare notes on this. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PaulWill</title>
		<link>http://mscofino.edublogs.org/2007/05/04/it-integration-planning-requirements-for-success/comment-page-1/#comment-697</link>
		<dc:creator>PaulWill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2007 21:14:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mscofino.edublogs.org/2007/05/04/it-integration-planning-requirements-for-success/#comment-697</guid>
		<description>Hi Kim,

I have doing exactly the same thing as you, in respect to trying to create a e-Learning and ICT Continuing Professional Development Vision, Plan and Documentation.

We have a similar process, which is quite a relief, I have gone through my vision like so:

1) Aims - for Teachers, Management &amp; Trainers
2) Training Analysis - What do we need to be able to do?
3) Motivation - why we need to change?
4) Application - How do we do this?
5) Review - How do we know what has been done?
6) Continuing Momentum - How do we keep going?

This is by no way the best way or the only way to do this process, but I thought it might be useful if you saw the similarities and differences in our 2 processes.

good luck with your project, I hope the wiki work all goes well!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Kim,</p>
<p>I have doing exactly the same thing as you, in respect to trying to create a e-Learning and ICT Continuing Professional Development Vision, Plan and Documentation.</p>
<p>We have a similar process, which is quite a relief, I have gone through my vision like so:</p>
<p>1) Aims &#8211; for Teachers, Management &amp; Trainers<br />
2) Training Analysis &#8211; What do we need to be able to do?<br />
3) Motivation &#8211; why we need to change?<br />
4) Application &#8211; How do we do this?<br />
5) Review &#8211; How do we know what has been done?<br />
6) Continuing Momentum &#8211; How do we keep going?</p>
<p>This is by no way the best way or the only way to do this process, but I thought it might be useful if you saw the similarities and differences in our 2 processes.</p>
<p>good luck with your project, I hope the wiki work all goes well!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Julie Lindsay</title>
		<link>http://mscofino.edublogs.org/2007/05/04/it-integration-planning-requirements-for-success/comment-page-1/#comment-684</link>
		<dc:creator>Julie Lindsay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2007 01:43:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mscofino.edublogs.org/2007/05/04/it-integration-planning-requirements-for-success/#comment-684</guid>
		<description>Kim, you are certainly taking your school-wide approach to technology integration to a higher level. I think you have been fair in allocating points to infrastructure and curriculum and have made it very clear that the mandate for 21st century learning has to come first (the biggest hurdle I feel). Equitable access to resources is one of the biggest frustrations still as if this hurdle exists then teachers are not always willing to keep going to the next hurdle or the next. A simple tool such as a digital projector in every classroom can make the difference between being on board with the mandate or not.
What sort of technology facilitator to teacher ratio are you advocating? One to 100 for example? One to a year level? One to a school section? Given that most schools, from what I can tell, have not embraced this position(s) as worthwhile....(what, not have your own classes!) I suggest you could come up with some suggestions as to what the facilitator model can look like. How many classes/students do you cater for? Is it too many? Also, administration structure...who makes the decisions? How powerful are YOU in your school? It would be interesting to compare notes on this ;-) You may have blogged about this before? If not, this is my request for your next blog post. Thanks again for your words of wisdom and inspiration!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kim, you are certainly taking your school-wide approach to technology integration to a higher level. I think you have been fair in allocating points to infrastructure and curriculum and have made it very clear that the mandate for 21st century learning has to come first (the biggest hurdle I feel). Equitable access to resources is one of the biggest frustrations still as if this hurdle exists then teachers are not always willing to keep going to the next hurdle or the next. A simple tool such as a digital projector in every classroom can make the difference between being on board with the mandate or not.<br />
What sort of technology facilitator to teacher ratio are you advocating? One to 100 for example? One to a year level? One to a school section? Given that most schools, from what I can tell, have not embraced this position(s) as worthwhile&#8230;.(what, not have your own classes!) I suggest you could come up with some suggestions as to what the facilitator model can look like. How many classes/students do you cater for? Is it too many? Also, administration structure&#8230;who makes the decisions? How powerful are YOU in your school? It would be interesting to compare notes on this <img src='http://mscofino.edublogs.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' />  You may have blogged about this before? If not, this is my request for your next blog post. Thanks again for your words of wisdom and inspiration!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
