iNACOL 2013-08-06 E-Rate 2.0: Defining Drivers and Capacity Needs


Published on

On Tuesday, August 6, 2013, the International Association for K-12 Online Learning (iNACOL) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) hosted a webinar to explore recently announced plans to update the Federal Communications Commission's E-Rate program. As more schools adopt new learning models powered by blended and online learning, an updated E-Rate program will provide more opportunities for schools, libraries and other learning environments to secure essential broadband access for the country's students. The webinar addressed the pressing need for schools and students to have improved access to high-speed Internet with upcoming online assessments in 2014.

Susan Patrick, President and CEO of iNACOL, said, "80 percent of U.S. schools do not have broadband Internet access sufficient to provide new learning models that ensure students graduate ready to face the challenges of a 21st century college or career environment. The United States is in the bottom half of developed nations for Internet access and speeds available to its citizens. It is vitally important that education leaders work with the FCC to strengthen and update the E-Rate program to make certain our students get the best start possible, regardless of where they learn."

In July, the FCC announced a proposal to modernize the E-Rate program to meet the educational needs of students and teachers. iNACOL, in partnership with leading education organizations, is committed to amplifying the voice of school leaders and policymakers throughout the country through this series of webinars dedicated to an examination of the E-Rate program and driving efforts to achieve a comprehensive update to this critical effort.


Susan Patrick, President and CEO, iNACOL
Evan Marwell, CEO and Co-founder, Education Superhighway
Susan Van Gundy, Associate Director for Assessment Technology, Achieve / PARCC
Jennifer Davis, Director, CCSSO Innovation Lab Network

More info:

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Jenny’s task: Set context for 2014 assessments, quick overview of state drivers of the need for an E-rate update (e.g., blended and online learning, new learning models)
  • To better serve the needs to all students, education systems are undergoing transformative change through the implementation of digital learning tools and adaptive assessments.
  • Assessment and LEarning in Knowledge Spaces is a Web-based, artificially intelligent assessment and learning system. ALEKS uses adaptive questioning to quickly and accurately determine exactly what a student knows and doesn't know in a course. ALEKS then instructs the student on the topics she is most ready to learn. As a student works through a course, ALEKS periodically reassesses the student to ensure that topics learned are also retained. ALEKS courses are very complete in their topic coverage and ALEKS avoids multiple-choice questions. A student who shows a high level of mastery of an ALEKS course will be successful in the actual course she is taking.ALEKS also provides the advantages of one-on-one instruction, 24/7, from virtually any Web-based computer for a fraction of the cost of a human tutor.
  • Screen readers text-to-speech/speech-to-text software Highlighting Enlargement of text/graphicsCustomized colorsGraphic organizers or representations Customized dictionary or other home language supports/toolsEmbedded/pop-up glossary Reducing visual distractions surrounding written text Captions for audioDescriptive audio for students with visual impairments Option response: adapted keyboards, StickyKeys, MouseKeys, FilterKeysBraille (tactile/refreshable)Signing supports (ASL)Assistive technology
  • Susan will do a brief, high level stage setting about the inseverability of assessment from other parts of the system, and importance of technology supporting learning first and then assessment.As states think about and plan for PARCC’s technology-based assessments, this needs to happen on multiple fronts. It has become a recurring theme in our conversations with PARCC states that there are needs around building readiness in both learning infrastructure and technical infrastructure – areas that have traditionally been considered separately, yet states recognize the need for these two areas to inform and reinform each other. This is increasingly the approach we are taking to interpreting and planning for the transition to computer-based assessments
  • Key points: For this spring, there are 18 parameters to be collected (and four more that we will calculate manually) Subsequent readiness assessment windows will likely add more info (such as any locally-installed software requirements), as the consortia further define their delivery engine and their minimum technology requirements.CLICK to show red circleThe highlighted parameters will be measured against the PARCC minimum hardware specifications
  • When looking at sustaining these efforts over time, there were some consistent themes across states that have the most experience with computer-based testing and widespread digital learning access. These key lessons include:Clear, Consistent, and Intentional PlanningThese states developed clear strategic plans to help districts build technology capacity and create a long-term vision for the state’s digital landscape. State leaders should consider creating clear plans to implement feedback loops and monitor progress, allowing a state to identify any challenges or issues in the plan and correct the course of action. State Leadership and SupportMany of the states that have successfully helped schools and districts build robust technology infrastructure have had strong and sustained leadership whether from the governor, a state legislator, the state’s chief state school officer, or state education agency leaders. In these cases, having a champion to help build the vision, lead the effort, and sustain support over time was critical. This holds true regardless of the state’s role (i.e. facilitating disseminating best practices, procurements, etc.).Intra-State Education Agency CoordinationStates can benefit from proactive, coordinated planning efforts across state education departments, including assessment, curriculum and instruction, teacher effectiveness and professional development, communication and outreach, and federal programs. States should also encourage personnel within the agency to work with professional organizations to network with and learn from other states by sharing strategies and lessons. These efforts should address all student populations to include students with disabilities and English learners. Clear and Ongoing CommunicationsIt is essential that states map out a communication strategy outlining different messages that may need to be targeted to different stakeholder groups, including legislators and state government leaders, educators, parents, students, business leaders, and community leaders. In some cases, communication will need to include targeted messages among different stakeholder groups to help build the support needed (monetary or otherwise) for increasing access to technology across the state. One Size Does Not Fit AllImplementing one or two strategies to help districts close technology gaps is unlikely to be enough. Instead, state leaders may want to consider a set of strategies that are targeted to the needs of different types of districts and that best fit the state’s policy and regulatory context.
  • iNACOL 2013-08-06 E-Rate 2.0: Defining Drivers and Capacity Needs

    1. 1. E-Rate 2.0: Defining Drivers and Capacity Needs • Susan Patrick, iNACOL • Jennifer Davis, CCSSO Innovation Lab Network • Evan Marwell, Education SuperHighway • Susan Van Gundy, Achieve/PARCC August 6, 2013
    2. 2. Welcome & Introductions Susan Patrick President & CEO, iNACOL
    3. 3. Susan Patrick President and CEO, iNACOL Susan Van Gundy Associate Director for Assessment Technology, Achieve / PARCC Panelists Evan Marwell CEO & Co-Founder, Education SuperHighway Jennifer Davis Program Director, CCSSO Innovation Lab Network
    4. 4. About iNACOL • Premier K-12 nonprofit in online learning dedicated to an important student-centric mission: that all students have access to a world-class education and quality blended and online learning opportunities that prepare them for a lifetime of success. • Leadership, advocacy, research, PD, quality standards, training, and networking with experts in K-12blended and online learning. – 4400+ members in K-12 blended and online learning in over 50 countries – Annual conference – iNACOL Blended and Online Learning Symposium: Orlando, FL in October 28-30, 2013 • Our strategic areas of focus in online and blended learning: 1. Policy 2. Quality 3. New Learning Models
    5. 5. iNACOL/CCSSO E-rate Webinars: to empower & inform education advocates 7/25 • E-rate 101: Basics for Education Advocates Today • E-rate 2.0: Defining Drivers and Capacity Needs SAVE THE DATE! 8/20 4-5 pm ET • ConnectED and E-rate: Q&A with FCC and Dept of Education officials
    6. 6. New Solutions through Online Learning • 40% of US high schools do not offer AP courses – 75% of districts use online learning to offer Advanced Placement or college-level courses. • Teacher Shortages – 40% of public school districts in America today say they need online learning resources because certified teachers are not available for traditional face-to-face instruction. • More than 50% need online learning to reduce student scheduling conflicts to graduate on time. • 60% of school districts say they need online learning for credit recovery.
    7. 7. Trends • Change toward New Models of Learning – Online learning – Blended learning – Competency-based approaches – Online credit recovery – Mobile learning • National: – CCSSO Innovation Lab Network – Gates Foundation’s Next Generation Learning Challenges • Wave IV Personalized, Blended, Mastery-based New School Models
    8. 8. Source: Susan Patrick, iNACOL
    9. 9. • Ensure Full Access to Broadband Internet Infrastructure • Build out broadband connectivity with needs of digital content resources, and online assessments to enable student-centered, personalized, blended and online learning – accessible anytime, anywhere at school and at home. Top Policy Issue
    10. 10. Where we are now • FCC launched update of E-Rate on 7/19/2013 • Comment on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking due 9/16/13
    11. 11. Questions?
    12. 12. Jennifer Davis Director, Innovation Lab Network Council of Chief State School Officers August 6, 2013 E-Rate 2.0: Defining Drivers and Capacity Needs
    13. 13. A new “North Star”…  College and career readiness for all students
    14. 14. …drives education system transformation…  Personalized, mastery-based learning  Anytime, anywhere learning  Computer adaptive assessment  Real-time data collection and reporting
    15. 15. …with new requirements for technology and connectivity Hardware Software High-speed internet
    16. 16. Examples  2014 assessments  Innovation
    17. 17. CCSSO Innovation Lab Network 17 9 states taking collective action to identify, test and scale student- centered approaches to learning that advance: 1. World-class knowledge and skills 2. Performance-based learning 3. Personalized learning 4. Comprehensive systems of learning supports 5. Anytime, everywhere opportunities 6. Student agency
    18. 18. CCSSO Innovation Lab Network (cont’d)  Schools and districts in ILN states come together to advance new and innovative practices aligned to the 6 critical attributes  States across the ILN come together to share lessons learned and advance policies and practices to support and scale innovation  CCSSO facilitates collaboration and communication among ILN states and with a broader audience, and provides leadership and/or support as states move forward
    19. 19. ILN Excerpt #1 “Student learning is individualized in a variety of ways in our district. Our middle school is the most sophisticated with these practices with the establishment of both Math and Literacy Centers in which 100% of 7th and 8th graders experience learning in a personalized manner. The Math Learning Centers utilize ALEKS as a tool along with a large group setting with multiple teachers and staff, structured around regular student goal setting and conferencing. Students move at a pace commensurate with their ability to learn the content and skills. Teachers monitor frequently and incorporate mini or small group lessons strategically based on student progress. The Literacy Center works in a similar manner using Google Apps and online teacher developed rubrics for ongoing feedback. Teachers work in teams and share the responsibility of helping all students grow.”
    20. 20. ILN Excerpt #2 “A teacher came to me wondering how she could make her reading assessment available online. I helped her create student Google Sites, Blogger, an Audioboo and a Google form. I attached students’ Audioboo accounts to their Blogger and embedded their Blogger into their Google Site. The site layout was a two column layout. In one column was the Blogger and in the other I embedded the Google form. Now when students use the Audioboo app on their iTouch, Smartphone, iPad, etc, to read a paragraph, the ‘boo’ is quickly posted to the blog where the teacher, the student, or other students can listen to the ‘boo’ and complete the form. The teacher now can hear the student progression throughout the year as well as see how students rate themselves and others on the individual’s progression.”
    21. 21. ILN Excerpt #3 “We are in the process of a 1:1 iPad roll out. In our PD we have stressed how technology supports learning but our focus is on personalization and preparing students for -career and -college readiness. Recently in a 1,2,3 multiage NxGL classroom, some students were gathered in a corner discussing a problem they were solving in math. A first grade student pulled out her iPad, snapped a photo of some of the data they were discussing and then invited her group to another remote location of the room. She proceeded to show the group, which contained several older students, how they could pull the data up on Skitch (a free app) and mark it up to collaborate over the data while working to solve their problem. This without any teacher direction! This student demonstrated her understanding of how technology can facilitate learning and allowed them to opportunity to move “anywhere” and mark and remix the data to make it their own.”
    22. 22. Recent state-level movement  California – Piloting Education Technology Task Force recommendations  Iowa – Creating a statewide plan for digital learning  Kentucky – Developing next-generation Open Educational Resources linked to the Common Core for broad distribution  Maine – Exploring expanded access to online courses, simulations, video resources  New Hampshire – Exploring open-source data systems and other digital platforms to support competency-based education system  Wisconsin – Implementing statewide learning management system
    23. 23. CCSSO Digital Learning Task Force  CCSSO recently launched a chiefs’ Digital Learning Task Force to engage federal policymakers in support of improved digital learning opportunities for all students.  This task force, co-chaired by Tom Luna from Idaho and Tom Torlakson from California, seeks as its first objective to inform the FCC rulemaking process that would improve and expand the E-Rate program.  The task force will advise upon:  Appropriate targets for E-Rate success  Metrics to define E-Rate success  States role in E-Rate program administration.
    24. 24. Our Imperitive  We must eliminate the “digital divide” in public schools to ensure that all students have access to 21st century learning opportunities.
    25. 25. Questions or comments Jennifer Davis Director, Innovation Lab Network
    26. 26. Questions?
    27. 27. iNACOL / CCSSO E-Rate Webinar Evan Marwell, CEO & Co-Founder August 6, 2013
    28. 28. Confidential EducationSuperHighway EducationSuperHighway 28 Identify Schools Requiring Upgrades Help Districts Create Upgrade Plans Lower the Cost of Connectivity & Equipment Support E-Rate Modernization Network Snapshot Internet Pricing Portal E-Rate 2.0 Mission: Upgrade the Internet infrastructure of every K-12 public school in America for digital learning America’s Leading Non-Profit for K-12 Internet Infrastructure
    29. 29. Confidential K-12 Networks: Best Efforts => Mission Critical 1.6 3.3 55 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Administrators Teachers Students MillionsofUsers Potential Users on K-12 Networks
    30. 30. Confidential Digital Learning Requires 100Mbps+ EducationSuperHighway 30 ConnectED Goal = 1 Gigabit / School
    31. 31. Confidential Teachers Waiting for Robust Infrastructure 31 45 77 105 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 0-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% AvailableBandwidth(Kbps/student) Bandwidth Utilization Average Bandwidth By Utilization Quartile
    32. 32. Confidential State of the Nation Source: EducationSuperHighway National SchoolSpeedTest – Interim Results as of 6-20-13 Assessment Readiness Based on SBAC Standard (Basic = 20K bps/student; Media Rich = 50 Kbps/student) Digital Learning Readiness Based on SETDA Standard 42% 31% 27% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% Not Ready For Assessment Ready For Basic Assessment Ready For Media Rich Assessment Assessment Readiness 77% 23% 1% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Not Ready For Digital Learning Ready For Digital Learning (2013) Ready For Digital Learning (2017) Digital Learning Readiness
    33. 33. Confidential K-12 Networks – Connectivity + Wi-Fi EducationSuperHighway 33
    34. 34. Confidential E-Rate Priority 1 Spending 58% 33% 6% 3% Data Network Telephony Mobile Application Services 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% E-Rate Spending by Category Source: EducationSuperHighway preliminary Form 471 Item 21 Analysis
    35. 35. Confidential E-Rate P1 Spending – Data Network 22% 78% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Internet Access WAN Percentage of Annual Data Network Cost
    36. 36. Confidential 2.5 5.5 55 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Current Required 2013 Required 2017 TotalK-12Usage(Terabits) K-12 Bandwidth Usage 1.2 2.65 9.25 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Current Required 2013 Required 2017 TotalK-12Cost($Billions) K-12 Bandwidth Cost E-Rate Note: 2017 cost assumes 67% decrease in cost / megabit Source: EducationSuperHighway estimates, SETDA E-Rate Will Be 5x Oversubscribed by 2017
    37. 37. Confidential Dark Fiber Transforms Bandwidth Costs $40 $6.15 $0.69 $0.08 $- $5 $10 $15 $20 $25 $30 $35 $40 $45 Median School "Best Practice" Leased Dark Fiber Leased Dark Fiber Owned Cost Per Megabit 21 159 1,419 12,237 - 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 Median School "Best Practice" Leased Dark Fiber Leased Dark Fiber Owned Megabits Per School*
    38. 38. Confidential E-Rate Modernization Objectives • Update goals to focus on Internet infrastructure – Priority One = Internet access, WAN, LAN & Wi-Fi – Priority Two = Telephony, Mobile, Application Services • Fund one time capital investment to connect schools to dark fiber and deploy ubiquitous wireless networks • Create incentives for pooled purchasing & cost savings • Increase transparency & accountability – Web based Form 471 Item 21 data entry portal – Automated bandwidth monitoring • Simplify the E-Rate application process EducationSuperHighway 38
    39. 39. Questions?
    40. 40. Technology and Common Core Assessments Susan Van Gundy Associate Director for Assessment Technology Achieve 40
    41. 41. What Is PARCC? The Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers:  Made up of 20 states  Developing common, high-quality math and English language arts (ELA) tests for grades 3–11 Computer-based and linked to what students need to know for college and careers For use starting in the 2014–15 school year 41
    42. 42. Available Now: PARCC Item Prototypes Available Now: Technology Readiness Tool Available Now: Capacity Planning Tool Available Now: Accessibility/Accommodations Manual Summer 2013: Item Try Outs and Research Studies Fall 2013: Additional Prototypes Released Winter 2013: System Check Tools Open Spring 2014: Field Test Spring 2014: Practice Test Available School Year 2014-2015: First Operational Assessment PARCC Timeline
    43. 43. Assessment Design ELA/Literacy and Mathematics, Grades 3–11 43 Beginning of School Year End of School Year Diagnostic Assessment Mid-Year Assessment Performance- Based Assessment End-of-Year Assessment Speaking and Listening Assessment Optional Required Key: Flexible administration
    44. 44. Assessment Shifts PARCC Assessment Technology Shifts From To Scale Individual state tests Multistate consortia sharing common tests, common infrastructure, and economies of scale. Content Low complexity items and task response modes. Cognitively complex tasks that leverage use of multimedia, interactivity, authentic tasks, multi-part, simulations – and address traditionally difficult to assess skills within the Common Core. Delivery - Once a year - Paper and pencil Computer-based assessment system including summative, mid-year, diagnostic components + curricular and professional development resources. Scoring & Reporting - End of year - Decontextualized - High Level - Data to inform instruction - Contextualized to CCSS - More granular feedback Data Student responses - Responses, interactions, patterns to improve assessments - Data for state longitudinal systems - Results will be interpretable across states (for example when a student moves from one state to another) Infrastructure - Procured services - State-specific - Common consortium infrastructure - Scalable, flexible, extensible Interoperability Virtually none Common standardized formats for results data, items, and student registration allow interoperability across states and across technical components.
    45. 45. Some examples include:  Text to Speech  Speech to Text  Magnification / Zoom  Highlighting  Customized colors  Masking  Graphic organizers or representations  Captions for audio and video  Descriptive video  Native language supports/tools  Braille (tactile/refreshable)  Signing supports (ASL)  Assistive technologies Accessibility Features and Accommodations 45
    46. 46. School Technology Readiness TECHNICAL INFRASTRUCTURE • Devices and Networks • Bandwidth • Accessibility • Security • Interoperability • Data Storage and Reporting • Tech Support • User Training • Systems Testing LEARNING INFRASTRUCTURE • Standards • Curriculum • Pedagogy • Instructional Materials • Opportunity to Learn • Professional Development • Formative and Summative Assessments • Data Analysis 46
    47. 47. PARCC Technology Specifications Desktops, Laptops, Tablets, Thin Client/VDI Minimum Recommended Operating System Windows XP–SP3 (with caveats) Mac OS 10.5 Linux: Ubuntu 9-10, Fedora 6 iOS6 Android 4.0 Chrome OS Windows 7 or newer Mac OS 10.7 or newer Linux: Ubuntu 11.10, Fedora 16 iOS6 or newer Android 4.0 or newer Chrome OS Memory By operating system 1 GB RAM Processor By operating system 1 GHz Screen Size 9.5 “ 9.5 “ or larger Screen Resolution 1024 x 768 1024 x 768 or better Bandwidth 5 kbps/ student using local caching 100 kbps/ student to support instruction and assessment
    48. 48. Technology Readiness Tool Goals • Assist states and districts in evaluating their own readiness and creating specific strategies to address local needs • Inventory baseline level of technology and supporting infrastructure currently residing in schools • Data to inform for technical platform architecture and assessment designs • All states are defining and evaluating readiness in same way Smarter Balanced – PARCC – SETDA Technology Readiness Tool 48
    49. 49. State & Local Participation • State Readiness Coordinators (SRCs) • Serve as primary point of contact for working with Pearson and the consortia • Communicate regularly to Local Educational Agencies (LEAs) including technology personnel • Facilitate training of LEA technology personnel • Answer questions from LEA personnel • LEA Staff • Upload or enter data for each school • Communicate when they are “finished” with data entry for a particular readiness assessment window 49
    50. 50. Data Collection Parameters Data Collection Parameters Parameter Collection Method Device Specifications Readiness Operating System Auto Processor (Type/Speed/Capacity) Auto Memory Auto Resolution Auto Monitor/Display size Survey Supported Browsers Auto Wireless connectivity Survey Type of Device Survey Device-to-Tester Readiness Number of devices Calculation Number of testers Survey Length of testing window in school days Survey Number of sessions/day Survey Ratio of devices/testers/sessions Calculation Parameter Collection Method Network Infrastructure Readiness Estimated Internet Bandwidth Available Survey Estimated Maximum Network Speed Survey Estimated Network Utilization Survey Number of wireless access points/school Survey Ratio: wireless devices to access points/school Calculation Maximum number of simultaneous testers Survey Available bandwidth for maximum number of testers Calculation Staff & Personnel Readiness Survey Question: Categories of Concerns/Problems Survey 50 Not Available in First Data Collection
    51. 51. Getting Results • Reports will be available for the different dimensions 51
    52. 52. • Technology Strategy for Instruction and Assessment • Clear, Consistent, and Intentional Planning • State Leadership and Support • Intra-State Education Agency Coordination • Clear and Ongoing Communications • Network Analysis at the Local Level • Recognition That One Size Does Not Fit All 52 Key Lessons – Successful Planning Involves…
    53. 53. Devices • Most machines meet or exceed consortia minimums, many meet recommended specifications (except operating system) • Windows XP still dominant operating system • Windows > Mac > Chrome > Linux > iOS > Android • Tablet segment is growing • Wireless vs. Wired almost even • Very little BYOD reported June 2013 Snapshot – PARCC + SBAC Trends 7.9 million devices reported 72,000 schools / 14,000 districts
    54. 54. Networks • Network speeds and utilization estimates are difficult for schools to report (32% of responses reported no network data) • Local environment considerations need to be calculated at a finer grain size to be meaningful (network configuration, peak load speeds, wired vs. wireless, simultaneous non-assessment usage, simultaneous test takers) Staffing • Largest concerns are around (1) having adequate IT staffing levels and (2) proctors having sufficient technical training to administer tests June 2013 Snapshot – PARCC + SBAC Trends 7.9 million devices reported 72,000 schools / 14,000 districts
    55. 55. Q&A
    56. 56. Thank you! Follow up questions about this webinar? Contact: Maria Worthen Vice President for Federal & State Policy, iNACOL