Technology Plan Comparisons Presentation Part 2

576 views
524 views

Published on

Here is the second part of our technology plan comparisons presentation.

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
576
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
8
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Technology Plan Comparisons Presentation Part 2

  1. 1. A good example of a technology plan’s Action Plan <ul><li>Featured Plan: Los Angeles Unified School District Technology Plan (1999-2003) </li></ul><ul><li>Begins with </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Brief synopsis of what to expect in plan </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>District gathering and analyzing data from “implementation activities” to determine the annual work & to anticipate the resources and budgetary support needed for each year </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Data gathering & analysis are mentioned in several portions of plan </li></ul>
  2. 2. A good example of a technology plan’s Action Plan (cont’d) <ul><li>Implements plan through 4 phases </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Timeline given of implementation of various strategies </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Addressing Access to Technology Resources </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Goal: Human Resource Management & Development </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Objectives: Technology Support Staffing, Equity of Technology Resources, & Learning Environment </li></ul></ul>
  3. 3. A good example of a technology plan’s Action Plan (cont’d) <ul><li>Addressing Technology Literacy </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Goal: Curriculum & Learning Standards </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Objectives: Curriculum & Technology Integration & Student Technology Standards </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Addressing Professional Development </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Goal: Human Resource Management & Development </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Objective: Staff Technology Competencies </li></ul></ul>
  4. 4. A good example of a technology plan’s Action Plan (cont’d) <ul><li>Addressing Community Collaboration </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Goals:Human Resource Management & Development </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Objectives: Staff Technology Competencies, Organizational Development, Human Resource Management </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Goal: (Addressing) Implementation Issues </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Objective: Community Learning </li></ul></ul>
  5. 5. A bad example of a technology plan’s Action Plan <ul><li>Featured Plan: Many High School (1997-1999) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Basic Shortcomings </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Concise to the point of seeming rushed and not well thought out </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>No indication of update or revision in following years </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Goals as single phrase statements that are elusive and tough to measure </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Ex: develop staff competency in technology </li></ul></ul></ul></ul>
  6. 6. A bad example of a technology plan’s Action Plan (cont’d) <ul><li>Lack of Evaluative methods </li></ul><ul><ul><li>For evaluation of effectiveness on teacher training and technology use the evaluation is listed as “teacher sign in sheets for training sessions” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>For evaluation of effective technology implementation in lessons the evaluator is “Copy of teacher lesson plans” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>No goal is supported or evaluated by data evaluated before or after a set period of time. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>All strategies are listed as “on-going”. Indicating that someone only wanted to write this plan once. </li></ul></ul>
  7. 7. A good example of a technology plan’s Budgeting <ul><li>Featured plan: Lakeshore Public Schools Technology Plan (2007-2010) </li></ul><ul><li>Clearly outlines cost of each action element during each school year from 2007-2008 to 2009-2010 </li></ul><ul><li>Lists each fund from which the money is coming </li></ul><ul><li>States that district will use federal, state, & local grants to assist in providing professional development, software, or technology equipment </li></ul>
  8. 8. A bad example of a technology plan’s Budgeting <ul><li>Featured Plan: Poway High School (2005-2008) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Budget does not provide for supporting needed infrastructure to support active technology usage. Details: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>6 Network drops per class </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>On-site hardware support, but not software/application support </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Handcuffed by mandatory purchasing of equipment every 4 years, as opposed to a lease that replaces obsolete technology as a provision. </li></ul></ul></ul>
  9. 9. A good example of a technology plan’s Evaluation <ul><li>Featured Plan: Plymouth Public Schools Technology Plan (2007-2011) </li></ul><ul><li>Describes how district will evaluate technology plan periodically throughout school year </li></ul><ul><li>(If necessary) technology plan will be adjusted after periodic evaluations </li></ul><ul><li>Considers feedback from stakeholder & advisory board meetings as evaluations </li></ul><ul><li>Summative evaluation at end of each year </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Will “redefine & redirect” plan for more effectiveness </li></ul></ul>
  10. 10. A bad example of a technology plan’s Evaluation <ul><li>Featured Plan: Greenwich Public Schools (2009-2012) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Although this technology plan was very impressive and had a continuous evaluation of alignment and effectiveness, it only required teachers to use technology 4 times a year. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>This puts a serious limit on what can truly be “evaluated” </li></ul></ul></ul>
  11. 11. A good example of a technology plan’s Policy <ul><li>Featured Plan: Los Angeles Unified School District Technology Plan (2006-2009) </li></ul><ul><li>Found in Appendix A </li></ul><ul><li>1st page addresses CIPA within AUP for District Computer Systems </li></ul><ul><li>Includes 2 attachments of AUP for students & parents and faculty & staff </li></ul>
  12. 12. A bad example of a technology plan’s Policy <ul><li>Featured Plan: Many High School (1997-1999) </li></ul><ul><li>The worst situation is the absence of a policy. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Many High School did not include a policy with their technology plan at all. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Other factors include making it accessible. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>While several school districts have well developed policies they tend to be written by school lawyers and are not easily understood by students and parents. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A “layman’s” version should be provided adjusted to grade level comprehension and I did not see this with any of the plans reviewed. </li></ul></ul>
  13. 13. Works Cited <ul><li>Burgess, R. et al. (2007). Lakeshore public schools technology plan 2007- 2010. Stevensville, MI: Lakeshore Public Schools. </li></ul><ul><li>Booker III, Norman (1997). Many high school technology plan. Many, LA: Sabine Public Schools. </li></ul><ul><li>Driscoll, E. et al. (2007). Plymouth public schools technology plan 2007-2011. Plymouth, MA: Plymouth Public Schools. </li></ul><ul><li>Douberley, K. et al. (2007). Hill-Gustat middle school technology plan 2007- 2010. Sebring, FL: HGMS. </li></ul><ul><li>Fisher, Scott (2005). Poway high school technology plan 2005-2008. Poway, CA: Poway High School. </li></ul><ul><li>Gunnip, Jan &Kompar, Fran (2009). Greenwich public schools technology plan 2009-2012. Greenwich, CN: Greenwich Public Schools. </li></ul><ul><li>Hines, A. et al. (2006). North Iredell middle school technology plan 2005- 2009. Olin, NC: North Iredell Middle School. </li></ul><ul><li>Oliver, J. et al. (2000). Los Angeles unified school district instructional technology plan. Los Angeles, CA: The Los Angeles Unified School District. </li></ul><ul><li>Tokofsky, D. et al. (2006). Los Angeles unified school district education technology plan July 1, 2006 - June 30, 2009. Los Angeles, CA: The Los Angeles Unified School District. </li></ul>

×