Running Head: STRATEGIC PLAN 1

Strategic Plan for Lakeside Junior High

ETEC 6223 Strategic Planning

Emily Cook

University of Arkansas
Running Head: STRATEGIC PLAN 2

Strategic Plan for Lakeside Junior High

Introduction

Lakeside Junior High School is a public school in Springdale Arkansas. Lakeside

houses approximately seven hundred and fifty 8th and 9th grade students from a wide variety of

cultural and economic backgrounds. Sixty-five percent of the population are minority, consisting

of Latino, Marshallese and African-American students and seventy-five percent of the total

population are at or below the poverty line. Fifty percent of the population are English Language

Learners (ELL) with English not considered their first learned or primary language. Lakeside is a

technology rich environment and provides a Chromebook for every student. With such an

emphasis on digital learning, as well as a heavy upfront monetary investment the stakeholders

want to ensure technology longevity as well as maximize education effectiveness.

Technology Vision Plan

Stakeholders

The ultimate stakeholders are the students at Lakeside who are affected by all future

decisions made by the planning committee. Those actively involved in the planning committee

include Dr. Michael Shepherd, Principal, Mrs. Chelsea Jennings, Assistant Principal, Building

Technology Manager, Mr. Austin Phillips, and the department heads of the four core main

subjects.

Technology Vision

The core planning committee met on Monday October 3rd to discuss where the

stakeholders saw Lakeside Junior High over the next two years. It was discussed that specifically

the stakeholders were looking at cloud based technology already in use at Lakeside and the

committee was very interested in how to more effectively implement it. Dr. Shepherd and Mrs.
Running Head: STRATEGIC PLAN 3

Jennings participated in a visualization exercise to sketch out where they see Lakeside now and

ideally where they would like to see Lakeside in the future. This activity was quite productive

and the vision statement is as follows:

Lakeside Junior High School will become a community of learners that uses technology

to transform learning.

Long Term Needs

It was discussed how the amount of available technology can be overwhelming for both

the teachers and students and how lack of training is a hindrance on its effective use. It was also

discussed that lack of teacher preparedness as well as limited training can result in using the

current technology as a crutch that does not support good teaching practices. With so many

students coming from homes with limited to no internet connectivity and relatively poor

communication skills it is important to take full advantage of all available tools and resources to

maximize efficiency. As of now, the stakeholders do not believe that Lakeside is using the

technology to encourage community learning on a building, district, state or global level. It is the

goal for Lakeside to provide students a community driven learning environment that encourages

collaboration from beyond the confines of physical walls.

Technology Evaluation

Overview/Purpose

This technology evaluation plan has been created to reflect the current technology status

at Lakeside Junior High School. This technology evaluation plan will fit within the current

technology vision statement for the school. The focus for this evaluation is to identify

implementation of current technology for student learning at Lakeside Junior High.

Running Head: STRATEGIC PLAN 4

Questions

The following questions were drafted to help guide the strategic planning process towards

identifying effective current technology usage.

What's considered effective cloud technology usage in the classroom?

How are cloud technologies being used to support student learning in the classroom?
Of those classrooms, which are using cloud based technology in the most effective way?
What technology training been has provided to the teachers to support teacher efficacy in

the classroom?

The most important first question is, what's considered effective cloud technology use in the

classroom? This question will provide a benchmark of what is effective use and what is not.

With these questions several potential barriers may arise. These barriers could include

receiving misinformation from teachers, not having enough time to pull information from a large

sample of teachers, teacher bias toward Chromebook technology or unwillingness to participate.

Data

The data sources that were used included:

Teachers from Lakeside

Information from Dr. Shepherd
Student Inventory Spreadsheet
Student Enrollment Spreadsheet

The specific data instruments that were used/ will be used for this plan included:

Gathering Existing Records Available records have been gathered to include student

Chromebook assignment lists, teacher Chromebook assignment lists, student technology

permission forms as well as all currently enrolled students.

Nominal Group Technique This technique was used to brainstorm ideas about how

teachers effectively use Chromebooks in the classroom to enhance student achievement.

Round Table Discussion Used with the Nominal Group Technique to help encourage

continual discussion.
Running Head: STRATEGIC PLAN 5

Google Form Survey A survey was sent out to the Lakeside faculty. The findings

demonstrated there is a very wide range of views on the use of Chromebooks in the

classroom.

Findings

The school chromebook data findings included:

Lakeside Junior High Chromebook Data

Number of Enrolled Students:
651 Students as of 10/20/2016
Number of Students who have
submitted Acceptable Use Policy
(required in order to be assigned
Chromebook)
648
All students but 3

Number of Inventoried Observed Number of Chromebooks:

Chromebooks: 724 with 4 missing
658 (does not include teachers)

To be assigned a Chromebook, students must have their parent or guardian sign an

Acceptable Use Policy (AUP). As of October 20th 3 students have either not turned in their AUP

or their parents declined the policy. 99.5% of students at Lakeside use the school provided

technology.

Data was also collected from teachers using a survey sent to the entire faculty. There are

41 teachers on staff at Lakeside and of those 29 responded to the survey. The scale for the

statements was: 1 Strongly Disagree ---- 5 Strongly Agree

Running Head: STRATEGIC PLAN 6
Running Head: STRATEGIC PLAN 7

1 Strongly Disagree ---- 5 Strongly Agree

1 Strongly Disagree ---- 5 Strongly Agree

Running Head: STRATEGIC PLAN 8

1 Strongly Disagree ---- 5 Strongly Agree

1 Strongly Disagree ---- 5 Strongly Agree

Running Head: STRATEGIC PLAN 9

1 Strongly Disagree ---- 5 Strongly Agree

1 Strongly Disagree ---- 5 Strongly Agree

Running Head: STRATEGIC PLAN 10

1 Strongly Disagree ---- 5 Strongly Agree

Conclusions

Data from this survey indicated that most teachers believe that the Chromebooks increase

student academic achievement and that teachers themselves implement the devices in an

authentic way but do not believe that Chromebooks improve student communication or

collaboration skills. This would suggest that teachers need more support understanding how to

translate their hard skills to solid lesson design in the classroom. The survey provided the

strongest contrast in opinions regarding the use of Chromebooks in the classroom.

Running Head: STRATEGIC PLAN 11

Regarding training, the teachers who disagreed with being provided proper technology

training were all recent hires. Two years ago Lakeside took part in heavy professional

development utilizing these online tools. Since then the school has hired new staff who did

not take part in these training sessions. Some new teachers indicated from the survey they are not

comfortable using google forms, slides and classroom but in general the teachers at Lakeside

have strong very strong application skills.

Nearly all survey respondents agree that if students had access to the internet and devices

at home the Chromebooks would be much more useful. A large percentage of students do not

have internet connections at home or devices to get access to the internet. One year ago the

decision was made to not to allow students to take Chromebooks home because so few have

internet connectivity. Wear and tear on the devices traveling provided little benefit if students

could not use them at home anyway. Nearly everyone agreed technical issues are not a problem.

Needs Assessment
Participants

This needs assessment took place at Lakeside Junior High. Stakeholders and decision

makers in the project included Dr. Michael Shepherd, Principal, Ms. Chelsea Jennings, Assistant

Principal and Technology Manager, Austin Phillips, and Team 9B teachers.

The participant perspectives varied based on designated role in the building. Dr. Shepherd

is responsible for budget money to replace or fix student technology. He is also responsible for

justifying decisions made when implementing curriculum or building wide changes. Dr.

Shepherd is very cautious when implementing new educational procedures. Lakeside was the

first building in the district to fully commit to 1:1 student devices and because of this Dr.

Shepherd must justify and back up his decisions with data and results. He is also very concerned

about the educational effectiveness of the technology for both teachers and students.
Running Head: STRATEGIC PLAN 12

Ms. Jennings is responsible for roll out of student technology as well as

building coordinator for standardized tests taken on student chomebooks. While Ms. Jennings

does not report to the superintendent to justify decisions she works with Dr. Shepherd, gathering

data and carrying out building procedures. She is also responsible for chromebook logistics in

the building as well as longevity of the devices.

Mr. Phillips is the building technology manager. He is responsible for keeping track of

enrolled and dropped students. He ensures the least amount of layover time from when a student

enrolls to receiving their chromebook. Since most information provided to students occurs on

their device new students are not issued a device until pushed thought the systems to provide a

username and login credentials. Mr. Phillips has streamlined the process to accommodate a

highly mobile student population.

Additional participants included a group of teachers belonging to a common structured

team referred to in the building as team 9B. These members included Mrs. Villarreal, Mr. Horne,

Mrs. Pennington, Mrs. Fierro and Myself. Each teacher represented a different department in the

building.

Questions

Several questions were developed to help determine true needs. These questions include:

1. How should cloud technologies be used to support student learning in the classroom?
2. Of those classroom that are currently implementing these school supported technologies,

how should school supported technology be used for maximum effectiveness?

3. What technology training is needed to ensure teacher efficacy in the classroom?

Techniques to Gather Data

Running Head: STRATEGIC PLAN 13

A google survey was created and sent to the entire staff at Lakeside Junior High. Of the 44

building teachers 39 responded. Nine statements were drafted and teachers were provided a scale

to rank their opinion for each statement. The statements related to professional views on

chromebooks and web applications in the classroom. The following statements were included:

The use of chromebooks in the classroom increases student academic achievement.

The use of chromebooks in the classroom makes classroom management more difficult.
The use of chromebooks in the classroom promotes student collaboration.
The use of chromebooks in the classroom improves student communication skills.
The use of chromebooks in the classroom requires too much time spend on technical

problems.
The use of chromebooks in the classroom provides easier differentiation and

accommodation of learning styles.

The use of chromebooks in the classroom would be more useful if students had access to

internet and devices at home.

I feel like I implement lessons with chromebooks in an authentic way that enhances

student achievement.
I feel like I have been provided enough training to create authentic learning experiences

for my students while using chromebooks.

Nominal Group Technique

The Nominal Group Technique was performed during a morning team meeting. The question

posed was How should chromebooks be used to support student achievement in the classroom?

The steps utilized for this technique included:

Step 1 - Divide the Team

o Team is naturally divided into groups of 5.
Step 2 State Open Ended Question
o How should chromebooks be used to support student achievement in the

classroom?
Step 3 Brainstorm Ideas
o Teachers were asked to brainstorm their ideas on a provided index card.
Running Head: STRATEGIC PLAN 14

Step 4 Collect Ideas and Share

o Ideas were collected and shared around the table.
Step 5 Voting Typically done anonymously
o This team group has been together for 2 years. Anonymous voting did not seem

necessary since everyone defends their vote anyway. Group members shared out

their ideas to the Team.

Step 6 Picking a Solution
o Many different ideas were brought to the table. These ideas included more

training for staff, more training for students, ideas on activities that use

applications designed to help students communicate more effectively and

assessment tools for teachers. Also my team has been working on developing

methods for motivating students in the classroom. It was discussed how

chromebook technology could be used as a motivational factor by building

engaging lesson plans around the technology rather than retrofitting existing

lessons around the devices.

Prioritization of Needs

For this step I worked with team 9B consisting of five people using the Action Planning

Technique. This technique is best used for determining the most important problems to discuss

and still make the most of time. The participants included Dr. Shepherd, (Principal) Mrs.

Villarreal, Mr. Horne, Mrs. Fierro, Mrs. Pennington and Myself. The participants come from a

variety of teaching disciplines as well as experience levels.

The Action Priority Matrix was on the board prior to the arrival of the team members.

Team members were given handouts with the need statements listed and a priority scale from 1

to 10 ranking the perceived amount of impact or effort the need requires. Participants ranked
Running Head: STRATEGIC PLAN 15

each need then wrote their need on a sticky note. They placed the note on the matrix where they

had ranked the need.

Hig
h

Quick Wins Major Project

Fill ins Hard Slog

Low High

Conclusion

Following the two need analysis strategies and action planning technique the need that

received the most discussion and focus was the need for teachers to develop lesson plans around

the newer chromebook technology and not try to fit old lessons to the technology. This need

resulted finding more problems because new teachers are simply not trained using the

technology and some are not aware of the capabilities of the technology. Other teachers are not

aware that the technology should be used for more than file management. Most the teachers at

Lakeside have the hard skills to perform tasks using the Google applications but rather lack

knowledge on how to meaningfully incorporate the technology with their lessons.

Question Need Found

How should cloud technologies be used to
support student learning in the classroom?
How should school supported technology
Students need interactive technology that
supports language acquisition skills and
student collaboration.
Teachers need to build lesson plans to better
utilized technology and not retrofit old lesson
plans around the devices.
Teachers need easier ways to assess student
Running Head: STRATEGIC PLAN 16

be used for maximum effectiveness?
What technology training is needed to
ensure teacher efficacy in the classroom?
work for quick grading feedback to students.
Students also need additional support for
basic computer skills such as typing, file
management and email composition.
Teachers need support on how to combine
chromebook technologies with their lessons.
New teachers need Google application
training as well a professional development
aimed at all technologies in the classroom i.e.
promethean boards, promethean tools and
Google applications.

Action Plan

Introduction

This action plan was developed to outline specific steps Lakeside Junior High should take

to achieve the technology vision statement. Data collected during the needs assessment

phase was used to construct the action plan. In order to complete the action plan, a series of

steps that includes professional development and financial management have been

outlined to ensure the success of the project and fulfillment of the vision statement. This plan

will begin in January 2017 and continue for 2 years.

Needs Assessment Data

The needs assessment that were uncovered identified several gaps between current

student technology implementation and the Lakeside Junior High vision. The data gathered

indicated that 1:1 technology in the school as well as the infrastructure to support the devices

is appropriate. Other issues discovered were not within the control of the school such as student

access to internet at home.

The two needs that were uncovered included; teachers need support on how to

combine chromebook technologies with their lessons and teachers need skills to better build

lesson plans and not retrofit old lessons around the devices. These needs were determined using
Running Head: STRATEGIC PLAN 17

methods to gather data that include surveys, nominal grouping technique, the action priority

matrix and collecting existing data. The stakeholders determined that professional

development should be used to support teachers integrating technology into their classroom. This

action plan is designed to improve teacher integration of technology in the classroom. Most

found needs relate to the integration of technology in the classroom. The data sources collected

over the course of this project confirm the need.

Hardware/Software

At Lakeside Junior High there are approximately 750 chromebooks for both student and

teacher use. Lakeside is a 1:1 school with all but 4 students using the school provided

technology. To support internet connected devices there are 16 servers which allows all

750 chromebooks to connect to the internet at once. Every chromebook has a free internet

monitoring software installed. This software allows teachers to monitor and look up student

browsing history as well as track missing chromebooks. Approximately 20 Chromebooks are

broken each month with 3 on average needing replaced. Of the 20 broken chromebooks 10 a

month need replacement. There is currently a system and personal in place to attend to these

hardware and software issues, and dedicated technology budget is used to pay for any needed

replacement devices. Thus, no gaps or needs exist that relate to the hardware or software used by

teachers and students.

Staff Development

After conducting the needs assessment, it was clear that the key area of need was

professional development for the faculty at Lakeside Junior High. Lakeside is a new building

with the design and facilities to support high volumes of technology. However, the faculty needs

more support utilizing the technology. To help alleviate this need professional development will
Running Head: STRATEGIC PLAN 18

be provided on teacher in-service days for the next two years. The three

instructional facilitators in the school will coordinate the training by providing the staff

instruction on google applications as well as proper chromebook implementation in the

classroom. The first training session will occur during the next teacher in-service day scheduled

for February 20th, 2017.

Facilities/Maintenance

Recently chromebook carts were purchased to better store and charge the chromebooks.

Each teacher in the building is responsible for one cart containing 30 chromebooks. Students

check in and check out their chromebook with their specified teacher. The building

technology manager handles all new or dropped students. The technology manager is responsible

for all chromebook logistics and repairs. Currently this system works well and was not

determined by the needs assessment to be an area of concern.

Finances

Lakeside Junior High is responsible for the repair and replacement of devices. The

school is provided a $17,000 a year budget designated for building use. Last year $5,000 was left

at the end of the year and was given out in the form of mini student use grants that teachers could

apply for. The savings from using less copy paper resulted in the $5,000 gain. It would be

expected that as the devices age less money will be left over at the end of each year. As of now

the current funds are enough to support 1:1 devices and cover the cost of any repairs. In the

future grants will most likely be needed to replace all chromebooks but the technology
Running Head: STRATEGIC PLAN 19

evaluation as well as needs assessment did not point to technology replacement or upgrades at

this time. The budget table below indicates the expected costs and funding for the next two years.

The cost of teacher training can be substantial. In the past when technology training

occurred it was during a normal school day. Substitute teachers were needed to pay for each

teacher being out the building for a day and the training would take place over a 3-day period.

One third of the staff would be out the first day, followed by the next third and finally the last

third. Each teacher would need a full day substitute to cover the day. Each substitute cost the

building $95. A 3-day training would cost the school approximately $4,300. There is little to no

budget to support these types of trainings, the outlined trainings have been moved to teacher in-

service days. These days allow for full faculty involvement for one day and do not require

substitute teacher pay.

Budget
Running Head: STRATEGIC PLAN 20

Budget Justification

The $10,000,000 federal Race to the Top grant funded all district building devices. This

grant provided funds for the devices, device cases and charging carts for the chromebooks.

Lakeside Junior High must support the equipment using the building budget supplied by the

district. The school budget for the next two years is $34,000 and will be used to buy

replacement chromebooks, parts and cases.

Substitute pay is an avoided cost at this time but has been included in the budget.

Professional development is scheduled during district in-service days but the budget

includes substitute teacher pay in the event more time outside of scheduled in-service

days are necessary.

Evaluation Plan

Introduction

The evaluation plan has been developed to determine the success of the strategic plan.

This plan will consist of three different methods of evaluation. These methods include

observations, surveys and focus group interviews. The outlined evaluation methods will be used

during the entirety of the strategic plan and the data collected from the evaluation methods will

be used to change or adjust key points listed in the timeline.

Methods of Evaluation

Observation is a simple technique to monitor what is happening in a target location.

Specifically, this tool will be used to understand how technology is being used in the classroom

by teachers. When an observation takes place the instructional facilitator will record notes and

findings to later evaluate during the during the quarterly strategic planning meetings.
Running Head: STRATEGIC PLAN 21

The online survey is a good tool to continuously monitor the effectiveness of teacher

professional development. Each survey will consist of a pre-survey and post-survey. The pre-

survey will occur before teacher professional development and the post-survey will occur after.

The pre survey will help determine what key areas need addressed during upcoming professional

development. The post survey will determine if gaps were filled after professional development

takes place. Dr. Shepherd and Mrs. Jennings will be responsible for developing and

administering the survey to the faculty at Lakeside Junior High.

The results of the survey and observations will be discussed during the quarterly

stakeholder meetings with Dr. Shepherd, the instructional facilitators and other key stakeholders.

To determine the progress of the strategic plan the focus group interview method will be used.

The focus group interviews will determine if the stakeholders are satisfied with progress and

allows an opportunity for changes to be made. These interviews will be conducted by a team of 3

instructional facilitators. These methods combined will help ensure teachers receive relevant and

adequate professional development that fulfills targeted needs.

At the end of the final planned professional development day in February 2018 a strategic

plan reevaluation meeting should be scheduled. This meeting will determine if continued teacher

professional development should occur or if all targeted needs have been fulfilled.

Timeline

Project Milestones Date Time Person

Allotted Responsible
Teacher Pre-Survey to solidify technology 01/16/2017 NA Shepherd/Jennings
needs
Tech Observation 01/17/2017 1 Hour Instructional
Facilitators (IF)
Quarter 3 Stakeholder PD Plan Meeting 01/24/2017 1 Hour Dr. Shepherd
Stakeholders meet to discuss observation
findings and organize teacher professional
development. Focus group interview will be
Running Head: STRATEGIC PLAN 22

conducted.
Teacher Professional Development Targeting 02/20/2017 8 Hour Day Instructional
found Needs Scheduled PD Day Facilitators/ Dr.
Shepherd
Teacher Post-Survey/ re-evaluation of current 02/21/2017 NA Shepherd/Jennings
technology needs
Observation 02/28/2017 1 Day Instructional
Facilitators
Teacher Pre-Survey to solidify technology 08/01/2017 NA Shepherd/Jennings
needs
Teacher Interviews 08/02/2017 1 Hour Instructional
Facilitators
Quarter 1 Stakeholder PD Plan Meeting 08/08/2017 1 Hour Dr. Shepherd
Stakeholders meet to discuss observation
findings and organize teacher professional
development. Focus group interview will be
conducted.
Teacher Professional Development Targeting 08/14/2017 8 Hour Day Dr. Shepherd/IF
found Needs Scheduled PD Day
Teacher Post-Survey/ re-evaluation of current 08/15/2017 NA Shepherd/Jennings
technology needs
Observation 08/22/2017 1 Day Instructional
Facilitators
Teacher Pre-Survey to solidify technology 10/24/2017 NA Shepherd/Jennings
needs
Quarter 2 Stakeholder PD Plan Meeting 11/07/2017 1 Hour Dr. Shepherd
Stakeholders meet to discuss observation
findings and organize teacher professional
development. Focus group interview will be
conducted.
Teacher Professional Development Targeting 11/17/2017 8 Hour Day Dr. Shepherd/IF
found Needs Scheduled PD Day
Teacher Post-Survey/ re-evaluation of current 11/28/2017 1 Day Shepherd/Jennings
technology needs
Observation 12/05/2017 1 Day Instructional
Facilitators
Teacher Pre-Survey to solidify technology 02/06/2018 NA Shepherd/Jennings
needs
Quarter 3 Stakeholder PD Plan Meeting 02/13/2018 1 Hour Dr. Shepherd
Stakeholders meet to discuss observation
findings and organize teacher professional
development. Focus group interview will be
conducted.
Teacher Professional Development Targeting 02/23/2018 8 Hour Day Dr. Shepherd/IF
found Needs Scheduled PD Day
Strategic Plan Reevaluation meeting 2/26/2018 8 Hour Day Dr.
Running Head: STRATEGIC PLAN 23

Shepherd/IF/All
stakeholders

The federal Race to the Top grant is a 5-year grant. Currently the district is in its final

year of the grant. It is possible that in 2019 the strategic planning process will need to be

revisited to reflect changing/aging technology or the discovery of future challenges.