Week 12 Step 9 - Critique the Existing Technology
Plan
Critique the existing technology plan in your school/district and answer the following questions:
1. How did the plan meet the existing needs in technology, funding, and management issues?
The existing technology plan for Rawson-Saunders School is out-of-date,
written at least six years ago. It was written based on the Texas Campus STaR
Chart, and addresses campus technology in four areas: Teaching and Learning,
Administrative Support and Outreach, Educator Preparation and Professional
Development, and Infrastructure for Technology. The Texas Campus STaR Chart’s
four sections are Teaching and Learning; Educator Preparation & Development;
Leadership, Administration & Instructional Support; and Infrastructure for
Technology (Texas Education Agency, 2006).
The existing technology plan does not address funding of technology. The
Texas Campus STaR Chart’s only mention of funding refers to the goals and
objectives in the Campus Improvement Plan, not the technology plan:
“Campus discretionary funds and other resources are allocated to advance
implementation of all technology strategies to meet the goals and objectives outlined
in the Campus Improvement Plan.” (Texas Education Agency, 2006)
The existing technology plan addressed management needs in terms of
planning, purchasing, and implementing student management software, and
creating core competencies for the faculty, setting expectations for the
faculty to achieve that level of competency, and planning and supporting
professional development in technology. Implied in the plan is administrative
support for all its components.
Technology is addressed in the existing plan by creating a robust
infrastructure. When the plan was written, Rawson-Saunders had a peer-to-peer
network; the plan was to create a client/server network and wireless access. The
technology plan also specifies technology in the classroom to support teaching
and learning: presentation equipment and computers.
2. How did the goals provide the measurable outcomes for future improvement?
A technology plan is to ensure that technology is
effectively integrated into instruction. It should be more than a roadmap for
providing computers and software, but must promote professional development and
support, meaningful learning in the classroom, and provide the mechanism for
evaluation and change. It should be a part of an overall school improvement
plan (November, 1998). Although November wrote about the development of the
technology plan more than ten years ago, his description is still relevant
today.
The existing
technology plan was written as a part of the school improvement plan. The plan’s goals are
not broken into measurable objectives, but are measurable in that they are
assigned dates by which they must be realized.
3. How did the strategies defined to meet the proposed objectives?
The
technology goals are realized through effective planning strategies. The
strategies should address resources, training, support, innovation, and
communication (Decker, 2004). The existing technology plan does not
specifically list strategies. The plan does list objectives with associated
dates for implementation, which becomes a timeline. While this is not the same
as strategies, it does provide an order for implementation.
Resources
Decker, K. (2004). Technology
planning strategies. Retrieved April 16, 2012, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED490100.pdf
November, A. (1998). Critical
Issue: Developing a school or district technology plan. Retrieved February
25, 2012, from http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/methods/technlgy/te300.htm
Texas Education Agency. (2006). Texas campus STaR chart. Retrieved April 16, 2012, from http://starchart.epsilen.com/docs/TxCSC.pdf
Susan,
ReplyDeleteDid either the old technology plan or your new technology plan set an "expiration date" on computers, meaning how old a computer should be before it needs to be replaced? "A sustainable technology practice means not purchasing more technology than a school can regularly maintain, upgrade, and replace... Computers much more than five years old become unreliable. If we’re going to replace our computers every five years, we need to purchase 20 percent of them new each year. Therefore, our annual computer budget needs to be .20 replacement rate x [number of computers] x $1,000—this year and every year from now on. If you don’t maintain the technology, you get unreliable computers that teachers won’t use." (Johnson, 2011)
This seems to be an important item that gets missed in some of the technology plans that I've seen at school districts.
Reference: Stretching Your Technology Technology Dollar.Full Text Available By: Johnson, Doug. Educational Leadership, December 2011, Vol. 69 Issue 4, p30-33
Kayla,
DeleteMy school is inconsistent in replacement of computers. Last year, there were a few new computers purchased; this year, a much larger number were purchased. I have also heard of the five year life of computers, but realistically, many schools have had to use computers that exceed the five year lifespan. My school has its share of computers older than five years old.
Susan,
DeleteEven though we don't have a technology plan that addresses computer replacement, we do have a policy, where we recently changed our replacement cycle from 3yrs to 4 years for faculty and not responsible for the upgrade of department computers. However, recently we've taken over the replacement of all computers on campus and implementing a one device per person with some exceptions (iPads for faculty). This will be very interesting to see the impact in our budget plus we are in the process of migrating to Windows 7 which requires the replacement of several department computers who've been using computers that are well over 6 years old. Despite the increase in the budget, being responsible for the upgrade of all computers will ensure that the technology on campus will support the applications that we package and deploy to campus.
Single Computer Per Employee. (2012). Retrieved from the SHSU website at http://www.shsu.edu/~ucs_www/Computer_Management/single_computer.html
Susan,
ReplyDeleteMeasuring results is another very time consuming process. Does you district share the planning process and the measureable results with your Board? It seems like the planning process often becomes a time consuming mechanism that’s used to suffice a certain group or need. Wow! That sounded negative didn’t it! Don’t get me wrong, planning can be such a great process if it’s actually done with a purpose! It’s up to the “leadership” at every institution to make sure it’s done right.
Mike
Mike,
DeleteI’m afraid I can’t answer your question. I work at a small private school, and teachers are not welcome at board meetings. It is part of the Head of School’s duties to be the faculty’s representative. I have never seen Board minutes. I haven’t seen much planning, either, just decisions made. Planning may exist, but the planning process in not open. This is a price paid for working in the private sector.
Susan,
ReplyDeleteYou mentioned that the technology plan does not address funding of technology. I am not sure how private schools manage this area, but how do they make decision for the purchase of new equipment or to implement a new technology resource? Is there any specific budget for this purpose?
Angela,
DeleteThere is a technology line item in the budget, but strangely, in the past several years, technology purchases have not come from this line item. The Head of School has made the purchases without my input, and it is not clear where the funds come from. This year, iPads for all faculty and staff were purchased with a grant. More iPads will be purchased next year with funds obtained with a tuition increase.
Susan,
ReplyDeleteOur school uses the STaR chart as well as an assessment. There are many who do not take this seriously. How do you think districts could handle this situation or what else do you think could be used in place of it. Thanks for your post. Carol