Cy-Fair ISD is a Texas public school district. We are subject to regulations both at the state (TEA) and federal level (No Child Left Behind Act). For example TEA developed the School Technology and Readiness Chart (known as the STaR) and the Long Range Plan for Technology in order to assist district in their technology planning. These documents address the major components of successful technology implantation (Cypress-Fairbanks ISD Technology Plan, 2011). However, the district also incorporates other resources as guides such as TEKS as well as 21st century learning skills and International Society of Technology Education Standards.
2 .Develop the objectives for the school technology plan based on the needs from your institution.
Need: Effective and relevant professional development in technology integration
Goal: Provide school district staff with opportunities to learn how to appropriately integrate technology as a tool utilizing collaborative, interactive and customized learning environments in an effort to achieve the Target Tech level in the Texas STaR Chart.
Objectives:
Objective 1.1: Increase the content of professional development to the Target Tech level by providing opportunities for teachers to participate in the development of strategies to create new learning environments that empower students to think critically to solve real-world problems and collaborate with experts across business, industry, and higher education.
Evidence:
• An examination of meeting agendas, attendance records, campus technology plans, Distance Learning Reservation Lists, and website availability for teachers
• Inventory of strategies
Person(s) Responsible: Instructional Technology Department, Campus Administrative Teams, and Technology Liaisons
*Budget Amount $518,000.00
LRPT category: Educator Preparation and Development
E-Rate Correlates: ER01, ER02
NCLB Correlates: 01, 02, 03, 04a, 04b, 08
Objective 1.2: Increase the models of professional development to the Advanced Tech level by providing on-going professional development utilizing multiple staff development models.
Evidence:
• An examination of lesson plans, content activities, curriculum guides, attendance records, training materials, meeting agendas, and professional development course offerings
Person(s) Responsible: Instructional Technology Department, Curriculum and Instruction Department
*Budget Amount: $187,000.00
LRPT category: Educator Preparation and Development
E-Rate Correlates: ER01, ER02
NCLB Correlates: 01, 02, 04a, 04b, 07
Objective 1.3: Increase the capabilities of educators to demonstrate proficiency of at least four State Board of Education (SBEC) Standards to achieve the Advanced Tech level.
Evidence:
• Percentage of teachers achieving SBEC proficiencies
• An examination of presentation agendas and test records
Person(s) Responsible: Instructional Technology Department, Curriculum and Instruction Department, Campus Technology Teams, Administrative Campus Teams, Technology Liaisons
*Budget Amount $114,000.00
LRPT category: Educator Preparation and Development
E-Rate Correlates: ER01
NCLB Correlates: 01, 03, 04b, 11
Objective 1.4: Increase participation in technology professional development (19-29 hours) to achieve the Advanced Tech level.
Evidence:
• An examination of meeting agendas, and professional development course offerings
• Attendance and credit records
Person(s) Responsible: Instructional Technology Department, Curriculum and Instruction Department, Campus Technology Teams, Administrative Campus Teams, Technology Liaisons
*Budget Amount: $481,000.00
LRPT category: Educator Preparation and Development
E-Rate Correlates: ER01, ER02
NCLB Correlates: 01, 04a, 04b, 07
Need: Increase the frequency and level of rigor for technology integration in the teaching and learning process
Goal: Improve academic achievement by allowing students to participate in opportunities that allow collaboration, communication, critical thinking, problem solving, creativity and innovation to solve real-world problems in an effort to achieve the Target Tech Level in the Texas STaR Chart.
Objectives:
Objective 2.1: Increase the pattern of classroom use to the Target Tech level as evidenced by classrooms where teachers are seamlessly integrating technology in a student-centered environment.
Evidence:
• Classroom observations
• Review of lessons plans and curriculum guides
Person(s) Responsible: Technology Consultant, Curriculum and Instruction Department, Instructional Technology Department, Teachers, Campus Technology Teams, Campus Administrative Team
*Budget Amount: $671,000.00
LRPT category: Teaching and Learning
E-Rate Correlates: ER01, ER02
NCLB Correlates: 01, 02, 04a, 04b, 07
Objective 2.2: Increase the frequency of use of digital content to the Advanced Tech level by providing teachers with regular weekly access and use of a variety of technology tools and resources.
Evidence:
• An review of lab schedules, lesson plans, student portfolios, completed training modules, attendance records, student products, and course offerings for training
• Results of teacher feedback
• Classroom observations
Person(s) Responsible: Technology Consultant, Curriculum and Instruction Department, Instructional Technology Department, Teachers, Campus Technology Teams, Campus Administrative Team
*Budget: $326,000.00
LRPT category: Teaching and Learning
E-Rate Correlates: ER01, ER02
NCLB Correlates: 01, 02, 04a, 04b, 07
Objective 2.3: Increase content area connections to the Advanced Tech level as evidenced by teachers using technology to support he development of higher-order thinking and collaboration while incorporating technology in their subject area TEKS.
Evidence:
• An examination of professional development course offerings, lesson plans, master schedules, video samples of classes being taught, teacher logs, records of distance learning session requests, number and types of programs installed, student records from software, and student products
• Benchmark and TAKS results
• Assistive Technology Team written recommendation
• Classroom observations
• Lesson plans
Person(s) Responsible: Instructional Technology Staff, Teachers, Campus Technology Teams, Campus Administrative Team, Curriculum Coordinators
*Budget: $314,000.00
LRPT category: Teaching and Learning
E-Rate Correlates: ER01, ER02
NCLB Correlates: 01, 02, 03, 04a, 04b, 07, 08
Objective 2.4: Maintain student mastery of Technology Application (TA) TEKS (86% to 100%) to the Target Tech level.
Evidence:
• An examination of lab schedules, professional development course offerings, completed product samples integrated into specific content area projects, campus professional development plans, lesson plans, and student/teacher portfolios
• Classroom observations
• Student mastery results
Person(s) Responsible: Curriculum Coordinators, Instructional Technology Staff, Special Education Coordinators, Media Specialists, Technology Liaisons, Assistive Technology Teams, Campus Administrative Teams, Teachers
*Budget Amount: $146,000.00
LRPT category: Teaching and Learning
E-Rate Correlates: ER01
NCLB Correlates: 02, 11
Objective 2.5: Increase online learning to the Target Tech level by allowing students to access teacher-created online TEKS-based content, resources and learning activities and interactive communications that support learning objectives throughout the curriculum.
Evidence:
• Student classroom assessments
• Classroom snapshots
• Wikispaces utilized by teachers and curriculum staff
• An examination of lab schedules, meeting agendas, professional development course offerings
• Teacher created online content
Person(s) Responsible: Campus Technology Teams, Technology Liaisons, Curriculum and Instructional Department, Teachers, Instructional Technology Staff
*Budget: $240,000.00
LRPT category: Teaching and Learning
E-Rate Correlates: ER01
NCLB Correlates: 01, 04a
Need: Continue update and enhancement of the technology including the technology infrastructure within the district
Goal: Provide an infrastructure system that allows all users 24/7 access to all e-learning opportunities and provide technical assistance to support instructional and administrative needs to achieve the Advanced or Target Tech level in the Texas STaR Chart.
Objective 3.1: Maintain and increase a student-to-computer ration of 2.75 to 1 and approaching the Target Tech ration of 1 to 1 when needed.
Evidence: Purchase orders, Delivery records, Contract awards
Person(s) Responsible: Technology Services
*Budget Amount: $32,000,000.00
LRPT category: Infrastructure for Technology
E-Rate Correlates: ER01
NCLB Correlates: 03, 05
Objective 3.2: Maintain and increase as necessary the district's internet connectivity and speed at the Target Tech level.
Person(s) Responsible: Technology Services
Evidence: Purchase orders, Delivery records, Contract awards
*Budget Amount $2,000,000.00
LRPT category: Infrastructure for Technology
E-Rate Correlates: ER01
NCLB Correlates: 03, 05
Objective 3.3: Provide additional classroom technology to enhance student instruction at the Advanced Tech level.
Person(s) Responsible: Technology Services
Evidence: Purchase orders, Delivery records, Contract awards
*Budget Amount: $16,000,000.00
LRPT category: Infrastructure for Technology
E-Rate Correlates: ER01
NCLB Correlates: 03, 05
Need: Provide administrative leadership and support for leadership for teachers in the use of technology
Goal: Increase the level of administrative support and use of technology in all focus areas as represented in the STaR Chart.
Objectives:
Objective 4.1: Increase the degree to which campus and district leadership promotes continuous innovation with technology leading to increased student achievement and operating effectiveness.
Evidence:
• A review of agenda items, surveys, Campus Technology Action Plans
Person(s) Responsible: Instructional Technology Department, Campus Administrative Teams, Technology Services, and Information Services
*Budget Amount: $102,000.00
LRPT category: Leadership, Administration and Support
E-Rate Correlates: ER01
NCLB Correlates: 01, 11
Objective 4.2:
Increase the level of technology involvement in district and campus plans such that technology benchmarks based on SBEC standards are established annually, leading to the Advanced Tech level.
Evidence: Campus Improvement Plans (CIPs)
Person(s) Responsible: Office of Administration, Campus Administrative Teams, Curriculum and Instruction Department, Instructional Technology Department
*Budget Amount: $40,000.00
LRPT category: Leadership, Administration and Support
E-Rate Correlates: ER01
NCLB Correlates: 01, 04a, 11, 12
Objective 4.3:
Increase instructional support for the use of technology by creating learning communities and teacher cadres, which allow teachers to use technology to maximize teaching and learning.
Evidence: Training materials, Professional Development course offerings, and size of teacher cadres
Person(s) Responsible: Campus Administrative Teams, Curriculum and Instruction Department, Instructional Technology Department
*Budget Amount: $260,000.00
LRPT category: Leadership, Administration and Support
E-Rate Correlates: ER01, ER02
NCLB Correlates: 01,02, 04a, 07
Objective 4.4: Increase the degree to which campuses and the district uses technology to collaborate with and communicate with stakeholders to the Target Tech level.
Evidence: Podcasts on District website, phone records, video content available through district website, online grade book access, and staff web pages
Person(s) Responsible: Communication Department, Information Services, Technology Services, Instructional Technology Department, Curriculum and Instruction Department, and Campus Administrative Teams
*Budget Amount $8,000,000.00
E-Rate Correlates: ER01
NCLB Correlates: 06, 10, 11,12
3. Identify the objective for each area of Technology, Funding, and Management. Provide the needed elements for each objective to make sure that it’s measurable.
Technology
Provide additional classroom technology to enhance student instruction at the Advanced Tech level.
Funding
Provide the budgetary support for campuses to realize all technology strategies outlined in the Campus Improvement Plans as specified at the Target Tech level.
Management
Increase the degree to which campus and district administrators utilize technology to improve productivity and effectiveness.
References:
Cypress-Fairbanks ISD Technology Plan. (2011, March 1). Retrieved February 25, 2012, from Cypress-Fairbanks Independent School District: www.cfisd.net/dept2/technology/Technology%20Plan.pdf
E-rate. (2012). E-rate Information. Retrieved on February 29, 2012 from http://www.mecnet.net/erate.cfm.
Long-Range Plan for Technology, 2006-2020 http://www.tea.state.tx.us/WorkArea/linkit.aspx?LinkIdentifier=id&ItemID=2147494561&libID=2147494558.
No Child Left Behind policy. (2012). Retrieved on February 29, 2012 from http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/states/index.html.
"Office of Finance." Operating Budget 2011-2012. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Feb. 2012. <www.cfisd.net/dept2/finance/2011-12%20Budget.pdf>.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteKristina,
ReplyDeleteHave you reviewed the STaR chart for your district on the TEA website? The data is available for public viewing. Within this data, charts reflect the growth within the district from the survey results. After viewing the one for my district, I discovered that one campus did not successfully complete the STaR Chart for submission. It was my understanding that this information is required for funding. After viewing the STaR Chart site, I found the following information:
"The NCLB Technology Reporting System is used to collect the additional data for these Title II Part D federal reporting requirements. This district level component of the STaR Chart system will open in April 2011 and close on June 30, 2011 for the 2010-2011 school year. All NCLB data must be entered by the time the system closes on June 30th so that data can be aggregated and forwarded to the United States Department of Education" (TEA,nd)
Reference:
TEA (nd. Texas STaR Chart. Retrieved (2012, February 28) from http://starchart.epsilen.com/nclb/default.html
Lori,
DeleteYes I have. The STaR chart data is incorporated in our technology plan. But it is available for review on the TEA website. This is very helpful because you can compare other districts across the state that are similar with your own district.
Kristina,
ReplyDeleteIn the course of research Advanced Technology, I found that “The way they see it in Mississippi, it's an if-life gives-you-lemons-make, lemonade solution…The districts are participating in a state-sponsored initiative called Challenging Regional Educators to Advance Technology in Education (CREATE) for Mississippi…CREATE's Student Tech Team program is a disciplined example of a generally less formal phenomenon with which most K-12 schools are very familiar (Waters, 2008).“ Lucy Miller-Ganfield, who runs Students Working to Advance Technology (SWAT), a nationwide program aimed at promoting student leadership through technology training, says she hears "the security question" all the time. "When you enlist students for tech support, you don't let them run your network," she says. "You don't let them into areas with private information. You don't give them the keys to every closet. You give them limited access. The technology allows you to give them appropriate roles and responsibilities. If you don't have segregated access to your servers and your critical data, you've got much bigger problems (Waters, 2008)." Moreover, student tech-support teams become stakeholders in their own education, Miller-Ganfield says, which makes them even less of a security risk. "Students like helping people with the technology," she says. "It becomes a very natural way for them to step into a leadership role. It allows them to own it (Waters, 2008).
I’m not sure if my present district would consider programs such as these but my former district did in fact hire students to assist on their technology support teams. They worked after school and in the summer to aid in the installation of software and hardware. They also help trouble shoot sometimes. Would your district be open to a programs such as this? ~ Carol
References
Waters, J. K. (2008). How Geek Became Chic: With Budgets and Staff Stretched Thin, Schools Are Turning Tech-Savvy Students into Technology Leaders and a Popular, Important of IT Support. T H E Journal (Technological Horizons In Education), 35(2), 48+. Retrieved February 28, 2012, from Questia database: http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5025695811
Carol I think you make several excellent points. In fact, Cy-Creek High School is centered around Academic and Career Academies. Entering freshman are taken a career survey and based on their answers are placed in different academies one of which is a Technology Academy. These students become Juniors/Seniors they can earn a Cisco certificate in networking for example. Unfortunately, not all of our campuses are providing students with these type of skills while in high school. Currently these are campus based decisions and there is no district mandate.
DeleteCareer Academies. (n.d.). Cy-Creek. Retrieved February 28, 2012, from schools.cfisd.net/cycreek/academies.html
Kristina, please elaborate more for each question.
ReplyDeleteQuestion 1: Based on the needs and weaknesses you indentified in your Report I, please list the standards from the STaR and No Child Left Behind Act to direct your proposed technology plan.
Question 2 & 3: There should be more objectives you would propose which are based on the needs and weaknesses from your Report I.
Please let us know if you need some clarification for writing the objectives.
Dr. Shannon,
DeleteI must have misunderstood. I will add clarification to 2 and 3.
Thanks!
Delete