DTTP

toc

**for ABC Schools**
AK EDTC640

**Technology availability in ABC Schools**
WALS is not a top-down district, but rather a confederation of approximately 23 private, autonomous K-12 institutions spanning from southern Baltimore to northern Virginia (SED-LCMS, 2011). Each school provides its own staff, curriculum, and resources, but nevertheless they share a common vision and belief system for educating our youth. Each school is expected to maintain LCMS Accreditation and is encouraged to maintain dual accreditation with //Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools// as well. Implementing and planning for school technology use is a part of maintaining those certificates.

Thus, there is an eclectic variety of available technologies among area Lutheran schools, but the goal remains the same – to continually improve and grow as 21st Century education institutions. A survey entitled, “Available Technology in WALS” was sent to area school administrators this fall (Kampia, 2011). The results (Fig. 1) illustrate the differences in technology use from school to school. For instance, some schools have interactive whiteboards installed in every classroom, others have a few shared IWBs, and others have none. Some schools are testing 1:1 computing in their classrooms, others have mobile or stationary computer labs, and still others have very few computers available to the students. While all schools have websites, their usage by faculty widely varies from every teacher maintaining a class webpage to very few classroom pages (SED-LCMS, 2011).

**Figure 1**

**Technology Training Needs**
It follows then, that our area schools have a similarly wide variety of training needs in the implementation and use of educational technology. A survey sent to area Lutheran school K-12 educators entitled, “Technology Training Needs in Lutheran Schools” also produced results that were all over the map (Kampia, 2011). Area teachers obviously have different needs based on the technology available in their schools (Fig 2). However, comparing this survey with the previous one also suggests that many schools have immediate plans to add new technologies, such as interactive whiteboards, and would appreciate training to get ready for the transition. In some cases, administrators and teachers view training also as a step in the decision making process when determining which technology to purchase for their schools. Since schools make their own purchasing decisions, rather than relying on a public district, this is a valid consideration when determining the purpose of a training program. For instance, the educator may not merely be thinking, “I have this Smartboard. Now how do I use it?” but rather, “Should I recommend purchasing Smartboards or Promethean - based on how they could be used in our classrooms?”

**Figure 2**

Currently, the only training available for Lutheran educators in our area takes place at the annual Southeastern District Lutheran Educators Conference each Fall. This year there are currently three technology-based workshops available (SED-LEC, 2011). This is not nearly enough to accommodate the variety and scope of training needs in our area. Many schools rely on training programs offered by the technology product vendors themselves, but those resources seldom cater to the specific audience of educators in small, private schools. Most schools also encourage use of the professional development budget for faculty to seek their own training workshops. Often, an in-house teacher who becomes familiar with a technology then leads a training session for the rest of the faculty.

The above options do not appear to address the amount or variety of needs expressed by area Lutheran educators. Therefore, this plan will outline a two-week technology training program to for the Washington Area Lutheran Schools as well as any other Southeaster District educators who can make the trip to attend. The program will be held at the end of the Summer, prior to teachers returning for the Fall, and will be worth 1 credit hour toward the continuing education requirement for school accreditation (SED-LCMS, 2011). The program will be hosted by an area Lutheran school large enough to facilitate the workshops and staffed by volunteer or paid instructors as can be recruited and budgeted by the Southeastern District.

**Intended Audience**
While this training program is intended primarily for area Lutheran school teachers, it should be of benefit to administrators as well. As referenced before, many school faculty are looking to learn how a piece of technology can be used before deciding how much money to spend and what to spend it on. Therefore, this additional audience will be kept under consideration in planning training goals and workshops.

K-12 Lutheran school teachers in our area are as diverse a group as the aforementioned eclectic training needs. One commonality, however, is that many hold degrees from Lutheran Universities such as the Concordia University system or Valparaiso University. That said, area schools are staffed with any number of teachers who graduated from various other public or private institutions as well. Most hold current Maryland, Virginia, or Washington, DC teaching certificates, as that is a criteria for meeting accreditation requirements (SED-LCMS, 2011). A few interviews with recent graduates from various universities reveals that there is little difference between the levels and types of technology training in the education programs of Lutheran Universities and other colleges. Today’s new teachers all seem to be learning about interactive whiteboards, internet use, and other classroom technology at similar levels.

Another commonality that affects teacher focus is the socioeconomic makeup of the students. Since private school clientele in our area pays tuition in an urban area with a high cost of living, it is uncommon for school families to go without computer and internet access at home. That said, there are families who receive tuition assistance and therefore may lack technology in the home, but these cases are rare. As one teacher states, “I might have one student a year without computer access at home, and we can always work around that here” (A.W. House, personal communication, September 28, 2011). Thus, teachers can be reasonably confident that assignments involving technology can be continued at home.

There are also very few students with extreme special needs in WALS, since small, private schools tend to lack the resources to accommodate them. Students with IEP’s are admitted, however, but only if the school scan ensure the necessary accommodations for their respective slight disabilities. For this reason, assistive technology, while it has its uses here and there, is not a hot topic among area Lutheran educators.

While there is no central collection of school faculty data available, a quick scan of the staff pages on school websites reveals that the gender ratio of teaching staff averages one male teacher to every three female, or approximately 25% male and 75% female (SED-LCMS, 2011). From personal observation ethnic diversity in area schools tends to somewhat mirror the community. A high percentage of graduates of Lutheran Universities are Caucasian, as most of the schools reside in the Midwest, with only a few on the East and West coasts. However, Washington area Lutheran schools tend to seek out qualified teachers who mirror their students’ ethnic background as much as possible. Schools with a high African American or Hispanic population will usually have a few faculty representing those ethnicities.

Depending on the school size, there can be wide variations in Lutheran teachers’ responsibilities. In some very small schools, elementary teachers might be responsible for teaching a combined class of two grades. Similarly, secondary educators might teach four to six subjects to three middle school grades. As the schools grow larger, the staff becomes more specialized, of course. It bears noting that many of the teachers attending training are juggling quite a few content areas and grade levels. Thus, they need resources that can be transferred across grade levels and ease the burden on their preparation loads – not add to them.

Perhaps the most glaring diversity among educators can be seen inside the schools themselves when one canvasses the age and longevity differences. Historically, K-12 Lutheran schools have had a low turnover ratio. This has changed in recent decades as various economic and cultural changes make a lifelong career at a small parochial school less attractive. It is not uncommon for a Lutheran school in our area to have a few teachers who have taught the same grade level or subject in that school for over 30 years. Meanwhile, in the classroom next door, there may be a young first-year teacher in charge of a class that has gone through four different teachers in as many years. When it comes to experience, there seems to be no pattern in terms of technical proficiency or attitude toward technology. Some long-time master teachers are always willing to try something new, and yes, a few are luddites who resist technology in their classroom at every turn. However, one consistent fact remains. From personal communication, it is evident that young teachers coming out of college more or less unanimously expect to be able to use the latest technology. They are usually disappointed to find out their new classrooms don’t have interactive whiteboards, and they grow frustrated when computer lab equipment and software is badly in need of upgrades.

Indeed the survey entitled, “Technology proficiency in Washington area Lutheran schools” produced a mixed bag of results (Fig 3). While there were very few responses at the low end, this was most likely due to the fact that it was an online survey. If one can’t log into email, one can’t complete the survey. Nevertheless, the “low-end” is out there. Short conversations with the faculty of a few area schools produces enough proof.

**Figure 3**



So due to this diversity of technological background, literacy, and attitude, it is imperative that training be differentiated to the needs of the teachers. This cannot succeed as a one-size-fits-all training program. This is not a large public school district deciding to install an interactive whiteboard in every classroom and providing training congruent to that main initiative. The program must meet the needs of a vast array of skill sets and expertise. Some will be attending the training starting at ground zero, but eager to learn. Some may be attending reluctantly. Others will settle for nothing less than cutting edge tools and techniques. It may be that these latter types will be helping facilitate some workshops. Regardless, workshops will need to be tiered to ability level as well as content needs. This makes this training plan a large undertaking, as participants will need to be provided with enough choices to have virtually something for everyone at any level.

**Program Goals**
Based on the needs expressed by Washington area Lutheran school teachers, an assessment of available or soon-to-be available technologies, and an understanding of the diverse participants, courses are designed to help educators achieve the following:

1. Participants will build on their general and specific knowledge of computer and other technology use in the classroom to improve learning. Best practices for 1:1 or shared computing environments will be interwoven throughout specific courses along with assistive technology resources.

2. Participants will learn about interactive multimedia tools and how to use them in the classroom as well as how to create their own multimedia resources.

3. Participants will learn about available tools for establishing a web presence and communicating with different audiences. Educators will become better web designers and learn best practices for online communication.

4. Participants will gain an understanding of how to use Web 2.0 tools such as blogs, wikis, cloud-computing, document sharing, and social bookmarking to create a collaborative online learning environment.

5. Participants will strengthen their knowledge of Internet research tools and techniques and become better equipped to keep students safe on the Internet.

**Course Offerings**
Participants will learn how to use hardware and systems such as interactive whiteboards, document cameras, student response systems, and others. Software and shareware resources for these tools will be explored. Numerous instructional strategies for using these tools will be covered, and participants will engage in hands-on activities. Multimedia creation and management, including video and digital images, will be covered with step-by-step activities for implementation in the classroom. Instructional gaming and simulations will be explored and a wealth of resources will be shared. Using multimedia and interactive technology for students with special needs will also be covered.
 * 1. Multimedia and Interactive Tools (Two levels: K-5 & 6-12) **

Since the audience will most likely contain some who make purchasing recommendations, the major differences between the three main interactive whiteboard manufacturers, Smartboard, Promethean, and Mimio, will be briefly examined.

Participants will learn about available options in school and individual website hosting. Those with influence in administrative decision making will benefit for a better understanding of available free options as well as what to look for in a vendor. Principles of good site design will be examined. The main goal of the course will be to provide an opportunity for hands-on classroom web page building. Popular free “drag & drop” hosting sites will be explored, and participants will be able to begin constructing their own pages on site, or will be able to improve on existing pages. Collaborative activities and guidance from instructors will lead to improved classroom communication websites. Implementation and uses of online gradebooks and school management applications will also be explored.
 * 2. Your Classroom on the World Wide Web (All grade levels) **

A large portion of the program will be spent touring Google Apps. Participants will learn best practices for implementing Google Docs, Calendar, Gmail, and other tools in the curriculum through hands-on activities. Procedures for integrating Google Apps for Education through the school web domain will also be covered.
 * 3. Web 2.0 and Cloud Computing in the Classroom (Grades 4-12) **

In addition, Blogs, wikis, social bookmarking, and other “Web 2.0” topics will be discussed, and their uses in the classroom will be demonstrated in virtually every subject area. Participants will be shown how to create and comment on a blog, they will be asked to blog about the training program. Participants will also contribute to a whole-group wiki. Procedures for embedding multimedia on Web 2.0 pages will also be covered in a hands-on environment.

Participants will learn techniques and best practices for teaching internet research at all grade levels.. From a simple primary grade level image search to secondary level library database research, participants will grow more aware of what is available and the strategies for guiding students through the information superhighway. Fair use law and proper crediting of sources will be covered, and participants will learn techniques for scaffolding instruction of these skills. Procedures for safeguarding K-12 students on the internet will be explored and discussed. An abundance of Internet safety resources and tools will be shared.
 * 4. Information Literacy and Internet Safety (Three levels: K-2, 3-5, & 6-12) **

Participants will explore project-based learning learning materials that use the World Wide Web, and will create their own throughout the course of the workshops. A resource sharing wiki will be created for this course, and participants will have the opportunity to past and share their final projects so others can use them in the classroom.

**Sample Course Outline**

 * Course Title: Web 2.0 and Cloud Computing in the Classroom **


 * Grade levels: ** 4-12


 * Course length: ** 8 days, two 3-hour sessions per day.


 * Tools used: **// Google Apps, Blogger, Wikispaces, Delicious, Diigo, Youtube, TeacheTube //, Windows Movie Maker, iMovie, Audacity.


 * Materials needed: ** Laptop computer with wi-fi capability (a limited number of computers can be provided on request).


 * Course objectives: ** Throughout this course, participants will:


 * Learn to use //Blogger, Wikispaces//, social bookmarking sites, //Google Docs, Google Calendar, Google Sites//, and other //Google Apps// tools.
 * Learn to use //Audacity// for voice recording and audio editing.
 * Learn basic non-linear video editing in Windows Movie Maker or iMovie and uploading to video sharing sites.
 * Gain an understanding of how to use these Web 2.0 tools in instruction and project-based learning.
 * Gain knowledge of and experience with online sharing through hands-on practice.
 * Learn how to manage a Web 2.0 environment in which students can share and often edit each others’ work.
 * Learn how to set up a //Google Apps for Education// account in their schools.


 * Instructional Design: **

This course is intended to be as hands-on as possible. Sessions will be instructor led, with demonstrations presented on an interactive whiteboard. Volunteers will be asked to demonstrate skills as often as possible, and individual or small group activities will follow demonstrations and discussions.

Each participant will need wi-fi ready laptop to participate in hands-on activities. A few extra computers will be available on request for those without access to a laptop. Participants will be creating their own blogs, wikis, and Google documents in the hopes that they can transfer these skills and some materials directly to the classroom.

A course support wiki will be used throughout the workshops. Participants will upload content to the wiki, and additional tutorials and resources will be posted by the instructor. This wiki will be available as a follow-up resource for participants and even those who did not attend this workshop.

A detailed outline of class activities is listed below, as well as a few samples of course materials:


 * Schedule and activities: **


 * **Web 2.0 and Cloud Computing in the Classroom** ||
 * ** Day 1 ** || ** AM Session: **

-Group discussion about what (if anything) participants currently use and for what purposes. -Discussion of teacher blogging with student responses vs. student created blogs. -Discussion of potential benefits of student blog/wiki publishing for a wide audience. -Navigate to //Blogger// and set up individual accounts. -Create new blog entitled “Web 2.0 Workshop.” -Navigate to workshop wiki page and post individual blog urls in appropriate area. -Return to blog and create new post entitled “Blogging in my classroom” -Compose 1-2 paragraphs on how a blog could be used to improve instruction in your classroom. ||
 * Blogs and Wikis ** || -Introduction to blogs and wikis and the differences between the two.
 * ^  || ** PM Session: **

-Introduction to //Google Reader// and the concept of RSS (Real simple Syndication) feeds. -Break into groups of 3-4 based on grade level taught. -Set up RSS feed in Google Reader for each small group member’s blog and attach feed to personal blog. -Add a short comment to each small group member’s initial blog post and observe the behavior of the RSS reader. -Discuss the implications for blogging with RSS in the classroom with the wealth of subscribe-able material that exists. -Create a new blog post entitled, “Where I Come From.” -Locate an image on //Google Images// or a video from //YouTube// related your hometown or birthplace. -Embed the image or video in the blog post with a brief explanaton. Cite image source. -Observe the behavior of the RSS feeds and comment on small group members’ posts. -Discuss further implications of blogging in the classroom with remaining time. ||
 * Blogs and RSS ** || -Register for Google account if participant does not already have a (Gmail) account.
 * ** Day 2 ** || ** AM Session: **

-Discuss the wiki as a collaborative learning tool. -Navigate to course wiki page: Beginner Wiki Project-The Wiki Table. -Add information under each column in the row next to your name. -Comment on at least one classmate’s row under the “feedback” column. -Group discussion on implications and management of such an activity in the classroom. -Demonstration of history and revision controls for teacher management of wikis. -Process for embedding images and multimedia to a wiki (similar to a blog). -Break into small groups of 3-4 based on subject area taught. -Each group creates a new page to the course wiki. -Create a table wiki based on categorization/classification in one subject area (i.e. science - the elements, social studies - geographical regions and places, Language arts - genres of literature. ||
 * Wiki creation ** || -Demonstration of a collaborative student wiki project.
 * ^  || ** PM Session: **

-Overview of //Delicious// social bookmarking and creating tags. -In-depth demonstration of //Diigo// social bookmarking, tagging, and web page highlighting. -Create participant //Diigo// accounts and practice bookmarking sites -Tag and highlight content from at least one site and share among classmates. -Discuss implications for social bookmarking in the classroom -Discuss the potential for social bookmarking vs. traditional search engines. -Participants send “hello” email to instructor in preparation for the next session. ||
 * Social Bookmarking ** || -Small group presentation and explanation of table wiki projects.
 * ** Day 3 ** || ** AM Session: **

-Walkthrough of importing .CSV file into Gmail contacts. -Demonstration of grouping contacts and exporting contact lists as .CSV files. -Introduction to //Google Calendar.// -Walkthrough of of setting up participant calendars, adding, and editing events. -Navigate to course wiki page entitled “Course Calendar” (calendar embedded on page). -Walkthrough of the process of adding Course Calendar to participants personal calendar, first by clicking its “add calendar” icon and following the steps, then through a calendar or contact search from the personal calendar. -Overview of calendar notification settings and “tasks” category. Point out “tasks” synchronization in Gmail interface. -Discuss implications for calendar sharing in the classroom and wider school environment. ||
 * Gmail, Contacts, and Google Calendar ** || - Instructor sends email to all participants containing a .CSV (comma separated values) file with participant names and Gmail addresses.
 * ^  || ** PM Session: **

-Brief overview of Document, Presentation, Drawing, Spreadsheet, and Form applications. -Instructor emails participants short PowerPoint presentation as Gmail attachment. -Walkthrough of the process for uploading PowerPoint file to Google Docs and conversion. -Create new presentation and title it “//Name’s//_Class. -Create short 2-3 slide presentation describing the class(es) you teach. -Walkthrough of sharing options and copying html embed code. -Navigate to course wiki page entitled, “Google Presentations” and embed presentation on the page. -Have a volunteer demonstrate that edits made to original are reflected in the embedded version. -Discuss implications for Google Docs presentations in the classroom. ||
 * Google Presentations ** || -Introduction to //Google Docs//, cloud storage, and document sharing concepts.
 * ** Day 4 ** || ** AM Session: **

-Participants open shared doc and create a copy (“include collaborators” box unchecked) - renaming the document to include their names, then deleting original (this provides everyone with an un-shared version of the doc. -Overview and demonstration of comments, comment streams, and notification settings.  -Participants choose a partner and follow instructor-led steps for sharing the doc with partner (make sure “can edit” is selected).  -Participants proofread partner’s shared doc for errors or style suggestions, using the comment feature.  -Create a dialogue on at least one comment.  -Original “sender” then revises document and resolves (deletes) comments.  -Discuss implications for comment sharing and comment streams in class activities and assignments. ||
 * Writing with Google Docs ** || -Instructor shares Google word-processing document “Student writing sample” with participants. Demonstration of how to share a doc using contact list.
 * ^  || ** PM Session: **

-Break into groups of 3-4 based on subject area taught and collaborate on a document outlining an activity using Google docs. -Share assignment with the entire class using the contact list and explain in a brief presentation. -Demonstration of organizing Google docs into “collections” ||
 * Google Docs classroom applications ** || Overview of advanced document sharing and permission settings.
 * ** Day 5 ** || ** AM Session: **

-Practice activity: Create a spreadsheet tabulating the numbers of different colored M&M candies in a small package. -Walkthrough viewing data summaries and inserting charts. -Share spreadsheets with class and each participant incorporates data from 3-4 additional spreadsheets. -Make new charts to reflect new data. -Discuss implications for shared spreadsheets in the classroom. ||
 * Google Spreadsheets ** || -Overview of Google Spreadsheet - similarities and differences with Excel.
 * ^  || ** PM Session: **

-Demonstrate quick creation of form entitled, “Favorite ice-cream flavor.” -Demonstrate sending form to email recipients by sending to class Gmail accounts. -Participants complete and submit forms. -Demonstrate how form data is converted to a spreadsheet and charts can be quickly inserted. Demonstrate other form editing tools (question types, sharing settings, etc.) -Practice activity: Create a short form using any of the question types, but no more than 3 questions. -Send form to class using contact list. -Participants complete each others’ forms and then analyze the results of their own surveys. -Discuss results. A few volunteers can share forms with instructor for display up front if time permits. -Discuss implications for using Google Forms in project-based learning. ||
 * Google Forms ** || -Overview of Google Forms
 * ** Day 6 ** || ** AM Session: **

-Introduction to Google Sites and overview of editing permission settings. -Demonstration/walkthrough of Google Sites controls -Practice activity: Create and begin a basic personal or classroom web page. ||
 * Google Sites ** || -Discussion of participant web page design experience and uses.
 * ^  || ** PM Session: **

-Choose a partner and add partner’s account name from contacts to the list of who can edit. -Partners add a small bit of content to each others’ sites. -When finished, delete contact from editor list if desired. -Discuss implications for student-created websites and shared websites. ||
 * Google Sites (cont.) ** || -Continue developing personal or classroom website.
 * ** Day 7 ** || ** AM Session: **

-Demonstration of voice recording using Audacity. -Demonstration of editing the recording and saving as .mp3. -Demonstration of uploading to server and creating link/embedded player in webpage, blog, and/or wiki. (note: podcasting activities can be problematic for hands-on assignments due to added microphone hardware, bandwidth issues, etc., but participants can volunteer assist in demonstrations on the interactive whiteboard).
 * Podcasting and Video Sharing. ** || -Introduction to podcasting.

-Introduction to non-linear video editing: concepts and file types. -//Windows Movie Maker// and //Apple iMovie//. demonstrations. -Demonstration of uploading rendered video (of course segment) to YouTube. -Demonstration of embedding YouTube video in course wiki. ||
 * ^  || ** PM Session: **

-Instructor provides link to download small, 1-minute video file. -Walkthrough of importing video files,cutting on the timeline, and exporting. -Demonstration of adding effects, titling, and audio layers (if time permits) -Participants create YouTube account (using Google account) and upload videos -Discussion of video creation for the classroom and student video projects. ||
 * Video Editing and Sharing (cont.) ** || -Demonstration of transferring video from camera to computer.
 * ** Day 8 ** || ** AM Session: **

-Suggestions for maintaining student anonymity on the web and revising Acceptable Use Policiesto reflect Web 2.0 technologies. -Step-by-step guide to setting up a school-wide Google Apps for education account -Benefits of doing so: 25GB cloud storage per student, powerful administrative controls and safeguards. -Coordinating with school web domain host for email routing. -Activity: blog about at least 3 ideas or activities you will take back to the classroom. ||
 * Web 2.0 Classroom Management and Ethics. ** || -Discussion of privacy and classroom management issues in a “cloud” environment.
 * ^  || ** PM Session: **

-unresolved questions. -implications for the classroom -personal experiences/sharing. -Final activity: add favorite web resources to the course wiki page entitled, “Webliography”. ||
 * Wrap-up ** || Wrap-up discussion:

** Sample Materials **
A screenshot example of a partially completed wiki table from the Day 2 session:

Google Docs student writing sample with comments (Day 4 session):

An example of one of the video tutorials provided to supplement this course  (Day 4):

media type="youtube" key="FZcFxCr6chY" height="720" width="960"

**Evaluation**
Because this is a technology training program, the evaluation process will take place online, using the same Google Forms application that many participants will learn to use. Participants will recieve the form via email on the final day, and those who are using computers in their classes will be asked to complete them beofre they leave.

The Google form will allow for sorting of data by workshop as well as a combining of overall data for planning of future training programs. The evaluation survey is embedded below, or it can be found at the following link: []

media type="custom" key="10923848"

**References:**
Kampia, A. D. (2011) Available technology in Washington area Lutheran schools [online survey]. Retrieved October 1, 2011 from __ https ____ : __//__ docs ____. ____ google ____. ____ com ____ / ____ spreadsheet ____ / ____ viewform ____ ? ____ formkey ____ = ____ dE ____ 90 ____ VGhWOGFISlUtWTJ ____ 1 ____ WUtHYUdCUlE ____ 6 ____ MQ __//

// Kampia, A. D. (2011) Technology proficiency in Washington area Lutheran schools [online survey]. Retrieved October 1, 2011 from __ https ____ : __//__ docs ____. ____ google ____. ____ com ____ / ____ spreadsheet ____ / ____ viewform ____ ? ____ formkey ____ = ____ dGNkMVBXNkRuUVE ____ 0 ____ M ____ 0 ____ xVOEllVlItQlE ____ 6 ____ MQ __

Kampia, A. D. (2011) Technology training needs in Lutheran schools [online survey]. Retrieved October 1, 2011 from __ https ____ : __//__ docs ____. ____ google ____. ____ com ____ / ____ spreadsheet ____ / ____ viewform ____ ? ____ formkey ____ = ____ dE ____ 90 ____ VGhWOGFISlUtWTJ ____ 1 ____ WUtHYUdCUlE ____ 6 ____ MQ __//

// SED-LCMS (2011) //. School accreditations (NLSA)//. Retrieved October 1, 2011 from [|http][|://][|se][|.][|lcms][|.][|org][|/][|school][|-][|ministry][|/][|accreditation][|.][|php] //

// SED-LCMS (2011) //. Southeastern District Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod//. Retrieved October 1, 2011 from [|http][|://][|se][|.][|lcms][|.][|org][|/][|school][|-][|ministry][|/][|schools][|.][|php] //

// SED-LEC (2011) //. Southeastern District Lutheran Educators Conference Workshops//. Retrieved October 1, 2011 from [|http][|://][|se][|.][|lcms][|.][|org][|/][|school][|-][|ministry][|/][|pdf][|/2011%20][|SEDLEC][|%20][|Workshop][|%20][|Descriptions][|.][|pdf]