Transformation Directions: A Forward Look

1. Transformation Directions: A Forward Look Kurt B. Richter, Ed.D. Educational Technology Specialist University of North Carolina Charlotte

2. Key Markers of the Information Age Features for Education? People learn at different rates… Sorting vs. Learning Time-based Attainment-based Group-based Person-based Teacher-based Resource-based

3. Key Markerssof the Information Age Look at our Current Changes Industrial Age Information Age Bureaucratic organization Team organization Autocratic leadership Shared leadership Centralized control Autonomy, accountability Adversarial relationships Cooperative relationships Mass production, etc. Customized production, etc. Compliance Initiative Conformity Diversity One-way communications Networking Compartmentalization Holism (Division of Labor) (Integration of tasks)

4. What is Paradigm change…and what might the new paradigm look like? BOTTOM LINE: To move from sorting-focused system to a learning-focused system… American Education MUST move from…

5. Transformation Directions: MSD Decatur • Decatur is a township of Indianapolis, on SW side. • Schools: 1 high (9-12), 1 middle (7-8), 2 intermediate (5-6), 4 elementary (K-4), and 1 early childhood. • Approximately 5,500 students and 350 full-time teachers. • Initiated a district-wide systemic change project in January 2001, using the GSTE. • Fall 2008: Redesign of Grade 5-6 Learning Academy • Spring 2009: Redesign moved to Enrollment Management Design Effort • 2009-Present: Recovery and forward movement.

6. Transformation Directions: MSD Decatur • Efforts to engage in Standards based education include: • Movement from K-4/Intermediate (5-6)/Junior HS (7-8)/HS (9-12) T0 • K-6/Junior HS/HS Coming soon: • Non-graded promotion • Small Schools integrating thematic education in multiple settings • District Choice • Teacher-groupings with shared principals • Standards-based promotion (PIES)

7. Transformation Directions: OTHERS ReInventingSchools Corporation (RISC) Standards-Based Education: Students advance only when (and as soon as) standards are met.

8. Transformation Directions: OTHERS Standards-Based Education: Students advance only when (and as soon as) standards are met.

9. Why PIES? Paradigm change • Knowledge work rather than manual labor • Learning-focused rather than sorting-focused (student progress) • Student assessment and Student records • Student self-direction and motivation (relevant, authentic) Need for technology to play different roles • The need for seamless integration of all aspects of student learning • Student records, planning, instruction, assessment, communications, etc. • ILSs, CMSs, and LMSs do not provide necessary functionality • Grade books, teacher-centered, group-paced AECT Anaheim 2010

10. PIES: Major Functions AECT Anaheim 2010

11. Pause while Kurt Takes a time limit Breath! • Dr. Kurt B. Richter • UNC Charlotte • E: kurichte@indiana.edu • Dr. Charles M. Reigeluth • Indiana University • E: reigelut@indiana.edu Materials link: http://kurtrichter.com/siia/

12. PIES: Major Functions: Record-Keeping AECT Anaheim 2010

13. PIES Major Functions: Planning AECT Anaheim 2010

14. PIES Major Functions: Instruction AECT Anaheim 2010

15. PIES Major Functions: Assessment AECT Anaheim 2010

16. PIES: SecondaryFunctions Communication • Communication via PIES • Parents/teachers: to get access to students’ inventory of attainments • Two-way communication between parents and teachers • Two-way communication between students and teachers • Two-way communication among students • Tools for communication • Web 2.0 technologies: Wikis/ Blogs/ Podcasts/ Video-sharing websites/… • Internet technologies: webpage creation, discussion boards, and whiteboards AECT Anaheim 2010

17. PIES: SecondaryFunctions General Student Data Function • A student’s name, address, birth date, parent information, health information, attendance • The student’s mentor & teachers, major life events, school or learning community one belongs to, and community organizations one is involved with; physical location School Personnel Information Function • A teacher’s name and address • Assigned students, certifications and awards received, professional development plan and progress; physical location PIES Administration Function • Supporting administration of sensitive data • Providing and restricting access to the data AECT Anaheim 2010

18. PIES: Future Activities • The PIES APP: • Open • Preferably open source • Open API’s (external developers may develop for platform, similar to Google, Facebook) • Interoperable • Functionality is not restricted to use in one application but can communicate with multiple platforms (GoogleMaps) • Customizable • User can customize interface and even functionality with drag-and-drop ease (iGoogle) • Modularized • Built on a platform of function-focused apps, rather than a single, massive application (Web 2.0) AECT Anaheim 2010

19. PIES: Future Activities Phase 1: A funded project to develop and improve PIES • Rapid prototype for “proof of concept” with an existing open-source system (e.g., Moodle) • Formative evaluation with teachers in a new-paradigm school to identify R&D priorities • Spearheaded by Dabae Lee & Yeol Huh Phase 2: A funded project to develop PIES 1.0 • Address the R&D priorities found in Phase 1. Phase 3: A funded project to formatively evaluate and improve PIES 1.0 • Try out in several schools and revise. AECT Anaheim 2010

20. Questions? Comments? Links? • Dr. Kurt B. Richter • UNC Charlotte • E: kurichte@indiana.edu • Dr. Charles M. Reigeluth • Indiana University • E: reigelut@indiana.edu Materials link: http://kurtrichter.com/siia/

21. Selected Publications Reigeluth, C. M., Watson, S. L., Watson, W. R., Dutta, P., Chen, Z., & Powell, N. (2008). Roles for technology in the information-age paradigm of education: Learning management systems. Educational Technology, 48(6), 32-39. Watson, W. R., Lee, S., & Reigeluth, C. M. (2007). Learning Management Systems: An overview and roadmap of the systemic application of computers to education. In F. M. M. Neto & F. V. Brasileiro (Eds.), Advances in computer-supported learning (pp. 66-96). London: Information Science Publishing. Watson, W. R., & Watson, S. L. (2007). An argument for clarity: What are Learning Management Systems, what are they not, and what should they become? TechTrends, 51(2), 28-34. Watson, S. L., & Reigeluth, C. M. (2008, Sept.–Oct.). The learner-centered paradigm of education. EducationalTechnology, 48(5), 39–48. AECT Anaheim 2010