Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
  • Like
501ferdon techplancritique
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Now you can save presentations on your phone or tablet

Available for both IPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

501ferdon techplancritique

  • 89 views
Published

 

Published in Education , Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
89
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Your Name: Susan FerdonName/location of Organization: Schaumburg Community Consolidated School District 54,Schaumburg, IllinoisWeb link of tech plan: http://sd54.org/plans/techplan0508/District54TechPlan2005.pdf CRITERIA Level of Comments Comprehensiveness 1 2 3 4 Pages 3 - 5 70+ member committee included teachers, administrators, students,Broad Based Support Process X school board, community(who was involved in developing it) members, special ed., gifted, tech staff, engineers and technicians. Pages 8 & 9 18 sources of data focused in three targeted goal areas: community X involvement,Needs Assessment Breadth & depth curriculum/instruction,(is everything included) professional development. Page 7 Written using broad statements, yet specific enough to provide X direction. Recognizes depth andMission and/or Vision breadth of learning as well as roles of school and community. Pages 10-16 All targeted areas (above) are addressed; focus is on how technology will improve teachingGoals and Objectives and learning, not on specific X hardware/software. Strong emphasis on staff development and infrastructure. Strategies and Activities can be amended/revised if needed, without adversely affecting the focus of the plan. Page 11 GOOD: Tied to NETS; goals are sufficiently broad. NOT GOOD: Objectives/activitiesCurriculum Integration (if a school) X lack detail. Marked difference in specificity between curriculum goals/activities and goals related to other areas (staff development, for example).
  • 2. Page 17-20 A variety of procedures are listed for gathering assessment and evaluation data as it relatesEvaluation/Research components community involvement, staff X development and infrastructure goals. Indicators of success and measurement instruments are listed but those related to Curriculum/Instruction are not uniform or research-based (checklists, rubrics). This Technology Plan covers three years, 2005-2008. In Illinois, schools are required to complete three-year Technology Integration X Plans, to be approved by the Illinois State Board of Education,Multi-year Planning in order to be eligible for e-Rate funds. Pages 11-14 Illinois Learning Standards listed (1B, 1C) are Language Arts Standards, unrelated to technology. NETS 2, 5 & 6 (student) are listed but actual connections are tenuousStandards addressed X and limited at best. Document states that staff development will be based on a variety of standards: NSDC, NETS-T, NETS-A, IPTS, Information Literacy Standards, but specific standards are not identified. Page 6 District characteristics and demographics are provided. District 54 is a K-8 district comprised of 27 schools serving about 15,000 students. No site- specific information is included,Facilities but one-to-one laptop program has X been instituted for students in grades 3-6. Even though the district is very large, some information about facilities could still have been included. Current Illinois forms used for tech planning includes a section about facilities.
  • 3. Goals and activities support hardware, software and infrastructure concerns. Issues related to reliability and security X are addressed. 16 district tech staff members were involved in writingMaintenance and Support the plan. There are more Activities, Strategies and Goals related to Professional Development than any other targeted area. Activities X target specific learners/staff and utilize a variety of instructionalStaff Development models.Briefly comment on the overall completeness/comprehensiveness of the technology use plan youevaluated:Overall, I believe the plan to be very good. Like any plan, its true effectiveness lies in theimplementation. Those goals and activities that lack specificity could very well be implemented in avery comprehensive manner thus providing effective training, resources and opportunities for thecommunity, students and staff alike.Beginning in September of 2008, Illinois moved to online TIP submission using a template(http://iirc.niu.edu/). Illinois Technology Integration Plans, to be eligible for e-Rate, are required to bedata-driven. The fact that District 54 used so many sources of data (18) to guide tech planning made itpossible to identify a variety of goals and is one of the plan’s greatest strengths. Many Illinois districts,including my own, are using only ISAT (state testing) data, which can easily result in a much narrowerfocus.