TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: MARIETTA CITY SCHOOLS, GA

Technology Plan Evaluation and Recommendations

Marietta City Schools, Georgia
FRIT 7232 Visionary Leadership in Instructional Technology

Candice Beattie, Erica Colbert, Alison Geigerman, Helena Wallace, Valerie Morris
Georgia Southern University
February 11, 2016

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: MARIETTA CITY SCHOOLS, GA

2
Technology Plan Resources
Retrieved January 30th, 2016, from
http://www.marietta-city.org/cms/lib07/GA01903590/Centricity/Shared/files/technology/MCS%20Technology%20Plan.pdf
http://www.newtoncountyschools.org/Portals/0/newtoncounty/main/documents/technology/Tech%20Plan%202014%20final.pdf
http://images.pcmac.org/Uploads/HabershamCounty/HabershamCounty/Departments/DocumentsCategories/Documents/Haber
sham_TechnologyPlan_2012-15.pdf
http://www.richmond.k12.nc.us/District/Department/3-Technology/11489-Untitled.html
http://its.georgiasouthern.edu/cio/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2009-IT-Technology-and-Information-Resources-Strategic-Plan.pdf
http://bcss-ga.schoolloop.com/file/1278179266424/1275747833509/7014720532592604134.pdf
This listing contains the local district technology plans that we used for comparison to other technology plans from districts within
Georgia. Each plan contains a basic framework that we analyzed to create our rubric.

Barnett, H. (2001, October 01). Successful K-12 Technology Planning: Ten Essential Elements. ERIC Digest. Retrieved February 05,
2016, from http://www.ericdigests.org/2002-2/ten.htm This website teaches how to create a technology plan. It talks about 10
importante categories and then it breaks them down into key points to help you understand how to apply it to your school or
district.

Brophy, T. S. (n.d.). Writing Effective Rubrics [Pdf]. Florida: University of Florida. Retrieved

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: MARIETTA CITY SCHOOLS, GA

3
February 05, 2016, from http://assessment.aa.ufl.edu/Data/Sites/22/media/slo/writing_effective_rubrics_guide_v2.pdf. This pdf
article teaches you all about rubrics. Why we use them, what they are most useful for, how to create an efficient one and how to
adapt them to your needs.
Connor, D. (2012, May 21). Technology Planning: Closing the Communications Gap. Retrieved February 05, 2016, from
http://www.educationworld.com/a_tech/tech152.shtml This website has several different links for teachers and technology
directors. This link provides information and articles for technology directors to implement and create a technology plan. It also
provides important information and ideas for teachers on using technology in the classroom.
Cox, C. (2007). Georgia K-12 Technology Plan. Retrieved February 5, 2016, from
http://archives.doe.k12.ga.us/DMGetDocument.aspx/2007-2012 Georgia State Technology Plan.pdf?
p=6CC6799F8C1371F6B339ECB94111E7B72D7D55A7A26DF919F8013470C8510E82&Type=D This is the Georgia
Department of Education technology plan from 2007-2012. This plan provides information on the stakeholders involved in
developing and implementing the technology plan. This document also provides a vision statement used to implement and carry
out the technology plan. The process used to plan and draft the plan is explicitly detailed throughout. They included the national
trends that would help guide the plan and vision for the technology needs.
Culatta, Richard. Future Ready Learning: Reimagining The Role Of Technology In Education. 1st ed. US Department of Education, 2016.
Web. 4 Feb. 2016. National Education Technology Plan: Office of Educational Technology. Retrieved February 5, 2016, from
http://tech.ed.gov/netp/ This website provides several help links and information on resources for teachers, leaders, students,

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: MARIETTA CITY SCHOOLS, GA

4
families, and developers. The link provides insight on the national vision for the use of technology in education. There are
several different links to help with the development and implementation of a technology plan.
Georgia Department of Education. (2014). Three-year technology plan. Retrieved from
http://www.gadoe.org/Technology-Services/ Infrastructure/Documents/GaDOE_Technology_Plan_Rubric_2013.doc In order to
receive E-Rate and other funding, systems in Georgia must have a current, approved technology plan. The purpose of this rubric
is to help systems write a technology plan that meets E-Rate guidelines and is designed to improve education. This document is
set up not only as a rubric, but also as a template that systems can use when creating their plans. The document provides an
outline of everything that is required in a technology plan as well as guidelines and examples for writing goals, strategies and
other necessary information.
IMPACT: Guidelines for North Carolina Media and Technology Programs. (2006). Retrieved February 05, 2016, from
http://www.ncwiseowl.org/impact/progadmin.htm This website talks about the different aspects of building and technology plans.
The information is written very directly with the use of bullet points and images to clearly define the areas that should be covered
in a plan. It also covers the use of language, page design and the layout of information so you can create an easy, readable
document. It also give examples of assessments and data collection tools which will help you develop an efficient technology
plan.
Quinones,S & Kirshstein, R. (1998) An Educators Guide to Evaluating the Use of Technology in Schools and Classrooms. Pelavin
Research Center: U.S. Department of Education.Retrieved February 5th, 2016 from http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ed-

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: MARIETTA CITY SCHOOLS, GA

5
techguide/handbook2.pdf This website is a very detailed account of how to evaluate a technology plan. This plan includes both
tips and forms that can be used to evaluate each piece of a districts plan and gauge its effectiveness.
National Center for Technology Planning. (n.d.). Retrieved February 05, 2016, from http://www.nctp.com/ This website provides
links to several county technology plans in several different states. It also provides a guidebook for developing an effective
instructional technology plan. This helps to identify what topics should be covered in each district plan.
(NetAction). (n.d.). The Virtual Activity. Retrieved February 05, 2016, from
http://www.netaction.org/training/part6.html This article explains the elements needed to successfully create a technology plan.
It divides the plan into categories, explains each one of them and gives detailed information of what each section needs to cover.
Sibley, P. H., & Kimball, C. (98, February 6). Technology Planning Analysis Rubric [PDF]. EDmin Open Systems. Retrieved
February 05, 2016, from http://course1.winona.edu/shatfield/air/technology%20planning%20analysis.pdf Technolgy Planning
Analysis Rubric: This resource is a detailed example of a technology plan rubric. There are 23 criteria used to thoroughly
analyze a technology plan.
Technology in Schools - Chapter 1: Technology Planning and Policies, Technology in Schools: Suggestions, Tools, and Guidelines for
Assessing Technology in Elementary and Secondary Education. (n.d.). Retrieved February 05, 2016, from
https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2003/tech_schools/chapter1.asp This document is divided into several sections. Each section focuses
primary on one part of technology plan. In the beginning of each section, you can find guiding questions that will help you decide
what needs to be addressed and how you can write those concerns or solutions in a clear and simple way. There is also a
sidebar topics tab that is not related to creating a plan but its related to the topics and it talks about classroom experiences of

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: MARIETTA CITY SCHOOLS, GA

6
technology applications, what to expect out of technology, how to fix simple technology problems, the standards connect to
technology application in classrooms and others.
Group Rubric and Average Score for Marietta City Schools Technology Plan

Rubric

Non evident

Needs work

Good/Adequate

Excellent

Score

Mission/Visio
n Statement
and Goals

Missing
Mission/Vision
statement, the
technological
and instructional
outcomes

Mission/Vision
statement is present
but hard to
understand. Missing
either the
technological or
instructional
outcomes

Mission/Vision
statement clear and
concise but limited
information on either
the technological or
instructional outcomes

Mission/ Vision statement is clear and

concise. The goals of the plan are
achievable, on track with the mission
statement and have detailed technological
and instructional outcomes

3/3

Professional
Development

Missing
professional
development
goals or the
development
goal is not
relevant to the
needs of all staff

A professional
development plan is
present but does not
provide a clear goal.
Recommendations on
incentives are not
given or are unclear,
no funding source is
mentioned

The plan states the

needs and technical
level of current
personnel. The goal to
promote professional
development is
present.
Recommendations on
incentives are given

A clear goal to promote professional

development for all faculty and staff is
presented. Provides recommendations on
professional, personal, or monetary
incentives. There are several researchbased, and relevant, professional
development programs outlined. Funding
sources are provided.

1.9/3

Assessment
of Services

Assessment is
absent,
incomplete or
not submitted

Technology has been

assessed and
analyzed, but may not
include summaries or

The technology plan

has been assessed
and analyzed for the
purpose of providing

Technology plan has been assessed and

analyzed for the purpose of providing
information on decision about teaching,
learning, technology resources, and

2.2/3

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: MARIETTA CITY SCHOOLS, GA

7
information from all
elements in the
technology surveys

feedback about the

impact of technology
on most curriculum
areas

provides information for further technology

decisions. The assessment provides a
comprehensive view of the use of
technology and districts vision

Accessibility
of
Technology
Resources
(Americans
with
Disabilities
Act)

There are no
goals in place to
address
accessibility.
There is no
system in place
to address
concerns

Students with
disabilities are
mentioned in the
technology plan, but
there is no clear goal
as to how they will be
accommodated

System considers
some disabilities and
has goals in place, but
does not cater to a
wide range of users

Strategies and goals are provided to detail

accessibility. Systems are accessible to all
users, including those with disabilities. All
computer labs and classrooms are fully
accessible to all users. The district and
schools understands and provides access to
the increasing demand of technology for
students and faculty receiving homebound
services

2.1/3

Budget

No budget
provided

Plan provides very

few details about the
budget and how it will
be implemented
throughout the
window

Plan provides some of

the budget details for
expenses, alternative
sources of funds and
implementation dates.
1.
Implementation dates
are realistic and on 2.
track with mission 3.
statement

Plan provides a budget summary with

explicit details on expenses, alternative
sources of funds and implementation dates
for:
Acquisition, maintenance, and upgrade of
software, hardware, facilities, and system
Staff development
Technology support
Implementation dates are realistic and on
track with mission statement

2.8/3

Ongoing
Evaluation

No plan for
ongoing
evaluation is
evident

The plan provides

limited information on
the process of
evaluating the
technology plan

There is a plan for

evaluating the
purpose of the
technology plan and
the needs for the
program

There is a clear plan of action directly

related to the mission and assessment of
needs for the program. There is a
standardized process for reviewing and
collecting data, monitoring and evaluating
professional development and making
changes as needs arise

2.8/3

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: MARIETTA CITY SCHOOLS, GA

8

Individual Rankings
Justification for scoring on the rubric: After reviewing Marietta City Schools 2015-2018 technology plan, each team member
scored the rubric independently. The average for each indicator was collected and submitted on the overall group rubric
above. This is the individual breakdown of each of our evaluations.
Indicator

Alison

Helena

Erica

Candice

Valerie

Mission/Vision
Statement and
Goals

2.8

Professional
Development

1.5

Assessment of
Services

Accessibility of
Technology
Resources
(ADA)

2.7

Budget

Ongoing
Evaluation

Recommendations for Improvement to the Marietta City Schools 2015-2018 Technology Plan
Mission/Vision Statement and Goals

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: MARIETTA CITY SCHOOLS, GA

9
The mission statement and goals in this plan were very clear and in our opinion, obtainable, within the time frame allocated. Many families
in the Atlanta area do have the privilege to be able to choose if they want to send their children to private or public schools. Many chose
public for the extracurricular activities that are offered in a larger setting. Marietta City Schools addresses the fierce competition and
created a vision statement that clearly identifies their intentions. The goals are something that smaller, more rural districts could one day
hope to strive for. One rater did point out that the district needs to be careful not to mislead readers into thinking they have a system that
will actually monitor or evaluate the use of technology in the home, due to the fact that there is no system control over home usage.
Professional Development
This was our lowest rating on the rubric. Although professional development is mentioned in the plan, what does professional
development look like to Marietta City Schools, meaning what conferences, workshops, etc. do they use on a consistent basis? It was
mentioned in their plan as an area to continue developing, and the funding source was mostly with Title 1 funds. However, no
recommendations on incentives for participants were mentioned, and research-based courses were not highlighted. Marietta has access
to nearby Atlanta, therefore some of the best professional development is offered nearby. It would be nice to see what trainings they are
focusing on for the next 3 years for their employees.
Assessment of Services
The assessment plan is very well developed, detailed and it maintains and monitors student's career/college readiness performance. To
improve the efficiency of this process, baseline information should be present and new data should be added as it becomes available.
(page 28)
Accessibility of Technology Resources
Students with disabilities are mentioned in this plan but there is no strategy to implement changes in schools or to monitor the efficiency
of those resources. Specific guidelines and procedures for utilizing technology with students with disabilities should be included in the
plan and should focus on the training of personnel, allocation of resources and evaluation of its benefits.

Budget
This section was very thorough and we rated it very high. Compared to other technology plans we reviewed, this section was meticulously
planned and described. The budget mentions acquiring new hardware and maintaining the technology with funds. It also mentions
different sources of funding if SPLOST should not come through. It also states that it will develop, plan, and facilitate professional
learning aligned with student and teacher expectations by grade level ranges, and utilize an online platform to streamline and

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: MARIETTA CITY SCHOOLS, GA

10
differentiate professional learning opportunities for teachers and staff. An area of the budget that could be improved is that teachers of
ESOL, speech, gifted, P.E., art, music, and special education were not included in the grade levels to be trained. Maybe this is already
taken care of by central office leaders, but it was not highlighted in the technology plan.
Ongoing Evaluation
Overall this was another strong component to this technology plan. Surveys are distributed to parents, students and teachers. We did find
some areas that could be polished, for example there is no plan to evaluate the quality of learning that students have when they use
technology inside a classroom. A possible solution would be to set up model classrooms where student use technology as a daily process
of inquiry-based learning and to collect data based on students performance. This data would be compared to other classrooms where
technology is not used on a regular basis, which could provide documentation of the benefits of technology implementation.