A brief analysis of Wilshire Elementary's STaR chart data

1. Technology and the
Wilshire Way:
an analysis of the Texas STaR Chart survey results 2006-2009
Julia Wilson
EDLD 5306
June, 2010

2. On the Agenda
• What is the STaR Chart?
▫ LRPT (Long Range Plan for Technology)
▫ STaR Chart domains
• A look at Wilshire’s data
▫ Comparison of campus data to district data 2008/09
▫ What’s working
▫ What are our challenges?
• Next steps

3. Each year, Wilshire
teachers, along with
teachers in public
schools across the
state, are asked to
complete the STaR
survey, which
measures technology
preparedness in our
school and our district.
(TEA, 2006)

4. The STaR Chart data is intended to answer two
main questions:
1. Are teachers and schools working toward the
goal of the LRPT? Long Range Plan for
Technology 2006-2010
2. Are students working toward mastery of tech
literacy objectives in the TEKS? Technology
TEKS

5. The STaR Chart Domains
Leadership, Admin
Educator
Teaching and istration, and Infrastructure for
Preparation and
Learning Instructional Technology
Development
Support
Source: Texas Education Agency, 2006

6. •STaR Chart data has been collected
since the 2006-2007 school year
•Data is disaggregated at the
campus, district and state levels
•Classifications are assigned for
each of the domains:
•Early Tech (6-8)
•Developing Tech (9-14)
•Advanced Tech (15-20)
•Target Tech (21-24)

7. How we stack up:
STaR Chart Comparison 2008-09
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
Wilshire
2
0 HEB

8. STaR Chart Analysis: Wilshire Elementary School; 2006-2009
Key Area STaR
Summary Area Key Area Totals Trends
Classifications
2008-09: 11 2008-09: Developing Static, with slight decrease
from year 2 to year 3; no
What does this mean
Teaching & Learning 2007-08: 12 2007-08: Developing
change in classification
2006-07: 12 2006-07: Developing (midrange)
2008-09: 10 2008-09: Developing
Slight growth in year 1,
Educator Preparation &
2007-08: 10 2007-08: Developing change in classification; then
for Wilshire?
Development
static (low range)
2006-07: 8 2006-07: Early
Slight growth; no change in
2008-09: 14 2008-09: Developing
Leadership, classification over three
Administration, & 2007-08: 13 2007-08: Developing years; no change in
Instructional Support classification (mid- to high
2006-07: 11 2006-07: Developing
range)
2008-09: 15 2008-09: Advanced
Slight decrease in year one,
Infrastructure for
2007-08: 15 2007-08: Advanced then static; no change in
Technology
classification (low range)
2006-07: 16 2006-07: Advanced

9. We have the tools . . .

10. According to the data from 2006 to 2009, our campus shows the greatest
strength in
infrastructure for technology:
• 4 computers per classroom
• over 75 computers in our two labs and the library.
• document cameras, video recorders, digital cameras, poster
makers, scanners, and SmartBoards
•excellent connectivity
• a wide variety of software for use (Office
2007, Photostory, SMART Technologies)

11. Where we fall short:
•Teaching and Learning: •Educator Preparation
•2006-07: Mid Developing •2006-07: High Early Tech
(12) (8)
•2007-08: No Change •2007-08: Low Developing
•2008-09: -1 Tech (10)
•2008-09: No Change
•Developing – “Instruction is
teacher-directed . . . students
use technology to access •Developing – “Use of
electronic information and technology is for administrative
develop communication and tasks and classroom
presentation projects. There is management. There is use of
minimal use of technology in online resources.”
•Source: TEA (2006). Texas STaR
foundation TEKS.” chart. Instructional Materials and
Educational Technology Division

12. How do we make
technology a part of
student-centered
learning?

13. We use our best
Continuous
practices, and Improvement
remember that
we are learners
as well as
Collaborate
teachers.
Professional
Development

14. “We all know that life will be
very different by 2100. Will
school?”
-- Marc Prensky (2008). Adopt and adapt: shaping tech for
the classroom. Edutopia: The George Lucas Educational
Foundation