Technology Evaluation Plan

Sara Brand
Paris Dimick
Allison Selber

Georgia Southern University

Visionary Leadership in Instructional Technology
Dr. Hodges
September 12,2021
Annotated List of Resources

District Technology Plan Rubric

Clifford, Mary. “District Technology Plan Rubric.” Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory Office
of Science / U.S. Department of Energy. 24 June 1998 - 17 July 2006.
https://ed.fnal.gov/lincon/staff_rubric.shtml.

This rubric, while 15 years since its last update, provided much of the information we used to
create the original framework for our technology plan rubric. Clifford clearly defined what
should be included in the vision, current situation analysis, and assessment/evaluation sections
of a district technology plan.

Technology Plan Evaluation for Module 5

Resta, Paul E. "Technology Plan Evaluation for Module 5." The University of Texas at Austin. 24
Oct. 2010-16 Jan. 2016. http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/html/EDU0240a.html. Internet
Archive. https://web.archive.org/web/20160116011858/http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/
html/EDU0240a.html.

We used this rubric in conjunction with Clifford’s to create the initial framework for our own
technology plan evaluation rubric. Though the original rubric seems to be geared toward a
college class project and as such included specific guidelines for the project, it provided us with
general insight into how technology plans are organized and what they should include.

Navigating the Digital Shift2019: Equitable Opportunities for All Learners

SETDA. (2019, July 2). Navigating the digital shift 2019 - leadership, technology, innovation,
learning. SETDA. Retrieved September 10, 2021, from https://www.setda.org/priorities/digital-
content/navigating-the-digital-shift/navigating-the-digital-shift2019/.

This resource provided insight to the essential pieces of technology within a school district,
including technology plans. This resource ensures that the educational system puts students
first to ensure a lifetime of learning and success. The current workplace looks at the educational
system to teach and develop students with tools necessary for the current workplace, including
technological and digital tools. To form a seamless transition between k-12 schools and college and
careers, digital learning opportunities are essential. “Navigating the Digit Shift 2019” includes a
section on the essential needs of professional learning to ensure maximum quality integration of
technology. We also used this resource when creating our section about the accessibility of
technology resources in schools. This document outlines what is necessary to include seamless
integration of resources and materials for all learners. We also used this to develop the section of our
rubric on infrastructure and bandwidth needs.

Schools and Libraries (E-RATE) Program Technology Planning

Universal Administrative Services Co. . (2016). SCHOOLS AND LIBRARIES (E-RATE)

PROGRAM TECHNOLOGY PLANNING. Universal Administrative Services Co. . Retrieved
September 10, 2021, from
https://www.usac.org/wp-content/uploads/e-rate/documents/Tools/USAC-SL-Technology-
Planning.pdf.

This document is from the Universal Service Administration Co. (USAC), created in 2016. Even
though it is not current, it lays out portions of a technology plan that were necessary to receive
funding from the E-Rate Program. These elements to include are: goals and strategy for
telecommunication use, professional development strategy, needs assessment of
telecommunication hardware, an evaluation process, and a sufficient budget. This resource
includes that technology plans should not last more than 3 years due to how quickly new
technology and services are developed, therefore committing to a long term plan ignores new
developments, except for large investments or lease plans. It also states that each plan should
have a provision in place that evaluates progress towards the goals annually. The document
should be seen as an open document, not a static one, meaning that it is open to review as long
as those changes don’t fall beyond the current technology plan.

Rethinking Acceptable Use Policies to Enable Digital Learning: A Guide for School
Districts

Bosco, J. (2013, March). Rethinking Acceptable Use Policies to Enable Digital Learning: A
Guide for School Districts. COSN Leading Education Innovation. Retrieved September 10, 2021,
from https://www.cosn.org/sites/default/files/pdf/Revised%20AUP%20March
%202013_final.pdf.

This document explains the differences between policies and procedures when it comes to
Acceptable Use Policies (AUP). It also informs us of the federal laws that require specific policies
within schools in terms of AUPs and internet filtering. The document also details who should be
responsible for the creation of the AUP, whether it be legal counsel or stakeholders, as well as
how often it is updated.

Reimagining the Role of Technology in Education: 2017 National Education

Technology Plan Update

Department of Education - Office of Educational Technology. (2017). Reimagining the Role of

Technology in Education: 2017 National Education Technology Plan Update. National
Education Technology Plan - Office of Educational Technology. Retrieved September 10, 2021,
from https://tech.ed.gov/files/2017/01/NETP17.pdf.

This document is the National Education Technology plan published by the Department of
Education’s Office of Educational Technology. We focused on Section 5: Infrastructure of this
document to help build our rubric. According to this section, essential components of
infrastructure that supports learning experiences include high speed internet access in and out
of school, access to mobile devices that connect learners and educators to various resources,
high quality digital learning content, and Responsible Use Policies. The infrastructure of a
school district helps to support technology in education anywhere and learning all the time.
Given the “homework gap” due to lack of connectivity at home, technology plans should ensure
learners have access to the internet when they leave school. This section also supports open
licensed programs within technology plans. This technology plan also recommends that school
districts have a sustainability plan for wired and wireless access and device refresh timelines.

Glynn County Board of Education Three-Year Technology Plan

Glynn County Board of Education. Three-Year Technology Plan. Glynn County Board of
Education, 2016. https://4.files.edl.io/5d5a/04/03/20/183833-0a2a1949-b247-46c0-aab6-
e30b1cf39879.pdf,PDF file.

We used Glynn County’s technology plan as a real-life example of what working technology
plans look like. While having rubrics and articles about the ideal plans were useful, seeing a
technology plan developed by a small school system was important. Though we ultimately
decided to use Dekalb County’s plan for evaluation, the comparison of the two plans was integral
to the creation of our evaluation rubric.

Evaluation to Planning: Technology Integration in a School of Education

Vannatta, R.A. (2000). Evaluation to Planning: Technology Integration in a School of

Education. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 8(3), 231-246. Charlottesville, VA:
Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education. Retrieved September 12, 2021 from
https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/8037/.

The purpose of this resource is to provide research proof of how technology integration happens
within different learning communities. While having technology plans is very important, it is
always important to know the procedural steps behind it and why it is so important to
implement it between the staff and students. Although this was based on faculty and staff within
a collegiate level, the same ideals and steps can be applied to primary and secondary learning
communities.

Considerations for supporting a successful start to the 2020-2021 school year for
students with disabilities

National Center for Systemic Improvement at WestEd. (2020). Considerations for supporting a
successful start to the 2020-2021 school year for students with disabilities. In the National
Center for Systemic Improvement at WestEd. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED609257.pdf

With school starting back with the traditional face to face, we can not forget the past we have
had within the learning community. We have noticed what we lived through, how it impacted
our students, what we have to move on with on our hands. Something we will always take for
granted is our special education populations and our students with disabilities. How does virtual
schooling affect them? How did they succeed? How they were not assisted in some areas with no
help at home on Microsoft Teams. Within the technology plans within our district it is important
to not only think of our general education students, our gifted and talented students but also our
Special Education students, the students with disabilities. How can they succeed with
technology in their homes and classrooms with and without assistance?

Rubric Nation: Critical Inquiries on the Impact of Rubrics in Education

Michelle Tenam-Zemach. (2015). Rubric Nation: Critical Inquiries on the Impact of Rubrics in
Education. Information Age Publishing.

Oftentimes, teachers wonder the purpose and quality of a good student sample and how they
can communicate the students' growth and glows appropriately. As a stakeholder within a
school district we are often left with the same questions. How can we analyze documents that
have constructed and communicate understanding and the pros/cons in an appropriate way.
Rubrics! They give stakeholders and community members a visual representation of where they
are and where they need to be. Also it could be attached with some strategies on how to move
forward as well.This book Rubric Nation, analyzes and describes the purpose of rubrics and how
they can be used within any aspect of the educational process.

Rubric

3 (Exemplary) 2 (Proficient) 1 (Incomplete)

Summary Clearly identifies the Contains some Does not include

vision, mission, and information related to vision, mission, or
goals for the district. vision, mission, and goals.
goals. May be unclear
or missing some
information.

Goals Clearly identifies and Contains some Does not contain any
details the initiative miscommunication of initiatives or detailed
they want to set in how exactly they will procedures on how
place and how they address the needs of they carry out the
will implement all the learning goal plan
aspects with the community and
learning community additional aspects.

Current Situation Contains detailed Contains some Does not contain an

information regarding information regarding evaluation of the
what hardware is current current situation
available, what availability/need for regarding technology
technology is needed, technology and how it in this district.
professional is used.
development, and use
by students and staff

Community/School Clearly defines who Contains only general Does not include
Support is responsible for departments information regarding
overseeing and responsible for who is responsible for
evaluating overseeing supporting local
implementation implementation. schools in
implementation.
Acceptable Use Clearly identifies the Contains some Does not include
Policy development, information regarding information regarding
policies, and the Acceptable Use the Acceptable Use
procedures in place to Plan’s development, Plan’s development,
follow federal laws policy, or procedures. policy, or procedures.
within their
Acceptable Use Plan
(AUP). Outlines how
often the AUP will be
updated.

Professional Creates professional Contains some Does not contain

Development learning opportunities professional learning professional learning
designed to support opportunities opportunities
student centered designed to support designed to support
learning student centered student centered
environments with a learning learning
focus on selection and environments. environments.
utilization of high-
quality materials and
instruction practices.

Ongoing Evaluation Clearly outlines a Contains a process to Does not include an

process to evaluate evaluate the progress evaluation process
the progress towards towards reaching the towards the plan’s
reaching the plan’s plan’s goals. goals and the
goals and has a Document is seen as document is static.
system in place to static.
modify/supplement
where needed to
reach the goal as an
open document, not
static.

Funding/Budget Clearly outlines the Contains only Does not contain

cost of information on the information on the
implementation and cost of cost of
where funding will implementation implementation or
come from. Includes and/or where the source of funding.
information regarding funding will come Nor does it contain
how resources and from. Resource and how resources and
funding will be funding distribution is funding are
equitably distributed vague or unavailable. distributed.
across the district.

Infrastructure Clearly outlines a Contains some Does not outline

 (telecommunication plan for staffing and outline for device and device and network
services, hardware, resources to monitor network management. management. Does
software, and other device and network Has a refresh plan not have a refresh
services needed) management. longer than 3 years. plan nor does it
Assesses bandwidth Provides some provide resources for
within the school resources for off off campus access.
system and off campus access.
campus access for
faculty and students.
Contains a 3 year
refresh plan.

Accessibility of Includes policies and Contains vague Does not contain

technology resources best practices to policies OR best policies or best
ensure provision of practices regarding practices that ensure
accessible materials accessible materials accessible materials
and technologies. and technologies. or technologies.
These materials Integration of Integration of
technologies create a materials and materials and
seamless integration technology is technology is not
and are equally seamless for some seamless for most
effective in both learners and/or users and/or is not
teaching and learning. partially effective. effective.
Materials are
designed to be usable
by the widest range of
learners, including
assistive technology.
This is written in
plain language that is
easily accessible to all
stakeholders.

Completed Rubric
We have decided to evaluate DeKalb County’s Technology Plan. Their plan can be found linked
here.
3 (Exemplary) 2 (Proficient) 1 (Incomplete)
Summary Clearly identifies the Contains some Does not include
vision, mission, and information related to vision, mission, or
goals for the district. vision, mission, and goals.
goals. May be unclear
or missing some
information.

Goals Clearly identifies and Contains some Does not contain any
details the initiative miscommunication of initiatives or detailed
they want to set in how exactly they will procedures on how
place and how they address the needs of they carry out the
will implement all the learning goal plan
aspects with the community and
learning community additional aspects.

DeKalb County lists

goals for an
Empowered Learning
Environment, Data
Governance,
Community
Partnerships,
Professional
Development, and
Infrastructure
Enhancements.

Current Situation Contains detailed Contains some Does not contain an

information regarding information regarding evaluation of the
what hardware is current current situation
available, what availability/need for regarding technology
technology is needed, technology and how it in this district.
professional is used.
development, and use
by students and staff
In the Current Reality
section of the plan,
DeKalb County was
very detailed about
what hardware is
currently available.
In another section
entitled Gap
Analysis, they
outlined the needs in
the areas of
 empowered learning,
community
partnerships,
professional
learning, data
governance, and
infrastructure.

Community/School Clearly defines who Contains only general Does not include
Support is responsible for departments information regarding
overseeing and responsible for who is responsible for
evaluating overseeing supporting local
implementation implementation. schools in
The Technology implementation.
Advisory Committee
is mentioned
throughout the
document with
specifics about their
responsibilities. The
members of the
Technology Advisory
Committee with their
names and titles are
listed at the end of
the Technology Plan.

Acceptable Use Clearly identifies the Contains some Does not include
Policy development, information regarding information regarding
policies, and the Acceptable Use the Acceptable Use
procedures in place to Plan’s development, Plan’s development,
follow federal laws policy, or procedures. policy, or procedures.
within their
Acceptable Use Plan DeKalb County’s
(AUP). Outlines how Technology Plan
often the AUP will be does not include how
updated. their Acceptable Use
Plan (AUP) or
Responsible Use Plan
(RUP) is developed
or implemented. The
only partially
relevant topic to a
AUP or RUP is that
of developing a
digital citizenship
 plan.

Professional Creates professional Contains some Does not contain

Development learning opportunities professional learning professional learning
designed to support opportunities opportunities
student centered designed to support designed to support
learning student centered student centered
environments with a learning learning
focus on selection and environments. environments.
utilization of high-
quality materials and
instruction practices.
There is a clear and
specific goal
associated with staff
development and 7
different strategies to
be implemented are
listed, including the
training of
technology
integration advocates
in each building who
will “support and
model 21st Century
teaching, learning,
and assessment.”

Ongoing Evaluation Clearly outlines a Contains a process to Does not include an

process to evaluate evaluate the progress evaluation process
the progress towards towards reaching the towards the plan’s
reaching the plan’s plan’s goals. goals and the
goals and has a Document is seen as document is static.
system in place to static.
modify/supplement
where needed to DeKalb has an
reach the goal as an evaluation section of
open document, not their technology plan,
static. albeit 2 sentences
long. Their
evaluations will
formally occur each
year but it is not
listed how the plan
and goals will be
 evaluated or if the
plan can change due
to evaluations.

Funding/Budget Clearly outlines the Contains only Does not contain

cost of information on the information on the
implementation and cost of cost of
where funding will implementation implementation or
come from. Includes and/or where the source of funding.
information regarding funding will come Nor does it contain
how resources and from. Resource and how resources and
funding will be funding distribution is funding are
equitably distributed vague or unavailable. distributed.
across the district.
DeKalb County’s
Technology Plan
does not mention or
reference a
budget/funding
directly in the plan.

Infrastructure Clearly outlines a Contains some Does not outline

(telecommunication plan for staffing and outline for device and device and network
services, hardware, resources to monitor network management. management. Does
software, and other device and network Has a refresh plan not have a refresh
services needed) management. longer than 3 years. plan nor does it
Assesses bandwidth Provides some provide resources for
within the school resources for off off campus access.
system and off campus access.
campus access for
faculty and students. DeKalb County
Contains a 3 year outlines its fiber optic
refresh plan. network, Web
filtering and
protection,
devices/workstations,
and technology
support. DeKalb
County does not
mention a refresh
plan for their devices
or workstations. They
mention they have
25,000 hotspots
available, but only
for high school
 students.

Accessibility of Includes policies and Contains vague Does not contain

technology resources best practices to policies OR best policies or best
ensure provision of practices regarding practices that ensure
accessible materials accessible materials accessible materials
and technologies. and technologies. or technologies.
These materials Integration of Integration of
technologies create a materials and materials and
seamless integration technology is technology is not
and are equally seamless for some seamless for most
effective in both learners and/or users and/or is not
teaching and learning. partially effective. effective.
Materials are
designed to be usable DeKalb County’s
by the widest range of Technology Plan
learners, including does not include any
assistive technology. policies or best
This is written in practices to ensure
plain language that is accessibility to
easily accessible to all technological
stakeholders. resources and
materials for any
range of learners.

Recommendations
The DeKalb County Technology Plan, according to our rubric, scored 22 out of 30
possible points, indicating that the plan is proficient. Regarding the summary and goals of the
rubric, we discovered that DeKalb County appropriately labeled and identified what their
mission, vision and goals were in the district in bold print. It was obvious to the reader and
assessor that this district had those components. To go further, the goals they outlined were
categorized into five components: empowered learning environment, infrastructure
enhancements, data governance, professional learning, and community partnerships. They
defined those components, each of their goals, and how they intend to reach those goals with 4+
strategies.
When it came to current situation, or what DeKalb labels its Current Reality, they were
able to detail what exactly they could account for regarding devices, the support, environment
(staffing), even protection and connectivity. Again, they clearly labeled and detailed what
exactly they had and how it provided proficiency within their school district.
Regarding the community/school support, they outlined it as stakeholder expectations,
so they outlined that they have students, business communities, parents and
teachers/administrators that play a part this in this plan and highlighted what goals and
expectations they have for the district and their school and what they would like to see go into
effect. In addition, they also have detailed the specific people and the role they play on the
technology advisory committees, which are made of principals, support, governance councils,
and college connections as well.
The professional development that the district has is detailed in one of the goal sections.
They want to “develop collaborative, job-embedded, differentiated and data driven professional
development experiences” which is spot on because they detail exactly what they plan to do such
as “explain their professional development plan,” “develop and train advocate in each building,”
and “create a learning community for the teacher to continuously develop and share strategies”.
These are just some of the proficient areas they have met.
Regarding recommendations, I suggest that Dekalb County look at their Acceptable Use
Policy, accessibility of technology resources, infrastructure, and ongoing evaluations. The
Acceptable Use Policy that they have in place for their students is not included within the
technology plan in any detail. They mention incorporating digital citizenship into their
curriculum, however they do not mention why. They could incorporate their acceptable or
responsible use plan into their technology plan to give a comprehensive look at what their
version of digital citizenship looks like since digital citizenship falls within
acceptable/responsible use policies.
In addition, when identifying accessibility of technology resources, it is important to
include all populations and not just general population students, so we suggest they detail and
highlight how special education and students of certain disabilities can be included in this
technology plan as well. Who will assist them when the teacher and parents cannot accommodate
them? What type of training will those teachers and assistance get regarding these learning
communities? All these details should be included in the technology plan for Dekalb County.
When discussing recommendations for the ongoing evaluations section of the rubric, we
noticed that they have an evaluation section in their plan, but it is not detailed enough to ensure
that the stakeholders, parents and student body can understand it. They want those evaluations to
happen each year, but they do not go into detail about what that will look like, how it will
happen, who will carry it out, where it will take place, how it will take place or when the data
will be discussed, evaluated, and shared with the learning community. I suggest they hold a
meeting regarding this matter. If their district utilizes Google or Microsoft, they can send out a
district-wide survey of some sort to identify the needs they need to address and hold quarterly
meetings to come up with strategies that can be highlighted on the technology plan regarding this
matter. In connection with how the last 16 months went with universal remote learning, they
could start with an evaluation of those policies, to be more prepared next time a sudden push to
digital learning happens.
Regarding budgeting and funding, they do not detail how much money is made each
year for this plan, how those funds will be raised, or how those funds are to be used within the
learning community. It’s very important that parents and stakeholders feel comfortable that their
taxes and donations are being used in the correct manner so that the students in these learning
communities can thrive appropriately. They should also hold an open forum meeting with the
learning community to identify how these fundraising efforts benefit scholars, what updates will
be made and how much they will cost. All these details should be identified within this
technology plan.
Finally, the infrastructure was discussed within the plans and strategies sections, but
unfortunately it was not detailed enough regarding primary students in K-8 students and those
buildings. Oftentimes, we think these students do not need safe and secure networks because
they need to have more hands-on experiences, but the world around them is changing every day
and it is very important that there are some types of details given regarding infrastructures in
those communities. There was also no mention of what happens to data on a device when that
device is compromised, destroyed, or lost.
Overall, we felt that Dekalb County had a well thought out technology plan. They have
clearly put a great deal of effort into discussing and articulating the district in terms of its current
reality, needs, and the steps they will take to move forward. What stands between this proficient
technology plan and an exemplary plan is simply digging deeper to ensure that all the details are
not only considered, but outlined for all stakeholders.