Action Plan for Technology

By Thomas Eaves

Part 1: District Organizational Chart for Technology

Job

Responsibility

Superintendent

Keeps abreast of the latest trends regarding technology and education, and disseminates this information to stakeholders. Evaluates the effectiveness of technology and its integration into classroom instructional initiatives.

Asst. Superintendent

Assists the superintendent with evaluating programs. Gathers feedback from relevant parties, especially at the campus level.

District Technology Coordinator

Informs superintendents of latest ideas in technology. Oversees implementation of technology on the campuses, and provides troubleshooting services for the network. Evaluates the district’s progress towards the Texas Long Range Plan.

District Professional Development Coordinator

Coordinates the implementation of staff development in the area of technology, such as the recent Smart Board in-service. Evaluates the effectiveness of the training and reports the results to the superintendents.

Curriculum Supervisors

Provides information to classroom teachers and principals regarding technology innovations in their particular subject area. Provides feedback to teachers and principals regarding effectiveness of technology use.

Principals

Monitors and encourages the use of technology on his/her campus. Identifies teacher leaders that are proficient with technology use.

Asst. Principals

Assists the principal in meeting the campus’ technology goals, such as all teachers having Internet access and multiple computers in each room.

Campus Technology Coordinator

Helps set up the network on his/her campus. Troubleshoots and corrects network problems as they occur. Takes the lead role in getting teachers to complete the STaR Charts. Head technology instructor for the campus.

Teachers

On the front lines when it comes to merging technology and instruction. Creates lesson plans and facilitates the use of technology to enhance the effectiveness of instruction.

Parents and Teachers

Supports the school and its technology use by following the guidelines set forth by the school regarding appropriate technology use.

Role of principal in making sure the organizational chart is implemented

As campus instructional leader, the principal is at the forefront when it comes to

implementing and evaluating campus technology initiatives. He/she will interact

with the various parties on the organizational chart, and will provide valuable

feedback regarding campus programs. For example, if our computers are

encountering a virus, he/she will coordinate with the district and campus

technology coordinator to begin solving the problem. The principal will meet with

the superintendents and staff development coordinator to give updates on the

training’s dissemination. The principal then is a key component to ensuring

successful technology use at the individual schools.

Part 2: Professional Development Training

One of the main needs for my campus and district is to spread the many great ideas in technology instruction throughout the district. As I discussed in my week three reports, my campus has many teachers doing great things with technology. Smart Boards, Elmos, Claymation videos, and the Rapid Response System are some of the ways teachers at Vincent Middle School are using technology. To move us forward in this area, those teachers who are using technology to enhance instruction must be identified and put to good use. To start, we need to know what works, and then develop a way to identify teachers who are using technology successfully. Next, these teachers need to be provided training in the area of in-service leadership and delivery. For example, Smart Board technology has been implemented on my campus. Just recently the staff underwent training in this area led by teachers proficient with the technology. The staff members presenting the training received specialized instruction about how to organize the in-service. As principals, we must harvest the skills demonstrated by those teachers who are strong in technology implementation. In this age of accountability, teachers and administrators must be competent in gathering, analyzing, and reading the data. In-service training focusing on interpretting AEIS data is a necessary skill for my district. It is not enough for the principal to tell us our state rankings. Rather, as instructional leader of the campus, the principal should provide each staff member with the school’s data and explain the data at an in-service training. Another aspect of improving the schools ability to gather and use data would be in-service using a technology search engine. At my school, we all have computers in every classroom. But it should not be assumed that every teacher is an expert in its use. An in-service covering the use of search engines, such as Google or Yahoo Search, could strengthen our school’s data gathering techniques. It would also strengthen the technology skills of our many digital immigrants.

Looking back at my school’s STaR Chart score, we gave ourselves an Advanced rating. Having served as assistant principal many times during the past year, I have had the opportunity to visit most of the classrooms. While I have seen teachers putting technology to excellent use, I have also seen just the opposite. I feel my campus and district could benefit from in-service that focuses on basic technology use. Some examples include: 1. How to create a blog and the benefits it provides for the teachers and students. 2. How to make use of basic tools, such as PowerPoint, Charts, Graphs, Spreadsheets, Cutting/Pasting, and Word Processing. It should not be assumed that everyone is familiar with these items. 3. How to create a Web Conference, allowing students to reach outside of the classroom walls. 4. Development of On-line lesson planning with evidence of technology usage. 5. Grade level mastery of specific software programs. 6. Teachers will become proficient in posting items to the district website. 7. Teacher leaders will be identified by the SBDM committee, and utilized as technology coaches. Stipends will be provided. Lastly, the staff needs to be heard from when it comes to addressing technology needs. I would use a variety of methods, formal and informal, to survey the teachers and find out what technology training they would like to receive. After receiving that information, I would enlist the help of technology savvy teachers, as mentioned above, to help present the training to our staff. Part 3: Evaluation Getting an accurate picture of the effective of in-service or various programs has been problematic for my district. Over the years, I have attended many in-service workshops where the evaluation tool was a written document asking the teacher to rank the session. These surveys were given out at the end of the in-service

when everyone was ready to go. Consequently, I have seen many of them completed in a haphazard fashion. Some new ideas are needed in gathering useful feedback, and technology can play a role. When it comes to evaluating professional development, I would initiate an “after- action” approach to the evaluation process. Following the session, I would instruct the participants to reflect on what they have learned from the training. I would then ask that they email a brief reflection about their feeling the next day. By allowing the information to soak in, a more accurate evaluation may be obtained. Another idea aimed at getting better data on the effectiveness of in-service is to solicit opinions while the training is on-going. An example of this occurred on my campus during the recent Smart Board training. Participants were actively engaged with the technology, and the presenters were gathering their responses as the training was ongoing. There was a written evaluation provided at the session’s conclusion, but the real information was obtained during the actual training. As far as our campus plans go, we are all about getting to Exemplary status. Our school uses technology to help us get to that goal, and provides updates along the way. We begin with the AEIS data, and also the TAKS report for each individual child. Teachers work to improve a student’s weak areas, and testing occurs every 6 weeks. Test results are put into reports and shared with department heads, principals, and curriculum supervisors. Technology is leading the way when it comes to handling this mass of information. These reports are generated electronically and emailed to the interested parties. When it comes to evaluating the effectiveness of our efforts, the principal will take the lead. Are the reports generated in a timely fashion? Are the appropriate personnel given the necessary data? The administrative team will analyze the data to make sure we are working towards our campus goals. When it comes to our technology goals and the Texas Long Range Plan, the administrative team needs to put in place ways to evaluate our progress. Currently at my school, there are two formal methods of evaluating teacher technology use in the classroom: the PDAS evaluation, or Professional Development and Appraisal System, and the STaR Charts. Both of these tools only give us a cursory look at campus technology usage. For it to thrive, technology

use needs to be made a priority. Administrators need to look for it as they conduct their walk-throughs. Teachers strong in technology use need to be encouraged to spread their ideas with colleagues. To move towards the goals of the Texas Long Range Technology Plan, my campus has to improve our commitment to its use, going beyond a one- sentence statement in the campus improvement plan. Finally, some obvious sources must be utilized when evaluating our technology usage. They are: 1. Students- feedback will consist of how they’ve experienced technology in the classroom. 2. Teachers- periodically throughout the year teachers will email to administrators how technology is being used in the classroom. 3. Assistant Principals- lesson plans will be analyzed for evidence of tech use, in addition to the classroom walk throughs. 4. District Administrators- will visit the building looking for evidence of technology enhancing instruction, and will report the findings to the building administrative team.