2. 1
Meagan Harrelson
Livia Daniel
Annotated List of Technology Plan Resources
“Evaluating the Effectiveness of Technology in Our Schools”
Noeth, Richard J. and Boris B. Volkolv. “Evaluating the Effectiveness of Technology in
Our
Schools.” ACT Policy Report.
<http://www.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/school_tech.pdf>
This scholarly article from ACT explores several areas associated with the
implementation of educational technology. It gives research-based evidence of the
positive outcomes of technology use within schools, but it also explains key components
of a technology plan that must be in place from the beginning in order for technology
integration to be successful, such as making sure that teachers are adequately trained.
Furthermore, this article emphasizes the need for evaluating these implementations as
well as what areas need the most attention.
“Overview of Technology and Education Reform”
<http://www2.ed.gov/pubs/EdReformStudies/EdTech/overview.html>
This article explains the core purposes for why we integrate technology in the classroom
in the first place. It emphasis the need for technology as a tool, rather than a lesson in
itself. It states, “Technology skills are acquired as a means to an end, and students
receive practice in selecting and using various technology applications to accomplish a
wide variety of tasks.” It is important to remember the why when creating a technology
plan, and its purposes need to be reflected sufficiently within the plan.
“Special School District Technology Plan Program Evaluation”
Special School District Technology Plan Program Evaluation. N.P.: Special
School District, 2009. PDF.
3. 2
<https://www.ssdmo.org/about_us/program_eval/07-
09/Technology%20Plan%20Pr
ogram%20Eval.pdf>
The “Special School District Technology Plan Program Evaluation” is a document
constructed by a large group of representatives from this school district that simply
looks at their current technology plans and addresses its strengths as well as concerns
they have and recommendations for improvement. In analyzing our own technology
plans, it will be important to review documents such as these and note how other school
systems like this one are evaluating themselves and what they find most important in
addressing.
“District/School Technology Plan Template: Your Blueprint for Success”
<http://www.scilearn.com/sites/default/files/imported/alldocs/cp/school-district-
technology-plan.pdf>
This online template is a useful resource to use for creating a technology plan from
scratch. It outlines the most important components of a successful technology plan,
and allows one to simply type in notes or even the plan itself into the subtitles. It even
has a page at the end that is devoted to evaluating one’s technology plan in general,
and one may score the plan in each area as “meets criteria,” “limited period of approval,
needs improvement,” or does not meet criteria.” This will be a useful tool in evaluating
specific areas of our technology plans.
“Critical Issue: Developing a School or District Technology Plan”
<http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/methods/technlgy/te300.htm>
“This Critical Issue was written by Alan November, senior partner at Educational
Renaissance Planners in Evanston, Illinois, and Carolyn Staudt, an educational
consultant, in conjunction with Mary Ann Costello, a free-lance writer, and Lynne Huske,
Pathways coordinator at North Central Regional Educational Laboratory.” Although the
article is a little dated, it gives a relevant step-by-step of where school districts should
start in developing technology plans and goals for a successful technology plan. It also
gives a breakdown of individual responsibilities as well as many resources for further
information.
4. 3
“Getting wired for learning”
Sliger, B. (1998). Getting wired for learning. Techniques: Making Education & Career
Connections, 73(6), 20.
This article, accessed on Galileo, is about how a school district can plan and implement
a technology plan. It discusses the steps to take and the essentials in creating a
successful plan. The article goes in steps. Each step describes what should be done
and how to do it. The plan should be congruent with the school improvement plan also.
The timeline for the plan should be 3-5 years. This article can be used to assess a
technology plan already in use. The detailed steps allow the reader to understand what
all needs to be included in plans.
“Raising the Bar On School Technology”
Jerald, C. D., & Orlofsky, G. F. (1999). Raising the Bar On School Technology.
Education Week, 19(4), 58.
This article provides the reader with information on how American schools across the
country invest in technology. This article provides information on computer-assisted
instruction and suggests what technology to buy and how to implement it. There are
resources linked at the end of the article for further reading and information on creating
a school technology plan. There are also details at the end on how each state in the
country uses money to implement technology plans. This resource is valuable because
it allows the reader to compare their home state to other states in the country. The
resources at the end are also very valuable in assisting with creating a technology plan
for schools.
“Making Dreams Come True! How to Write a Technology Plan”
Anderson, L. S. (1995). Making Dreams Come True! How to Write a Technology Plan.
Multimedia Schools, 2(5-), 14-19.
The title of this article gives it away. It is just that- a step by step plan of how to write a
technology plan. The article recommends the National Center for Technology Planning
5. 4
as a great resource and tool to use while creating a plan for a school. This article
encourages one to not reinvent the wheel.
“Tips on writing a great school technology plan”
Braatz, R. (1998). Tips on writing a great school technology plan. Familypc, 5(9), 53.
This article not only gives information on creating a school technology plan, but also
information on how to improve/modify a plan. This article is useful to schools that need
to modify an already-made technology plan. There is no point in recreating the wheel.
Sometimes a great technology plan can be made by modifying an existing one. The
article also highlights budgeting for a technology plan in an effective and cost-efficient
way.
“7 Proven Strategies for Winning Ed Tech Grants”
Waters, J. K. (2015). 7 Proven Strategies for Winning Ed Tech Grants. T H E Journal,
42(2), 12-17.
This resource is extremely valuable because it includes information on how to obtain
money to fund a school technology plan. The article discusses the fact that there is a
wide range of “ed-tech” funding sources that are available for schools. The article
discusses the traditional ways to receive federal, state, and private foundation grants
and also new donor programs and contests available to schools. This is such a valuable
resource, because most schools lack the funding necessary for all of their technology
desires. Sometimes items have to be cut. If schools can receive more grants, receive
money from new donor programs, or win contests, then maybe more of their technology
needs can be met.
Evaluation of School Technology Plan
3 2 1 0
6. 5
Goals **The plan
establishes
clear goals
and a realistic
strategy for
using
technology to
improve
education or
library
services.
The plan
establishes
clear goals but
it is not
completely
clear how the
goals will be
reached.
The plan
establishes
goals that
seem
unrealistic and
it is not clear
how the goals
will be
reached.
The plan does
not seem to
establish clear
goals or a
strategy for
reaching
them.
Professional
Development
**The plan has
a professional
development
strategy to
ensure that
staff knows
how to use the
new
technologies to
improve
education or
library
services.
The plan’s
professional
development
strategy seems
weak or
incomplete.
The plan
mentions
professional
development,
but does not
include a
strategy for
training the
staff.
The plan does
not include
professional
development.
An
assessment
of
telecommuni
cation
services,
hardware,
software,
and other
services
needed
**The plan
includes an
assessment of
the hardware,
software, and
other services
that will be
needed to
improve
education or
library
services.
The plan does
not include an
assessment of
telecommunic
ation services,
hardware,
software, and
other services
needed,
Accessibility
of technology
resources
(Americans
with
Disabilities
The plan
includes a
strategy that
correlates with
the Americans
with
Disabilities Act
Accessibility is
mentioned, but
a strategy for
accessibility is
not clear.
The plan does
not include a
strategy that
correlates with
the Americans
with
Disabilities Act
7. 6
Act) in order to
make
technology
accessible to
all students.
in order to
make
technology
accessible to
all students.
Budget **The plan
provides for a
sufficient
budget to
acquire and
maintain the
hardware,
software,
professional
development,
and other
services that
will be needed
to implement
the strategy for
improved
education or
library
services.
The plan
provides for a
budget for all
needed
services, but it
does not seem
sufficient.
The plan’s
budget does
not cover all
necessary
services, nor
does it seem
sufficient.
The plan does
not include a
budget.
Ongoing
Evaluation
**The plan
includes an
evaluation
process that
enables the
school or
library to
monitor
progress
toward the
specified goals
and make mid-
course
corrections in
response to
new
developments
and
opportunities
as they arise.
The plan
includes an
evaluation
process, but
does not allow
for corrections
in response to
new
developments
as they arise.
The plan
mentions
ongoing
evaluation, but
does not
include a
process or
strategy for
evaluating or
making
corrections.
The plan does
not include an
evaluation
process.
8. 7
Purpose/
Mission
The plan
reflects a clear
purpose or
mission for the
integration of
new
technology
and student
achievement is
consistently
the basis for all
decisions
within the plan.
The plan
mentions it’s
purpose or
mission and
states student
achievement
as a priority,
but that vision
is not clearly
reflected
throughout the
plan.
The plan does
not seem to
reflect a
purpose at all.
**<http://www.scilearn.com/sites/default/files/imported/alldocs/cp/school-district-
technology-plan.pdf>
9. 8
Cherokee County School District
Canton, GA
Three-Year Technology Plan
June 1, 2014 - June 30, 2017
http://www.cherokee.k12.ga.us/departments/technology/D
ocuments/StateTechPlan-2014-2017.pdf
Evaluation of School Technology Plan
3 2 1 0
Goals **The plan
establishes
clear goals
and a realistic
strategy for
using
technology to
improve
education or
library
services.
The plan
establishes
clear goals but
it is not
completely
clear how the
goals will be
reached.
The plan
establishes
goals that
seem
unrealistic and
it is not clear
how the goals
will be
reached.
The plan does
not seem to
establish clear
goals or a
strategy for
reaching
them.
Professional
Development
**The plan has
a professional
development
strategy to
ensure that
staff knows
how to use the
new
technologies to
improve
education or
library
services.
The plan’s
professional
development
strategy seems
weak or
incomplete.
The plan
mentions
professional
development,
but does not
include a
strategy for
training the
staff.
The plan does
not include
professional
development.
10. 9
An
assessment
of
telecommuni
cation
services,
hardware,
software,
and other
services
needed
**The plan
includes an
assessment of
the hardware,
software, and
other services
that will be
needed to
improve
education or
library
services.
The plan does
not include an
assessment of
telecommunic
ation services,
hardware,
software, and
other services
needed,
Accessibility
of
Technology
Resources
(Americans
with
Disabilities
Act)
The plan
includes a
strategy that
correlates with
the Americans
with
Disabilities Act
in order to
make
technology
accessible to
all students.
Accessibility is
mentioned, but
a strategy for
accessibility is
not clear.
The plan does
not include a
strategy that
correlates with
the Americans
with
Disabilities Act
in order to
make
technology
accessible to
all students.
Budget **The plan
provides for a
sufficient
budget to
acquire and
maintain the
hardware,
software,
professional
development,
and other
services that
will be needed
to implement
the strategy for
improved
education or
library
services.
The plan
provides for a
budget for all
needed
services, but it
does not seem
sufficient.
The plan’s
budget does
not cover all
necessary
services, nor
does it seem
sufficient.
The plan does
not include a
budget.
11. 10
Ongoing
Evaluation
**The plan
includes an
evaluation
process that
enables the
school or
library to
monitor
progress
toward the
specified goals
and make mid-
course
corrections in
response to
new
developments
and
opportunities
as they arise.
The plan
includes an
evaluation
process, but
does not allow
for corrections
in response to
new
developments
as they
arise.
The plan
mentions
ongoing
evaluation, but
does not
include a
process or
strategy for
evaluating or
making
corrections.
The plan does
not include an
evaluation
process.
Purpose The plan
reflects a clear
purpose for the
integration of
new
technology
and student
achievement is
consistently
the basis for all
decisions
within the plan.
The plan
mentions it’s
purpose and
states student
achievement
as a priority,
but that vision
is not clearly
reflected
throughout the
plan.
The plan does
not seem to
reflect a
purpose at all.
**<http://www.scilearn.com/sites/default/files/imported/alldocs/cp/school-district-
technology-plan.pdf>
Explanations and Recommendations
The Cherokee County School District’s three-year technology plan was evaluated
using the above rubric. Although most categories of the technology plan were deemed
as excellent, with a score of 3 on the rubric, the main issues seem to lie with the amount
of detail devoted to each category. For example, the plan clearly includes professional
12. 11
development as a strategy for reaching “Goal 2: Teaching”; however, it is not clear on
how the professional development will be attained. We recommend that the plan
include their methods of professional development. For example, the plan could include
sending a certain number of teachers from each school to the annual state technology
conference. That would show not only a clear intent, but a clear vision and what steps
would be taken to ensure that the teachers are effectively trained.
Another area where this plan could improve is in the category titled “Accessibility
of Technology Resources (Americans with Disabilities Act).” Accessibility is mentioned
under “Goal 6: Community,” stating, “Ensure the District site meets standards for those
with disabilities.” However, the evaluation method for this is very vague. It only
mentions the use of accessibility tools. To improve this area, the plan should state
specifically what tools will be used to ensure that students with disabilities are
accommodated.
Other areas that need revision or additions are the budget and the plan’s
evaluation steps. The only mention of a budget is within the Goals, Benchmarks, and
Strategies chart. The title of this section on the chart is Funding Source/Amount. The
only mention of any dollar amount is in this section. The plan includes the proposed
amount each goal will cost and the funding source. Many of the goals’ funding sources
are coming from SPLOST. Compared to other plans that our group has evaluated in the
previous tasks for Module 3, this technology plan’s budget does not seem detailed
enough. Other technology plans had a section devoted to the budget detailing where
funds would come from, while this one does not have that.
The evaluation section of the plan also is lacking. The only mention of evaluation
is also within the Goals, Benchmarks, and Strategies chart. The chart has two titles
dedicated to evaluation: Benchmarks/Success Indicators and Evaluation Method. The
Benchmarks/Success Indicators section includes a method for each goal to be
measured. The Evaluation Method section of the chart gives a brief description of how
each goal’s success will be evaluated and also by who (Persons Responsible). This is
the only section in the entire plan that evaluation is mentioned. There is no mention of
how things will be changed if something goes awry. If corrections need to be made,
there are no expectation, steps, or details for how that process would work. Mostly,
each evaluation section for each goal only includes one sentence (if that). The plan
definitely needs more attention given to the evaluation portion and the budget.
