lausd instructional technology: key findings

SUPPORTING DOCUMENT A

LAUSD Instructional Technology: Key Findings

• The Center for Educational Leadership and Technology (CELT) developed an initial set of findings frominterviews of teaching staff and administrators in schools and offices in LAUSD.

• The key findings present a current picture of where LAUSD is in terms of instructional technology.

• Focus groups worked with CELT to develop recommendations and implementation strategies to address thekey findings. Focus groups members were selected based upon their areas of expertise and proven abilitiesin:

• Human Resources and Development

• Curriculum and Learning Standards

• Plan Implementation Issues

• Technology Enhanced Learning Environments

• The initial findings were validated by focus groups whose members read and offered clarifications to thefindings.

• The final report consisting of key findings, recommendations, and implementation strategies is being used toform the Instructional Technology Plan.

LAUSD Instructional Technology Planning Project Recommendations and Implementation Approaches

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY PLANNING PROJECT

Recommendations and Implementation Approaches Draft Report

MIDDLE 21st Century School

HomeMunicipal

Government

College/University

Library Social Services

Business/Industry

Prepared by:

CELT Corporation199 Forest Street

Marlborough, Massachusetts 01752(508) 624-4877www.celt.org

October 6, 1999


CELT Corporation Page 1

1. RECOMMENDATIONS AND IMPLEMENTATION APPROACHES MATRIX

Curriculum and Learning StandardsKey Findings Recommendations Implementation Approaches

Curriculum/Technology Integration

• District leadership at all levels look tothe integration of instructional computingdevices and related instructionalapplications to increase the options/materials available to teaching staff tomeet the diverse learning needs of theirstudent populations.

• Strategies incorporating technology todeliver and enhance instruction (distancelearning, on-line learning, interactivetwo-way video, data collection projects,mentorships, and tutorials) are highlydesired by leadership within the district.

• To achieve systemic integration of desktopcomputing devices to address curriculargoals, district leadership identified theneed for staff development as a highpriority for most all teachers.

• ITAFs (Instructional TechnologyApplications Facilitators) involved infocus group discussions were able toarticulate a comprehensive vision forintegrating technology resources toachieve curricular goals, but cited manychallenges to achieve this visionsystemically.

♦ Identify and adopt strategies (processesand structures) for systematicallyintegrating technology into all aspects ofthe curriculum, specifically areas thatsupport the superintendent's sevenpriorities.

⇒ Identify, embrace, and disseminate a set ofresearch-based curriculum/technologyintegration approaches that align studenttechnology standards with contentstandards, and process skills, such as thoseidentified in the ISTE guide NationalEducational Technology Standards forStudents ~ Connecting Curriculum andTechnology.

⇒ Focus initial curriculum and technologyintegration initiatives on specificallyidentified district/cluster priority areassuch as:

- literacy

- special education

- students at-risk

⇒ Create and regularly update guidelines toassist teachers in the selection oftechnology-based resources that aredifferentiated by instructional levels andcontent area.

⇒ Design a web page to distribute thetechnology selection guidelines to teachers.

⇒ Link selection guidelines to staffdevelopment design and implementation.




Curriculum/Technology Integration (continued)

• Methods using technology tode-emphasize the differences amongteachers and among students within theLA learning environment are soughtwithin the recommendations andimplementation approaches presented inthe Instructional Technology Plan.

(See Recommendations on previous page.) (See Implementation Approaches on previouspage.)





• Current district-wide communicationsregarding instructional practices andguidelines are ineffective.

• Few channels exist for teachers to sharesuccessful curriculum and technologyintegration practices with colleaguesacross the district.

• Channels that are available for sharingare not well known and under-utilized.

• LAUSD educators expressed the need foruniform criteria, formats, and templates toprovide a vehicle for on-line, searchablelessons and units in support of learningstandards.

• Establishment of quality controlprocedures for gathering/ documentingsuccessful practices was identified as apriority by LAUSD staff.

♦ Develop communication channels,implementation strategies, and qualitycontrol procedures for identifying andsharing successful curriculum andtechnology integration practices amongdistrict educators.

⇒ Include, as part of LAUSDnet andultimately as a component of the district’sdecision support system, an easily-accessible, relational database of lessonplans and units for sharing successfulintegration practices across the district.

- develop criteria for selecting lessonplans/units (initial emphasis on literacy)

- design template with searchable fields

- determine quality control procedures

- design and conduct a variety of staffdevelopment initiatives for using(inputting lessons into and searching) thedatabase

⇒ Make this database available through theLAUSD web site.

⇒ Widely publicize the existence of andencourage the use of this database asteachers secure technology resources intheir schools and classrooms.

⇒ Investigate and document successfulpractices of other large school districtswith similar populations as LAUSD.





• LAUSD educators expressed a need forwell-researched, centralized learningresources for use with at-risk students.

• Additionally, leadership within thedistrict seeks technology solutions andstrategies to address the requiredinterventions for students not succeedingwithin the standard school day.

• Likewise, there is a growing need fortechnology-based resources able tosupplement efforts in support ofinterventions and extended instruction as aresult of the "no social promotion"legislation.

♦ Identify and promote a variety oftechnology supported solutions andstrategies for students at-risk whichprovide interventions during and beyondthe standard school day. Ensure thatthese solutions are linked to the districtdecision support system such that it maybe used for early identification toprescribe early interventions.

⇒ Research and disseminate via the LAUSDwebsite successful strategies, programs, andmodels for addressing the needs of studentsat-risk from preK through grade 12 by:

- defining and identifying the district's at-risk populations

- determining criteria for selecting at-riskpopulations that can benefit fromtechnology enhanced interventions

- aligning technology enhancedinterventions with at-risk populations

- creating and disseminating assessmentstrategies to align individual students at-risk with the most appropriateintervention

⇒ Increase access to LAUSD instructionaltechnology resources by promotingpartnerships with childcare serviceproviders offering before-school, after-school, and week-end programming forLAUSD students.

⇒ Provide appropriate access to studentinformation within the district decisionsupport system to childcare serviceproviders offering before-school, after-school, and week-end programming forLAUSD students.





• Leadership within the InstructionalTechnology Branch seeks to develop anunderstanding at the school level of theuse of diverse types of instructionaltechnology devices available to supportcurricular goals and increase studentperformance on district standardized tests.

♦ Research and document alternativedesktop computing devices which haveproven successful in supporting curriculargoals, improving literacy, increasingstudent performance on districtstandardized tests, and addressing thesuperintendent's priority areas.

⇒ Research and publish (print and electronic)a guide for creating effective technologyenhanced learning environments thatincludes the use of alternative desktopcomputing devices, such as portable writingkeyboards, graphing calculators, laptopand portable computers. (See the Guide toTechnology Enhanced LearningEnvironments)

⇒ Negotiate high volume purchasingagreements for all LAUSD schools withvendors of these alternative desktopcomputing devices. Distribute proceduresfor securing devices at these prices to allschools.

⇒ Maintain up-to-date hot links from theelectronic version of this guide to vendorsites and schools sites describing successfulimplementation stories/strategies.

⇒ Identify mentor teachers who have usedthese devices and are willing to work withothers to facilitate effective integrationinto classroom activities. This mentoringcan be provided remotely via e-mail.





• Although a process exists for reviewingeducational materials (overseen by theAdministration of Textbooks and LibraryServices), current on-line softwareevaluation resources are limited.

• A comprehensive on-line system wasidentified as desirable to align productswith state learning standards and withLAUSD’s goals and major educationalpriorities.

♦ Develop a comprehensive on-line systemthat aligns educational materials withstate learning standards and withLAUSD’s goals and major educationalpriorities. Ensure that this system canlink to and communicate with thedistrict's decision support system.

⇒ Implement a district-wide on-line systemthat aligns educational materials withstate learning standards and withLAUSD’s goals and major educationalpriorities:

- research and identify existing systemswith the capacity to meet LAUSD needs

- identify customization required forLAUSD clusters/schools

- review the system from a technicalperspective to ensure that it can beintegrated into the district's decisionsupport system

- determine implementation strategies,timelines, and maintenance needs

⇒ Negotiate high volume purchasingagreements for all LAUSD schools withvendors of core instructional applications.Distribute procedures for securinginstructional materials at these prices toall schools.




Student Technology Standards

• No district level student technologystandards have been articulated orembraced. This is envisioned by some as aprimary task of the ITAFs.

• The Standards Branch has embedded sometechnology standards within specificcurriculum areas.

• District leadership expressed interest inthe emerging ISTE student technologystandards which will be generated as acomponent of the NETS (NationalEducation Technology Standards) project.

• ITAF's voiced their desire to havedistrict-wide student technology standardsidentified, aligned with specific gradelevels, and integrated into multiplecontent areas.

• Some clusters have identified studenttechnology standards by grade levelsand/or discipline. Some schools haveembraced other student technologystandards found primarily on the Internet.

• District-level student technologystandards are desired for clusters andschools where they do not exist, are notcomprehensive, or require updating.

• There is strong consideration withinLAUSD to establish core student indicatorsdemonstrating technology standards as agraduation requirement.

♦ Select and endorse a comprehensive set ofstudent technology standards, K-12, withassociated student assessmentstrategies/performance measures. Alignthe student technology standards withthe Superintendent's seven priorityareas.

⇒ Identify/endorse major categories ofstudent technology standards (considerISTE/NETS standards as a model).

⇒ Develop/embrace a comprehensive list ofK-12 student technology standards withineach major category, differentiated bygrade level.

⇒ Design a process and guidelines forcustomizing the standards for the district,cluster, and school levels as appropriate.

⇒ Develop a comprehensive set of assessmentstrategies to assist teachers in measuringstudent proficiency of specific technologymilestones at selected grade levels.

⇒ Provide teachers and professionaldevelopment personnel with models forsystematically integrating technologystandards within subject areas, themes,and/or lesson plans.

⇒ Design and implement a web-basedrelational database to accommodate the K-12 student technology standards.

⇒ Establish effective communicationchannels to implement the K-12 studenttechnology standards initiativesystemically.

⇒ Create a review/transition process forschools who have previously embracedother technology standards to ensureconsistency across the district over time.




Assessment

• District assessment data and performanceindicators have been aligned with theSuperintendent's seven priority initiativeswith comparative data tables producedannually for each school. Thisinformation is available on the districtweb site, allowing for quick access.

• Student achievement data at the districtlevel includes standardized testing usingthe Stanford-9, which is conductedannually.

• District-level staff are also investigatingnorm referenced testing options whichwould create an annual studentperformance profile.

• To date, tracking and compiling of studentassessment data has been foradministrative and legal compliancepurposes, with less emphasis on improvinginstructional strategies.

• Teachers do not have timely and readyaccess to assessment data on individualstudents to the extent that such data can beused in on-going modification andadaptation of student instructionalactivities/programs.

• Likewise, teachers do not have access totechnology assisted assessment tools toenable documentation of studentachievement in direct support of promotiondecisions.

♦ As a component of the district's decisionsupport system, integrate an automated,easy-to-use assessment system, composedof multiple indicators and linked to thedistrict content standards, that providesteachers and administrators withinformation about student mastery oflearning standards and cross-disciplinecompetencies.

⇒ Implement a district-wide studentassessment system that:

- addresses multiple indicators (i.e., theSAT-9, on-demand performanceassessment, and authentic classroom-embedded assessment measures)

- correlates all forms of student assessmentwith the content standards, benchmarks,and performance standards

- provides disaggregated data

- links directly to curriculum developmentand learning management information

- provides electronic, easy-to-accessinformation

- creates assessments that determinestudent proficiency with technology in thecontext of the integrated curriculum

- provides access to banks of assessmenttasks

- includes ability to aggregate anddisaggregate assessment data by multiplestudent characteristics

- meets the needs of all students




Assessment (continued)

• At the cluster level, a number of pilotprojects using technology resources to targetliteracy, student assessment, and improvedperformance are underway. For example,the Roosevelt cluster is consideringAccelerated Reader, Skills Bank, orCornerstone for cluster-wide purchase.

• Within individual schools, sometechnology enhanced performanceassessment strategies have been identifiedand initiated, but these initiatives arefound in small pockets throughout thedistrict. Systemic impact of these effortshas not been evaluated.

♦ Measure the impact of the pilot projectsand school-level initiatives in the areaof assessment and issue guidelines forexpansion of these models.

⇒ Develop instruments and procedures forevaluating the impact of the pilot projectsand school-level initiatives in the area ofassessment.

⇒ Gather both quantitative and qualitativedata about the programs.

⇒ Compile the data and report findings.

⇒ Create a set of guidelines for potentialdistrict-wide implementation based uponstudy results.

⇒ Review assessment initiatives from atechnical perspective to ensure that theycan be integrated into the district's decisionsupport system.

⇒ Develop implementation guidelines andtechnical specifications for schools andclusters interested in embracing successfulmodels.




Curriculum Development/Learning Management

• Curriculum development and improvementhas been largely driven by standardizedtesting results. Increased scores onstandardized testing such as the Stanfordare one of the Superintendent's sevenpriority areas.

• In this highly site-based district, mostcurriculum development and improvementinitiatives occur at the school andsometimes the cluster level. These projectsare as diverse in their intent and outcomesas are the many schools which compriseLAUSD.

• Leadership within the InstructionalTechnology Branch seeks to developunderstanding in schools regardingcurriculum development, improvement,learning management, and the role oftechnology to assist these efforts.

• The district is currently reviewingproposals resulting from an RFP for aDecision Support System (DSS) for thedistrict. This system holds the potentialto support teachers with some learningmanagement needs.

• Efforts at district-wide curriculum design,improvement, or implementation havebeen initiated over the past few years,such as the primary literacy endeavor.

♦ Expand the criteria/components of thecurrent decision support system design toinclude a web-based curriculumdevelopment and learning managementsystem using relational databasearchitecture to link curricular,instructional resource, assessment, andstudent information.

⇒ Integrate into the proposed decisionsupport system a curriculum developmentand learning management system that will:

- be easily accessible to teachers andadministrators at the classroom, smalllearning community, cluster, and districtlevels

- use a relational database architecture

- link curricular information (e.g., contentstandards, performance standards, etc.)with learning resources, studentassessment, and student information

- monitor the alignment of instructionalresources to district standards

- enable educators to record and share thealignment of content standards,benchmarks, performance standards,frameworks, and cross disciplinecompetencies

⇒ Develop functional and bid specificationsfor the curriculum development/learningmanagement system in accordance withidentified district needs.

⇒ Procure, implement, and test the curriculumdevelopment/learning management systemin a pilot setting.




Curriculum Development/Learning Management (continued)

(Continued from the previous page.)

• There is a pervasive concern that acomprehensive learning managementsystem with a robust assessment componentwould be used inappropriately to judgeteacher performance.

(See Recommendations on previous page.) (Continued from the previous page.)

⇒ Implement the curriculum development/learning management system across thedistrict.

⇒ Clearly define for administrators andeducators the intent and purpose of thesystem for improving instruction.




Curriculum Development/Learning Management (continued)

• Strong research-based instructional modelsresulting from curriculum reforminitiatives (such as LASI for K-12math/science via NSF grant) have hadmuch impact on improving teaching andlearning.

• The Los Angeles System Initiative (LASI)via NSF addressed embedding technologywithin various subject areas, but did notinclude equipment acquisition.

• The Los Angeles Education Reform Now(LEARN) initiative targets improvementthrough facilitated site-basedmanagement and accordingly impacts allcurriculum areas.

• Eisenhower Grant funds have been used tosupport district-wide professionaldevelopment in math, science, andtechnology.

♦ Continue to channel federal, state, andlocal grants and entitlements intotechnology resources and initiativeswhich address the superintendent'sseven priority areas. (Please see PlanImplementation Issues ~ DistrictPlanning for more information on grantsprocurement.)

⇒ Develop and disseminate a menu of allfederal, state, and local grants andentitlements for technology resources andinitiatives that are available at theschool, cluster, and district level.

⇒ Encourage school staff to tap all availablefunding sources in support of technologyinitiatives such as:

- TetraPak/Edmark promotion

- ETCEP recycling program

- soup label/box top offers

⇒ Identify strategies for finding andapplying for "special audience" grants.

- identify individuals/agencies with theskills to develop competitive grantapplications

- conduct workshops/seminars on successfulgrant development

- regularly check web sites for grantopportunities

⇒ Locate standard grant elements on thedistrict web site for easy access during thegrant development process including:

- superintendent's seven priority areas

- technology mission, vision, and goalstatements

- strategic/improvement plans

- needs assessment data



Human Resource Management and DevelopmentKey Findings Recommendations Implementation Approaches

Staff Technology Competencies

• The need has been identified at thedistrict level to determine teachertechnology competencies aligned withstate technology standards and modeled oncurrently available ISTE guidelines.

• The state has identified teachertechnology competencies at four levels:personal proficiencies, instructionalproficiencies, mentor proficiencies, andleadership proficiencies.

• Technology competencies for school andcluster administrators and support staff,and staff of the Division of Instructionhave not yet been identified.

• The Information Technology Plan notedthat there was an inconsistent level oftechnology proficiencies across all LAUSDpersonnel and recommended thatproficiencies be identified.

♦ Identify technology competencies andlevels of performance for teachers, andother staff who support curriculum,instruction, and student learning.

⇒ Relate the technology competencies to theprimary functions of the different staffgroups engaged in instruction. Linking therequired technology competencies toessential functions helps provide a clearrationale and incentive for technologycompetency development. The connection tofunctions also helps individuals and groupsto prioritize staff development needs.

⇒ Provide flexible guidelines based on thelevel of access individuals/groups have tovarious technology resources. For example,development of Internet research skills canonly be expected of staff who have access tothe Internet in their daily workenvironment.




Staff Technology Competencies (continued)

• Some school, cluster, and district leadersmodel appropriate use of technology tosupport their day-to-day functions, butmany do not. Not all school, cluster,division, and branch leaders can clearlyarticulate how technology needs to be usedto address high priority needs and criticalmandates, i.e., assessment documentation;standards-based curriculum development,delivery, and management; literacy;massive staff development needs; specialeducation mandates, etc..

• Most building-level administrators havelittle experience assessing the success ofcurriculum/technology integration effortsof teaching staff.

♦ Identify technology competencies andlevels of performance for principals thataddress their leadership andsupervisory functions, as well as, thoserelated to administrative andmanagement responsibilities.

⇒ Provide structured opportunities forprincipals to develop the followingleadership-related technologycompetencies, in addition to those relatedto personal productivity:

- an understanding of, and ability to buildand communicate a shared vision oftechnology integration as necessary tosystemic, strategic improvement andessential to effectively addressing thesuperintendent’s priorities

- supervisory skill in monitoring andevaluating individual teacher/staffeffectiveness in integrating technologyinto major role-related functions

Staff Development Planning and Programs

• The Professional Development Branch isinitiating strategic planning to helpcoordinate all the various developmentactivities. The current intention of branchleadership is to identify core professionalcompetencies and develop a multi-yearcurriculum.

• A survey has been conducted to assess theimpact of staff development programs andof access to computers in schools.

• There is not consistent, coordinatedplanning for technology-related staffdevelopment at the district-, branchcluster-, school-, or individual-level.

♦ Identify and implement a district -levelcomprehensive professional developmentplanning model to enable more effectivecoordination and collaboration amongvarious branches and groups providingtraining, and more efficient use ofdistrict, community, and vendorresources.

⇒ Determine the scope of professionaldevelopment services that will beprovided at the district-, cluster-, andschool-level.

⇒ Encourage the use of a planning model andprocess that promotes the alignment ofprofessional development with thesuperintendent’s priorities, districtmandates, and cluster/school improvementgoals.

⇒ Plan for and provide professionaldevelopment services that reflect adultlearning theory.




Staff Development Planning and Programs (continued)

• A centralized train-the-trainer model isoften used, but the most appropriate staffare not selected to participate in theprograms.

• The intended sharing of the trainingand/or dissemination of integrationpractices does not always happen back atthe cluster or school.

(See Recommendations on previous page.) (Implementation Approaches continued fromprevious page.)

⇒ Ensure that the professional developmentplanning model and process addresses theneed to use technology as a tool to:

- assess competency-based developmentneeds/priorities

- do market research and marketing ofprofessional development opportunities

- research best practices and effectivemodels of professional development

- engage in ongoing collaboration,communication, support, and technicalassistance

- increase the number and variety ofdevelopment delivery options includingdistance learning activities

- evaluate the effectiveness ofdevelopment activities, i.e., the impacton practice, using multiple assessmentstrategies

- schedule, track, analyze, and manageprofessional development activities anddata

-





• Some clusters provide technology-relatedstaff development, but other provide none.

• Some schools provide on-site applicationstraining.

• Technology facilitators at some schoolsdemonstrate the use of instructionalsoftware, and suggest strategies tointegrate technology into teaching andlearning.

• There are examples across the district ofunstructured development activities, suchas coaching and modeling being providedby peers and/or designated or informalstudent technology aides.

• The Digital High School and upcomingDigital Middle School programs arecurriculum reform-driven. Technology isconsidered a tool to accomplish thereforms. In addition to the original$30/student the state provided forinfrastructure to participating schools, itis anticipated in the second round that$45/student will be available for staffdevelopment.

♦ Set district-wide expectations forcluster- and school-based technologytraining to develop technologycompetencies.

⇒ Identify successful models and practices forboth cluster-provided, and school-basedtechnology staff development, such as:collegial workshops, tutorials, peermodeling, coaching/ mentoring, thedevelopment of student technologyleaders/aides, and distance learningoptions.

⇒ Develop and implement strategies for on-line sharing of successful cluster and schooltechnology-related staff developmentmodels and practices within, and among,clusters.





• There are five (5) ITD regional trainingcenters, each with a Mac and PC lab, thatprovide services to district staff. Inaddition to district provided free training,schools can use the site, paying only forinstructors. Satellite training centers arealso located at selected school sites.

• There is a cadre of AT Assessors(assistive/adaptive technology resourcestaff) available through the clusters tohelp teachers use technology to addressspecial learning needs.

• There is some reliance on externalproviders, such as vendors, privatebusinesses, and the LA County Consortia.AT & T worked with LA County toorganize regional teacher training centers.

• The LA County Office of Education started“Technology for Learning” and trainedhundreds of staff in LAUSD, at least twoper cluster.

• To a large extent district-provided staffdevelopment has been linked to grantprograms. For example, staff developmenthas been funded through the two LiteracyChallenge Grants, Title II, and NationalScience Foundation programs. However,staff development providers rarelyincorporate how technology can be used asa tool to support the programs’ goals.

♦ Begin the transition to competency-basedhuman resource development by settingthe expectation that descriptions fortechnology-related staff developmentactivities will identify the targetedtechnology competency and performancelevel.

⇒ Enhance the effective use of developmentresources and help staff make the mostappropriate selection of activities to meettheir personal development needs andthose of their staff by using competency-based descriptions.

⇒ Use the course descriptions to clearlycommunicate any prerequisitecompetencies/ experiences/skills, and theminimum system and hardware/softwarerequirements to ensure that participantswill be able to use their new learnings uponreturn to their school/work site.

⇒ Set the expectation that staff developmentplanners and delivers will routinely useavailable technology to support all majormandates/ initiatives/programs. Forexample:

- train teacher in how to use technology toprovide and document multiple studentassessments to help track progress forpromotion and gains in literacy

- include as part of the basic curriculum inthe classroom management module forbeginning teachers how to use and manageclassroom technology resources

- develop technology vision and technologycompetencies in new school leaders as partof the New Administrators’ Academies





(Findings continued from previous page.)

• Well-focused courses (30 hrs.) on aspects ofscience and math curriculum/ technologyintegration have been offered throughEisenhower Grant funding.

• Through special grant programs, threedays of training have been provided tonumerous parents to become “advocates fortechnology”.

• Descriptions of training and developmentopportunities do not use competency andperformance-level language to enable staffto select programs that best match theirneeds. Prerequisites are rarely identified.

• Professional development providers (bothin-district and county) often assume somebasic level of staff proficiency that doesn’texist.

• A baseline capacity of teacher technologyproficiency to enable them to effectivelyuse on-line courseware cannot be assumed.

• The Information Technology Plan notedthat 5,000 employees attend one or more ofthe various courses offered by theInformation Technology Division.

(See Recommendations on previous page.) (Implementation Approaches continued fromprevious page.)

- continually evaluate and implement non-traditional, technology-assistedprofessional development deliverymodels to: expand the types of trainingand ongoing support opportunities for allstaff, to help the district keep pace withits ever-expanding development needs,and to increase the ROI (return oninvestment) on professional development





• There is strong interest in using technologyto deliver more effective staffdevelopment options.

• District leadership has expressed twoimportant directions for staff developmentdelivery: (a) use of the Internet for on-linecourses and (b) interactive video.

• LAUSD has internal capacity to developon-line professional developmentprograms.

• It is estimated that 25,000 - 30,000teachers will need staff development onimproving student literacy skills. There isinterest in using technology-supporteddelivery systems to address this enormousand urgent need.

• The Information Technology Planrecommended weighing the costs andbenefits of available training deliverymethods: classroom instruction, self-study,or web-based. It also noted that thegreatest efficiencies can be realized bycoordinated delivery of baseline skill-setknowledge training since these courses maybe identical for both the certified andclassified staff.

♦ Use technology-supported deliverysystems to enable staff to access a greatervariety technology-related trainingmore conveniently.

⇒ Research currently available on-linecourses and development resources andprovide cluster and school personnel withprinted and/or on-line information onsources that could meet their technologycompetency development needs. Developand implement process for updatinginformation on on-line courses.

⇒ At the district-level, identify highereducation, community, vendor, andcorporate partners for developing andimplementing distance learning deliverymodels that focus on professionaldevelopment needs related to thesuperintendent’s priorities.

⇒ Design and pilot competency-based,distance learning delivery models such as:on-line courses, on-line developmentmodules and resources (more specific withlimited scope), project-based learning withon-line coaching, interactive video,teleconferencing, satellite broadcasts, on-line discussion groups, asynchronisticlearning, etc..





• Staff do not currently develop multi-yearindividual development plans alignedwith district/school/program/departmentimprovement goals and their ownprofessional growth needs.

• The Professional Development Branchintends to identify core professionalcompetencies and develop a multi-yearcurriculum.

• As part of a grant program, some teacherswere provided with laptops. In order toparticipate and receive this equipment,participants were required to participatein substantial technology training relatedto laptop use.

• There is not a formal incentive program toencourage wide-spread participation intechnology competency development.

♦ Develop and implement a competency-based Individual ProfessionalDevelopment Plan (ISPP) process andtemplate to enable strategic andcollaborative planning betweeninstructional staff and their supervisors.

⇒ Use the ISPP to assist staff in identifyingtechnology-related and other competencydevelopment needs and linking these withappropriate training and developmentactivities and delivery models. Use thetemplate to help staff and supervisors focuson individual development needs thatalign with district, cluster, and/or schoolimprovement priorities and strategic goals.

⇒ Encourage ISPP template use incollaborative determination of the mostappropriate assessment strategies to enablethe individual to demonstrate progress andgrowth in the targeted competency areas.

⇒ Develop a comprehensive incentiveprogram to encourage and rewardcompetency development.

⇒ Make the ISPP template electronic andsearchable so that data from individualdevelopment plans can be used to:

- monitor “grassroots” professionaldevelopment needs and plan staffdevelopment programs at district-,cluster-, and school-level

- guide the design of high-leverage,competency- and performance level-baseddevelopment activities

- collect and share sample assessmentstrategies for various types of competency-based professional development activities




Organizational Development and Human Resource Management

• The Professional Development Branch hasbeen reorganized within the past twoyears and deals largely with content areaand educational mandates.

• The Professional Development Branchintends to include representatives fromInstructional Technology in their strategicplanning process.

• There is a lack of coordination between theProfessional Development andInstructional Technology Branches and theInformation Technology Division.

♦ Involve the Professional Developmentand Instructional Technology Branches,and the Information Technology Divisionin collaborative organizationaldevelopment activities to improvecoordination and communication.

⇒ Provide joint organizational developmentworksessions with leaders andrepresentatives of the ProfessionalDevelopment and Instructional TechnologyBranches, and Information TechnologyDivision to:

- clarify major functions, roles andrelationships

- identify opportunities for mutuallybeneficial collaborations on providingtechnology-related staff development,and using technology to assessdevelopment needs; promoteopportunities; develop and deliverprograms; provide ongoingcommunication/support/technicalassistance; manage development data;and monitor and evaluate staffdevelopment activities

- determine critical interdependencies

- develop action plans for improving staffdevelopment services provided by the twoinstructional branches.




Organizational Development and Human Resource Management (continued)

• There are not clearly defined expectationsfor district, division, branch, cluster, andschool technology support, includingsupport services for technology integrationinto teaching and learning.

♦ Engage in organizational development toclarify functions, roles andresponsibilities for technology supportservices related to: technologyintegration into curriculum/instruction;technology integration intoadministrative/ management functions;and planning, acquisition, maintenance,upgrades of technology resources andsystems.

⇒ Involve representatives from the variousunits involved in providing technologysupport services in organizationaldevelopment worksessions. Starting at thedivision and branch levels first, thenworking to the cluster and school levels,the sessions need to take a “customerservice” approach to addressing andreaching consensus on:

- spans of authority, service charters, andmissions of different branches or groups

- critical interdependencies among thevarious groups

- communication and collaborationprotocols

- reporting relationships andorganizational structures

- standards of service or quality assurancecriteria.




Organizational Development and Human Resource Management (continued)

• There is no mechanism for managingcompetency-based human resource dataaligned to student learning standards,district strategic goals, and schoolimprovement priorities.

• The Information Technology Planrecommended district-wide coordination ofstaff development which would includethe tracking of baseline technologyproficiencies.

• The Information Technology Plan noted aneed to market staff developmentactivities since many staff are not awareof the technology-related staffdevelopment opportunities availablewithin the district or from externalproviders.

♦ Develop as part of a district-widedecision-support system, the capacity tostore, manage, and query personnel andcompetency-based human resource datalinked to standards, strategic goals, andimprovement priorities.

⇒ Ensure that the application accommodatescompetency-based human resourceinformation, as well as, traditionalpersonnel data. The HR modules shouldinclude competency-based components suchas: staff competencies and performancelevels, job descriptions,recruitment/selection criteria, staffdevelopment programs/activities,supervision/evaluation templates anddata, individual staff development plans,etc..




Technology Support Staffing

• The district has established the cluster-level ITAF position (InformationTechnology Application Facilitator).Cluster administrators selected ITAFs.

• The ITAFs were drawn from various roles.Some are teachers. Many are technologyintegration specialists. The functions andresponsibilities of this new position haverecently been clarified.

• It has been emphasized by districtleadership that ITAFs need to buildcapacity within clusters, not provide it. Itis felt that they must formulate resourcesand identify key staff, be managers, notdoers.

• Currently, technology advisory positionsexist in cluster offices, exclusive of thenewly established ITAF positions. Theinterdependencies between the new ITAFsand technology advisors have not yet beendefined.

♦ Continue to clarify the role of the newITAF position and define theirrelationship to the cluster, InstructionalTechnology Branch, and schools theyserve.

⇒ Document the outcomes of ITAFworksessions defining roles andrelationships. Share results throughoutthe district so all constituencies have aclearer understanding of the varioustechnology support services available, howthey are accessed, and expectations forservice quality.

⇒ Establish a protocol for resolving conflictsand addressing issues relative to theongoing implementation of the ITAFprogram.




Technology Support Staffing (continued)

• Many schools have a person who serves asa technology coordinator or liaison but thefunctions and responsibilities are notclearly defined and vary greatly. At theelementary school site level, there istypically one person, often part-time, thatassists with technology. This may be aTitle I staff member, a paid aide, anInstructional Support Service Assistant(ISSA), parent volunteer, or teacher“magnet”.

• At the high school level, many sites havea teacher or former teacher designated asa technology support staff person.

• An Information Technology Plan StageOne goal was to have at least one person ineach school or center trained to the levelof being able to train others in: networkadministration and technical support, theuse of all classroom applications, and eachmajor district application (e.g., SIS, IFS,etc.).

• School library/media staff and aideshave exceptional training opportunities.However, with some exceptions, thistraining does not focus on the use oflearning technologies and the training isnot mandatory.

♦ Establish guidelines for school-basedtechnology support services.

⇒ Establish guidelines based on variablecriteria such as: school size, staff andstudent population, type of technology-supported learning environments,anticipated level of access to technologyresources, etc..

⇒ Provide multiple models for school-basedtechnology within “acceptable parametersof variation” to enable schools to exerciseflexibility in meeting their growingtechnology support needs.

⇒ Provide sample competency-based jobdescriptions for school-based technologysupport staff to assist school leadership inbuilding a technology team. Often schoolsneed to repurpose and grow the technologyskills for their support staff. Competency-based job descriptions that includeperformance levels, can help guide theongoing training and development process.




Technology Support Staffing (continued)

• The role of the school librarian is definedand requires state certification.

• A library/media aide must pass twenty-five (25) competencies for certification.

• Approximately four-hundred elementaryschools have no trained or certifiedlibrary/media staffing. Most have athree-hour per-day aide.

• Decisions regarding library/media staffpositions are site-based.

• Recruiting technology support staff isbecoming more difficult as demand exceedssupply. Industry draws talent anddeveloped technology expertise awayfrom the school system.




Technology Enhanced Learning Environments Key Findings Recommendations Implementation Approaches

Equity of Technology Resources

• Equity is understood by many LAUSD staffas being more than an equipment issue.Access to equipment and to instruction thatutilizes the equipment effectively are thecritical variables.

• There are significant inequities of studentaccess to technology and to instructorstrained in curriculum/technologyintegration among schools and clusters inLAUSD.

• It is perceived that some schools withadequate quantities of computers,peripherals, and printers are not usingthese to their maximum potential.

• The distribution of technology fundingresources across the district is uneven.Entitlement grant funds and other resourcesfor technology are available to someschools but not others.

• A survey instrument is distributedannually to each school to gather district-wide information on the quantity andfunctionality of existing technologyresources. Not every school responds in atimely fashion, but much usefulinformation is obtained.

♦ Develop a procurement and allocationprogram and schedule, within theparameters of anticipated resources, forinstructional computers and peripheralsthat addresses equity of technologyaccess throughout the district.

⇒ Define and embrace approved “criticalmass” configurations for classrooms andlearning environments at all levels.(Critical mass is defined as that level oftechnology infusion sufficient formeasurable gains in studentperformance.)

⇒ Analyze school and cluster progresstoward critical mass utilizing aninventory database populated by an on-line, school-based survey template.

⇒ Place the district-wide inventorydatabase on-line with electronic searchcapabilities by each school office.

⇒ Create cluster- and district-level reportsfrom both the inventory database andprocurement system that depict thedistribution of quality resources, provideschools and clusters with comparativedata, and flag inequities.

⇒ Involve principals, cluster leadership,and ITAFs in the design of useful reports.

⇒ Assign the task of auditing andmonitoring equitable access to technologyresources at the cluster level.




Equity of Technology Resources (continued)

• Efforts in providing teacher training haveincluded numerous low/no-cost optionslocated in various highly accessiblecenters throughout the district.

• Individual schools have purchasingdiscretion within their operating budgets.Schools that are advancedtechnologically target more funds fortechnology purchases and teacher trainingand are proactive in writing grants.

• Principals play a pivotal role inadvancing the acquisition of technologyresources within their buildings.


• Home access to technology resources is along-term district priority.

• No efforts have been made to providestudent access to computing equipmentoutside of school buildings.

♦ Establish electronic access toappropriate informational and learningresources at school from home andcommunity centers.

⇒ Determine appropriate instructionalresources to be made available for after-hours student access and for communityaccess.

⇒ Initially prioritize resources to addressimproved literacy skills.

⇒ Develop web-based strategies forcommunity access and dissemination.

⇒ Communicate the need for expandedhome/school communication linkages tofamilies and community centers and theavailability of resources.

⇒ Maintain and improve web sites andmonitor access.




Learning Environments

• The class-size reduction initiative hascaused a classroom shortage in manyelementary facilities, resulting in thedismantling of computer labs. In mostcases, these resources have beendistributed among classrooms.

• Although in a district of this size allconfigurations are likely to be found, thereappears to be a trend of placing computersin lab environments at the secondary leveland computers within individualclassrooms at the elementary level.

• In general, given sufficient quantities ofresources, staff of the InstructionalTechnology Branch are more supportive ofcomputers being located in classroomsrather than in labs.

• Pilot programs exist within selectelementary schools where classrooms havefour to five modern computers each.

♦ Continue to place computers in classroomsaccording to guidelines established inthe district, school, and cluster levelplans, purchasing new computers to theextent possible and maintaining labs onlywhen appropriate to learning needs andteaching styles of the grade level/discipline.

⇒ Develop master procurement/ allocationplan for achieving the goal of onecomputer for every five students (State ofCalifornia recommended guidelines), theequipment to be located predominantly inclassrooms and the library/media center,while simultaneously upgrading orreplacing equipment that is no longeruseful.

⇒ Incorporate design templates presentedin the Technology Enriched LearningEnvironments document that support thevariety of learning/teaching needs at theelementary, middle, and high schools,and for school libraries.

⇒ Align and maintain computer labenvironments with the instructionalneeds of the school.

⇒ Reconfigure layouts of computer labs, asneeded, to create improved cooperativelearning environments.




Learning Environments (continued)

• There have been several initiatives thatprovided computing equipment to teachersoutside of school buildings.

• The Mathematics and Science EngineeringEnhancement Model (MSEEM) combinedNational Guard and Eisenhower funding toprovide two math/science teachers permiddle school with laptops equippedwith modems and also some training.

• The LEARN initiative, in support of site-based management, provided a laptop andtraining to a teacher and an administratorin each school.

• The Technology Literacy Challenge Grant(TLCG), now in its 3rd year, providedlaptops to teachers in 45 middle schools.This program will be extended into theelementary schools in the upcoming year.The TLCG has not yet been evaluated interms of benefits or learning outcomes.

♦ Expand availability of portablecomputers to as many teachers aspossible.

⇒ Communicate recommended choices forportable computers and built-in software.Negotiate favorable pricing fromvendors.

⇒ Research interest in and feasibility ofincentive approaches for teachers suchas:

- payroll deduction for purchase plan

- shared cost between teachers andLAUSD

- teacher loan programs at school-sites

- lease/purchase options for teachers

- free computer to teachers who acquireall staff technology competenciesidentified for their position.

⇒ Adopt one or more of the above options.

• ITAFs mentioned the wide-spread use ofgraphing calculators within middle andhigh schools, but noted limited use ofother low-cost desktop computing devices,such as GeoBook, AlphaSmart, Laser PC5,and DreamWriter products.

♦ Communicate information to principalsand teachers regarding low-cost desktopcomputing devices and their potentialapplication to learning standards.

⇒ Coordinate vendor demonstrations of thisequipment at convenient sites throughoutthe district. (See Section Curriculum andLearning Standards, recommendation 3,page 5).

⇒ Include information regarding desktopcomputing devices in TechnologyEnhanced Learning Environmentsdocument and make available to allschool staff via web-site.




Libraries

• In general, school libraries have not beeninvolved significantly in past technologyplanning efforts and are often ignored withrespect to instructional computingresources.

• The vision of libraries serving asinformation resource centers for schools anddeveloping “information literacy” amongstudents and staff is prevalent amongsecondary school librarians.

• Elementary school libraries are neitherfunded nor staffed to serve as informationresource centers for the schools. Someelementary schools have no library. Insome others, numerous educational andbuilding management activities inelementary schools are dependent upon thelibrary space for their operation.

• Decisions regarding the equipping andstaffing of school libraries are site-based.

• A model school library has beenestablished. The model includes eightcomputers (one for the specialist, one forcirculation, and six for students).

♦ Implement model school librariesthroughout the district, transforminglibraries over time to serve asinformation resource centers for studentsand staff.

⇒ Emphasize to school leadershipthroughout the district the importantrole school libraries serve as informationresource centers.

⇒ Convene a task force of library/mediastaff and administration to periodicallyreview and maintain standards andmodels for school libraries that alignwith the districts’ learning standardsand include technology.

⇒ Utilize model configurations oftechnology-enriched learningenvironments for school libraries.

⇒ In each school library, install a serverand a host of computers along with awide selection of software fordistribution to classrooms.

⇒ As school buildings become networked,ensure that the school library receivespriority for being connected to allclassrooms.

⇒ Ensure that district-wide professionaldevelopment plans and programs targetschool librarians in order to preparethem to:

- manage technology rich informationresources

- train teachers and students to usetechnology resources appropriately forresearch




Libraries (continued)

• Efforts for automating secondary schoollibraries have been ongoing for over adecade. Eighty percent (80%) of secondaryschools have been automated and are Y2Kcompliant.

• There is no single library managementsystem implemented consistently acrossthe district. Alexandria, Xerox, andElectra have been popular selections bymany schools. Current library systems forthe most part function independently.

• No specifications or guidelines exist forschools investigating the purchase oflibrary management applications.

♦ Complete automation efforts in allschool libraries, migrating ultimately tothe establishment of a comprehensivemedia management system that:

- operates over LAUSDnet

- includes the functions of acquisitionscontrol, cataloging, circulation, on-linecatalog

- provides access to off-site libraries andinformation services.

⇒ Develop guidelines and samplespecifications for schools investigatinglibrary management applications.

⇒ Develop and implement a plan andtimetable for automation of all schoollibraries.

⇒ Connect as many schools as possible toL.A.’s public library system and toaccessible university library systems.

⇒ Assess existing libraries’ hardware,software, Internet access, structural,electrical, and training needs related toincorporating a comprehensive mediamanagement system.

⇒ Develop a district-wide plan andtimetable for establishing a compre-hensive media management system.

• The CD-ROM, “Focus on Books” is a uniqueand valuable resource on studentliterature. Seven-thousand (7,000) newbooks have been processed and referencedfor the CD-ROM project.

• The Educational Instructional Materials(EIM program) is a joint project withXEROX Corporation that provides an on-line library.

• The Digital Library (14 schools) includes aparticular computer, used in math andlanguage arts only, over the Internet toparents. Site license is $3,000 per year.

♦ Expand successful models and practicesregarding library-based resources.

⇒ Assess success and replicability ofexisting models, practices, and limitedinitiatives related to library-basedresources.

⇒ Design resources to be Web-enabled andaccessible by all school sites and, asappropriate, from homes and communitycenters.




Facilities

• A comprehensive bond (BB) has beenpassed for the upgrade of school facilities(approx. 2.5 billion) addressing networkinfrastructure (voice, video, and data),electrical supply, asbestos, security,intercom/alarm, and HVAC issues at all668 schools.

• There are concerns that BB technicalspecifications/guidelines may not keeppace with new and emerging technologiesas implementation continues over the nextfew years. The need to continuouslyupdate the Proposition BB OversightCommittee was mentioned as an exampleof this concern.

• At this time, most older schools are ingreat need of enhancement and yet othernewer facilities are in good condition.

• The physical space does not exist in manyschools to effectively accommodatespecial education needs. This couldpotentially limit the availability of, andaccess to, resources in some buildings.

♦ Ensure that guidelines for schoolfacilities upgrades are current and willaccommodate appropriate instructionaltechnology throughout school buildingsand take into consideration differences inteaching and learning needs amongelementary, middle, and high schoolstudents and for special programs.

⇒ Ensure that guidelines for schoolconstruction will:

- provide adequate power and networkoutlets in every classroom

- accommodate specific classroom andprogram learning environment needsspecific to each building

- accommodate the different teachingand learning needs between theelementary, middle, and high schoolstudents.

⇒ Establish a standards setting committee(See Technology Standards,Recommendation 1, p. 13) that willregularly inform and update the BB TaskForce on issues of technology standardsand appropriate school configurations.

⇒ Help schools determine the appropriateplacement of network components in orderto provide the best environment at theleast cost.




Facilities (continued)

• Included in the bond is all school wiring,CAT-5 with fiber optic backbone. Serversare not included. Switches are included.This bond is approximately in its thirdyear of seven.

• Decisions regarding desktop hardware forclassrooms have not yet been finalized.

• Schools within LAUSD continue toembrace both Windows and Macintoshplatforms.

• Many schools are still using olderequipment such as Apple IIEs, LCIIs, andLCIIIs, few of which have CD-ROMdrives.

• The "BB" initiative requires six drops perclassroom (5 computer, 1 printer). There iscurrently no requirement for drops innon-instructional school spaces, such asguidance and health offices.

(See Recommendations on previous page.) ⇒ Consider the establishment of clusterlevel technology support teams that willconduct an on-site visit to each school andreview its technology requirements inadvance of scheduledfacilities/technology upgrade.

⇒ Provide web-based guidelines andnecessary funds to enable schools toprotect their networking componentsenvironmentally.





• LAUSDnet provides an extensive WANfor the district, with over 70,000 users.

• Band width providing access to thedistrict Internet service variessignificantly among schools and clusters.

• A separate network, distinct fromLAUSDnet, may be needed to deliverinteractive video district-wide.

• Some clusters have taken full advantageof Universal Service Fund (E-rate)discounts to connect schools to the Internetwith robust band width. Many schoolsstill rely upon dial-up modem access toconnect to the WWW.

♦ Contract for an external audit ofLAUSDnet in light of anticipated needsfor delivery of efficient Internet accessfor all schools and interactive videodistrict-wide.

⇒ Secure an audit report, with action planand associated budget, that identifiesrequirements and procedures to deliveryefficient Internet access and interactivevideo either through LAUSDnet or aseparate network.

⇒ Review audit report recommendationsand develop a strategy to ensure capacityfor delivery of interactive video district-wide.

• T-1 lines are being brought to schools someof which have no LAN in place to tie in.Coordination of installation andavailability of end-user equipment hasbeen erratic. Schedules and roll-outinformation have not been effectivelycommunicated to schools.

• Access to the Internet for research,participation in on-line projects, andcommunications with "field experts" islimited to the school library or computerlab in many schools.

♦ Continue installation of wiring andequipment for voice, video, and dataLANs in all schools, with drops in thelibrary, computer lab, administrativeoffices, and classrooms.

⇒ Prepare a schedule for the installation ofwiring and equipment for voice, video,data LANs for all schools that do nothave this that coordinates effectivelywith the availability of T-1 lines thatconnect to the district WAN.

⇒ Establish teams that conduct site-visitsto schools in advance of LAN installationto work with building leadership inidentifying appropriate location fornetworking equipment and drops intoclassrooms, libraries, and other areas.





• With the development of an InformationTechnology Plan, LAUSD addressednumerous facilities variables which willbe considered during planning forinstructional technologies.

• Security of technology equipment isconsidered a major problem for manyschools.

• LAUSD self-insures technology equipmentagainst theft and vandalism. Stolen ordamaged equipment often cannot bereplaced within a budget cycle.

♦ Ensure that security of technologyequipment is addressed in guidelines fornew construction and in BB fundedrenovations. In existing buildings, findways to increase the security oftechnology in classrooms and labs,especially after school hours.

⇒ Authorize and allocate funding to allowschools to upgrade their security systemsto incorporate protection for computers,peripherals, and other technologieswherever possible.

⇒ Improve the security of technology by:

- installing theft deterrent devices oncomputers in classrooms

- expanding intrusion alarm systems withmore zones and adding dial-upcapabilities to security staff/centralcontrol

- ensure that video surveillance coversall areas in which newly acquiredtechnology is concentrated.



Plan Implementation Issues Key Findings Recommendations Implementation Approaches

Technology Standards

• There is much support at all levels for theestablishment of technology standards, butstandards that take into account thespecific educational requirements of users.

• If LAUSD were to establishcomprehensive mandatory district-widetechnology standards, it would be, undermost circumstances, required to providefunding to support them.

• There has not been one organizationalstructure that effectively deals withtechnology standards. Separateorganizations have been independentlyinvolved to date. Accordingly, a varietyof systems and applications have beenacquired and adopted throughout LAUSD.

• The establishment of standards in somecases has been detrimental to ongoingsuccessful practices.

• Desktop standards are provided to schoolsregarding models and approved vendors.However, there has been no collaborationbetween ITD and the InstructionalTechnology Branch in the developmentand maintenance of standards.

♦ Establish an integrated standard-settingcommittee of representativestakeholders and adopt a process forsetting and reviewing standards for allmajor technology components, includingnetworks, peripherals, and systemsoftware.

⇒ Create a technology standardsdevelopment process that:

- includes activities that communicate toall stakeholders the need and benefits forstandardization within parameters

- allows for participation throughrepresentation by all user groups

- involves vendor representatives

- addresses periodic revisions that arenecessitated because of technology marketadvances

⇒ Define standards for network andworkstation hardware (PC and Mac) ,software, and upgrades that address bothtechnical capability and minimumcapacity of equipment at classroom andbuilding levels to help ensure equity ofaccess across schools and to facilitatetraining and support.

⇒ Design a policy that allows waivers tostandards in defined situations thatwarrant variation, such as specificteaching situations, ongoing successfulpractices, support of new technology pilots.

⇒ Assign the function of oversight oftechnology standards to a specific person orrole within the organization.




Technology Standards (continued)

• ITD has a set of technology standardsregarding school networks. Updatedstandards for communications and networkarchitecture, network components, switchsystems, hardware and operating systems,and desktop hardware and software wereidentified in the recent InformationTechnology Plan .

• The Information Technology Plan providesstandards for PC compatible desktophardware and software as well as specificconsiderations for classroom workstationsrelative to their instructionalfunctionality.

• There is no effective universal mechanismfor communication of technology standardsthat are proposed or exist.

♦ Define and communicate minimumcapabilities for workstations that arealigned with teaching and curriculumstrategies identifies in district and statelearning standards for students.

⇒ Align instructional technology withteaching/learning environments at variousgrade levels and in various disciplines.

⇒ Maintain real-time updates to allstandards and have these available on-line through LAUSDnet.

⇒ Have the web-site organized so thatstandards are easily referenced by allusers. Separate instructional fromadministrative, as needed.

⇒ Allow for comments to be logged regardingthe site, any standard, and itsapplicability to specific situations.Utilize the comments to continuallyimprove the site and to consider as inputfor upgrading of standards.

• There is no mechanism in place forencouraging compliance to standards thatmay exist nor any effective means ofenforcing the standards.

♦ Support adherence to standards byproviding guidance and on-site access toresources for school staff on the purchaseof hardware and software suitable totheir teaching needs and students’learning needs.

⇒ Define a benchmarking process that allowsvendors to qualify specific products againstLAUSD standards, where applicable.




Equity

• There is concern from many stakeholdersabout the inequity of access to technologyresources within and among schools.

• Obstacles to equitable access within andamong schools have been identified as (a)lack of availability or access to qualityequipment, (b) variance in availability offunding sources, (c) priorities of siteleadership, and (d) lack of technology-related staff development.

• Some programs and schools populationshave funding opportunities that are notavailable to other schools.

♦ Establish district-wide policies andguidelines regarding critical mass oftechnology resources at the school andclassroom levels to help ensure equity ofaccess by all students within and amongschools.

⇒ To ensure a systems approach to definingcritical mass, develop a school-level rubricfor assessing inter-related elements oftechnology integration: hardware,software, network capacity, and facilities;technology support staffing; degree ofcurriculum integration; impact oftechnology integration related staffdevelopment.

⇒ Have schools self-assess their statusregarding technology critical mass andaccess through use of the rubric, andcommunicate results to cluster and districtlevels.

⇒ Develop policies for dealing with obsoleteequipment.

Policies

• There are no well defined methodologiesor organizational structures in place forestablishing and enforcingtechnology-related policies andprocedures throughout the district.

• A district-wide Technology SteeringCommittee currently deals with these andrelated issues.

♦ Empower the Technology SteeringCommittee or a subcommittee ofrepresentative stakeholders to establisha process for reviewing and settingtechnology related policies andprocedures for the district.

⇒ Ensure that the organizational body thatdeals with technology related policies andprocedures has, as the foundation of itsdecisions, the district’s core mission - theinstruction of students.

⇒ Ensure that policies and procedures arecontinually updated and effectivelycommunicated to all staff.




Policies (continued)

• Schools vary in their policies andprocedures governing student access tocomputers in libraries, labs, classroomsduring free periods, lunch, after school,and when school is not in session. Someschools encourage access and use; otherschools have difficulty increasing accessdue to supervision or security issues.

♦ Consider policies and procedures at theschool level for increasing student accessto computers in libraries, labs, andclassrooms throughout the school dayand after school hours.

⇒ Provide funding, at the district level, forincreased opportunities for student accessthroughout the school day and beyond.

⇒ Develop multiple strategies formonitoring, supervising, and securingcomputer use that supports and encouragesmaximization of student access.

⇒ Include strategies that increase availabletechnology and also monitoring andsupervision of that technology (byvolunteers, students, paid aides, etc.)

⇒ Develop strategies for sharing andcommunication of current best practices forexpansion of student access to technologyresources.

• Clear criteria do not exist for what is coredistrict policy, cluster-level policy, andwhat is site-based policy in regard toinstructional technology.

• Some LAUSD educators feel that district-wide policy should ensure that everyschool has the equivalent of a full-time(FTE = 1.0) instructional support staffperson on site to provide vision and tofacilitate technology integration insupport of learning standards.

♦ In collaboration with the InstructionalTechnology Branch, cluster and schoolleadership, ITD should develop andprovide, for district-wide review, a setof criteria that determine whichtechnology policies and decisions will bemade at the district level and by whom,and which policies and decisions arecluster- and site-based.

⇒ Develop consensus, adopt criteria, andcommunicate it effectively system-widealong with articulation of those policiesthat have already been established andimplemented.

⇒ Establish and clearly define thecollaborative process for developing andimplementing technology policies anddecision-making parameters to meetemerging needs.

⇒ Develop on-line procedures that alertdecision makers to new and amendedpolicies.





• There are no clear policies or guidelinesregarding installation, upgrading,maintenance, and phasing out ofequipment.

♦ Develop clear policies and proceduralguidelines regarding installation of newinstructional technology equipment,upgrading and maintenance of olderequipment, and phasing out of obsoleteequipment

⇒ Organize a joint working group ofInstructional Technology Branch and ITDstaff to develop policies and guidelines forinstallation, upgrading, and maintenanceof instructional technology equipment.

⇒ Post policies and guidelines on a web-siteaccessible to all school and cluster staff.

⇒ Define obsolescence for instructionalcomputers and peripherals.

⇒ Identify and communicate potentialeffective uses of older equipment to schools.

⇒ Develop “use or move” procedures bywhich older equipment is relocated tointerested schools/classrooms for theidentified purposes, or else discarded.

⇒ Gather and dispose of unusable equipmentin environmentally safe manner.





• Policies or guidelines regarding acceptanceof donated equipment have not beendeveloped.

♦ Develop policies, guidelines, andstandards for acceptance of donatedequipment.

⇒ Communicate the need for policies and/orguidelines regarding acceptance of donatedequipment to all schools and clusters.

⇒ A Technology Standards Committee (SeeTechnology Standards, Recommendation 1,p. 13) should identify LAUSD standardsfor acceptable computer and peripheraldonations to schools and develop anappropriate communication for potentialdonors. Upgrade the donation standardsperiodically.

⇒ Proactively distribute the communicationto all businesses, agencies, and institutionsin the region who could be potential donors.

⇒ Require all schools and clusters to adhereto the policy/ guidelines for donatedequipment.

• A model policy on acceptable/ ethical useof the Internet and WWW has beendeveloped, sent to all schools, and isavailable on the LAUSDnet home page.

• A district-wide bulletin regardingsoftware duplication and copyright issueshas been provided to all schools andoffices.

• An ethics committee is currently engagedin identifying issues and establishingappropriate policies.

♦ Review, upgrade, and communicateeffectively, by various means to allschools and staff, an ethical andappropriate use policy.

⇒ Establish a process for periodicallyreviewing and upgrading the ethical andappropriate use policy.

⇒ Develop strategies for communicating theethical and appropriate use policy,including ongoing incorporation of policiesinto curricular activities and projects.

⇒ Establish procedures for monitoringcompliance to ethical and appropriate usepolicy.




Procurement

• Schools are concerned about technologyobsolescence. LAUSD’s budgeting processesdo not accommodate regular technologypurchases base upon life cycle or upgradestrategies.

• There is no regularly budgetedinstructional technology acquisition planor schedule at the district- orcluster-levels.

♦ Based upon the Information TechnologyPlan recommendations and an approveddistrict Instructional Technology Plan,schedule and budget for technologyacquisition and support on a regularbasis.

⇒ Have instructional technology budgetsdeveloped for each school based upon

- standards for desktop hardware andsoftware

- critical mass decisions regardingrecommended configurations for variouslearning environments

- the goal of achieving equity over timewithout restricting the capacity ofprogressive schools/programs to provideleadership in effective practices.

⇒ Ensure alignment among the districtInformation Technology Plan, theInstructional Technology Plan, and clusterand school level plans throughestablished linkages of plan developmentand upgrade processes.

• Many schools have no on-site resources orguidance regarding instructional softwarepurchases relative to what is availableand appropriate. Purchases are sometimesmade at the school level withoutadequate time for consideration of variousoptions for hardware or software.

• The state has on-line evaluative resourcesand an informational clearinghouse foreducational technology products.San Diego also has a comprehensive site.

♦ Make informational and evaluativeresources for aligning instructionalsoftware to priority student learningstandards available on-line to allschools.

⇒ Make a variety of evaluative resourcesavailable. Over time, an instructionalsoftware web-site specific to LAUSDshould be developed, maintained, andupgraded in real time.

⇒ Negotiate blanket contracts for softwareand supplies that allow schools to orderdirectly from vendor lists and catalogs atfavorable discounts.




Procurement (continued)

• Schools negotiate their own purchasingagreements with vendors for instructionalsoftware. School principals control thetechnology procurements for theirbuildings.

• Principals are sometimes in the position ofmaking key decisions in regard totechnology acquisition withoutappropriate and timely resources to guidetheir decision making.

• Technology procurement practicestypically do not incorporate an effectivesystem for checking against recommendedstandards.

• LAUSDnet has been striving to build itscapacity as an informational resource forprocurement information. However, thereis no single web-site that serves as areliable resource for decision support fortechnology procurement.

♦ Ensure adherence to standards byassigning to each school someoneknowledgeable about technology who cansupport people during the purchasingprocess to ensure that

- appropriate technology purchases,compliant to standards, are made

- software will be compatible with thehardware on which it is run and issuitable to teaching and learning needs

- orders take advantage of any availablegroup purchasing or licensingarrangements.

⇒ Develop a rules-based procurement systemthat will ensure that schools followestablished standards on technologypurchases.

⇒ Consider having ITAFs work with schoolswithin clusters to identify appropriateresource staff and informational resourcesto assist in acquisition.

⇒ Consider having ITAFs work withresponsible district-wide staff andLAUSDnet staff in communicatingprocesses regarding adherence oftechnology purchases to establishedstandards and for meeting specificeducational requirements.

⇒ Incorporate the technology resourceacquisition process into the districtdecision support system being designed.

• Current information on the status oravailability of site licenses forinstructional software is not uniformlycommunicated throughout the district.

♦ Establish effective communicationsstrategies for informing and updatingschools, clusters, and programs about thestatus of district-wide site licenses forinstructional software.

⇒ Identify Instructional Technology Branchpersonnel responsible for negotiating andmonitoring the status of district-wideinstructional software licenses.

⇒ Establish a web-site for license statusupdates as well e-mail notificationsystem for ITAFs to help guide purchasingwithin clusters.




Procurement (continued)

• Clear standards have not been establishedand universally communicated that relateto non-instructional software used withinschools.

♦ Define minimum software standards fortool-based applications for students oneach hardware platform and include as aminimum configuration.

⇒ Establish standards for applications withconsideration of present installed base aswell as future requirements.

⇒ Phase-in standards for applications withacquisition of new equipment and shouldbe communicated to all personnel involvedwith the design and delivery of staffdevelopment programs.

• Information regarding total cost ofoperation of technology equipment has notbeen made available to schools andclusters.

♦ Research and report on total cost ofoperation for educational technologies asapplicable to educational settings.

⇒ Provide research report on total cost ofoperation to schools and clusters to assistin long term planning for technology.




Maintenance

• There is no effective centralizedmaintenance system for instructionaltechnologies. ITD is not perceived as thesupport mechanism for schools. Theyprovide support for administrativesystems.

• For ITD customer support, there are noservice level goals and staffing isinadequate for meeting demand.

• Equipment is not able to be installed orrepaired nor are system/software problemsresolved in a timely fashion becauseinternal staffing for set up and systemmaintenance is very limited.

• System-wide network repairs happen in atimely fashion since they are critical tothe district’s decision-making function.

• Many staff feel that support of theinfrastructure should be provided at thecluster level because of distanceconsiderations for on-site service.

♦ Research large district models forproviding support for school/cluster end-user technologies. Consider models thatdecentralize specific customer supportfunctions to the cluster and complexlevels.

⇒ Develop an RFP to explore the most costeffective and appropriate options formaintenance and support functions forinstructional technology.

⇒ If the decision is made to provideinstructional technology maintenancefunctions within LAUSD, develop anorganization chart and plan for providingsupport for instructional technology at thedistrict, cluster, and school levels.

⇒ Develop an engineering plan and charterfor the new help desk and customer supportorganization to include staffing andorganization, professional training, servicedelivery and communications, and ongoingquality improvement processes.

⇒ Align customer support services withstandards, policies, guidelines, andrecommendations about hardware,software, networks, etc. used to achievethe goals of the Instructional TechnologyPlan.




Maintenance (continued)

• Utilization of outsourced services to meetthe demand for repairs and installation isnecessary at the school level.

• Repairs on computing equipment are paidfrom a district-level budget.

♦ Until a district/cluster-wide supportsystem for instructional technologies canbe established, improve timeliness ofrepair and maintenance of computers andother teaching aides by:

- negotiating more maintenance contractsthat guarantee repair efficiency,provide loaned replacement equipment,allow tracking and policing of repairs,etc.

- expand use of trained high-schoolstudents as technology support/ repairteams.

⇒ Develop an RFP to explore the best andmost effective options for maintenance andsupport functions for instructionaltechnologies.

⇒ Provide schools and clusters with modelservice contracts .

⇒ Develop and distribute a system formonitoring and supervising computerrepairs, such as keeping a database of allrepairs in order to flag computers that arerepaired multiple times or are over acertain age, etc.

• Some schools have developed certifiedstudent repair services. Parts areavailable from Apple Computer. ITD issupportive of such programs.

♦ Replicate student-supported repairservice models to other complexes andclusters.

⇒ Explore currently successful models andresearch national models.

⇒ Identify and document the guidelines andparameters for the establishment of successstudent supported repair systems.

⇒ Assign responsibility for implementingreplication/expansion of student




Maintenance (continued)

• Preventive maintenance programs thataccommodate hard drive maintenance,system software maintenance, upgrading,transitioning, and retirement of obsoleteequipment do not exist.

• A system for inventory/accountability andtracking of location and repair records oftechnology equipment has not beenestablished in schools, clusters, ordistrict-wide.

♦ Over time, establish a fixed assetmanagement program as part of thedistrict-wide decision system that:

- stages/phases procurements

- tracks performance

- provides preventive maintenance

- uses inventory information for decisionsupport

⇒ Establish a highly coordinated, fixedasset management plan and supportingdatabase application to help avoidproblems throughout the asset life-cycle,such as procuring more technology any onetime than can be absorbed at the beginningof the life cycle and unplanned-forobsolescence at the end of the life cycle.

⇒ Ensure that the fixed asset managementprogram interfaces effectively withprocurement components of the decisionsupport system.

District Planning

• No central planning services are availableto help clusters and schools plan.

• The magnitude of the changes necessary toimprove student performance requiresubstantial changes in the ways thatpersonnel, time, facilities, space, andother resources are employed.

♦ Establish a permanent central planningstructure to guide, develop, coordinate,implement, and monitor major district-wide planning efforts.

⇒ Establish a strategic framework andcharter for a central planning office withinLAUSD within Schools, Curriculum, andInstruction.

⇒ Determine critical priorities for district-level planning.

⇒ Develop research-based planning modelsand guidelines, and implementation,monitoring and evaluation systems toensure quality, coordination, andaccountability.

⇒ Ensure that planning emphasizes theconnections and interdependencies amongall initiatives and their support ofdistrict-wide goals.




District Planning (continued)

• A Grants Assistance Office exists withinthe LAUSD organization. However, thisoffice does not generally prepare grants.They disseminate information andcoordinate some required activities.

• Application for technology-related grantsmay be impeded because staff who wouldtypically do the writing often havedifficulty finding time within the scope oftheir regular work assignment.

♦ Expand the capacity and functionality ofthe Grants Assistance Office to providemore guidance and technical assistance inthe preparation of grants at the school,cluster, and district levels.

⇒ Establish criteria for determining high-leverage grant opportunities.

⇒ Establish a web-site location for grant-related information. (See SectionCurriculum and Learning Standards,Recommendation 9, page 12)

⇒ Explore expansion of grant assistancepersonnel through a fee-for servicesarrangement funded by the district.




School-level Planning

• Strategic school improvement plans aresubmitted annually and reviewed at thecluster level. Only some schools have atechnology component in their school-based education plan. Considerations fortechnology vary significantly and oftenconsist of hardware/software lists.

• The Digital High School initiative fromthe State of California provides eachhigh school with funding for bothequipment and staff development.Technologies must be linked to learningstandards. Schools need to provide aletter of intent and school technology plan,and complete extensive documentation forapproval by the DSA.

• A minority of schools have done someplanning for the acquisition of technologyhardware, software, and infrastructure buthave not linked these efforts to highpriority curriculum/instructional goals.

• Schools with technology plans seek tointegrate technology across the curriculum.However, due to scarce resources, this hasbeen a very slow process.

• Some school improvement plans useformats that are determined by the school;others are using cluster-based models.

• District-wide standards, guidelines, andparameters are not available to facilitateor guide site-based planning processes.

♦ Establish a district-wide model forschool-based planning.

⇒ Provide schools with planning models,web-based templates, and materials to beused in the development of strategic schoolimprovement plans that address prioritiesrelative to: student achievement,curriculum, staff development, andtechnology integration.

⇒ Ensure alignment of school goals withcluster and district priorities.

⇒ Incorporate stakeholder input andresearch-based critical success factors inthe development of standards and modelsfor school improvement plans.

⇒ Ensure accountability by developingschool-level planning models thatincorporate strategies for monitoring andevaluation of plan implementation




School-level Planning (continued)

• The quality and components ofschool-level technology planning varyconsiderably across the district. Manyschools in LAUSD have done very littleplanning for technology integration duelargely to lack of pending resources.

♦ Develop models for recommendedtechnology configurations fromclassrooms, computer labs, schoollibraries, and other resource areas; and,share with schools for use in technologyplanning.

⇒ Have model configurations take intoaccount all factors that effect decision-making regarding technology systeminstallation.

⇒ Recommended configurations should belinked to learning environments specific tovarious disciplines and grade levels.

• Criteria and processes for evaluatingschool-level plans are not uniformlyestablished nor implementeddistrict-wide.

♦ Establish criteria and processes forevaluating school level plans, providingfeedback to each school, and addressingdeficiencies.

⇒ Establish evaluation criteria that reflectdistrict standards for school-level plans.

⇒ Identify and assign responsibility forproviding evaluative feedback andremediation support for school planningefforts.




Cluster- and Program-level Planning

• Some clusters have developedcomprehensive strategic technology plansthat serve to focus and guide the planningof schools and complexes within thecluster. Other clusters have not.

• Cluster- and program-level strategicplanning and technology planning havenot been uniformly established todetermine high leverage improvementpriorities in the delivery of supportservices and/or the performance of theirmajor functions.

• Even those clusters and programs that doengage in planning often under utilizetechnology to access, analyze, andcommunicate accurate and timely data intheir educational improvement andtechnology planning processes.

♦ Develop planning standards, models,templates, and resources to guide cluster-and program-level educationalimprovement and technology planningefforts.

⇒ Provide cluster and program leadershipwith planning models, web-basedtemplates, and materials to be used in thedevelopment of strategic improvementplans that address priorities relative to:student achievement, curriculum, staffdevelopment, and technology integration.

⇒ Identify obstacles to full utilization oftechnology tools to support planning effortsat all levels.

⇒ Develop strategies for full utilization oftechnology tools to address and eliminateidentified obstacles.

⇒ Ensure alignment of cluster and programgoals with district priorities.

⇒ Incorporate stakeholder input andresearch-based critical success factors inthe development of standards and modelsfor cluster and program plans.

⇒ Ensure accountability by developing clusterand program planning models thatincorporate strategies for monitoring andevaluation of plan implementation.




Community Learning

• Instructional technology resources aretypically not made available tocommunity members beyond the schoolday. Reasons include: (a) resources forsecurity and supervision, (b) equipment notcentralized, and (c) appropriateinstructional applications not identifiedand not available.

♦ Seek ways to increase the number oftechnology-based community learningprograms and mutually-beneficialtechnology-focused formal relationships,allowing both the school population andthe community-at-large to benefit fromand contribute to available technologyresources.

⇒ Develop and disseminate a catalog andweb-based resources that describe in detailsome exemplary national, regional, andlocal technology-based community learningprograms.

⇒ Establish guidelines and support forassisting schools and clusters inestablishing programs that foster andencourage access to technology resources forafter school programs in schools andthroughout the community for children andadult community members.

⇒ Plan and conduct a city-wide informationand planning session, highlighting existingcommunity learning programs, and how tosuccessfully establish, fund, and markettechnology-based community learningprograms.

• There is minimal coordination andpublicizing of existing communityprograms, partnerships, and relationshipsamong schools.

• UCLA has partnered with LAUSD intechnology-related linkages to improveoutreach to minorities and the communityat-large.

♦ Expand existing technology partnershipsand promote new technologypartnerships with higher education,business, and industry.

⇒ Plan and conduct a School TechnologyPartnership Summit that will focuseducating school department personnel andcommunity leadership on currentlysuccessful partnerships, expansion ofexisting relationships, and promoting newpartnerships with higher education,business, and industry.




Community Learning (continued)

• Efforts to promote collaboration betweenschools and outside agencies iscompromised by limited technologyresources.

• District leadership has indicated a strongneed for improved family outreach tosupport early intervention programs.

♦ Enable sharing of data and informationwithin and among school sites, healthand service organizations, courts, andcity and state agencies, as part of acomprehensive student database withinthe proposed decision support system.

⇒ Assess status of parent and communityaccess needs as to hardware, software, andtraining.

⇒ Increase access to hardware, software, theInternet, and training to address andfacilitate parent and community needs,partnerships, and linkages with city andstate agencies.

⇒ Identify and address equipment, security,and technical issues associated with cross-agency sharing of data and information.

lausd instructional technology: key findings

Documents