capstone report screencasting: differentiated teaching and...

Running head: CAPSTONE REPORT 1

Capstone Report

Screencasting: Differentiated Teaching and Learning Opportunities

James Chase-Wegner

Kennesaw State University

October 22, 2016

Dr. Anissa Vega

Fall 2016 (Cohort 19)

Running head: CAPSTONE REPORT 2 Description of Capstone Experience and Results

The experiences that the candidate engaged in throughout the completion of this capstone

project were valuable. Many new skills and lessons were learned along the way. After completing the

capstone paper in the Fall of 2015 the candidate fine-tuned the survey questions in preparation to gain

IRB approval from Kennesaw State University and permission to perform research through the Paulding

County School District. With the assistance of the P.B. Ritch Middle School administration, the

candidate was able to get the Capstone Project listed as a sanctioned opportunity within the district for

staff to earn Professional Learning Units (PLUs). Staff that attended, participated, and completed the

assigned job-embedded professional development activities were able to earn PLU credits.

Historically screencasting has been used for out of class remediation and extension; however,

the focus of this capstone project was to use screencasting to provide opportunities for in class

differentiation of content, product, and process in order to create lessons in which students are given

assistance or challenged depending on current understanding of standards and cognitive ability. The

candidate envisions screencasting as an opportunity to provide multiple pathways within a single

teacher classroom where teachers can provide opportunities for high achieving students to move ahead

or even move beyond the standards. The candidate also believes screencasting can be used to provide

struggling students with opportunities for increased one-on-one interaction without slowing down

instruction for other classmates. The instruction and activities that participant engaged in focused

directly on using screencasting to differentiate instruction for students in their classrooms which

allowed for job embedded professional learning.

The initial survey was sent to the entire staff at P.B. Ritch Middle School to help garner interest.

This survey was also meant to assist the candidate in understanding the skills and deficits of those

interested in joining this professional development opportunity. By analyzing the data from the initial

Running head: CAPSTONE REPORT 3 survey the candidate was able to gain a better understanding of the prior knowledge and attitudes that

participants would be bringing with them into the professional learning group. This allowed the

candidate to focus on the specific needs and learning styles of the participants. The participants were

two 6th grade teachers and four 8th grade teachers from within the candidates building at P.B. Ritch

Middle School. The content areas taught by participants included Science, Math, English Language Arts,

Social Studies, Spanish, and Family and Consumer Science. The teaching experience of the participants

ranged from 1-5 years (1), 6-10 years (3), and 15+ years (2). A Likert scale ranging from 1-5 with one

being the lowest level and five being the highest level was utilized for several survey questions. The

average current understanding of using data from informal, formative, and summative assessments to

drive instruction for my participant group was 3.5. The average current level of ability to provide

instruction to students at the highest levels and lowest levels within the same class period for my

participant group was 2.83. One member of the participant group felt as though they had a strong

understanding of screencasting tools prior to this professional learning opportunity while three

members had absolutely no experience with screencasting. Participants had the lowest level to an

above average understanding of what flipped learning meant with a scattering of scores ranging 1 to 4

with an average understanding of 3.5. Participants were slightly less comfortable with the concept of

blending learning with an average understanding of 3.33. The participants average current level of

technology implementation for instructional purposes was 3.16. The participants average current level

of technology implementation for remediation purposes was 3.33. The participants average current

level of technology implementation for extension purposes was 3.33. The participants average current

level of technology implementation for assessment purposes was 4.2. All participants agreed that

“technology implementation would be more successful if given support and participants had the

opportunity to design, create, implement, receive coaching, and reflect on successes and shortcomings.”

All participants chose the survey choice that stated “these elements are quite often lacking in the

Running head: CAPSTONE REPORT 4 process.” The candidate took these responses into consideration when designing this professional

development course, methods of instruction, and overall approach to the coaching opportunity. The

online learning management system Edmodo was utilized as a forum for class sharing, discussion, and

uploading of teacher and student made screencasts. Participants were invited to join the Edmodo

“Screencasting for Differentiation” group through email.

Professional learning (PL) session one was completed via the flipped classroom model. By

flipping this part of the professional learning it provided greater flexibility to the participants and

allowed the first face-to-face meetings to be utilized for hands-on learning. Participants watched these

initial screencasts on their schedule. These screencasts were meant to provide a strong foundation for

why differentiation is necessary, the need to meet students at their proximal zone of development, and

how screencasting could be utilized to meet these needs and could be utilized for many other tasks that

an educator must carry out.

During the PL session two each member shared how they currently provided differentiation

within their classrooms. The candidate recorded these ideas and then shared how screencasting

technology could enhance what they were currently doing. After the candidate provided several

examples, participants brainstormed and shared ways in which they could use differentiated screencasts

in their classrooms. Next, the candidate provided instruction on creating screencasts. Participants

completed activities using the screencasting tools Jing and Screencast-o-matic during this session. They

worked in content area pairs to assist each other. The candidate facilitated the introduction of the

screencasting tools and the various tools within these applications. Participants created short screen

screencasts using both Jing and Screencast-o-matic and used the sunburst tool in Jing to make screen

captures. Participants were able to ask questions and receive assistance as needed. The candidate

Running head: CAPSTONE REPORT 5 stayed beyond the intended end time of this session to discuss the software and assist members of the

group further.

Prior to PL session three the candidate checked out document cameras and

headphone/microphones from the school media center. The candidate assisted participants in setting

up software and equipment needed for screencasting in each of their classrooms. The instructional

portion of PL session three was divided into whole group face-to-face instruction and one-on-one

instruction in participants’ classrooms to provide greater levels of support and coaching to any

participants that requested. Once participants created their differentiation screencasts they

implemented these screencasts during in-class instruction.

Professional learning session four involved meeting to reflect on the participants current

understanding of screencasting for differentiation. Participants shared the struggles and successes they

had with the design, creation, and implementation of their screencasts. Participants posted teacher

made screencasts to the Edmodo professional learning blog, reflected on the overall experience, and

gave feedback to one another.

The candidates goal of having every participant complete two cycles of creating differentiated

screencasts to facilitate instruction during the Spring of 2016 was almost accomplished. During

professional learning sessions five and six participants repeated the process of analyzing data and

looking for opportunities in which they could use screencasting to differentiate instruction within their

classes. Due to the timing of the Georgia Milestones, a state-wide assessment of learning in all content

areas some participants requested to fulfill the commitment of creating and implementing a second

screencast during the Fall of 2016. The candidate used this opportunity to work more closely with

specific participants who had not completed their second screencast to build confidence and ensure

future successes. Participants were also asked to complete a midpoint evaluation of the professional

Running head: CAPSTONE REPORT 6 learning opportunity thus far. When asked to describe their experiences with the professional

development opportunity thus far participant responses were:

“This professional development opportunity has opened up my eyes on how to use

technology to differentiate in my classroom. Screencasting has provided me the

opportunity to remediate and enrich students in my class that either might struggle or

need to move ahead. Screencasting allows me the opportunity to facilitate my

classroom and work more one-on-one with students. I would highly recommend

teachers to learn Screencasting (Personal Communication, 2016).”

“It has been very educational. I have learned how to do screencasting and will do so

weekly next year (Personal Communication, 2016).”

“I have found this professional development opportunity to be very useful so far to

differentiate content, specifically, how students access the content we are learning.

What I discovered when I planned do my whole group lesson plan was that most

students were not ready to move on to the point that I expected because the most

students were not finished with the previous project. I used the screencast that I had

originally planned to use to differentiate product to differentiate content by modifying

the text materials to a screencast for them and main lessons that I usually lecture over.”

“Supportive thanks to the instructor's availability. It has also been intriguing to embed

differentiation within my classes with the screencasts (Personal Communication, 2016).”

“Immediately beneficial and applicable to me. This is a tool that I can use right now to

help my struggling students, parents, and differentiate in the classroom in order to

maximize instructional time (Personal Communication, 2016).”


When participants were asked share the positives of this professional development opportunity

thus far are they responded:

“Screencasting has allowed me more flexibility in my classroom to work with students

that need more teacher-directed assistance. It also allows me the opportunity to assess

my students more often and provides them with a positive learning experience (Mid-

Point Survey, 2016).”

“I feel like I have more knowledge than my peers (Mid-Point Survey, 2016).” “Providing

me with different ways to present information and making me think more about

differentiation in my classroom (Mid-Point Survey, 2016).”

“Frankly, this activity is pushing me to view differentiation in its purest form. In other

words, it is hard for me to truly have multi-leveled activities occurring simultaneously

within a class period, allowing me to give those various groups feedback (Mid-Point

Survey, 2016).”

“The ease of use of the technology and collaboration and discussion among the cohort

(Mid-Point Survey, 2016).”

When participants were asked about the shortcomings of this professional development opportunity

they responded:

“I still find getting data and grouping students difficult as well as thinking of a plan for

how to lay out expectations for behavior in groups that I don't have to work with

individually. Many students I have will not work if they are left to their own devices

(Mid-Point Survey, 2016).”


“Overall, the only shortcoming of the professional development opportunity is that I

wish there was more time to implement this technology into my classroom, and that I

could have more time to create more screencasts (Mid-Point Survey, 2016).”

“To do a great screencast, it takes a lot of time (Mid-Point Survey, 2016).”

“I haven't noticed any from my end. Most of my issues have been user error. For

example, not using a platform to do screencasts (Edmodo or otherwise) that most

students are not familiar with without training them first. Thinking of a management

plan for when this is happening in class (Mid-Point Survey, 2016).”

“Time is crunched. Application may be a little bit forced (Mid-Point Survey, 2016).”

“I do not believe there are any shortcomings to this professional learning. The most

difficult part so far has been the learning curve with the technology and figuring out

how to effectively implement the screen casts in the lesson (Mid-Point Survey, 2016).”

One survey question that was repeated on both the initial recruitment survey and on the

midpoint survey that demonstrates some positive growth for participant’s attitudes was: “Please select

the current level of support you feel from peers in the building in regards to technology implementation

in your instructional practices. A score of 5 represents the highest level of support and a score of 1

represents the lowest.” Participant responses on the initial recruitment survey showed participants felt

as though the current level of support in regards to technology from peers in the building was low to

average with two participants selecting 2 and three selecting 3 with a combined average of 2.1. On the

midpoint evaluation this survey question recorded three responses at 3, one response at 4, and two

responses at 5 with a combined average of 3.8. This data can be analyzed in a few ways. Participants

attitudes towards peer support could have increased due to their participation in this professional

learning opportunity. These improved scores in attitude toward peer assistance within the building may

have improved due to the candidate’s time and attention to participant technology needs. Participant’s

Running head: CAPSTONE REPORT 9 growing relationships with each other may have given them an improved level of comfort when

discussing technology and assisting each other with technology issues. Finally, participants themselves

may be more confident in their own abilities to assist others with technology. This last statement can be

defended by examining one other repeated question from the recruitment and midpoint surveys.

Participants were asked to “Please select the current level of support you feel from a technology mentor

in the building in regards to technology implementation in your instructional practices. 5 represents the

highest level of support with 1 representing the lowest.” On the initial recruitment survey responses

ranged from one 1, two 3’s, and three 4’s for a combined average of 3.1. On the midpoint survey

participants demonstrated a greater confidence with their selections when they selected two 3’s, two

4’s and two 5’s for a combined average of 4. Building the confidence of peers when working with

technology is one role of an effective technology coach. When working with technology educators must

be able to troubleshoot problems as they arise in order to successfully implement instructional

technology within their classroom consistently.

Beginning in the Fall of 2016, the professional learning group met for professional learning

session seven to discuss the skills and attitudes that were shared and acquired in the Spring of 2016.

Participants reflected on their past learning regarding screencasting, differentiation, and uploading to

online hosting sites for student use. Participants shared current strengths and struggles with the group.

Solutions and opportunities for growth were discussed and recorded.

The candidate discussed the importance of providing students with an opportunity to use

screencasting and how it could benefit student achievement and long term memory. The candidate

discussed the real world tasks of preparing reusable instruction for others and documenting one’s

learning through storytelling and reflection. The candidate facilitated discussion and a brainstorming

opportunity dedicated to considering best practices when preparing students to use screencasting to

Running head: CAPSTONE REPORT 10 complete assessments over learning. Best methods for managing behavior while students use

screencasting technology and which types of devices would be most effective for completing student

screencasts were shared. Other topics discussed included ideas for grouping students and creating

differentiated assignment options. While working in content/grade level pairs participants developed

assessment options, rubrics, and honed personal screencasting skills by asking questions they still had

concerning the software and its limitations. After this session, participants implemented student

screencast projects in individual classrooms, uploaded student projects to the Edmodo blog, and

completed an online reflection of their experience. Participants reviewed each other’s student

screencasts

During professional learning session eight the candidate facilitated a discussion with the

participants regarding their experiences with using screencasting as a tool for alternative assessment

and reflection for students. Participants shared many thoughts during the reflection. Some positive

comments included:

“The students enjoyed using the screencasts and I told them that I would make a future

project involving the use of the screencasts (Edmodo Communication, 2016).

“I shared some of my student screencasts with all of my classes and the math teacher

next door shared it with her classes too (Edmodo Communication, 2016).”

“My students went into the hallway to film themselves. This was a great idea because

the noise in the classroom was no longer a factor (Edmodo Communication, 2016).”

“I think the students really enjoyed the activity. In fact, I am planning to complete

another screencasting activity with the same students (Edmodo Communication,

2016).”


“I also used screencasting for enrichment to excel my more advanced students

(Edmodo Communication, 2016).”

“Once I showed them (How the software worked) they were able to teach one another

how to use the software. I simply had to facilitate (Edmodo Communication, 2016).”

“I do find that using screencasts helps students make their learning more concrete. It

truly allowed them to apply the content they acquired and create an assignment that

displayed their knowledge (Edmodo Communication, 2016).”

In regards to issues that arose and helpful solutions to consider in the future participants shared

these thoughts:

“The screencast app was preloaded on the laptop computers. But, the video wouldn't

work; that is, until we figured out which button to press to activate the camera. Once

the video was activated, it was smooth sailing (Edmodo Communication, 2016).”

“One thing that I would do differently is to say that not everyone has to be filmed. If

someone is too shy, then he/she can be the behind-the-scenes person. Because one

group of students held the papers up to their faces, it was hard to hear what they were

saying. It also made for a boring video (Edmodo Communication, 2016).”

“Having extra flash drives when working with screencasts is a necessity (Edmodo

Communication, 2016).”

“Time was an issue. I would have liked to had more of my students create more

screencasts. Also, it was harder for me to monitor the students that were using this

activity to enrich their learning. What I probably should have done was a complete an

additional screencast for those students that were remediating and on level (Edmodo

Communication, 2016).”


Participants were asked “Do you feel that allowing students to use screencasting was worth the

effort it took to plan the lesson, gather the technology, and manage the use of the laptops and

screencasting application?” The response was positive from all participants with one member of the

group stating, “Absolutely! I love screencast and hope to do more of them in the future with my

students (Edmodo Communication, 2016).”

In the final reflection opportunity of the course, participants completed a post-project survey.

For many of the questions a Likert scale was utilized with 1 representing the lowest level and 5

representing the highest level. Participants were asked if they “believe the “Differentiation through

Screencasting” professional learning series has impacted them and at what level.” The average score in

this area was a 4. While this is not a score of 5, it does show that screencasting have had an above

average impact on participants. Participants average understanding of how to use of data to drive

instruction was also a 4 which is an improvement from the initial recruitment survey where the

participant average was 3.5. Participants ability to “provide instruction to students at the highest levels

and lowest levels within the same class period” received an average score of 3.3 which was an

improvement from 2.8 on the initial survey. Participant’s comfort levels with using screencasting tools

improved from 2.3 on the initial survey to 4.3 on the post-project survey. When asked whether

participants felt “screencasting is beneficial in differentiating instruction for students” the average score

was 4.3. When asked what kind of support participants could offer other staff members “in regards to

screencasting and its uses in instruction and assessment” the staff average was 3.7. This score shows

there is still work to be done in the continuing confidence building of these staff members in regards to

screencasting and technology implementation. Finally, when participants were asked to select the

“current level of support from a technology mentor in the building in regards to technology

implementation in instructional practices” the overall average improved from 3.1 on the initial

recruitment survey to 4.6 on the post-project survey.


Participant responses to open ended questions also provide insight into the overall success of

this capstone project. In your own words what would you say the positives of this professional

development opportunity were?

“Learning how to use screencasts in the class to allow myself to do more than one thing

at a time (Post-Project Survey, 2016).”

“The instructor was always there for additional and needed support during this

professional development course. He was always willing to go above and beyond to help

others (Post-Project Survey, 2016).”

“Before this class differentiation was always something that I did not like planning for

because I knew it was going to be a struggle. Screencasting has really changed that for

me. It allows me to extend learning for accelerated learners and it frees me up to be

more one on one with my low level learners. Parents love the screencasts because they

feel like they have a better understanding of what is being taught in the classroom.

When students are absent all they have to do is watch a screencast in order to get

caught up and it doesn't waste instructional time. The possibilities are endless (Post-

Project Survey, 2016).”

Some lessons can be taken away from participant responses during the Post-Project Survey as

well. Participants were asked to respond to the following question: “In your own words what would you

say the shortcomings of this professional development opportunity were?”

“I can't really think of any except that I felt overwhelmed sometimes. This would have

been great on canvas. I think modules rather than Edmodo would have worked better

(Post-Project Survey, 2016).”


“I wish there was more time we could have spent on learning more about this plc. It was

very beneficial and schools need to spend more time on plc's that teachers can actually

use (Post-Project Survey, 2016).”

Comments about the participants’ experiences with the candidate as a peer coaching partner

and what the candidate could improve within this professional learning process included:

“It was good. He gave good instructions (Post-Project Survey, 2016).”

“It was nice having a peer coaching partner to bounce ideas off of (Post-Project

Survey, 2016).”

“My peer coaching partner was excellent (Post-Project Survey, 2016).”

Finally, participants were asked to share a few success stories they had during this professional

learning experience.

“I used screencasting a lot last year with my FACS classes because they all moved at a

different pace through projects. I put all of my lectures for the last half of the year in

screencasts and I think it helped those who made use of it how I instructed in the

screencasts (Post-Project Survey, 2016).”

“I have two students in my small group math class that were recommended to move

into a less restrictive environment because screen casting allowed me to accelerate

their learning while giving the lower students extra attention (Post-Project Survey,

2016).”

“My students really loved creating the screencasts. I had my students create an

advertisement for a new restaurant. They had to create the restaurant and then come

up with the natural, capital, and human resources they needed to create this restaurant.

Once they completed the written part of this assessment, they then created a newscast


interview about their restaurants. They absolutely loved working with the technology

and really understood the material better (Post-Project Survey, 2016).”

Obstacles Encountered

There were a few obstacles that were encountered throughout this capstone project. One

obstacle encountered was the timeline. After gaining IRB approval from KSU and then approval to

complete research from the Paulding County School District, it was the end of February forcing the

candidate to start the search for participants a little later in the school year than originally planned.

Upon gaining the appropriate permissions, the candidate immediately sent out an email to staff relaying

the opportunity. After receiving feedback through the recruitment survey, the candidate moved quickly

to plan out scheduled dates with interested applicants. The professional learning group took on a

flexible schedule of Mondays or Wednesday’s due to various commitments from some of the

participants. This flexibility was appreciated by those participating. At the close of each session the

group would collaboratively select which day of the week would be best to meet on for the next session.

Another hurdle the candidate was able to work out was obtaining and installing the needed

equipment and software on every participant’s teacher computer. This took a few days due to schedule

and complete. The candidate personally checked out all of the equipment for participants and assisted

the participants with the install and testing to ensure that everything was up and running correctly. This

allowed the participants to quickly begin practicing what they were learning about in the privacy of their

own classrooms. Some teachers were quick to begin to work on screencasting projects while some

teachers took longer to get going.

Heading into the April state mandated testing window participant’s interest in learning about

and working with screencasting was strong; however, participants were also concentrated on

maximizing the success of their students on standardized tests. The testing window at P.B. Ritch Middle

Running head: CAPSTONE REPORT 16 spanned the last 3 weeks in April. Most of the participants were able to complete their second cycle

effectively before testing occurred in April; however, three of the participants had not completed their

second cycle yet. As soon as testing was concluded participants’ minds seemed to shift to how

screencasting could be used to benefit and prepare students for success at the start of the next school

year. With the many extra-curricular activities and increase in student excitement regarding the

impending close of another school year during the month of May, keeping momentum going was

difficult. The candidates desire was to keep the participants to keep the participants on schedule, but

the candidate was willing to work with them as they were passionate about their ideas for using

screencasting to differentiate instruction for students at the start of the following year. The candidate

compromised by having those participants share their plans for the second cycle of differentiated

screencasts on the Edmodo blog so others could offer feedback and offer ideas and praise. Participants

were given the goal of posting completed screencasts to our Edmodo blog before the Summer break of

2016. All but one of the groups participants completed both cycles of evaluating student data, designing

a differentiated screencast, creating the screencast, implementing it within their classrooms, and

reflecting on their experiences. The candidate was pleased with this success rate as well as staff

responses to the professional learning experience.

During these Spring cycles the candidate spent time after school working with participants on

non-meeting days to help them acquire the confidence and skills needed to work alone. The candidate

originally planned to focus on building screencasts, understanding software features, being comfortable

with the document camera and microphone, and most importantly providing insight into the

importance of data analysis, differentiation, and alternative teaching, learning, and assessing

opportunities. However, participants lacked previous experience with online file management,

uploading, embedding, and or streaming. This was not an element the candidate had originally planned

to offer instruction on during the face-to-face sessions. Once participants began to create screencasts it

Running head: CAPSTONE REPORT 17 was clear that many of the participants were interested in using different online opportunities to host

screencasts. The candidate discovered that some participants did not communicate struggles during

group meetings; however, they preferred to wait until after the meeting to ask questions. Meetings

stretched from the planned hour to two hours at times, spending additional time working with one or

two individuals. The candidate spent unplanned time working one-on-one with participants whom had

a personal teacher website, blog, LMS, or a teacher website provided by the district. Directions for

uploading were created for each of the above. The candidate realized that one of the participants was a

very visual learner and always preferred a PDF or screencast that would break down the various skills

and features of the program even when the participant spent extra one-on-one time with the candidate

mastering skills. This participant was not quick to openly relay this during early sessions. Once this was

realized, the candidate tried to accommodate for this participant’s needs each time, understanding that

many fellow and future participants could benefit from those additional resources. Some directions

needed to be written and recorded to a screencast to assist participants. This extra instructional time

cut into the candidate’s personal time to complete required school responsibilities, but the candidate

appreciated the participants’ personal sacrifices to become a vested partner in this capstone project.

Participants had given their time and the candidate’s intention was to be sure participants received as

much support as they needed to feel successful creating valuable differentiated screencasts. Some

participants created screencasts that would accompany assignments to assist struggling learners. Other

screencasts were made that enabled students to complete assignments/products of varying difficulty.

Screencasts were made to lead whole group facilitation while participants were able to work individually

with struggling students.

The follow-up for this professional learning opportunity is a planned technology professional

learning community. Participants have been asked to join the PLC and continue to work together to

improve technology integration and implementation efforts at P.B. Ritch Middle School. The candidate

Running head: CAPSTONE REPORT 18 will lead this group in the development of technology plans, advocacy efforts for increased technology

funding, and advancement of using technology to impact student achievement within diverse

populations such as P.B. Ritch Middle School.

Reflection

By completing this Capstone Project, the candidate built on and improved both the pedagogical

and technological knowledge of fellow staff members by successfully leading participants through a

series of flipped learning, blended learning, engaging job embedded professional learning, and reflection

opportunities. During this capstone project the candidate learned that all learners, even staff, come

with different levels of prior knowledge, need for support, willingness to ask for support, and attitudes

regarding professional learning. During this capstone project the candidate was able to employ many of

the partnership philosophies championed by Jim Knight (2007) which were learned and internalized

through “continuous learning” and practice. The candidate was able to “research, recommend, and

implement strategies for initiating and sustaining technology innovations and for managing the change

process in schools (PSC Instructional Technology Standards, 2010).” The candidate was able to provide

valuable technology based professional learning to fellow staff by “modeling and facilitating the design

and implementation of technology-enhanced learning experiences aligned with student content

standards and student technology standards (PSC Instructional Technology Standards, 2010).” This was

done by: completing a “needs assessment” of the staff, developing a means to recruit and establish

prior dispositions and knowledge of participants, planning for meaningful and research based

professional development, developing useful resources in multiple formats, providing opportunities for

flipped learning within the professional development series in order to use actual meeting times for

practice and professional discussion amongst participants, providing individualized support, and leading

opportunities for reflection and data collection. Reflection and data collection are key components of

Running head: CAPSTONE REPORT 19 “program evaluation” and is used to “determine the overall effectiveness of professional learning on

deepening teacher content knowledge, improving teacher pedagogical skills and/or increasing student

learning Instructional Technology leaders must be flexible and willing to work with the schedules of their

staff (PSC Instructional Technology Standards, 2010).” They must sacrifice personal time to meet the

schedules and varied learning needs of their staff. This capstone project clearly shows the candidates

ability to “develop and implement technology-based professional learning that aligns to state and

national professional learning standards, integrates technology to support face-to-face and online

components, models principles of adult learning, and promotes best practices in teaching, learning, and

assessment (PSC Instructional Technology Standards, 2010).”

The candidate facilitated fellow teachers in PSC skills such as “basic troubleshooting” of

software and hardware. Participants were engaged through participation on an online platform to

bolster “communication and collaboration.” Through the use of screencasting the candidate has

improved the staff’s ability to use digital tools and resources to support and extend the learning and

assessment of diverse learners. By demonstrating how screencasting can be used for alternative

student assessment the candidate has given teachers a means of modeling safe, healthy, legal, and

ethical uses of digital information and technologies (PSC Instructional Technology Standards, 2010).”

The candidate also facilitated discussions concerning “classroom management and collaborative

learning,” methods for “managing digital tools and resources,” and “online and blended learning.”

This capstone project required participants to make deeper connections to “content standards

and student technology standards, “technology based “authentic learning” opportunities, “data

analysis,” “differentiation,” “high order thinking skills,” “instructional design,” and “assessment

opportunities (PSC Instructional Technology Standards, 2010).” By facilitating this professional learning

experience, the candidate has taken and shared a vision with fellow staff for how a new emerging

Running head: CAPSTONE REPORT 20 technology can be implemented to change and improve “teaching, learning, and leadership” at P.B.

Ritch Middle School.

Reflecting back on obstacles that occurred during this capstone project it would be wise to

consider changes for future implementations of technology based professional development. The late

start during the Spring semester negatively impacted this professional learning opportunity. Many of

the staff involved were interested in learning these new skills, but each had many other professional and

personal commitments they were juggling. These are important factors to consider when planning for a

professional development series. Recruiting participants in August when the staff is eager to learn new

ways to reach students and the stresses of the school year have not yet begun to pile up may lead to

even greater results. By starting in August these new skills would be solidified heading into January

where staff members could continue to hone and sharpen their craft, providing truly valuable

differentiation in large amounts leading up to the April testing window. Having led others through this

type of professional development has provided the candidate with the necessary insight needed to

assist others with screencasting as well as other technology based professional learning opportunities in

the future. If one was to engage others in a similar professional learning experience, plan for instruction

in the following areas: downloading files, saving files, understanding mp4 file formats, and uploading

files to various online learning and content management systems. Lastly with the Paulding County

School Districts purchase of a subscription to the Canvas learning management platform, it was

suggested by one of the participants that the ability to break the learned content into segregated pages

or modules would improve the flow, understanding, and collaborative elements of the capstone project.

This is an excellent suggestion and utilizing Canvas to deliver instruction, organize content, collect

submitted work, and provide methods for communicating through specific discussion boards for would

really elevate this course to a higher level. Specifically, the instructional technology coach could make

Running head: CAPSTONE REPORT 21 use of the discussion boards to lead trouble shooting threads and brainstorming threads within Canvas

which would be separated from other instructional content.


References

Edmodo Communication. 2016. Screencasting and differentiation: Professional learning group.

Georgia Professional Standards Commission. 2010. Instructional technology standards. Retrieved from

http://www.gapsc.com/Commission/policies_guidelines/Downloads/Instructional_Technology_

Standards.pdf

Initial Recruitment-Survey. 2016. Screencasting: Differentiated teaching and learning opportunities.

PollDaddy. Wordpress.com.

Knight, J. (2007). Instructional coaching: A partnership approach to improving instruction. Thousand

Oaks, CA: NSDC.

Mid-Point Survey. 2016. Screencasting: Differentiated teaching and learning opportunities. PollDaddy.

Wordpress.com.

Post-Project Survey. 2016. Screencasting: Differentiated teaching and learning opportunities. PollDaddy.

Wordpress.com.

http://www.gapsc.com/Commission/policies_guidelines/Downloads/Instructional_Technology_Standards.pdf

http://www.gapsc.com/Commission/policies_guidelines/Downloads/Instructional_Technology_Standards.pdf

capstone report screencasting: differentiated teaching and...

Documents