hwes strategic plan - keena d. crenshaw - home
TRANSCRIPT
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
1
Strategic Plan for Health Wellness and Environmental Studies Magnet School
Abstract:
Health, Wellness, and Environmental Studies is a 1-6 elementary school located in Jonesboro,
Arkansas. A technology strategic plan has been created to help the school uphold their technology
vision. An evaluation found that certain needs have to be addressed to fulfill the current vision.
These needs include: professional development, technology integration, software use, future
hardware, and student technology proficiency. Actions have been developed in each of these areas
and an evaluation to monitor the progress of the strategic plan has been included.
VISION
The stakeholders in this project include a wide variety of district and building level employees as
well as students and parents. At the district level, Michael Summers (Director of Technology) and
Jane Jamison (Federal Programs and Testing) were included as stakeholders. At the building
administrative level, Tracie Hiller (principal) and Kim Anderson (assistant principal) have been
included. Building level staff include 1st Grade teachers (Traci Clayton; Parent, Debbie Gairhan, Kay
Richardson, Stacey Batoon, and Jenny Mayer), 2nd Grade teachers (Melinda Knight, Nancy Coleman,
Cheryl Reeves, Barbara Linam, and Justin Cook), 3rd Grade teachers (Staci Darr; Parent, Sandie
Henderson, Greta Felts, and Mary Helen Cox), 4th Grade teachers (Klugh Woodruff, Lisa Cole, and
Darcy Whitehurst), 5th Grade Teachers (Vicki Prater, April Miller and Toshiba Pugh), 6th Teachers
(Dana McFarland, Karen Nelson, Amanda Tyler and Billie Sue Hoggard), Special Education
Teachers (Heather Graham, Loyce Cowgill, Stacey Jackson and Dena Decker), the library media
specialist (Jamie Skelton), and computer lab support staff (Lisa Long and David Skaggs; Parent).
The technology vision for the school was developed by Keena Crenshaw, Kim Anderson (assistant
principal), Debbie Gairhan (technology committee), and grade level representatives and is as
follows:
“Every staff member, child and parent associated with Health Wellness and Environmental Studies
has a personal responsibility to promote the educational goals that have been determined by the
schools and community. Health, Wellness, and Environmental Studies Magnet will empower our
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
2
community of learners with the necessary skills and capabilities for success in the 21st Century.
Through technology integration, students will become empowered with the knowledge needed to
become an integral part the future workforce.”
This vision served as a guiding force in the development of this technology strategic plan. The main
focus of this plan is to address the long term needs of learning community in relation to technology
proficiency of students and professional development for staff.
TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
An evaluation of Health, Wellness and Environmental Studies Magnet School was conducted to
determine the current technology and training opportunities available to support and enhance the
learning community. There are many steps to performing an evaluation including narrowing down
questions to ask, determining what information is needed, obtaining specific information and
analyzing the information that was found. Each of these will be discussed.
Questions specific to the focal point of the evaluation include:
1. What hardware and software is available for teacher/student use?
2. What technologies are used the most and the least?
3. What previous trainings have teachers had on available technology resources?
4. Are technology best practices being implemented?
5. How are students scoring in technology proficiency?
6. Does the current bandwidth and networking environment meet the needs of emerging wireless
technology?
Specific data sources included records of current technology and how often items were checked out.
Inventories of permanently established technology in classrooms including Smart technologies,
printers, and document cameras provided knowledge of what immediate resources teachers have at
their fingertips. Sign in sheets for district wide technology workshops and building level technology
professional development activities indicated how often teachers attended training. Observations of
teacher use of technology were used to distinguish which teachers were implementing technology.
The building technology survey provided answers to questions based upon the previous year.
Teacher lesson plans documented the implementation of the k-12 technology scope and sequence for
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
3
expected technology integration. Student portfolios with finished technology assignments required
by teachers indicated the transfer of technology skill to the learning community within the school.
A few barriers effected this evaluation. Teachers did not like to be interrupted during lessons some
did not answer surveys. Surveys may also exaggerate the use of technology in the classroom. The
availability of teachers for interviews was also an issue as well as accessing all student portfolios.
The information was collected and the facilitator met with a small group of stakeholders. Surveys
that were created provided the analysis of data automatically. Inventories sheets and observation
information was collected and placed into spreadsheets. Interviews were conducted with two grade
level teachers and special staff for a total of 16 staff members. They were asked how they felt about
available technology in the building. 81% of staff felt they had access to what was available and
incorporated it appropriately while the three staff members felt differently. Those staff members
were directly involved with technology in the building as part of the technology team. During
unannounced observations of the same interviewed teachers plus two additional teachers, 60% of
staff was not using technology during lessons.
Surveys, building equipment inventory, and building walkthroughs found that 87% of classrooms
have computer workstations, 95.7% of classrooms have a projector and screen, 87% of classrooms
have a document camera, 87% of classrooms have sympodiums, 69.6% of classrooms have a wireless
slate, and 52.2% of classrooms have a Smart response system. 100% of classrooms have a RedCat
Classroom amplification system. One classroom, the Bio-Lab, has a SmartBoard. Other equipment
available includes, Flip video cameras, camcorders, VCR’s, laptops. There are also overhead
projectors on cards as well as DVD players and boom boxes.
Survey results were also analyzed for frequency of software program use. Twenty-five teachers
responded to the survey. According to survey data, 62.5% of teachers indicated that they used the
software program Orchard. It is pulled from the server and is on every computer. It’s primary use is
for remediation and does not allow for teacher/student interaction together with technology. 58.3%
of teachers responded to using Microsoft word frequently and 40% of teachers responded to using
accelerated reader frequently. Other programs that are available but are used less than 20% of the
time included Smart Notebook, Inspiration, Kidspiration, Understanding Math, netTrekker, iLife
Suite, Excel, Access and Harcourt Math.
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
4
Questions related to a lack of technology integration revealed that 39.1% of teachers felt a lack of
training discouraged their use of technology and 47.8% stated they did not have time to incorporate
technology. However, these same teachers felt that installed multimedia equipment motivated their
students and improved critical thinking. No teacher thought that technology was not relevant to his
or her curricula. 17% of teachers felt that appropriate equipment is unavailable and 13% felt that
scheduling equipment is difficult.
Technology training opportunities are provided at the district level for all staff members. Two weeks
in the summer is dedicated to technology training on various topics is provided based upon what
teachers’ feel they need more training in. The school librarian schedules weekly technology
mentoring sessions on Wednesday afternoons after school. When new technology is purchased, the
district also schedules ½ day training in the use of that new technology. Lastly, a district level
technology coach is available by work order to meet the needs of each individual teacher. In relation
to the use of these training opportunities the survey indicated that 30% of teachers did not attend
summer technology sessions while 20% attended one, 25% attended two, and 20% attended three
sessions. The weekly after school technology sessions were attended by 93.3% of teachers in varying
numbers. Using the sign in sheets for the weekly sessions, the largest group of attendants was six
participants for Senteo Systems. The district work order system showed that there have been 164
work orders, which have increased by 50% over the past year, that have been completed at HWES
dealing with hardware trouble or technology integration issues.
In relation to how teachers incorporate technology and where they felt they needed assistance 50% of
teachers reported that they had never given electronic assignments. They also felt they needed major
assistance with burning files to a CD/DVD (17.4%), editing pictures (34.8%) creating presentations
(60.9%), using digital cameras (37.5%), and creating projects with the new apple mobile lab (91.3%).
These data are supported by the evaluation of student portfolios. Searching student portfolios for the
year resulted in a lack of electronically created assignments with only 10% of students submitting any
electronic projects. Of those 10% all projects only use Microsoft office software as the technology
feature.
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
5
Although there was a k-12 technology scope and sequence in place, 50% of teachers indicated they
had never assigned electronic projects to their students. Reading the responses asking which parts of
the technology scope and sequence they have completed, the answers consisted of:
• N/A
• I don’t do them
• I’ve used all I have
• most of the first half has been completed
• and I don’t know
• One teacher responded with the correct response listing the actual scope and sequence
activities.
This indicated that teachers were not familiar with the district technology scope and sequence for
students. (Appendix)
When interviewed, the PC computer lab support staff felt that she was not efficiently trained in all
programs to be able to help teachers or students. Training dealt with software that was pushed out
through the server. She received initial training, but no updated training as program changes were
made. The media specialist, who checks out hardware to teachers, wanted to find the best way to
deliver training to staff members at their convenience so they would take advantage of the different
hardware that was available to them for checkout throughout the year. She was aware that the teacher
checkout of technology was sporadic.
Classroom observations found that teachers were only using a fraction of the technologies that were
available. The current level of student technology proficiency, student technology assessments via
online tech assessments, and the assessment of student technology portfolios determined what
programs students use most often to complete assignments that incorporated technology. Through
these tests it was found that students were not reaching the required 85% level of technology
proficiency. Rather, students are at 49% proficient in regards to technology, and many student
portfolios utilized minimal technologies such as PowerPoint and Microsoft Word documents.
Classroom observations and student surveys are deemed best to determine if students are interacting
with technology during lessons. Two classroom walkthroughs were performed in 20 classrooms over
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
6
the course of one month. It was found that students were engaged in the traditional educational
environment and were not using technology to produce lessons. However, teachers were using
technology to present lessons in many ways including web based educational content (ie Discovery
Streaming, netTrekker, Visual Thesaurus), Smart Technologies, and Microsoft Office applications.
Several educational software programs (My Reading Coach and Project RIDE) were being utilized in
the resource room and many state provided (online based) software were available for daily use in the
office.
New mobile devices and laptops have caused wireless technology to become a necessity and should
be implemented in the near future. The district technology director, Michael Summers, stated that
bandwidth continues to pose a problem as more online resources become available. He is currently
working on finding ways to redirect bandwidth depending on the importance of the resource and
users’ needs.
NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Based upon the technology evaluation, a needs assessment was conducted to find where HWES needs
to be to meet their vision. Questions to determine the building technology needs in regards to training
that supports and enhances the development of best practices and contributes to the learning
community would include:
• How much training do teachers need?
• What level of technology proficiency is wanted from students?
• How many electronic projects do teachers need to assign for students?
• How is bandwidth and wireless devices currently being supported?
There are many data gathering methods that can be used including surveys and questionnaires,
interviews, focus groups, site visits and observations, and pre/posttests. Several data gathering
methods were used to answer to each of these questions. To find how much training teachers need,
teacher surveys were appropriate as well as teacher observations during the use of technology. The
district adopted the current 85% proficiency of all students by 8th grade. We are currently only
producing 49% of our students as technology proficient by 8th grade. Current student portfolios
contained work that did not meet the requirements of the grade level scope and sequence and district
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
7
expectations, the number of projects should target completion of all of the technology scope and
sequence expectations for each grade level
Needs related to teacher technology training, student technology proficiency, student electronic
projects, and wireless device support were addressed during a technology meeting. Other items
teachers thought were important were also added during the meeting. They were prioritized using the
Urgent/Important matrix. It is a simple 4 square matrix that divides needs according to importance
and urgency.
• Quadrant 1: This area held all important and urgent needs. Student difficulty logging into
Mac laptops were listed in this area.
• Quadrant 2: This area held import and non-urgent needs (Goals). Increasing student
technology proficiency, finding ways to make technology integration easier for teachers,
increasing professional development for teachers, supporting new wireless devices, making
current bandwidth work, increasing the use of software by teachers and students to enhance
the curriculum, and offering more support for technology integration after training were listed
in this quadrant.
• Quadrant 3: This held important but urgent needs (interruptions). Training to use web-based
software for personal projects was listed in this area.
• Quadrant 4: Training for personal communication devices such as cell phones, iPads, and
software that is not available in the building was included in this area.
Participants were asked how much time they spent using the technologies in each quadrant. Those
spending too much time in quadrant 1 were stressed because they cannot use what they want to
because of underlying issues. Those spending more time in quadrant 2 were aware of what is
available and willing to use it for technology integration. Those using technologies in quadrant 3 felt
they never really got a grip on how certain technologies work. They needed to let go of these things
and spend more time on other technologies. Those using technologies in quadrant 4 were unclear of
what they should be doing with the technology or how to integrate it. They felt as if technology was
just another “thing” in the box of tricks. Items that were in the non-urgent or unimportant were
ignored and actions were developed for the important, non-urgent tasks. Staff members will work
towards successful implementation of those technologies within the classroom.
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
8
Urgent Not Urgent
Quadrant 1
• Student difficulty logging into Mac
Laptops
Quadrant 2
• Increase student technology proficiency,
finding ways to make technology
integration easier for teachers,
• Increase professional development for
teachers,
• support new wireless devices, making
current bandwidth work,
• Increase the use of software by teachers
and students to enhance the curriculum
• Offer more support for technology
integration after training
Not
Impo
rtan
t
I
mpo
rtan
t
Quadrant 3
• Training to use web-based software for
personal projects
Quadrant 4
• Training for personal communication
devices such as cell phones, iPads, and
software not available in the building
Those items listed in quadrant two were finalized as being goals for the school. As a final statement,
data indicated there is a need to have more professional development and support for teachers after
training. Students need to increase their technology proficiency and teachers need to assign more
technology projects to students and increase their familiarity of current software available to fulfill
the implementation of the k-12 technology scope and sequence into the daily curriculum. Lastly, a
wireless environment as well as the bandwidth needs to accommodate emerging technologies as well.
All of these things will guide HWES toward the goal of creating a community of 21st century
educators and learners.
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
9
ACTION PLAN
Health Wellness and Environmental Studies proposed action plan addresses the needs within the
school and the measures that will be taken to close the gap between where the school is and where it
needs to be. The closing of the indicated gaps will help enable the school to empower our
community of learners with the necessary skills and capabilities for success in the 21st Century.
Technology integration will empower students with the needed knowledge to become an integral part
of the future workforce.
To identify the current status or where the school is several data points were gathered. In addition
data were gathered related to where the school needs to be in relation to these same areas. The results
indicate several gaps. These areas include: Student technology proficiency, implementation of the k-
12 technology scope and sequence, wireless technology and bandwidth, available software,
professional development, and the funding of technology.
Student technology pre and post tests were used to assess the understanding and use of computer
systems in a variety of ways. Classroom observations were also used and identified that students did
not use technology for assignments; rather teachers used technology to present information. Using
learning.com assessment, the district adopted the 220-scaled score as being proficient. Our students
are currently pretesting at a scaled score of 210, which is below proficiency. 49% of our students met
the proficiency standard and 85% is the number the district would like to attain. Thus, student
technology assessments, observations of student technology interaction in the classroom and student
technology portfolios indicate that student’s technology proficiency and interaction are not where
they should be and need to be increased. To build up to student proficiency level and decrease the
gap between current scores of 50% and desired 85% proficiency, it is recommended that
learning.com curriculum be purchased for student use in the computer lab.
A current k-12 technology scope and sequence was created for all teachers to adhere to. Observation
of teachers in the classroom and surveys found that teachers were not utilizing technology to assign
projects that would fulfill the implementation of the k-12 technology scope and sequence into their
daily curriculum. Surveys indicated that 50% of teachers have never created electronic project
assignments for students to be completed during the school year to fulfill the scope and sequence
implementation. A teacher survey found that 53.3% of teachers felt they did not have time to
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
10
incorporate technology into their curriculum despite the requirement to do so. To fill this gap and
help teachers meet the technology scope and sequence, additional teacher training specific to
technology incorporation should be provided. If future funds are available, a building level
technology coach should also be considered to assist teachers with incorporation of technology into
core curriculum classes. This will help make technology integration part of the current curriculum
rather than an additional subject to teach. 100% of teachers should assign electronic project
assignments at every grade level, which is a 50% increase, at least once a year.
Current building hardware resources were identified using surveys and information obtained during a
walkthrough. It was found that teachers have sufficient access to hardware within classrooms and
throughout the building. There is one student lab of 27 computers and a small library lab that consist
of 6 student computers. 92% of classroom teachers also have classroom student labs that consist of at
least 3 computers and one teacher computer. All classrooms are equipped with a projector, document
camera, Smart Podium and screen. There are 10 Smart response systems and 11 teachers have
wireless slates. There is also a Mobile Mac Laptop lab (with its own server) that is available for
teacher/student use. There are 8 flip videos, 2 camcorders and 2 scanners. There are 8 personal
printers and 4 network printers.
New mobile devices and laptops have caused wireless technology to become a necessity and should
be implemented in the near future. The district technology director, Michael Summers, stated that
bandwidth continues to pose a problem as more online resources become available. He is currently
working on finding ways to redirect bandwidth depending on the importance of the resource and
users’ needs.
Currently, key technology software in place for teacher and student use includes Smart Notebook,
Inspiration, Kidspiration, Understanding Math, Orchard, netTrekker, ILife Suite, Accelerated Reader,
Microsoft Office and Harcourt Math. Surveys have concluded that many of these programs are not
utilized. District software licenses were purchased to help facilitate instruction in core curriculum
classrooms. These licenses include:
• Smart Notebook: Presentation software used by teachers and/or students to present lessons.
• Inspiration/Kidspiration: Software to enhance writing.
• Understanding Math: Software to enhance math lessons.
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
11
• Orchard: Program to remediate math and language arts deficits students may be experiencing.
Reports can be printed off and given to parents during conferences.
• netTrekker: State approved web browser for students.
• iLife Suite: Software available on Mac mobile labs to enhance student projects
• Accelerated Reader: Used to help reading comprehension. 100% of students should have
goals set and be using the program weekly.
• Harcourt Math: Animated software to review/remediate math skills. Follows the district
adopted textbook and should be used weekly to supplement/enrich the curriculum.
These programs can be used as a resource to enhance curriculum using technology. They can help
build technology proficiency and/or create technology projects to meet the district technology scope
and sequence. To close this gap, teachers need to be instructed on how to use all available programs
with students in the classroom or lab environment. We will also evaluate future technology as it is
developed, assess our needs, and make appropriate selections that will enable our students and
teachers to utilize technology effectively.
There is no specific amount of money set aside for staff development and training needs are met as
they arise. Currently technology staff development takes place during the summer months, after
school and on professional development days. To support training efforts, two technology facilitators
are available on an individual basis to assist teachers with the use of available technologies.
Computer lab assistants are also available during scheduled computer lab time to assist with software
installed on lab student computers. The library media specialist assists with the arrangement of
technology staff development and software installed in the library. The staff takes part in yearly
technology surveys to help guide future PD offerings. Even though support is high, teacher turnout at
PD activities is not. Currently, the only the only technology professional development teachers must
meet is the required six hours. 37.5% of teachers did not sign up for summer workshops and only
6.7% of teachers have never been to a weekly technology mentoring session. HWES would like to
increase the percentage of teachers’ attendance to technology professional development that is
specific to district hardware and software by 12.5%. An increase of PD hours required by the district
may help to raise the percentage of teacher turnout at technology professional development activities.
A part time building level technology facilitator may help to close the gap on professional
development as teachers are currently utilizing this resource. HWES has had great success with
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
12
technology facilitators. There have been 157 technology work orders completed at HWES since
August 2011 and has proved to be an effective way of reaching teachers and their needs on their time.
The current facilities at HWES have been updated within the past year. 10 additional classrooms and
an art room have been added. The building is equipped with one computer lab (27 workstations) and
one Mac mobile lab (32 laptops), and a mini lab in the library (6 student stations). All classrooms
also have at a minimum 2 and a maximum of 4 student workstations. The computer lab manager
reported that grades 4,5, and 6 have two scheduled classes per week in the computer lab and 1st, 2nd,
and 3rd grades have one scheduled class per week. The mobile lab is available to all teachers via a
signup sheet. Based on reported needs the current facilities are sufficient.
Current financial information was created in spring 2010 for the school year. There has been an
increase in the millage, but that money has not been set for use in the district. The current financial
plan will be followed and no additional federal money will be set for use until the next year’s ACSIP
plan is created. Currently, money for technology funding comes from a variety of sources to include
federal, state and grant money. Teachers and schools are free to write grants for school and classroom
materials. This is the only way to add money to the current financial status. To close this gap,
teachers should be informed of grant opportunities that may arise.
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
13
Current 2010/2011 budget
Accelerated Reader Title I: 3500.00
Kidspiration ARRA 2500.00
Computer Lab Instructional Assistant Local Revenue: 30975.00
Lab manager for Mac Laptop Lab Title I Employee salaries
and benefits
31205.00
Tech. Integration Support Title I 2633.00
IXL Web-based Math software Title I 234.00
Additional projector for Smart Technology Title I 600.00
The staff at HW&ES will integrate technology
and instruction, following the JPS Scope and
Sequence of Technology Literacy K-12
TOTAL BUDGET 65,647
Smart Board for Bio Lab Local Revenue 26178.00
Students at HW&ES will have active, hands-on
experiences with science concepts and problem-
solving.
TOTAL BUDGET 26178.00
Renaissance Learning Title III 2450.00
Provide support for ELL students in learning the
English language.
TOTAL BUDGET 2450.00
Librarian to AAME conference PD State Money 600.00
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
14
Projected 2011-2012 Budget Items
Learning.com Curriculum $2800.00
Professional Development: How to Integrate
Technology Quickly in the Classroom (In house
professional development) Summer technology
session and offered throughout the year.
Attendants are paid $20/hour
Presenters are paid $30/hour (summer
sessions only)
Part time building level technology coach to
assist teachers with integration of technology
scope and sequence within their core curriculum
Salaries and benefits: $64,300
Professional Development on software purchased
to enhance the curriculum
Attendants are paid $20/hour
Presenters are paid $30/hour (summer
sessions only)
Inform teachers of grant opportunities by
administrator by e-mail
$0
Evaluation of future technologies by staff $0
Wireless Installation to support mobile devices:
25 enterprise class access points ($550 each),
wiring and labor to run network wire to the
access points ($5500), power over Ethernet
switches ($1000 each X 3), centralized
management controller ($500)
Brand of wireless: Aerohive
$22,750
Monitoring of bandwidth in 2010/2011 budget:
$18,000 for a 5-year subscription to the content
filter/bandwidth shaper. $3500 for bandwidth
aggregation device and three years of support.
There are not any additional costs at this time for
maintenance and monitoring of bandwidth.
$0
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
15
Three Year Timeline
Year 1
May
2011
• District Technology Survey
• Start scheduling technology professional development
• Student Technology Proficiency Post-Test
• ACSIP BUDGET DUE (Include technology actions in Priority 4 of the building ACSIP Plan)
June
2011
• Technology professional development
• Begin to work on bandwidth/wireless environment
Aug.
2011
• Technology professional development
• Finish wireless environment
• Purchase of learning.com license for elementary schools
Sept.
2011
• Survey: Evaluation of professional development
Oct.
2011
• Ongoing Observations of students portfolios and teacher use of technology
• Student Technology Proficiency Pre-Test
Nov.
2011
• Focus Group to help determine attitudes on how plan is moving forward and make adjustments
• Grant Opportunities E-Mail
Dec.
2011
• Survey to evaluate progress of strategic plan.
Jan.
2012
• Conduct interviews to monitor plan and make adjustments
• Evaluate technology for the next year recommendations
Feb.
2012
• Continuation of observation for implementation
Mar.
2012
• Strategic Planning Survey for individual opinions about effectiveness of the planning process
April
2012
• Focus Group for attitudes and feelings about effectiveness of strategic plan
Year 2
May
2012
• District Technology Survey
• Start scheduling technology professional development
• Student Technology Proficiency Post-Test
• Potential hiring of building level technology coach (if funding will allow)
• ACSIP BUDGET DUE (Include technology actions in Priority 4)
June
2012
• Technology professional development
Aug.
2012
• Technology professional development
•
Sept.
2011
• Survey: Evaluation of professional development
Oct.
2012
• Ongoing Observations of students portfolios and teacher use of technology
• Student Technology Proficiency Pre-Test
Nov. • Focus Group to help determine attitudes on how plan is moving forward and make adjustments
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
16
2012 • Grant Opportunities E-Mail
Dec.
2012
• Survey to evaluate progress of strategic plan.
Jan.
2013
• Conduct interviews to monitor plan and make adjustments
• Evaluate technology for the next year recommendations
Feb.
2013
• Continuation of observation for implementation
Mar.
2013
• Strategic Planning Survey for individual opinions about effectiveness of the planning process
April
2013
• Focus Group for attitudes and feelings about effectiveness of strategic plan
Year 3
May
2013
• District Technology Survey
• Start scheduling technology professional development
• Student Technology Proficiency Post-Test
• ACSIP BUDGET DUE (Include Technology Actions in Priority 4)
June
2013
• Technology professional development
Aug.
2013
• Technology professional development
•
Sept.
2013
• Survey: Evaluation of professional development
Oct.
2013
• Ongoing Observations of students portfolios and teacher use of technology
• Student Technology Proficiency Pre-Test
Nov.
2013
• Focus Group to help determine attitudes on how plan is moving forward and make adjustments
• Grant Opportunities E-Mail
Dec.
2013
• Survey to evaluate progress of strategic plan.
Jan.
2014
• Conduct interviews to monitor plan and make adjustments
• Evaluate technology for the next year recommendations
Feb.
2014
• Continuation of observation for implementation
Mar.
2014
• Strategic Planning Survey for individual opinions about effectiveness of the planning process
April
2012
• Focus Group for attitudes and feelings about effectiveness of strategic plan
The action plan created for Health, Wellness and Environmental Studies made several
recommendations. Those included:
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
17
• Purchase Learning.com curriculum for elementary students to increase student technology
proficiency.
• Increase teacher professional development activities to enable teachers to utilize technology
and become an asset to the school learning community.
• If funds permit, the hiring of a building level technology coach to provide one on one training
for teachers
• Increase bandwidth and provide wireless internet access to support new and emerging
wireless technologies.
• Evaluate future technology and make purchases that will enable students and teachers to
utilize technology effectively
• Inform staff of grant opportunities
EVALUATION PLAN
Evaluating the progress of a strategic plan should be done on a regular basis to monitor progress,
determine if anything is preventing the plan from moving forward, determine if there is a need to
revise objectives, or decided if any adjustments should be made. To determine if the technology
strategic plan is on track for Health, Wellness, and Environmental Studies, surveys, observations,
focus groups and interviews will be used.
A survey is a tool to gather information about individuals. It may focus on individuals or serve to
collect opinions. They can be administered in different ways. The researcher can ask questions and
record answers, a questionnaire can be given (paper or online) and participants fill out the survey on
their own. This allows a large amount of data to be gathered in a short period of time. With the
correct questions, they can be created quickly and administered easily. One disadvantage is that
answer choices may not reflect how participants truly feel.
Observations monitor and evaluate the plan progress. Notes will be taken on what works/does not
work well. Classroom observations will help determine student progress based upon technology
infused lessons. Observations of technology facilitator and assistance they offer to see if instruction
is beneficial. Based upon observations, judgments can then be made on changes that may be needed.
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
18
A focus group interview is used to obtain perspectives about the same topic. You can gain insights
into the shared understanding of the strategic plan and how individuals are influence by others in a
group situation. Attitudes, feelings and beliefs are gathered. A moderator with group leadership and
interpersonal skills is needed.
Interviews can be conducted face to face or over the telephone. A set of interview questions are
asked while the researcher records the answers (the researcher may opt to record the interview). The
researcher has the opportunity to clarify answers that are given unlike in a survey situation.
Evaluation of the strategic plan will take place at the end of every 9 week grading period (October,
December, and March).
In October, observations of student portfolios and teacher use of technology will be used to evaluate
if additional professional development has increased teacher use of technology and if students are
gaining technology proficiency through the use of more technology in the classroom.
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
19
Student portfolios:
TECHNOLOGY
USED FOR PROJECT
Number of Students
Grade 4
Number of Students
Grade 5
Number of Students
Grade 6
PowerPoint
Excel
Word
Access
Notebook 10
Photo Story
Photo Booth
Garage Band
iMovie
iPhoto
Teacher/Student Technology Interaction Observation:
1. Teacher: ____________________________________________________________
2. Lesson: _____________________________________________________________
3. Technology used: ____________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
4. Way technology used: ________________________________________________
5. Teacher comfort with technology used (1-10 with one being having a lot of difficulty with
using technology easily): ______
6. Student interaction with technology: ___________________________________
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
20
7. Student Project given: ________________________________________________
8. Student comfort with technology used (1-10 with one being having a lot of difficulty with
using technology easily): _____
In December, a focus group will help determine attitudes on how the plan is moving forward. Jamie
Skelton, librarian, will act as the moderator for this meeting. Adjustments will be made if needed.
Chart Paper and markers will be needed.
Questions to ask:
1. What is your overall understanding of the strategic plan?
2. Do you feel goals and objectives are being accomplished? If not, what changes need to be
made?
3. Do you feel there are problems that may keep the plan from moving forward?
4. What is going well?
5. What differences, if any have you seen taking place within the school in respect to the use of
technology?
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
21
In March, a survey will be used to monitor the plan and make any additional adjustments.
Questions to ask:
1. Do you have an understanding of HWES technology plan
A. No understanding
B. Little understanding
C. Moderate understanding
D. Full understanding
2. Do you feel that goals and objectives are being met?
A. No goals and objectives have been met
B. One goal/objective has been met
C. Two goals/objectives have been met
D. All goals and objectives have been met
3. What area of the strategic plan is unclear?
A. Vision
B. Action Plan
C. Evaluations
D. All parts of the plan are unclear
4. Have any purchases related to the plan been made that you are aware of?
A. Yes
B. No
If yes, please list what purchases you are aware of
5. Have you been offered any one on one professional development?
A. Yes
B. No
If yes, what did you specifically receive training on?
6. Do you feel that any changes to the plan need to be made at this point?
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
22
One Year Timeline of Evaluation
May 2011 • District Technology Survey
• Start scheduling technology professional
development
• Student Technology Proficiency Post-Test
June 2011 • Technology professional development
August 2011 • Technology professional development
September 2011 • Survey: Evaluation of professional
development
October 2011 • Ongoing Observations of students
portfolios and teacher use of technology
December 2011 • Focus Group to help determine attitudes on
how plan is moving forward and make
adjustments
March 2012 • Survey staff to monitor plan and make
adjustments
APPENDIX
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
23
TEACHER TECHNOLOGY SURVEY
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
24
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
25
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
26
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
27
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
28
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
29
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
30
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
31
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
32
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
33
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
34
HWES TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIC PLAN Keena Crenshaw ETEC 6223
35