Technology Plan Evaluation FRIT 8132

Tina Benner, Laura Houston, and Ryan Rickard April 3, 2011

Part 1 - Rubric

Elements
Goals, Objectives, Strategies for using telecommunications and information technology. Specific statements of desired outcomes. Objectives framework provided. Measurable outcomes. Realistic results that are provided in a specified time period. Professional development strategy Establish specific ways for identifying and delivering effective technology training. Provide grant programs and financial assistance initiatives that support implementation of educational technology integration. Establish and provide instructional technology positions --including sitebased technology resources teachers in school systems Current Status/Needs Assessment

3-Fully Meets
The goals, objectives and strategies are clearly stated with emphasis on using educational technology in classroom. The objectives are specific, measurable, achievable, and time referenced. They also provide an approach to technology integration. The plan describes strategies, activities, and practices for providing ongoing professional development that will enable all educators in the system to use educational technology effectively in their classrooms to promote student achievement. Support programs are provided.

2--Moderately Meets
The goals, objectives, and strategies are related to the systems goals for student achievement. The objectives are clearly written and achievable with at least some reference to evaluation. The goals, objectives and strategies generally provide an approach to technology integration. The plan provides minimal evidence of an effective professional development program that supports educators in becoming proficient in incorporating educational technology aimed at improving student achievement. Minimal support programs are included.

1--Does Not M

The goals, objec strategies are vag related to the sys goals for student achievement. Th vaguely written difficult to meas

The plan provide evidence of an e professional dev program that sup educators becom proficient in inte educational tech classroom. Ther no connection to educational goal students. No sup programs are add

Assessment to meet needs for telecommunication services, hardware, software and other services needed to improve academic achievement.

Budget Resources The plan provides for a sufficient and specific budget to acquire and maintain the hardware, software, professional development and other services that will be needed

The current status/needs assessment is clear in relationship to the overall plan. It uses valid and reliable sources to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the educational technology program. The plan clearly describes resources that are available or needed to implement the plan, with attention to cost estimates that address the total cost of ownership.

The current status/needs assessment is clear in relationship to the overall plan.

The current statu assessment is va relationship to th plan.

The cost estimates are vague, and not clear on what process is in place for identifying future funding sources and costs.

Budget is missin resources to imp plan are not iden are so vague as t useless.

to implement strategies. Evaluation Process Provides process for evaluating benchmarks with specific indicators for demonstrating success. Provides appropriate decision capabilities for all stakeholders. Ensure that local technology plans are consistent with the state technology plan. Implementation Timeline Lays out a chronological plan of implementation indicating specific points at which various activities will occur or objectives will be achieved.

The plan describes the process for evaluation utilizing the goals and benchmarks of each component as indicators of success. Process included to report the monitoring and evaluation results to persons responsible for implementing. Benchmarks and timeline in the plan outline goals and strategies for the next 3 years with a reasonable timeline for implementing the plan and achieving plan outcomes.

The evaluation is described but the process is vague on the implementation of the evaluation and the measurable outcomes that indicate whether the objectives are met, is missing.

There is no prov evaluation in the how success is d

The timeline is 3 years in length with minimal reference to when the objectives will be achieved, or the timeline is unreasonable.

The benchmarks associated with a particular timelin

Part 2
Introduction Our group chose to use Dekalb County School Systems Technology Plan. The three-year Technology Plan (July 1, 2009 June 30, 2012) covers the required mandates for the State of Georgia and was submitted in June of 2009. The plan is currently a year behind in updating their data. No new entries have been made since their initial submission in June of 2009. Since we are finishing the 2011 school year, data from June 2010 should now be included to assess their progress in meeting their goals. The lack of monitoring their plan is possibly the same reason our group rated them with mixed reviews using our created rubric from Fully Meeting on Goal, Objectives, and Strategies to Moderately Meeting on Professional Development and Not Meeting on their Evaluation and Timeline. Goals, Objectives, Strategies The goals, objectives and strategies clearly outline a measurable approach for incorporating educational technology in teaching and learning. The goals are broken down into two different sections. Section 1 provides the mission and vision for technology use. It states the mission for the DeKalb County School System and provides a vision for students, teachers, administrators, parents, community, and parental involvement. It states why each group is important to the plan and shares the vision and future of the groups. Section 3 lists the goals and benchmarks for the system. The eight goals are specific, measurable, achievable and time referenced. Each goal is broken down into strategies that can be used to obtain the overall goal. The strategies, though vague, do include a benchmark, evaluation method, timeline, funding source/amount, and the person responsible. Each goal is clear and concise so the reader knows exactly what needs to be done in order to reach the goals listed. Professional Development DeKalb County's technology plan contained information on professional development; however there were key concepts that were absent from the plan. Based on the created rubric, the professional development aspect of the technology plan moderately meets criteria. DeKalb county has several goals and plans in place for professional development, but they were not very detailed and did not contain enough information to to be successful in training teachers in the area of technology. The plan is not well-developed. The strategies include training for teachers to integrate technology in the core curriculum and other county technologies. The strategies mentioned are a great goal for a district, but there is not enough data to support the goal. The plan states that 40% of the schools will commit to 8 hours of professional training based upon needs. To effectively train teachers county-wide on new technologies, more than 40% of schools need to be included in the measurable data. There is no source of funding for this training. All schools should be trained on how to implement technology provided by the county. There also needs to be a specific way to measure the professional learning other than the number of participants trained or training logs. Effective professional development uses evaluation to ensure that each activity is meeting the needs of the participants and providing them with new learning experiences. Observations need to be conducted on the use and implementation of the technologies used. The ultimate goal of evaluation is to determine whether professional development promotes using technology to enhance students learning and achievement. Administrators cannot simply assume that professional development is good by definition only. Today, students are being held to higher standards than ever before, teachers are held accountable for student's achievement. All

educators must show that professional development has an impact on achieving the goals that are identified in the professional development plan. In order for teachers to implement technology in the classroom to engage learners and improve achievement among students, a well-planned professional development program for technology implementation is essential. Effective professional development gives teachers the skills they need to incorporate new technology into their lessons rather than just adding technology to their day to day job. Effective professional development requires dedicated planning, hands-on activities directly linked to curriculum, follow-up activities, built-in evaluation using several assessment techniques, an adequate timeline, sustained and detailed funding, and the willingness of educators to take on new and expanded roles. Current Status/Needs Assessment The technology plans current status/needs assessment Fully Meets our criteria. It is clear in both scope and relationship to the overall plan and uses a variety of valid and reliable sources to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the education technology program. Section two shows the current reality of the system as well as list seven strategies that moves towards reaching their overall goal. The remaining data breakdowns the actual number of computer workstations and peripherals that are available throughout the county. They also include data about the number of interactive boards, student response systems, and many other technological tools that are used inside classrooms. A description of different educational computer software is also provided along with numerical data that compares the usages over a three year span. Overall, the current status/needs assessment was very clear and easy to follow. The reader understands where they are at now, and where they want to go within the next three years. Budget Resources Dekalbs Technology Plan does not meet our rubrics criteria for Budget Resources. Through out the plan the only mention of any form of budget resource to meet their goals and objectives is a Capital Improvements Plan (SPLOST 3) and Title I during the 2008 2009 school year. Neither of these sources is a guaranteed source of funding. The Splost 3 is based on projected revenue from the county and Title l is based on funding from the Federal Government, both of which are not financially sound planning especially during our recent economic situation. The only other mention of any form of budget is using E-rate, which still requires funding from the school system. For example, Dekalb School System is using a Data Management System that the Tech Plan provided detailed information on what it was, how it was being used, who was using it, but only listed it as funded. It did not mention the cost or even how it was being funded. Where are the funds coming from? There needs to be more emphasis on actual concrete momentary sources. The plan needs to include specific costs and sources of funding for each aspect of their plan not just the numerous N/A and TBD that were listed as most of the funding. Without it, the plan is basically a wish list instead of a viable Technology Plan that can be actually implemented and evaluated. Next, we will discuss another area that Does Not Meet our criteria, the Evaluation Process. The Evaluation Process The entire Evaluation Component of Dekalbs Technology Plan is very vague. First in Section 1: Mission and Vision for Technology Use states that Teachers from different subject areas will plan together to develop interdisciplinary activities for student learning. Technology will be an essential component of these assignments. The plan doesnt even address how this will be evaluated. The only mention of this component is in their Goal of Instructional Uses which lists as one of their strategies to

provide training/support for teachers to integrate technology K-12 in the core curriculum. As mentioned earlier in our paper their Benchmark was 40% of the schools will commit to 8 hours of technology professional development training based on school technology plan needs. The only evaluation for their training was training logs. Only requiring someone to attend training doesnt constitute actually integrating the technology in the classroom. Integration of technology in the classroom needs to be separated from professional development training and have its own specific benchmark and evaluation. For example: in some Technology Plans, technology integration in the classroom is part of a teachers classroom observation instrument and is evaluated by administration. Other plans use Levels of Technology Implementation Framework (LoTi) to evaluate teachers on their implementation of technology in their classrooms. Other concerns with the Plans evaluation component is the number of technology programs the system uses such as, BrainPop, Compass Learning, Explorelearning, and Discovery Education. The plan provides graphs showing the number of log-ins and views for past three years. However, the log-ins are considerably fewer than the views of the program, which leads to the assumption that only a few people are using the programs often. A better evaluation would be to compare the log-ins with total number of teachers that have access to the program. This would give a better view of how often the program was being utilized and even address possible funding concerns.

Implementation Timeline One of the most important components of a technology plan is to establish a timeline for implementation. The DeKalb County Technology Plan moderately meets the criteria from our rubric in this area. Each goal in the technology plan has a timeline listed, but they are not specific. Most of the timelines included are for years 1 to 3. The goals do not have specific years and times for the goal to be completed. For example: the goal of developing middle school online courses gives the timeline of years 1-3. The implementation timelines need to be more specific as to what is going to be achieved within each year listed. Each year that is mentioned needs to have the implementation that will take place and how it will be achieved. The goals described in the plan are specific, achievable goals, but each goal should have a more specific timeline for implementation. In researching other technology plans, timelines are very clear and exact giving a month and date for the timeline. The outcome of the goals will be more effective if the timeline implementation is more specific. The vague timelines are somewhat of a shortcut for counties to use in a technology plan. The more specific the date, the more the county is held accountable for achieving the goal. Summary DeKalb Countys Technology Plan basically provides strong goals, objectives, and strategies for their school system. However, we found that their plan presented more of a clear overview of what they wanted to achieve compared to what their current status and needs were in their school district. The plan however, failed to provide viable means of meeting their goals and objectives. Only a few of their strategies presented a specific way of implementing and adequately evaluating them. The plan also failed to provide specific means of funding their desired goals and objectives. Therefore, as an overall evaluation, using our rubric, DeKalbs Technology Plan received a low Moderately Meets rating. Our recommendation to improve their plan would be to include specific timelines for implementation, an evaluation process that provides data as well as accountability, and a detailed budget outlining each expenditure and means of funding.