Technology Plan Evaluation FRIT 8132 - Administration of Technology Resources Dr.

Charles Hodges Stephanie Songer Christopher Kahley Jeff Johnson November 7, 2011

Stephanie Songer, Christopher Kahley, and Jeff Johnson November 7, 2011 FRIT 8132 - Administration of Technology Resources

Technology Plan Evaluation

Introduction A Technology Plan is designed to provide structure for integrating technology into the schools and providing support to teachers so they can effectively know how to use technology within the curriculum. It is a guide for all stakeholders to see the progression of technology implemented into the educational system. The Technology Plan casts the vision of how technology will be used. It describes the current use of technology, the needs of the system, budget of resources, long term goals, and benchmarks. The Plan would also address policy that affects the use of technology and opportunities for professional development among employees of the system. The Technology Plan that we used was created in the Burke County School System (2011). It is a three year plan that runs from July 1, 2011 to June 30, 2014. The plan was created by the Technology Coordinator and his team. Since the plan has only recently begun to be implemented, it has not yet been updated. The implementation of technology is given high priority, as evidenced by the statement that the Board of Education strongly believes that having a technologically rich environmentshould be an integral part of any successful school system. To complete this assignment, our evaluation team created our own rubric using a 1-3 scale based on rubrics developed by Dr. Paul Allen and by Peter H.R. Sibley and Chip Kimball. Grading Criteria The grading criteria that form our rubric are: (1) goals and realistic strategies; (2) professional development and strategies; (3) assessment of hardware, software, and services; (4) budget resources; and (5) ongoing evaluation process. These criteria were selected as the basis for evaluating the technology plan because Burke County schools fall under the state mandate that all school technology plans include these five components. Goals and Realistic Strategies This criterion was met at the highest level of comprehensiveness, which is a 3. Every goal was accompanied by a list of strategies, specific benchmarks, an evaluation plan, a budget, and a responsibility list of individual administrators and/or staff. The benchmarks and budgets were frequently described in an incremental fashion by year. None of the goals appeared to be unrealistic: Improvement was projected but not, in most instances, perfection.

Professional Development and Strategies The professional development and strategies criterion was met at a level of 3. Some specific goals of the technology plan are directed at professional development. These include training teachers in the use of technology for differentiated instruction, offering continuing education for technology support staff, and ensuring that employees can participate in professional learning opportunities. Funding sources for professional development are identified in the plan. Moreover, when teachers take advantage of professional development opportunities, they may earn Professional Learning Units, or PLUs. These can be applied toward certification credit, thus serving as an incentive to participate in professional development. Opportunities are presented online, during the school day, after school, on planned professional learning days, and in the summer, so scheduling does not become a barrier to participation. Assessment of Hardware, Software, and Services The technology plan shows that assessment of hardware, software, and related servicesincluding telecommunicationsis ongoing, and so we rated this criterion at level 3. Instruments are in place and used by the technology leadership staff to assess hardware, software, and services in all schools. The technology plan describes, in detail, the inventory of technology resources and services that are available at each school. The technology plan also has the inventory and services broken down into subcategories of use that include teachers, students, parents, and administrators. Each type of hardware, software, and service that is available for use is listed under each of those categories. Several areas of future improvement are also explained. Budget Resources Budget resources received a score of 3 on our rubric. The technology plan provides a budget summary and estimate of capital expenses, funding resources, and alternative funding. The budget is realistic with respect to the plan goals. There are goals in place for instructional, administrative, and parent/community uses of technology. The technology plan also outlines budgeting for system readiness for new and future technology integration. Strategies for accomplishing each goal are provided and appear to be feasible in terms of the budget. Criteria for the evaluation of each goal are consistent and measureable. Overall the technology plans budget and goals are well-outlined and easy to understand. Ongoing Evaluation Process The ongoing evaluation process scored a 2 on our rubric. There is no specific section that addresses ongoing evaluation. Within the Balanced Scorecard section of the plan, there is a goal that addresses continuous improvement, but we believe it pertains to the area of teaching and not the use of technology. Within the GAPP Analysis section we did find many goals, benchmarks, and strategies. Each table in the GAPPS Analysis has a column entitled Evaluation Plan. To see if the process is

effective, a set of criteria is evaluated. The analysis uses a color code system to indicate the progress of implementation. Red represents does not meet, yellow represents progressing and green represents areas that are met. Some of the evaluation processes would be: annual technology inventory, surveys, purchase orders, professional learning reports, and percent of users accessing the application. Because the technology plan affects so many different areas of education, it was somewhat confusing to pinpoint a system that grades its process. Although the color code system is in place, we did not see specific grading criteria. Summary The grading criteria that we used included only the state mandated components. A more thorough rubric would help pinpoint specific areas that this evaluation may not have addressed. Even so, our overall evaluation of the Burke County School Systems Technology Plan is quite positive. The document has many strong points, including: a realistic perspective, an emphasis on professional development, detailed budgeting, and ongoing assessment of technology resources and services. The fact that one of our team members was actually employed by the Burke County School System gave us a unique perspective, because he was able to experience the implementation of the Technology Plan. Because of a strong vision, dedicated support staff, and financial stability, the school system is making great strides in providing the best opportunities for students and teachers to grow with the changing world of technology. Burke County thrives on technology being implemented during instruction, and relies heavily on the contributions that technology provides to academic success.

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION

ADMINISTRATION OF TECHNOLOGY RESOURCES

CRITERIA

Level of Comprehensiveness

Level of Comprehensiveness

Level of Comprehensiveness

Score

1
Goals and realistic strategies Goals are not measurable. Difficult to understand or not clearly stated.

2
Goals are evident but not linked to long or short term plan. Goals are hard to measure.

3
Goals are specific and linked to realistic timeline. Goals answer the who, what, when, and how much according to instrument. 3

Professional development and strategies

Assessment of hardware, software, and services

Professional development minimal on current needs. No long term professional development structured. No needs assessment given or needs assessment outdated.

Limited details of current needs for PD. Limited strategies or incentives to support PD.

Budget resources

Ongoing evaluation process

Little or no reference to budget given. Timeline vague with limited information. Budget request unrealistic. No reference toward funding resources. Evaluation of plan not provided.

Assessment of equipment and services are conducted. Limited information of process. Limited to equipment; no information on services. Realistic goals. Limited support of estimate information. Limited funding resources.

Evaluation process is described but lacks detail. Link to goals not apparent. Timeline of expectation provided.

Specific and clear PD strategies. Description of PD offered, recommended and required. Incentives in place. Assessment is ongoing. Instruments in place to assess all hardware, software and services in all schools. Inventory and services well documented. Provides budget summary estimate of capital expenses. Provides funding resources and alternative funding. Budget is realistic with plan goals. An evaluation process and instrument is in place. Benchmarks are identified. Evaluation links to goals and objectives.

References Burke County School System. (2011). Three-year technology plan: July 1, 2011 June 30, 2014. Waynesboro, Georgia. Burke County School System.