private school Allison Robertson due April 2

Revisions to Reports I and II:


       I submitted my goals, objectives, performance goals and strategies to several people, but the school does not have higher position managers.  Instead I asked the school principal to review them, as well as the school's technology partner, Lewis Wynn and my mentor at Bryan ISD for peer review.  While they are willing to review the reports, they are all very busy this time of year so it may take an extra week to get meaningful feedback.

My own intuition and comments from other Cadre members seems to indicate that the plan is overly ambitious in the short run, but rather is designed to be a long-term plan.  When I review the State of Texas STaR chart results, here is how I would rate First Baptist School:

Teaching and Learning:  Developing Tech
Instruction is teacher-directed and students regularly use technology on an individual basis to access electronic information and develop communication and presentation projects. There is minimal use of technology in foundation TEKS. Most Technology Applications TEKS are met K-8.

Educator Preparation: Early Tech
 Technology skills include multimedia and the Internet. 10% of educators meet SBEC standards. Administrators recognize benefits of technology in instruction. There is minimal personal use. 5% or less of technology budget allocated for professional development.

Administration and Support: Early Tech

There is no campus technology plan. Technology is used mainly for administrative tasks. No technical support is on-site. There is no district technology coordinator. Technology Allotment is only source of funding.

Infrastructure:  Advanced Tech
There are 4 or less students per computer. There is direct connectivity to Internet in 75% of classrooms and library. Web-based learning is available. All rooms are on LAN/WAN. There is one educator per computer. There is shared use of other resources.

Standards

     Using the SBEC standards seems impractical in this setting because of the mid-career teachers, some of whom indicated that they use little to no technology, but who have given their entire teaching careers to this school.  The school does not have a budget for professional development nor for  hiring a technical support person.  Incorporated into the Technology Plan are extensive goals for increasing teacher preparation to keep the school's staff moving toward the Target Tech levels. Taking a closer look at Standards for teachers and comparing them with another standard  highlights the differences between a focus on teacher as technology expert (State Standards) and teacher as facilitator and co-learner (NAIS Standards).

State Board for Educator Certification (SBEC)    

National Association of Independent Schools Standards.

Standard I. All teachers use technology-related terms, concepts, data input strategies and ethical practices to make informed decisions about current technologies and their applications.

Standard II. All teachers identify task requirements, apply search strategies and use current technology to efficiently acquire, analyze, and evaluate a variety of electronic information.

Standard III. All teachers use task-appropriate tools to synthesize knowledge, create and modify solutions and evaluate results in a way that supports the work of individuals and groups in problem-solving situations.

Standard IV. All teachers communicate information in different formats and for diverse audiences.

Standard V. All teachers know how to plan, organize, deliver and evaluate instruction for all students that incorporates the effective use of current technology for teaching and integrating the Technology Applications Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) into the curriculum.

1. Educators research, evaluate, and employ technology to support curricular goals and to meet the range of learning styles, abilities, and life experiences of their students.
2. Educators appreciate and recognize that technology can create learning opportunities for students that would not otherwise be possible, fundamentally transforming the nature of the relationship between teacher and learner.
3. Educators embrace technologies that promote project-based, student-centered learning, the acquisition of problem-solving skills, and the development of media and information literacy.
4. The school educates students, teachers, and parents about the safe, healthy, ethical, legal, and appropriate use of technology resources.

    There are other standards that are more practical because they are more suited to the small staff of this school and take into consideration limited funding, and the school's unique mission.


Leadership

1. The school regularly evaluates its use of technology to support its mission, goals, and program.
2. School heads, curriculum leaders, and professional development leaders are actively involved in the development, implementation, and evaluation of technology integration goals.
3. School leadership articulates the rationale for educational use of technology and builds widespread consensus for its adoption.
4. School leadership incorporates technology considerations into strategic planning and creates a sustainable financial model for school technology commitments.
5. The staff member responsible for the technology program contributes leadership to the school’s administrative team.
6. The school provides faculty, staff, and students with equitable access to technology.
7. The school recognizes that advancing technology integration often requires significant support for risk taking, time for faculty planning, and adjustment in the allocation of instructional time.

Teaching and Learning

1. Educators research, evaluate, and employ technology to support curricular goals and to meet the range of learning styles, abilities, and life experiences of their students.
2. Educators appreciate and recognize that technology can create learning opportunities for students that would not otherwise be possible, fundamentally transforming the nature of the relationship between teacher and learner.
3. Educators embrace technologies that promote project-based, student-centered learning, the acquisition of problem-solving skills, and the development of media and information literacy.
4. The school educates students, teachers, and parents about the safe, healthy, ethical, legal, and appropriate use of technology resources.

Professional Development

1. The school recognizes that the single most important factor in technology integration is the teacher.
2. Educators seek out opportunities to learn technology and implement research-based best practices for technology use within their discipline. 
3. The school includes technology integration as an essential component of its professional development, provides the necessary time and resources for it, and ensures that educators acquire and demonstrate essential technology skills and proficiencies.

Infrastructure and Administrative Operations

1. The school uses technology to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of administrative operations.
2. The school has adequate technology staffing and infrastructure appropriate for its size and operations.
3. The school maintains and protects its data, network, and hardware.
4. The school provides timely support for computers and the people who use them.

         According to the Consortium of School Networks (2012) schools rarely budget for the total cost of ownership of computers.  Total Cost of Ownership incorporates both direct and indirect costs.  Schools frequently overlook training costs, time spent requesting support, and software updates.  These costs can be as much as the hardware.  Teachers with computers but without a support network to use them to the fullest don't stumble upon best practices--especially when they have little time as it is on the job to manage other expectations.

        In my perspective, the job description of classroom teacher has exponentially increased with the addition of technology--both in time spent learning to use software that quickly changes and in the expectation that teachers will now create technology-infused lessons for students so they can better learn computers as workplace tools.  These tools have the capacity to lighten the workload of teachers and return the natural curiosity children have about the world, but few experienced teachers have had sufficient training in best practices to reap the benefits.  The result is that technology becomes another burden.

    John Goodlad (1994) calls for a simultaneous renewal--of both the schools' practice and the teachers' training.  University programs and schools are tightening the links between theory and practice.  While this benefits new teachers, it has the potential to retrain mid-career teachers as well by creating time for experienced teachers through the use of teacher-candidates as substitutes and technology mentors (Smith 2006).

 References
Consortium of School Networks (2012) Total Cost of Ownership. Retrieved March 31, 2012 from http://www.cosn.org/Initiatives/ClassroomTotalCostofOwnership/TCOHome/tabid/5118/Default.aspx

Goodlad, J. (1994). The National Network for Educational Renewal The Phi Delta Kappan
Vol. 75, No. 8, pp. 632-638.
National Association of Independent Schools (2012) Technology use in independent schools.  Retrieved March 31, 2012 from http://www.nais.org/about/seriesdoc.cfm?ItemNumber=149157

Smith, A. (2006). What schools are for: stimulating nessary dialogue for the reconstruction of schools in our democracy.  A Review of John I. Goodlad’s, What schools are for. (Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappan International, 2006, Signature Edition). Retrieved April 1, 2012 from http://www.wce.wwu.edu/resources/cep/ejournal/v003n001/a009.shtml

Texas State Board of Education (2012). Results from the long-term planning survey. Retrieved March 31, 2012 from  http://starchart.epsilen.com/standards.html