Technology Integration Plan

EDLD 5352 Instructional Leadership: The Technology Link
Week 4 Assignment
Kaye Windel-Garza
December 13, 2009

Part 1: Development of an Organizational Chart Integrating Technology
In developing an organizational chart for Technology Integration, one must consider the importance of full integration. All members of the instructional team must be involved in the integration process, from the Superintendent and the Board of Trustees to the paraprofessional in the classroom assisting the teacher. All are members are responsible for their part in technology integration but many have distinctly differing roles within this context that are impacted by their assigned duties and responsibilities.
http://www.scribd.com/word/embed/24061717



The Superintendent is responsible for technology integration in several ways. It is his duty to inform the School Board regarding the needs and challenges of technology. He is responsible for directing the budget and finding needed monies for technology. The superintendent is also responsible for pushing technology as a priority in a district. If the Superintendent is not fully on board, no one else will be.
The School Board is responsible for asking questions of the District and making informed decisions about technology and development. If the school board is not aware and does not make technology a priority, funding will go elsewhere.
The Assistant Superintendents for Administration and Educational Services, the Director of Assessment, the Director of Technology, and the Director of Special Programs all sit at the next level in the hierarchy. These people are directly responsible for the planning and coordination of educational services, and their role is to seek ways to integrate technology into the curriculum. The Director of Technology is responsible for planning, maintaining, and implementing the district technology plan. This person is central to the inner workings of both hardware and software within the district. However, this person must communicate regularly and meaningfully with the other people at this level about integration. These other people, the Assistant Superintendents, Director of Assessment and Director of Special Programs, must prioritize integrating technology into the curriculum and assessment. The Director of Special Programs must take special care to examine risks and benefits of technology for students with special needs. This group must develop a planning long term work group that develops and examines long term goals for tech. integration in coordination with the adopted technology plan. Information provided by Building Administrators and technology integration specialists could inform recommendations to the Superintendent and Board.
The building Administrators play a vital role in the Technology Integration Organization. Building administrators must convey the goals and plans of Upper Administration to front line persons, teachers and paraprofessionals. The building Administrator, in collaboration with technicians, technology coordinators, and tech. integration specialists are the people who will drive innovations in instruction by being cheerleaders for innovation. She will encourage staff to use technology in new ways with students and encourage them to allow greater independence in their students. The building Administrator must expect that technology is being used by the students and must be clear that it must be observed. It is the building Administrator who will guide a successful implementation on their campus or a lukewarm one.
Technicians, technology coordinators, and technology integration specialists will be responsible for maintaining hardware, helping teachers integrate the use of this technology, and will provide training to increase use. Technology coordinators and Technology Integration Specialists will also be responsible for developing communities of learning within the different grade levels to assist teachers in learning and sharing ways to integrate technology. They will also advise the building Administrator regarding problems with implementation, general resistance, and make suggestions to improve compliance.
Classroom teachers and paraprofessionals are last on the list, but central to the project. Teachers will have high expectations placed upon them with few resources. It is up to teachers to demonstrate what they can do with what they do have, but also advocate for more resources. Teachers must be represented at technology meetings at the district level and all major school levels, elementary, middle, junior high, and high school, must be represented.
At all levels, there should be committees discussing technology integration regularly. Each group should be identifying needs, developing action plans, and assisting in the implementation of technology. All plans should support the District action plan for Technology Integration.


Part 2: Professional Development Planning
Technology availability is a problem on our campus. However, it is not as large an issue on other campuses in the District. One of the chief frustrations is having only one computer per classroom and one computer lab for a severely overcrowded school. There is limited access to a laptop lab (always in use) and the computers in the library are also heavily used to take AR tests. Teachers have been slow to use the technology available simply because it is so difficult to access. That said, there are teams that regularly use technology to complete student projects.
In terms of analysis of campus technology, we utilize the Texas STaR chart as a means of gauging technology advancement. We are in the “Developing Stage”. However, in my analysis last week, I realized that the shortened definitions on the STaR questionnaire are not exactly what the longer definition explained. For this reason, I realized that I have been filling out the STaR chart inaccurately. I informed my principal that I felt those numbers might be compromised due to lack of training/orientation prior to doing the STaR chart online. I believe that a short review of the STaR categories as well as a handout of the more detailed chart would automatically increase our STaR rating in some areas.
In addition to improved reporting on the STaR chart, I would like our campus to participate in the Project Tomorrow online survey. This survey is free, allows for collection from all stakeholders (teachers, students, and parents) and provides data that the school can use for technology planning. My recommendation is that all teachers take the Project Tomorrow survey, that we send notes home to all parents asking them to take the parent survey, and have 4th grade students take the student survey. (The Technology Instructor took the student test and found it lengthier than the parent and teacher test. She felt only fourth graders would be able to complete it successfully.) This data will be used in conjunction with the STaR data to drive planning.
Finally, since next year is the final year in the District Technology plan, I will request information regarding status of projects related to our campus. I will also request a position on the technology committee to develop the new plan. This information can guide planning as well. On our campus, we simply must have more access to computers. Informing the Technology Department that we are aware and concerned can help to prioritize projects on our campus.
In developing professional development, it is not only prudent but strategic to use technologically competent practitioners on our campus. Our librarian and technology teacher are highly innovative and can demonstrate some easy ideas for integrating technology in the classroom. We also have several grade level teachers who do neat things with technology. Showcasing them and their ideas at staff meetings is a great way to identify “experts” one can go to. Providing time to discuss technology during staff training days is also critical. Giving staff time to problem solve can be a great way to demonstrate this new kind of learning. Many teachers need to know that they can integrate technology and how it is done. Assigning a monthly student project (within the current curriculum) that must integrate technology to each grade level to develop is a great way to have teachers work together to develop technology based plans. These could also be shared in staff meetings.
Part 3: Evaluation Planning for Action Plan
Currently, our campus uses a wealth of data from multiple sources to determine progress in our students, sub groups, and special populations. We can analyze data for trends, and can disaggregate it any way we wish. We use Eduphoria, Skyward, Special Education Manager, STaR, STAR testing, and AR testing. Fortunately, the ability to track data for regular education students is very good. However, for students in self-contained classes, this information is not tracked. Many of these students take modified tests or their scores are so low that the campuses do not want them to count in their district tracking. Finding a way to track these students through the system also could be beneficial.
In terms of Technology Integration, we only have the STaR chart data to inform us. Technology has sent out surveys regarding technology in the past, but this data is not available. I would like to see the use of Project Tomorrow data used in conjunction with STaR. In addition, I would like simple surveys after all technology mini trainings and a brief reflection from each team as they complete their technology integrated lessons. This information could guide further development and identify needs.