Reflections+on+Overall+Degree+Plan

Reflections on Overall Degree Program**
 * [[file:Reflections on Overall Degree Program McDaniels.doc]]

The Master’s of Educational Technology Leadership program has been an important part of my growth and development as an educator. I have expanded my technology skills and become very familiar with aspects of school leadership. Prior to this experience, I was a strong teacher, but I feel that the knowledge I have gained has had a significant impact on my future in the field of education and my role as a leader. Throughout each course, I felt confident that the lectures, readings, and assignments were designed to address state objectives and standards that all educational technology leadership candidates should master. As I studied Curriculum Management, the TEA Learning System, and Instructional Design, I realized that, due to accountability purposes, educators are becoming less likely to commit what Wiggins and McTighe (2005) identify as the “twin sins” of lesson design (p. 16). These two commonly committed mistakes involve activity-based lesson design and coverage-based lesson design. In such cases, the curriculum is not designed with the end in mind; therefore, the lessons, units, and courses are not logically inferred from the results sought. However, this is not the case with the courses in the Educational Technology Leadership program through Lamar University. Instead, the rubrics for each assignment closely aligned with the state standards for certifications in administrative leadership and technology leadership. Therefore, I feel very confident that each course consisted of requirements that implemented standards-based curricula and assessments. As a result of this backward design, I feel highly prepared to pass the certification tests in these areas and earn official credentials to attain a leadership position and be very successful.

References:

Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J. (2005b). Understanding by design. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, p. 16.