Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Technology Plan Evaluation - Sorrell - Harris
Technology Plan Evaluation - Sorrell - Harris
Technology Plan Evaluation - Sorrell - Harris
Abstract
Benjamin Harris and Patavious Sorrell administered an evaluation of Clayton County Public
Schools Technology Plan. Mr. Harris and Mr. Sorrell devised a rubric that was founded in
common practice where certain parts were mandated by the State of Georgia. The three rating,
twelve-topic rubric guided an analysis of the plan with an overall assessment.
Executive Summary: 1
Clayton County Public Schools Technology Plan received a 1 in the Executive Summary
category. The document did not have an Executive Summary. An Executive Summary is a
summary of the entire document that provides recommendations. It is intended for individuals
who do not have the time to read the entire document (Definition of Executive Summary, 2012).
The rubric details that the plan should include a statement that indicates the technology vision,
mission, goals and objectives, etc., the plan covers most of these items throughout the paper, but
fails to summarize and include recommendations in an executive summary.
Vision: 3
The technology plan includes a vision and receives a 3 on the rubric rating. Indeed, the vision
focuses on access to technology but learning is also a key component. The vision includes ideas
of the district as globally competitive. The plan also emphasizes that administrators will be
empowered to recognize impactful instructional technology use. This is important because to
simply have access to technology does not directly correlate to an impact on student
achievement.
Goals: 3
The goals of the technology plan are clearly stated and contain realistic strategies for using
education-based technology. This category receives a 3 on the rubric. The seven goals are
clearly stated and contain a list of strategies, benchmarks, evaluation methods, funding sources,
and individuals responsible for the outcomes.
Professional Development: 1
In analyzing the professional development section, it is evident that the section has a tremendous
focus on course offerings. The plan does focus on teachers and administrators, but it does not
focus on other staff in the district. The plan also does not focus on peer collaboration nor does it
have a sustainable model that addresses learning away from the attendance of a course. When
teachers are away from the course instructor, there is no model to provide technical assistance.
The professional development section receives a 1 for the lack of professional learning
innovation and sustainability.
Needs Assessment: 2
The technology plan does not have a category for needs assessment, but does address some
needs. The definition of needs assessment is the systematic effort to determine the nature of
problems, challenges, and opportunities in a specific area, and then to select interventions that
can move us towards meeting the need in the fastest, most costeffective manner (Needs
Assessment Reports, 2010). The plan addresses the need to acquire and synthesize data from
trainings to determine effectiveness. However, the training does not offer data to address the
need for technology hardware based on student and teacher use. The rubric assigned score is 2
for a lack of a comprehensive needs assessment where technology decisions are founded.
Budget: 2
There is not a budget section identified in the plan, but the plan does provide some evidence of
financial planning. The details the infrastructure costs of equipment, cabling, etc. and shows
funding from E-rate and the expense that the district must incur. The plan also projects E-rate
funding and district expenses for future years. The technology plan lists seven goals and
provides funding sources to help bring the goals to fruition. However, the plan fails to provide
detailed descriptions of hardware, software. Since the plan does a good job of listing goals and
providing funding for those goals, the budget section receives a ranking of 2.
Community: 3
Technology plan exhibits the parent and community role as a partner in technology by discussing
the use of email, website, newsletters, and a cable television show. The technology plan also
includes an analysis of some weaknesses in the system. For example, it discusses how the current
plan as is doesnt offer a more interactive web base and there is currently no way of measuring
how many parents and community members are watching the cable television show. Goal 5:
Parent and Community Uses of Technology, goes a little bit further with the topic. By 2012, the
district would like to have created an interactive portal to increase parent, teacher, student, and
overall community involvement; also, maintain at least 10 technology related shows produced
yearly on the cable station.
Tech Standards: 3
The System Readiness portion of the plan discusses aspects such as connectivity that are already
in place. Goals 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, and 7 all discuss the bare minimum requirements that the district will
set forth by 2012. For example, all teachers will have at least one 21st century classroom
component per 5 teachers. 21st century components include, but are not limited to, document
cameras, student clickers, and digital camera equipment. Also, it will be the norm that each
classroom will have at least 5 student accessible computers per classroom. Any new school
construction will have all new digital components placed throughout. Examples of two software
applications that were mentioned for implementation are Thinkgate (to disaggregate data in order
to differentiate instruction and increase student learning in subgroups) and LoTi Profiler Tool (an
observation tool for classroom teacher technology integration and innovation assessment). Also,
the standard will be that all students will exhibit proficiency in the technology of the district by
the 8th grade.
Educational Research: 1
As I searched throughout the document I did not come across any specific mentions at
Educational Research.
Software Agreements: 2
As stated previously, Thinkgate and LoTi are the only software implementation that is mentioned
in the tech plan. Within the goals and benchmarks area the plan discusses updating software that
is aligned with the curriculum, but fails to discuss specifics.
The Appendices area is clearly defined with the districts policies and procedures as pertaining to
the use of its technology. Included in this area is the notification of compliance with the Children
Internet Protection Act, the Acceptable Use Policy, the Board Policy, and the Student Internet
Agreement form. Each of these documents discusses what is deemed as acceptable and
unacceptable usage of the district technology.
Conclusion/Recommendations: 2
I believe that for each section the goals, needs, and challenges were clearly defined; but, there
were no clearly defined aspects of how to reach those goals and meet the needs and challenges.
For example, in the Parent and Community Gap Analysis, it discusses the challenges that must
be met in order to have increased parent and community involvement. What is not discussed is
the option of how.
In summary, Clayton County Public Schools Technology Plan is acceptable, but it clearly needs
be more specific in how it addresses the needs of the district through technology. It fits my
overall evaluation of the district in that there is a lack of communication as it relates to the needs
of the teachers and staff and the ideas of its leadership. A clearly written needs assessment is
needed where educators, students, and the community are involved. The data collected from all
stakeholders should be used in the decision making where technology purchases are concerned.
References
Needs Assessment Reports. (2010). Daryl L. Sink and Associates, Inc. Retrieved from
http://www.dsink.com/needs.html
Definition of Executive Summary. (2012). Colorado State University. Retrieved from
http://writing.colostate.edu/guides/documents/execsum/pop2a.cfm
Appendix
Technology Plan Rubric
Components
Executive
Summary
Vision
Goals
Professional
Development
3
The plan should include a statement
indicating the technology vision,
mission, goals and objectives,
background, findings, issues,
conclusions, and recommendations
of the plan
The vision for using technology
focuses on learning, not technology.
The technology vision supports the
overall vision of the district.
The Goals are clearly stated and
contain a realistic strategy for using
education-based technology
All of the following items are present:
Needs
Assessment
Budget
Technical assistance is
provided.
Staff development is
supported through
collaboration with peers.
Staff development is
supported through
collaboration with peers.
Technical assistance is
provided.
Technical assistance is
provided.
Community
Technology
Standards,
Requirements,
and Models for
Technology
Learning
Educational
Research
Software
Agreements
Policies and
Procedures
Conclusions and
Recommendation
s