Week 6 Assignments

 

Article #4 review - Staff Development in Instructional Technology

 

Brooks-Young, S. (2007, August). Putting the LURE in Learning Community. T.H.E. Journal, 34(8), 18-20.

 

The article 'Putting the LURE in Learning Community' is an excellent review of how to create a staff development program that works; it encompasses many of the topics that we discussed in this course including the need for follow-up and committment by administration to the process.  The program title of LURE stands for "Learn it. Use it. Run with it. Explain it.).  So far, three quarters of the staff at the school have participated in this staff development process with the remaining members scheduled to complete the program this school year.  The program was designed to address a need that many of us in the cohort have voiced:  being technology rich but usage poor. 

 

The Sebastian Elementary school program was started by the building principal along with a team of teachers and technology aides to incorporate the NETS standards into her staff development processes.  Through the use of the NETS standards and participation in the NECC conference, the school has created a core team of teachers who work on their skills in the area of online communication.  The team encountered some roadblocks in their efforts, but instead of giving up when faced with difficulties they chose to re-organize and find ways to work within the district technology constraints.

 

The system has changed the school technological setting in that teachers are now willing to attempt to use technology in more and different ways with their students, including project assignments that require technology-based research and reporting.  The use of the Internet to improve communication between home and school also allowed for increased student exposure to ICT skills when some student web pages were started.

 

I believe that our district could and should attempt to create a similar program in MNSD.  I've already shared this article with our director of student learning and will be attempting to find grant funding to send a team to the ISTE Institute referenced in the article.  The next NECC is late June/early July in San Antonio, TX....so the cost of sending a team may end up being prohibitive.

 

==============================================

 

Board presentation on area of weakness in tech plan - in class preso

 

Staff Development inservice Design and proposal - in class preso

 

 

---

 

Week 5 Assignments

 

Work on group projects

 

 

---

 

Week 4 Assignments

 

Individual

• Locate instrument/process for evaluating admin software, post to student wiki page with positive and negative reasons for using the instrument. - DONE
• Summarize Chapter 4 - DONE
• Describe areas of district tech plan where successful and where falls short using DPI Tech Plan review criteria. - DONE

 

Group

• prepare brief assessment of school district's present level of systems development and post to group page. - DONE
• Of issues listed in Critical Mgmt Issues powerpoint, what are the top three in your school or district and how would you address them.  Post answers on group page for Critical Management Issues - DONE

 

 

==============================================

 

Student Information Systems Evaluation Rubric

 

The document pasted below is an evaluation sheet and rubric that was used by a WI school district in the evaluation process for a new student information system.  The evaluation sheet is very thorough and deals with the different issues that we have discussed, including usability, breadth of support, etc.  In my previous job as a systems engineer dealing with student information systems, I was exposed to a number of these evaluation processes and this is the one that I found to be the most comprehensive listing of items to review.  The downside to this evaluation form is the length; you must have a dedicated committee that is willing to put in the time to do this extensive checking of a number of systems. 

 

The other major "gotcha" to the evaluation of administrative packages is the selection of the review committee.  ALL areas of the district that are impacted by this software need to be included in the evaluation phases.  Many districts will miss stakeholder groups, and then wonder why teachers, admin assistants, etc. aren't happy with the project implementation.

 

 

=======

Chapter 4 summary

 

This chapter reviews the use of technology for administrative purposes.  The first section covered is databases.  The chapter goes into a review of the basics of database design and elements.  Many systems in a modern school administrative area are covered by database applications, such as student information, financial management, etc.  In the diagram for section 4-3 and 4-5, it outlines some of the functions covered by both items.  The electronic spreadsheet section of the chapter lists student information system functions that are covered by databases in modern situations.  In our district, the main use of electronic spreadsheets is in the financial planning areas.  Our business director makes extensive use of Lotus spreadsheets for financial planning; along with the data management software (Gusto) on our AS400, those tools make for a powerful combination.

 

Office automation functions are (as stated in the book) not limited to word processing anymore.  Our district level administrative assistants use web systems for substitute scheduling, database applications for managing personnel information, and Microsoft office programs for publication and data tracking needs.

 

One area of concern that I had with the email portion of the chapter was the discussion about Jefferson County, KY and their decision to provide email accounts to all students in grades 4-12.  In our current regulatory and legal environment, the potential for mis-use (cyber-bullying, inappropriate content, potential contact by predators) is so high that I find it difficult to imagine a district adding this level of legal responsibility.

 

The discussion of the portal concept is a bit dated; most districts already have a district portal and are working to consolidate their efforts on creating a unified message to their parents and community.  We have implemented an electronic messaging system with parents (email only) and hope to start a phone system as well.  Our district has been working with the energy educators system for the past few years and have already saved a considerable amount of money.  The software that is used allows our administrative team to analyze current savings and find areas for additional cost avoidance.

 

=======

District Tech plan evaluation

 

One of the items that I was involved with when first taking over the head of the technology department in our district was the completion of our state-mandated technology plan.  The previous technology director had delegated this project to our curriculum coordinator and was heavily weighted toward library-media related items.  The plan has some specific objectives and goals related to integrating technology into the curriculum.  

 

The introduction to the plan is fairly clear, and states the necessary items about the district as well as a quick overview of the goals and objectives.  This area of the plan should be publicized on our district website, and I will be making that adjustment to the site as soon as time allows.  The evaluation of the staff competency and proficiency levels are laid out, and rationale for how/why are stated.

 

Monitoring progress and evaluation are listed in the document and are heavily tied to building administration.  One modification to this area needs to be the implementation of stricter guidelines for evaluation how our technology is used in the classroom.  Policies and procedures make up a majority of the appendices, and are listed as required by law.

 

Overall, the plan meets the requirements of the state but does not give a clear overall picture of the district strategic plan and how technology is to be used to support the district goals.  As we continue with our strategic planning efforts, I will be keeping this plan in mind so the limited goals that are listed can be rolled into the new plans sure to develop.

 

 

---

 

 

Week 3 Assignments

 

Individual

• Technology Integration article review : DONE
• Post question responses on group enGauge wiki site : DONE
• Post compare/contrast on Modern Times wiki page : DONE

 

Group

• Identify 3 strengths/weaknesses on WINNS; post to WINNS wiki - DONE
• Evaluate district tech plans for next class - DONE
• Review Lotusville case - post to Lotusville wiki - DONE
• Begin staff development program creation - due last class

 

==============================================

 

Article #3 - Technology integration article review:

 

Starr, L (2001). The Administrator's Role in Technology Integration. Education World, NA, Retrieved September 28, 2007, from http://www.education-world.com/a_tech/tech087.shtml  

 

Many of the articles that I reviewed when searching for what I would cover in this second resource review dealt with specific applications of technology in the classroom.  While these were all of interest, I was particularly interested in a more systemic view of what can be done to assist staff with the successful integration of technology into their classrooms.  While the article is a bit dated (2001), the concepts expressed are just as valid today as they were when written.   

 

One of the areas that I have been working with our administrative staff is to model the practices that we want to have used by our staff.  To that end, we have instituted a practice that all administrator calendars will be kept online in our Groupwise software.  Because of this, many of the admin staff are moving toward either smartphone or PDA usage.  Having such a visible reminder of the importance of technology AND having it a daily part of our administrator's functions can only help emphasize the importance of electronic communications.  The article discussed sending newsletters and other annoucements through email or web publishing, and we have been working toward this at all levels of our district for the past year.  Not all of the bugs are out of those systems, but we are progressing in that direction.

 

As we have been learning in our course work and class discussions, the article emphasizes the importance of proper staff development.  The two-step process discussed is a great reminder that teachers (or anyone for that matter) will tend to NOT use something that they don't feel comfortable with.  Providing on-going staff development is a critical part of the process toward successful integration of technology in the classroom, and something that our district must do a better job with.  I have begun working with our HR administrator to find a way to add a position of technology integration specialist; in our budgetary environment, this is proving to be a difficult task, but one I am going to continue working toward.

 

The area in which I believe our district has moved most significantly in is the manner in which budgetary decisions are made for technology.  Staff members who wish to have technology in their classrooms are being supported by department and building funds in a way that did not seem to exist when I first began working at MNSD.  The article states that "the focus of technology is to enhance student learning...".  That is the lens which our tech department attempts to use when asked for recommendations by building administration.

 

The Summing It Up section of the article is a concise list of areas in which building and district administration can support and enhance the use of technology in their buildings. 

 

 

---

 

Week 2 Assignments:

ETIPS Assignment - done

Second resource critique - done

Chapter 3 review - done.

Thoughts on Change - posted to Leadership page - done.

 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 

Article #2 - Technology planning resource review

 

King-Sears, AuthorM.E., & Evmenova, A.S. (2007). Premises, principles, and processes for integrating

   TECHnology into instruction. Teaching Exceptional Children. 40, 6-14.

 

I chose an article that discusses how computers and technology can be integrated into special education situations in order to prepare for the "Closing The Gap" conference that I will be attending in mid-October.  As the lead technology person at the district level, I am often very absorbed in systemic and district-wide initiatives and not as aware of the specific uses that technology can be applied in the classroom.  One of my personal goals this school year is to become more fluent in specific applications throughout all levels of the K-12 environment. 

 

The article gives a brief synopsis of the need for educational technology in the classroom from both a real-world and educational standpoint.  The discussion about the IDEA act provides the legal setting that instructors must specify assistive technology items on a student IEP when technology use is required.  This change in federal regulation instructs all of the efforts that we are undertaking with our students with disabilities.  One item mentioned that is often overlooked is that a piece of technology that is assistive in nature for one student, can be a form of instructional technology to another (iPod or other digital method for delivering content).  We currently use Apple iBooks for some of our visually disabled students to have documents and websites read to them, and the iBooks are also used by the general education population for research, etc.

 

I was also interested in the discussion of the need for flexible assessments when dealing with assistive/instructional technologies.  The need to plan ahead for how students will be assessed when using technology is an important consideration that I don't believe gets enough weight attached to it.  One of the new initiatives that we have undertaken in MNSD is a regular meeting between the Student Services assistive technology specialists and the district technology team.  In this way, we can be sure that all points of view for AT and IT are available during hardware and software planning sessions.

 

From a planning perspective, the principle that states "Choose technology that aligns with curriculum outcomes" is of particular importance.  Often, I have seen technology purchased because a teacher or principal goes to a seminar and gets excited by how 'cool' the technology is.  If the use of that technology is not aligned with the outcome that the district/school/teacher is attempting to achieve, that budgetary resource is wasted.  Also, the 'Match student's instructional needs with the technology' is a goal that we strive toward.  I have been attempting to create a "platform-agnostic" attitude toward technology in our district; we should select the best tool for the job if there is any way to safely integrate into our overall technology plans.  We have a majority of Windows computers in the district, but recently have added both Macintosh and Linux operating system machines where those better fit the district goals.

 

Here is the TECH process (excerpted): 

* Target the students' needs and the learning outcome.

* Examine the technology choices, then decide what to use.

* Create opportunities to integrate technology with other instructional activities.

* Handle the implementation, and monitor the impact on the students' learning.

 

I strongly believe that the items in this article are ones that all technology directors/leaders should read and attempt to fit into their organizational culture.

 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

Chapter 3 review:

 

One of the areas of interest for me in moving from the private to the public sector deals with how technology can best be used to support education.  The initial portion of the chapter discusses how computers can/should be used in the classroom.  I have had experience working with ILS systems, and do not believe that they are as effective as real teachers in almost every case.  I agree with the author's contention near the end of the section that technology is only as good a tool as the person using it.  Project-based learning is an area where I believe that technology has the most potential to have a positive impact on student learning.

 

Our district utilizes technology for special education students on an individualized basis.  Every student has a right to an equal and equitable education, and that is the base that we attempt to work from in the MNSD tech department.  I will be attending the Closing The Gap conference in October in order to further my knowledge on assistive technology and how we can use it to help our learners with special needs.  I have not seen personally the type of equity issues discussed in the text; but have seen many areas where different schools within the same district do not have the same access to technology resources.  Normally this is due to differences in the building adminstrator's opinions regarding tech usage. 

 

As for racial equity, my personal experience with this in having gone to a school with a very high minority population is that the level of funding that is available in order to overcome the inequities is immense.  My high school in the early 1980's had more computer equipment than some of the academic buildings at UW-Oshkosh when I started there.  Also, our HS made the computer lab available to students before and after school which lessened the impact somewhat.  At MNSD, we open a computer lab monthly for the community (and if demand were higher, we would do that more). 

 

Nice summary of the chapter and your reflection increases the understanding of the chapter

 

 

---

 

Week One Assignments:

• Summarize Chapters 1 and 2 from our text. - DONE
• List the Technology Needs Assessments you find - DONE
• Article/resource review on Change  - DONE

 

Chapter 1

 

Chapter 1 of the text stated the purpose of the book and went into brief detail on what systems approach and systems theory means.  One of the areas that was interesting to me was the focus on both the theoretical parts of planning for technology AND the practical limitations of time, budget, and personnel resources.  The text stated some facts about the history of technology in schools, starting with the main-frame era and moving to the early personal computer revolution sparked by Apple.  The division of computer usage between administrative and instructional was a source of some interesting history, in that schools were able to take advantage of the more rapid development of administrative and accounting applications (due to the free-market forces that drove the early adoption of technology in that venue).  

 

I think that the layout explained in the text makes logical sense and it will be interesting to see how the concepts in the book align with all of the readings that I have done on change management and technology in schools. 

---

 

Chapter 2

 

Basic concepts in planning is the subject matter for Chapter 2.  The authors discuss the differences between social planning and a pure business model (called rational model in the text).  The change resource that I'm reviewing for this week also deals with the differences between social entities and business entities.  It was interesting to see the parallels between the textbook and the "Good to Great and the Social Sectors" monograph.  The common elements of educational planning as listed by the text are:  comprehensiveness, collaboration, commitment, and continuity.  The article on Systems Thinking underlined the importance of these items to successful change management.  I was encouraged by the emphasis on comprehensiveness; one of the battles that I face on a daily basis is convincing teaching staff that some technology needs have to be delayed or reworked in order to fit into the overall goals of the district.  

 

The discussion on technology planning was well designed, and covered the steps that are required to write a comprehensive plan.  One area of weakness in our district technology plan is in the evaluation and review areas, and that is something that I will be working to create consensus on over the course of this school year.  The differences in planning for instructional vs administrative needs was interesting as well.  I don't believe that I have seen an analysis of the differences between these two areas done in this way before.  Having the focus of your instructional planning always be on "how does this impact students and student learning" is the method that we have adopted at MNSD, and it appears as though the text also agrees with that.  One area that I have difficulty with in the text is the need for formal assessment of implementation of instructional applications.  My belief is that this needs to be part of a larger assessment of the curricular items as well as technology for a particular unit.

 

 

---

 

Technology Needs Assessments

 

The first of the needs assessments that I reviewed was the enGauge survey.  This survey was widely used in Wisconsin districts prior to 2005.  The study was federally funded prior to that time, and is still available on a subscription basis.  This framework assesses 6 systemwide conditions that are needed for the effective use of technology; Vision, Practice, Proficiency, Equity, Access, and Systems.  The Proficiency area is what most directly assesses the needs that teachers perceive for their technology use and staff development.  However, the other areas are also vitally important in order to prioritize budgetary and resource constraints.

 

What I found particularly interesting in the review of some completed enGauge surveys were the recommendations that were provided based on the survey responses.  For example, contained in a completed report was a recommendation that false assumptions are a danger in the visioning process and that communicating early and often with all stakeholders is the key to creating an accurate vision.  Also contained in the same review was the need for inclusion of the community in the process.

 

NCREL, (2003). enGauge online assessment profile. Retrieved September
	16, 2007, from theclasslist.com Web site: http://www.theclasslist.com/
	sysfiles/dyna_files/dyna129_935.pdf

N/A, (2006). enGauge. Retrieved September 16, 2007, from NCREL Web site: http://www.ncrel.org/engauge/

 

 

The second needs assessment process that I reviewed was from an organization named Sun Associates.  I chose this one because I have found that (in my experience working with districts across the midwest) it often helps to have an outside voice when doing reviews of internal processes.  The process outlined on the website shows the need for a systematic effort that is focused and customized to the district in question.  I found the two teacher technology surveys to be easy to read and sufficient for most assessment needs.  I particularly (as many of the other participants in this class have mentioned) liked the fact that this survey gave multiple opportunities for free-form comments.  This allows those staff members with specific needs or concepts (think Irene from the simulation) to air those concerns and make it easier to get staff buy-in.

 

Sun Associates, (2007). Evaluating the Impact of Technology on Teaching and Learning. Retrieved September 16, 2007, from Sun Associates Web site: http://www.sun-associates.com/eval/sample.html

 

---

 

Article/Resource#1 - Change review

 

Good to Great and the Social Sectors

 

I have chosen to review this monograph for two reasons; first, I felt that it does a great job of outlining the basic process that an organization needs to follow to move from being a good one to a great one, and second, I have to read this as part of our ongoing performance excellence review process in the district.  Last year, our leadership team read the book "Good to Great" which deals with case studies of how does an organization move from being a good one to a great one. 

 

The 5 themes from the original book are : (1) Defining Great, (2) Level 5 leadership, (3) First Who, (4) The Hedgehog concept, and (5) Turning the Flywheel.  I won't go into extensive detail about each element, but the gist of the conversation is that in order to become a great organization, you must first define what Great means.  In education, this is more difficult than business as we don't have profit capability to generate our statistics from.  Level 5 Leadership deals with how do administrators get things done in a setting where they do not have the power that corporate executives do; social sector leadership is more about how to get consensus and buy-in to vision than simply ordering staff to do it "this" way.  First Who, then what....that is a quote that I think about often in my role.  It's vitally important to get the right people on board, who are motivated to do things well and think about the vision and mission of the district at all times.  The Hedgehog concept is "what can we do better than anyone in the world?".  The author states that determining what your passion is and going forward with that to the exclusion of opportunities or activities that do not promote it is key to becoming a great organization.  Turning the Flywheel simply means that the smallest incremental activities that move the organization forward will eventually create a self-sustaining movement in the proper direction.

 

Two quotes from the book that I would like to share are :

 

"True leadership only exists if people follow when they have the freedom not to."

 

"Time and talent can often compensate for lack of money, but money cannot ever compensate for lack of the right people."

 

I highly recommend both the original book "Good to Great" and the Social Sectors monograph for anyone who is involved in an organizational change project.

 

Collins, J (2005). Good to Great and the Social Sectors. Boulder, CO: Jim Collins.