Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Texarkana ISD Technology Plan
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Texarkana ISD Technology Plan


Published on

Texarkana ISD Technology Plan

Texarkana ISD Technology Plan

Published in: Technology, Education
  • 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

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide
  • The ICT Integration Guidebook (2008) states, “Without a shared vision, planning may be ad hoc, resources may be under utilised and there may be little commitment to implement the planning steps. Also the implementation may rely unduly on the continued involvement of certain individuals.” Texarkana ISD includes the following vision statement in its plan:
  • According to John See (1992), technology plans should be short rather than long term. He suggests dividing technology plans into phases rather than years. He also advises against allowing a technology plan to lock you into old technology and applications. This three year plan provides for regular revision and adjustment to accommodate the changing needs of the district and development of new technologies. Although each of the plan’s three phases are tied to a specific year of the plan, the goals of each phase overlap and permit restructuring of the plan.
  • Although a high emphasis is placed on internet connectivity in the district, with the district reporting 100% connectivity on each of its campuses and in every classroom, the district does not show uses of the internet which reflect the scope of its vision statement. According to Levin and Arafeh (2002), “Students report that there is a substantial disconnect between how they use the Internet for school and how they use the Internet during the school day and under teacher direction.” The technology plan does not address this disconnect.
  • The district plan uses a local area network to provide for the sharing of resources and files. Although the plan mentions all the important components of such a system, it does not give specifics as to the numbers of these resources in current use nor to the plan for increasing such resources as the network grows.
  • The district’s wide area network connects the district to the world through the internet, as well as connecting all schools together for additional sharing of resources. The districts filtering system is integrated through the wide area network, ensuring district wide compliance with the national child internet protection and online privacy protection acts.
  • Robert Moore (2006) reports, “A second accelerator that every school district should be deploying today is wireless networking capabilities, also known as Wi-Fi.” The technology plan calls for adding equipment to provide this resource, although how and when this will take place is not specified.
  • The district has a robust Student information system in place which currently generates and stores a huge amount of data relating both to the students and to daily operations such as financial reporting. Integration of this system has allowed the district to remain in compliance with the Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS) reporting requirements.
  • The district has planned for growth of this system to incorporate online grade reporting and attendance tracking.
  • Barker and Wendel, cited in Cavanaugh et. al. (2004), stated, “Students in virtual schools showed greater improvement that their conventional school counterparts in critical thinking, researching, using computers, learning independently, problem-solving, creative thinking, decision-making, and time management.” In fact, similar studies have shown online learning to be as successful or in cases more successful as traditional approaches to learning across much of the curriculum. Despite this, Texarkana ISD seems reluctant to integrate online distance education into its offerings, preferring the use of technology to support the traditional classroom instruction. The plan does call for increased use of online courses for staff development, but hedges around the use of it for student education, indicating that they will watch the market and implement solutions which are “applicable” to the current curriculum.
  • Many members of the higher education community were involved in the design and implementation of the technology plan. The higher education community utilizes Blackboard, a robust course management solution. However, the plan does not address the use of such a system, and only hints at the future implementation of online grade reporting.
  • Although educator preparation is one of the four focuses of the technology plan, the district plan only seems to address instruction in technology competency rather than in the integration of the technology into specific content areas or across the curriculum. In fact, a direct quote by the plan emphasizes this oversight by the plan designers:
  • Texarkana ISD is the only district in the area to provide a stipend to a classroom teacher on each campus for serving as the technology leader and providing hardware and software support for the rest of the teachers on campus.
  • According to See (1992), an effective technology plan defines technology as more than computers. With that in mind, the Texarkana ISD technology plan is distinctly lacking in any mention of technology resources beyond the computer. There is no discussion about the use of handheld personal computing devices such as iPads, web enabled phones, or other internet enabled devices. The plan also fails to address other technology resources which many schools utilize, including audio-visual equipment, webcams, microphones, and other video-conferencing tools, student response systems also known as “clickers”, interactive white boards, projectors, and the like. The plan is unclear whether this kind of technology is addressed elsewhere in a plan or even in the budget.
  • Schools today have access to a vast quantity of storage and resources via the internet utilizing what has become known as “the cloud”. Cloud computing allows schools to use excess storage space and resources to expand the resources at the school’s disposal, providing free or nearly free access to additional resources. The plan mentions the increased use of online storage by staff for online record-keeping and data sharing, but no other reference to cloud solutions is made. The district needs to make use of this solution as a way to save costs and to increase collaboration, student engagement, and parent and community involvement in education. Cloud computing allows applications such as online student portfolios and file sharing across great distances.
  • With open source solutions, districts do not have to settle for canned software packages, but can customize software for specific use by their district. In addition, most open source applications are offered without charge, saving the district money. Many are also very robust, having benefitted from the combined skill of many programmers working collaboratively on the project. The technology plan does not mention the use of open source solutions. While it states that students will make use of free online resources, it also names a specific proprietary software application which is installed on all their computers, which would seem to demonstrate the district prefers paid applications over open source solutions.
  • In conclusion, while the technology plan addresses many topics of interest to schools today, it fails to address many important aspects. There is also a seeming disconnect between the stated vision of the district and the priorities of the plan. Texarkana ISD has made a good start, but needs to rethink traditional education before it can produce a plan which satisfies its vision.
  • Transcript

    • 1. A review by Julia Allen EDLD5362 5/15/2011
    • 2. Vision Statement
      • “ In a dynamic learning community, technology connects home, school, and the world, and supports learning as a continuous process. We believe that all students can develop enhanced thinking and problem-solving skills through the use of technology as a basic tool to help them enter the workforce and to become life-long learners” (Sullivan, 2006).
    • 3. Plan Scope
      • Three year plan
      • A framework for response to changing needs
      • Implemented in three phases:
        • Upgrade of infrastructure and expansion of staff development
        • Expansion of infrastructure, staff development, and technology integration
        • Evaluation and Improvements
    • 4. Internet Connectivity
      • 100% of district’s 600 classrooms and 10 campuses have direct access to the internet.
      • Internet usage does not reflect the problem-solving and higher order thinking skills the district proclaims as its vision for the technology.
    • 5. School Networks
      • Each site contains its own local area network (LAN)
      • provide access to shared instructional resources
      • comprised of file and print servers, Ethernet switches, IP routers, web servers, IP telephony equipment, and Uninterruptible Power Supplies (UPS)
    • 6. Wide-Area Network (WAN)
      • LANs converge into WAN to provide access to Internet and inter-campus communications
      • Provides access to shared communication tools such as E-mail, calendars, and web content
      • Allows sharing of firewalls, web filters, proxy servers, and other security gateways.
    • 7. Wireless Connectivity
      • Calls for the purchase and implementation of equipment and software to facilitate secure wireless access to network resources
    • 8. Student Information Management
      • Maintains accurate and secured student data for reporting purposes including reporting PEIMS
      • Data includes:
        • student enrollment
        • Attendance
        • participation in special programs
        • student performance
        • educational progress of mobile students
        • expenditures
        • local accountability information
    • 9. Student Information Management, Continued
      • Other planned uses:
        • on-line attendance
        • grade reporting
    • 10. Online Learning
      • Implemented for staff development
      • For student online instruction, district plans to “stay abreast” of the market and implement “applicable” solutions
      • Plan does not emphasize non-traditional approaches but describes use of technology to support current curriculum
    • 11. Course Management Systems
      • No mention of such resources in the plan
      • Aside from plan to implement online grade reporting, no indication of any plan to utilize such resources
    • 12. Staff Development
      • Does not address teaching staff effective implementation of technology
      • Seems to indicate plan to teach competency rather than integration
      • “ Before technology can significantly improve learning, teachers must first be competent with the hardware and technology applications that facilitate their work in curriculum and support student learning” (Sullivan, 2006).
    • 13. Technology Support
      • Each campus has at least one Technology Representative who assists with on-site staff hardware/software implementation and support
    • 14. Beyond Computers
      • Specifically addresses computers and computer infrastructures
      • No provision for use of handheld personal computing devices
      • No mention of technology resources such as:
        • audio-visual equipment
        • video-conferencing tools
        • student response systems
        • interactive white boards
    • 15. Cloud Computing
      • Describes increased use by staff of online record-keeping and data sharing
      • No other reference to use of cloud storage solutions by teachers or students
    • 16. Open Source
      • Reference to students’ use of free online resources
      • No specific discussion of open source solutions
      • Mention of proprietary software by name installed on every device seems to support paid solutions over open source
    • 17. References
      • Cavanaugh, C., Gillan, K., Kromrey, J., Hess, M. and Blomeyer, R. (2004). The Effects of Distance Education on K–12 Student Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis. Learning Point Associates.
      • ICT Integration Guidebook (2008). ICTPD Online Professional Development.
      • Levin, D. and Arafeh, S. (2002). The Digital Disconnect: The Widening Gap Between Internet Savvy Students and Their Schools. Pew Internet and American Life Project.
      • Moore, R. J. (2006, August). The Five Best Accelerators in Schools. School Administrator 63.7.
      • See, J. (1992). Developing Effective Technology Plans. National Center for Technology Planning, Tupelo, MS.
      • Sullivan, F. L. (2006). Texarkana ISD Technology Plan.