Community Members: Email your questions and feedback to techplan@psusd.us.


Note: This website contains only DRAFT material generated by the technology planning committee. The content has not been presented to - or approved by - the board of education. The site does not include built in spell check or grammar check, and many typographical errors remain on these pages. This will be rectified in the first draft of the complete document. Please accept our invitation to view (and offer feedback on) this work in progress.



Curriculum


This section of the wiki is provided for discussion and collaboration related to the Curriculum component of the technology plan.

Subcommittee Lead: Lee Grafton
Subcommittee Members: Susan Brister, Susan Hurst, Sandi Enochs, Pete A’Hearn, Karen Cornett, Mike Swize, Erik Mickelson, Janis Reutz

Guiding Questions

3: Curriculum Driven Technology Goals

Overview
This section is the heart of our district technology plan. It addresses each of our strategic curriculum driven technology goals and the development of each of our remaining technology plan components. State, district and site research-based curriculum planning documents and survey data, state and local student achievement results, and EdTechProfile survey data have served to guide our technology team in determining which research-based best practices to include in our 2007-2010 curriculum driven technology goals.

The following goals will strategically meet our students’ need to acquire and refine their technology and information literacy skills in order to improve the effectiveness, efficiency, and ideally the enjoyment of their learning experiences as they master the core content standards.

Goal 1: All students will use technology to support their mastery of District and state academic standards.
Goal 2: All students will use technology to support their development of 21st century skills, as identified in enGauge: 21st Century Skills for 21st Century Learners.
Goal 3: All students will master the technology skills identified in the District Student Technology Skills Scope and Sequence.
Goal 4: All students will master Information Literacy skills, as identified in enGauge: 21st Century Skills for 21st Century Learners.
Goal 5: All students will have appropriate access to technology.
Goal 6: The District will use technology to improve student achievement through data collection, analysis, reporting and data driven decision-making.
Goal 7: The District will utilize technology to make teachers and administrators more accessible to parents.

3a. Description of teachers’ and students’ current access to technology tools both during the school day and outside of school hours.

Narrative, discussion and implications still needed here. (See also needs and resource assessment in Guiding Questions.)


The following describes the technology access available in classrooms, library/media centers, or labs for all students, including special education, GATE, English Language Learners, both during and after school hours. Access to appropriate site-based technology resources has been evaluated through district inventory records, annual California School Tech Survey data. The 2005-06 data has been summarized below.

According to our current 2006 California Technology Survey and district records, our student to computer ratio for computers four years old or newer is 16.9:1. All teachers at all 24 K-12 schools in our district have access to a minimum of one multi-media computer with Internet access in their classrooms as well as in their Library/Media Centers, and/ or Computer Labs, before, during, and after school hours. All schools can schedule before and/ or after school access to computer programs and the Internet as needed for students to complete classroom activities.

Figure - Computer Locations:

As the next figure illustrates, most computers in the District are more than four years old and must be replaced to simply maintain our current level of student to computer ratio.

Figure - Computer Age:

Percentage of sites connected to the Internet: 100%
Percentage of classrooms connected to the Internet: 99%

In addition to the technical support that the District provides, as detailed in the Infrastructure Section, school sites have used outside vendors, students, volunteers and county offices to a marginal degree.

Figure - Site-Based Technical Support:

As the next figure describes, in-house, site-based curriculum support can come from a number of sources, but it is virtually non-existent and not universal across the schools.

Figure - Site-Based Curriculum Support:

Spreadsheet:



3b. Description of the district’s current use of hardware and software to support teaching and learning.

Narrative, discussion and implications still needed here. (See also needs and resource assessment in Guiding Questions.)



A summary of data collected from the 2006 California Technology Survey, the 2006 EdTech Profile Technology Proficiency Assessment Survey and District reports follows. This data describes how administrators, teachers and students use technology for a range of tasks to support teaching and learning.


Administrators Technology Use
The data below indicates that the majority of the District administrators actively use technology daily for a range of tasks. The use of technology to support data driven decision-making has increased over the past five years due to the use of student assessment tools, including Edusoft, Data Director, and Zangle - the District student information system. Administrators also use Galaxy, the District's financial, purchasing and personnel management system, to manage budgets and track purchases. A few administrators are learning to be proficient users of Microsoft Excel to enable them to manipulate and analyze data more efficiently.

Figure - Administrator Technology Use:

All District staff have eMail access to support communications with colleagues, parents and students. Microsoft Outlook Exchange provides the e-mail features, complete with calendars for scheduling purposes, plus access to a District address book. All District employees have web access to their eMail to enable them to use the system from any location with Internet access at any time. Administrator and teacher access is recorded in the chart below. It should be noted that all District full-time teachers have access to eMail, but teachers employed by the county - such as ROP, do not......(Note to Lee - double check this with Will or Wayne)

Figure - Teacher and Administrator eMail Access:

Please see section for 4a for additional discussion and figures related to administrator technology use.


Teacher Technology Use: Curriculum Planning and Delivery

Districtwide, technology applications are most often used in reading/language arts and mathematics, but generally not daily or weekly. In all subject areas, 19% (reading/ language arts) to 30% (science) of teachers report using technology less than monthly or never.

Figure - Subject Areas:

Most teachers across the District use technology to create materials and gather information for lessons, as the following figures illustrates.

Figure - Prepare lessons -

The frequency of technology use to deliver the curriculum varies widely. Thirty-seven percent of the teachers reported frequent use of at least 2-4 times per week, but 20% reported never using technology to deliver curriculum.

Figure - Deliver Curriculum

Technology applications that are most frequently used by teachers for classroom instruction are computers and peripherals, Internet, and eMail. A growing number of teachers also use video-based presentation devices. This is largely due to the acquistions of LCD projectors, document cameras, wireless electronic schoolpads, and video-streaming programs, such as unitedstreaming and BrainPop. A complete listing of District software and hardware resources can be found in the Infrastructure section.

Implications for training, which will be addressed in the Professional Development Section, are also evident by the data reported below.

Figure - Tech Apps

A breakdown of the 2006 EdTech Profile Technology Proficiency Survey data by elementary, middle, and high schools gives a more complete picture of the frequency of technology use by teachers to deliver the curriculum. The data in the following tables show that the frequency of technology use is higher in the secondary schools. The high use of technology in the middle schools may be largely attributable to the influence of the Enhancing Education Through Technology (EETT) Competitive Grant which funded technology applications in the mathematics classrooms, grades 6-8. Two of the middle schools were funded in the 2005-2006 school year and their technology use would be reflected in the data below. The other two middle schools were funded in 2006-2007, so an increase in frequency of technology use is expected to be reflected in the 2007 data for the middle schools. The momentum that was generated from the EETT Competitive program has affected an increase of technology use in other subject areas in the middle schools as evidenced by District records, such as purchase orders.

Figure - Breakdown by School Type


Teacher Technology Use: Data Mangement

Most teachers across the District use technology to manage student attendance and grades. This is because of the implementation of the Zangle, student information systems which enables all teachers to keep grades online - a District expectation for all teachers. The system also enables all secondary teachers to use an electronic gradebook to record and post student grades. Most secondary teachers post their final grades using the system. Some secondary teachers use the electronic gradebook to record grades as well.

Edusoft has been used as the online student assessment system until this year when Data Director was purchased. When surveyed, 46% teachers responded that they do not use an online student assessment system to make decisions in lesson design - a statistic that has implications for training.

Figure - District Data Management

All teachers use the Zangle Student Information System to keep attendance. However, only secondary schools use the Zangle gradebook feature to post and record grades. A standards-based report card that can be posted electronically is planned for the elementary schools. (CHECK WITH BRYAN AND WENDY)

Figure - Data Management by School Type


Teacher Technology Use: Communications

Teachers very frequently communicate with their colleagues online. Seventy-two percent of teachers communicate with their colleagues at least every two to four days and 50% communicate daily. In addition to communicating within the District, teachers also communicate with parents and students. Sixty percent of teachers communicate with parents and students online at least monthly. Forty-five percent of teachers post to a school web site with class related information. Some teachers have created and maintain their own web sites for home to school communications. Most teachers that post to a website use the District's Zangle ParentConnection feature, which is linked to the student information system with its attendance records and gradebook.

Figure - Communications

When looking at the frequency of communications by school classtification, it is clear that the secondary school teachers communicate much more frequently both with colleagues and with parent and students. As the data shows, the middle schools communicate the most which may be due to the influence of the EETT Competitive Grant program. Since home-to-school communication is a major component of the EETT Competitive program, the middle schools received the first wave of training and support to implement Zangle's ParentConnection in 2006. In addition, because of the grant's guidelines, home-to-school communication strategies have been part of the professional development offered to the 6-8 mathematics teachers. Another explanation is that one of the middle schools has had a five year history of using online tools and web postings to communicate which was set as an expecation by the school administration.

Figure - Communications by School Type

Please see section for 4a for additional discussion and figures related to teacher technology use.



Student Technology Use

Twenty-seven percent of District teachers assign students work that uses computers at least 2-4 days per week and 20% of the students use the Internet at least 2-4 days a week. By contrast, 30% of District teachers do not assign student work that uses computers and 37% of District teachers do not assign students work that uses the Internet. When comparing computer use between elementary, middle and high schools, 65% of elementary teachers, 68% of middle school teachers, and 80% of high school teachers assign students work that requires the use of computers to some degree. When comparing Internet use, 51% of elementary teachers, 69% of middle school teachers, and 80% of high school teachers assign student work that requires the use of the Internet to some degree.

Figure Stu Use District Level-

When comparing computer use between elementary, middle and high schools, 65% of elementary teachers, 68% of middle school teachers, and 80% of high school teachers assign students work that requires the use of computers to some degree. When comparing Internet use, 51% of elementary teachers, 69% of middle school teachers, and 80% of high school teachers assign student work that requires the use of the Internet to some degree.


Figure - Stu Use School Level -

Data collected from the 2006 California Technology School Survey described the frequency of student use of technology at the site level. Each site reported the level that students use technology at their site to apply learning. For example, 8 schools indicated that 75% - 100% of the students at their site used technology for wordprocessing. Another 8 schools indicated that 50% to 75% of their students use wordprocessing and finally another 8 schools reported that 25%-50% of their students used wordprocessing. There were 24 schools reporting altogether. So, at all sites wordprocessing was an activity that at least 25% of the students engaged in. The learning activities that were most likely to be used in all schools to some degree were wordprocessing, accessing content-specific resources, research using the Internet or CD ROMS, and creating or writing reports.

Figure - Student Technology Use:

The following charts depict the frequency of student use reported on the 2006 California Technology Survey by school site levels: elementary, middle, and high. This data analysis with the previously described reports has been used and will continue to be used and updated to inform technology planning decisions.

Figure Student Technology Use by School

Spreadsheet:


3c. General District Curricular Goals

District Strategic Goals (District Strategic Plan 2007)

The following goals have been established for the District during the process of creating a new District strategic plan:

Strategic Goal 1 - Core Academic Subjects: All students in the Palm Spring Unified School District will meet grade level proficiency in standards in the core academic subjects, English language arts, math, social studies and science as measued by the annual California Standards Test (CST).

Strategic Goal 2 - ELL: All English Language Learners in the Palm Springs Unified School District will advance one level per year in English language proficiency as measured by the annual California English Language Development Test (CELDT).

Strategic Goal 3 - Attendance: The ultimate attendance goal in the Palm Springs Unified School District is for all students to attend school every day. There is a definite link between attendance and academic achievement. In addition, the District is significantly fiscally impacted as attendance increases or decreases. Beginning the 2008-2009 school year, all elementary schools will have at least 96.0% attendance rates, all middle and hgh schools will have at least 95.0% attendance rates.

These current District strategic goals are aligned with the perfomance goals established in the Local Education Agency (LEA) plan for 2003-2008. Each performance goal and any technology related planned improvements are listed below:

Performance Goals (LEA Plan 2003-2008)

Performance Goal 1: All students will reach high standards, at a minimum, attaining proficiency or
better in reading and mathematics, by 2013-2014.
  • Planned Improvement #4 (in Language Arts and in Math): Increased Access to Technology.

Performance Goal 2: All limited-English-proficient students will become proficient in English and
reach high academic standards, at a minimum attaining proficiency or better in reading/language
arts and mathematics.
  • Planned Improvement #9: Improve the instruction of LEP children by providing for the acquisition or development of educational technology or instructional materials.

Performance Goal 3: By 2005-06, all students will be taught by highly qualified teachers.
  • Planned Improvement #6: Multi-stakeholder groups and the Technology Information Services Team will ensure that professional development activities address technology-related professional development activities that are coordinated to address staff needs in assisting all students to meet or exceed State academic achievement standards in alignment with the district Technology Plan.
  • Planned Improvement #7: (a.) All teachers and administrators will receive training in using the district’s new student information system and the new standards-based data analysis system. (b.) Access to online professional development will be available to teachers to support standards-based and curriculum based instruction. (c.) The district Technology Information Services Team will continue to provide professional development in the use of data analysis and systems software for teachers, paraprofessionals and administrators.

Performance Goal 4: All students will be educated in learning environments that are safe, drug-
free, and conducive to learning.

Performance Goal 5: All students will graduate from high school.

This technology plan also fullfills the Title II, Part D assurance included in the LEA Plan: The LEA has an updated, local, long-range, strategic, educational technology plan in place.

3d. District Goals for Using Technology to Improve Teaching and Learning

3d.1. Goal - All students will use technology to support their mastery of district and state academic standards.

3d.1.1. Objective 1 - ELA: All students will use technology to support their mastery of standards in English Language Arts, as measured by the California Standards Test (CST).
  • Base 2006: 31% proficient or above.
  • Benchmark 2007-2008: 34.0%
  • Benchmark 2008-2009: 45.0%
  • Benchmark 2009-2010: 56.0%
    • Action plan note: Develop and share tech resources that align with standards.

3d.1.2. Objective 2 - Math: All students will use technology to support their mastery of standards in Mathematics, as measured by the California Standards Test (CST).
  • Baseline 2006: 29% proficient or above.
  • Benchmark 2007-2008: 34.6%
  • Benchmark 2008-2009: 45.5%
  • Benchmark 2009-2010: 56.4%

3d.1.3. Objective 3 - ELL: All English Language Learners will use technology to support their advancement of one level per year in English language proficiency as measured by the annual California English Language Development Test (CELDT).(Based on Title III AMAO 1: http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/el/t3/documents/title3infoguide.doc)
  • Baseline: 45% of ELL students advanced one or more levels.
  • Benchmark 2007-2008: 54.1%
  • Benchmark 2008-2009: 55.8%
  • Benchmark 2009-2010: 57.4%

3d.1.4. Objective 4 - Attendance: All students will be engaged in learning through the use of technology and thus be more motivated to attend school, as measured by attendance rates.
  • Baseline (Elementary): 94.5%
  • Benchmark 2007-2008: 95%
  • Benchmark 2008-2009: 95.5%
  • Benchmark 2009-2010: 96%

  • Baseline (Middle School): 94%
  • Benchmark 2007-2008: 94.5%
  • Benchmark 2008-2009: 95%
  • Benchmark 2009-2010: 95.5%

  • Baseline (High School): 93.5%
  • Benchmark 2007-2008: 94%
  • Benchmark 2008-2009: 94.5%
  • Benchmark 2009-2010: 95%
    • Action plan note: Develop and share engaging and motivting tech resources and instructional strategies.
    • Action plan note: Use tech to monitor attendance and to make attendance records accessible to parents (Zangle).
    • ELL: Mike - tech is more helpful in helping ELs meet ELA and Math goals. Read 180? Rosetta Stone in the past. At Desert Springs they started using Inter-Write Pads, Quizdom, wanted Elmos (document cameras), digital images/video for vocabulary development, language labs...

3d.2. Goal - All students will use technology to support their development of 21st Century Learning Skills, as identified in enGauge: 21st Century Skills for 21st Century Learners. (Note: These 21st Century Skills include Digital Age Literacy, Inventive Thinking, Effective Communicaiton, and High Productivity.)

3d.2.1 Objective 1 - All students will use technology to support their development of 21st Century Skills, as measured by the District 21st Century Skills Survey distributed to a representative and statistically significant sample of students.
  • Benchmark 2007-2008: Develop strategies for integrating 21st Century Skills into the curriculum for all grade levels. Develop 21st Century Skills Survey to measure implementation of the strategies.
    • The Educational Technology Advisory Committee (ETAC) establish grade level and subject area curriculum committees to develop strategies.
    • Grade level and subject area curriculum committees develop and pilot strategies.
    • The ETAC review and approve strategies developed by curriculum committees, and then present the strategies to the Instructional Council for review and approval.
    • Cabinet review and approve strategies approved by ETAC and Instructional Council.
    • The Educational Technology Specialist, in collaboration with other members of the ETAC, develops the District 21st Century Skills Survey to measure implementation of the strategies.

  • Benchmark 2008-2009: Implement 21st Century Skills strategies at all grade levels. Implement 21st Century Skills Survey. Establish baseline data and establish benchmarks for 2009-2010.
    • Technology coaches receive professional development in the implementation of the strategies.
    • The technology coaches implement the strategies in their classrooms and provide professional development for other teachers at their site.
    • Teachers implement the strategies in their classrooms.
    • The ETAC, with the help of technology coaches, administers the District 21st Century Skills Survey to a representative and statistically significant sample of students.
>
>
>
>
  • Benchmark 2009-2010: Continue implementing and improving 21st Century Skills strategies for all grade levels. Continue implementing 21st Century Skills Survey. Meet Digital Age Literacy benchmarks established in 2008-2009.
    • Technology coaches will receive professional development in the implementation of the strategies, including any changes as necessary.
    • The technology coaches implement the strategies in their classrooms and provide professional development for other teachers at their site.
    • Teachers implement the strategies in their classrooms.
    • The ETAC, with the help of technology coaches. administers the District 21st Century Skills Survey to a representative and statistically significant sample of students.
>
>

(Note: An overview of enGauge: 21st Century Skills for 21st Century Learners will appear as an appendix.)

3e. District Goals for Describing How and When Students will Acquire Technological and Information Literacy Skills Needed to Succeed in Classroom and Workplace

3e.1. Goal - All students will master the technology skills identified in the District Student Technology Skills Scope and Sequence.

3e.1.1. Objective 1: All students will master the technology skills identified in the District Student Technology Skills Scope and Sequence, as measured by the passing rate of computer literacy classes and the District computer literacy exam.
  • Baseline 2006: All high school graduates have passed a computer literacy class or passed the District computer literacy exam. 31.4% of ninth graders have passed a computer literacy class or passed the District computer literacy exam.
  • Benchmark 2007-2008: All high school graduates will have passed a computer literacy class or passed the District computer literacy exam.
  • Benchmark 2008-2009: All high school graduates will have passed a computer literacy class or passed the District computer literacy exam. 50% of ninth graders will have passed a computer literacy class or passed the District computer literacy exam.
  • Benchmark 2009-2010: All high school graduates will have passed a computer literacy class or passed the District computer literacy exam 60% of ninth graders will have passed a computer literacy class or passed the District computer literacy exam.
    • Teachers receive professional development on strategies for incorporating skills from the scope and sequence into students' learning experiences.
    • Teachers also work together in collaborative groups (such as professional learning communities) to develop and share additional strategies for incorporating skills from the scope and sequence into students' learning experiences.
    • Technology coaches support teachers as they implement the above strategies.
    • All ninth graders either take a computer literacy class or take the District computer literacy exam
    • All tenth, eleventh, and twelfth grade students who have not passed the class or the test also take either a computer literacy class or take the District computer literacy exam.
>
>

(Note: The District Student Technology Skills Scope and Sequence will appear as an appendix, as will an overview of the high school computer literacy classes and exam.)

3e.2. Goal - All students will master Information Literacy skills, as identified in enGauge: 21st Century Skills for 21st Century Learners.

3e.2.1 Objective 1: All students will master Information Literacy skills, as identified in enGauge: 21st Century Skills for 21st Century Learners.
  • Baseline: Approximately 80% of ninth graders complete an information literacy orientation.
  • Benchmark 2007-2008: Develop strategies for integrating Information Literacy into the curriculum for all grade levels. Develop 21st Century Skills Survey to measure implementation of the curriculum. 87.5% of ninth graders complete an information literacy orientation.
    • The Educational Technology Advisory Committee (ETAC) establish grade level and subject area curriculum committees to develop strategies.
    • Grade level and subject area curriculum committees develop and pilot strategies.
    • The ETAC review and approve strategies developed by curriculum committees, and then present the strategies to the Instructional Council for review and approval.
    • Cabinet review and approve strategies approved by ETAC and Instructional Council.
    • The Educational Technology Specialist, in collaboration with other members of the ETAC, develops the District 21st Century Skills Survey to measure implementation of the strategies.
  • Benchmark 2008-2009: Implement Information Literacy curriculum for all grade levels. Implement 21st Century Skills Survey. Establish baseline data and establish benchmarks for 2009-2010. 95% of ninth graders complete an information literacy orientation.
    • Technology coaches will receive professional development in the implementation of the strategies, including any changes as necessary.
    • The technology coaches implement the strategies in their classrooms and provide professional development for other teachers at their site.
    • Teachers implement the strategies in their classrooms.
    • The ETAC, with the help of technology coaches. administers the District 21st Century Skills Survey to a representative and statistically significant sample of students.
>
>
  • Benchmark 2009-2010: Continue implementing and improving Information Literacy curriculum for all grade levels. Continue implementing 21st Century Skills Survey. Meet Information Literacy benchmarks established in 2008-2009. 100% of ninth graders complete an information literacy orientation.
    • Technology coaches will receive professional development in the implementation of the strategies, including any changes as necessary.
    • The technology coaches implement the strategies in their classrooms and provide professional development for other teachers at their site.
    • Teachers implement the strategies in their classrooms.
    • The ETAC, with the help of technology coaches. administers the District 21st Century Skills Survey to a representative and statistically significant sample of students.

(Note: An overview of enGauge: 21st Century Skills for 21st Century Learners will appear as an appendix.)

3f. District Goal for Ensuring Appropriate Technology Access to All Students

3f.1. Goal - All students will have appropriate access to technology.

3f.1.1. Objective 1: All students will have appropriate access to technology, as measured by the District student to computer ratio, the District Student Technology Use Survey, and the District Teacher Technology Use Survey - each survey being administered to a representative and statistically significant sample.
  • Baseline: District Student-to-Computer Ratio (Internet Connected Computers) = 7.01:1 as of 2006 School Technology Survey.
  • Benchmark 2007-2008: 7:1
  • Benchmark 2008-2009: 6:1
  • Benchmark 2009-2010: 5:1 (Note: Approximately 1hr/day for each student.)
    • Technology coaches coordinate inventory at their sites.
    • Technology coaches report their findings to their SIP committees, the District Educational Technology Advisory Committee (ETAC) and to the state (via the annual technology survey).
    • School sites purchase computers necessary to meet the student-to-computer ratio goal at the site.
    • District provides sites financial support as necessary and as possible.
    • District reviews all funding sources to determine if any changes will need to be made in the district technology budget.
    • District configures, deploys, and installs all new computers as planned.
    • District collects and disposes of all old and/or surplus technology in a manner as prescribed by law.
    • Review potential donations to determine if they meet District specifications and allocate out to sites in accordance with the planned deployment.
  • Baseline: Student and Teacher Technology use survey baseline data will be established in 2006-2007.
  • Benchmark 2007-2008: On average, students and teachers will answer "at least once a month" (3.0) in response to each item on the District Teacher Technology Use Survey.
    • The Educational Technology Specialist, in collaboration with other members of the ETAC, develops the District Teacher Technology Use Survey to measure implementation of the strategies.
    • The ETAC, with the help of technology coaches. administers the District Teacher Technology Use Survey to a representative and statistically significant sample of students.
  • Benchmark 2008-2009: On average, students and teachers will answer "at least once a week" (4.0) in response to each item on the District Teacher Technology Use Survey.
  • Benchmark 2009-2010: On average, students and teachers will answer "daily" (4.5) in response to each item on the District Teacher Technology Use Survey.

(Note: The District Student Technology Use Survey and the District Teacher Technology Use Survey will appear as appendixes. Note also that the only teacher use survey questions monitored for this goal are those related to student use and instruction. Administration and planning uses are not considered here.)

3f.1.2. Objective 2 - ELL: All students identified as English Language Learners will have appropriate access to technology necessary to support mastery of the English Language Development Standards in addition to District and State Academic Standards, as measured by the student to computer ratio in ELL classrooms, the District Student Technology Use Survey (disaggregated by ELL students), and the District Teacher Technology Use Survey (disaggregated by ELL teachers) - each survey being administered to a representative and statistically significant sample.
  • Baseline: Currently, no quantitative data exists. Anecdotally, the committee observes significant inequity district wide. For the duration of this plan, the disagregated ratio should equal the ratio for all students.
  • Benchmark 2007-2008: 7:1
  • Benchmark 2008-2009: 6:1
  • Benchmark 2009-2010: 5:1
    • Action plan note: See above.
  • Baseline: Student and Teacher Technology use survey baseline data will be established in 2006-2007.
  • Benchmark 2007-2008: On average, ELL students and teachers will answer "at least once a term" in response to each item on the District Teacher Technology Use Survey.
  • Benchmark 2008-2009: On average, ELL students and teachers will answer "at least once a month" in response to each item on the District Teacher Technology Use Survey.
  • Benchmark 2009-2010: On average, ELL students and teachers will answer "at least once a week" in response to each item on the District Teacher Technology Use Survey.
    • Action plan note: See above.

3f.1.3. Objective 3 - GATE: All students identified as gifted and talented will have appropriate access to technology necessary to support the District GATE Plan, as measured by the student to computer ratio in GATE classrooms, the District Student Technology Use Survey (disaggregated by GATE students), and the District Teacher Technology Use Survey (disaggregated by GATE teachers) - each survey being administered to a representative and statistically significant sample.
  • Baseline: Currently, no quantitative data exists. Anecdotally, the committee observes significant inequity district wide. For the duration of this plan, the disagregated ratio should equal the ratio for all students.
  • Benchmark 2007-2008: 7:1
  • Benchmark 2008-2009: 6:1
  • Benchmark 2009-2010: 5:1
    • Action plan note: See above.

  • Baseline: Student and Teacher Technology use survey baseline data will be established in 2006-2007.
  • Benchmark 2007-2008: On average, GATE students and teachers will answer "at least once a term" in response to each item on the District Teacher Technology Use Survey.
  • Benchmark 2008-2009: On average, GATE students and teachers will answer "at least once a month" in response to each item on the District Teacher Technology Use Survey.
  • Benchmark 2009-2010: On average, GATE students and teachers will answer "at least once a week" in response to each item on the District Teacher Technology Use Survey.
    • Action plan note: See above.


3f.1.4. Objective 4 - Special Education: All students identified for special education will have appropriate access to technology, as measured by the student to computer ratio in Special Education classrooms, the District Student Technology Use Survey (disaggregated by Special Education students), and the District Teacher Technology Use Survey (disaggregated by Special Education teachers) - each survey being administered to a representative and statistically significant sample.
  • Baseline: Currently, no quantitative data exists. Anecdotally, the committee observes significant inequity district wide. For the duration of this plan, the disagregated ratio should equal the ratio for all students.
  • Benchmark 2007-2008: 7:1
  • Benchmark 2008-2009: 6:1
  • Benchmark 2009-2010: 5:1
    • Action plan note: See above.

  • Baseline: Student and Teacher Technology use survey baseline data will be established in 2006-2007.
  • Benchmark 2007-2008: On average, Special Education students and teachers will answer "at least once a term" in response to each item on the District Teacher Technology Use Survey.
  • Benchmark 2008-2009: On average, Special Education students and teachers will answer "at least once a month" in response to each item on the District Teacher Technology Use Survey.
  • Benchmark 2009-2010: On average, Special Education students and teachers will answer "at least once a week" in response to each item on the District Teacher Technology Use Survey.
    • Action plan note: See above.


3f.1.5. Objective 5 - Students With Disabilities: All students with identified disabilities will have appropriate access to assistive technologies, as measured by fullfillment of IEP technology requirements.
  • Baseline: 100% of all students with identified disabilities have appropriate access to assistive technologies, as measured by fullfillment of IEP technology requirements.
  • Benchmark 2007-2008: 100% of all students with identified disabilities will have appropriate access to assistive technologies, as measured by fullfillment of IEP technology requirements.
  • Benchmark 2008-2009: 100% of all students with identified disabilities will have appropriate access to assistive technologies, as measured by fullfillment of IEP technology requirements.
  • Benchmark 2009-2010: 100% of all students with identified disabilities will have appropriate access to assistive technologies, as measured by fullfillment of IEP technology requirements.
    • Action plan note: Special Education representative on the ETAC reviews all IEP technology requirements.

3f.1.6. Objective 6 - One-to-One Initiative: The District will implement one-to-one pilot programs in order to better understand an environment in which each student will have access to a computer whenever necessary to meet the goals in sections 3d and 3e.
  • Baseline: The District has no one-to-one intiative.
  • Benchmark 2007-2008: The District will implement a three one-to-one pilot programs: one elementary classroom, one middle school classroom, and one high school classroom. Each program will be hosted in one of the three different geographical hubs of the district. (A total of three pilot teachers)
  • Benchmark 2008-2009: The District will expand the one-to-one pilot programs to include a total of nine programs: one elementary program, one middle school program, and one high school program (freshmen) in each of three hubs. The three existing pilot programs will expand to include a second teacher. An effort will be made to keep students who participated during the previous year in the program for another year. (A total of 12 pilot teachers)
  • Benchmark 2009-2010: The District will expand the one-to-one pilot programs to include one pilot program at each site. All existing pilot programs will expand to include an additional teacher. An effort will be made to keep students who participated during the previous year in the program for another year. (A total of 48 pilot teachers, given the 24 existing sites.) Note: Alternatively, the benchmarks for objective 6 can be aligned with opportunities to open new schools. Note: Perhaps AVID is a natural program for implementing at the high school level. GATE may be a natural for K-8.)
    • Action Plan Note: Waiting until approval of this draft.

NOTE: See the Apple 1-to-1 initiative page for more information.

NOTE: Add edtech profile back in.

3g. District Goal for Using Technology for Student Data Collection, Analysis, Reporting, and Decision Making

3g.1. Goal - The District will use technology to improve student achievement through data collection, analysis, reporting, and data driven decision-making.

3g.1.1. Objective 1: The District will use technology to improve student achievement through data collection, analysis, reporting, and data driven decision-making, as measured by Data Director access reports, the District Teacher Technology Use Survey, and the District Administrator Technology Use Survey.
  • Data Director Baseline: 18,527 logins (July 1 to Jan 8). 995 Unique users. 18.6 logins per user (average).
  • Benchmark 2007-2008: 25,000 logins, 1000 unique users, 25 logins per user
  • Benchmark 2008-2009: 30,000 logins, 1050 unique users, 28.6 logins per user
  • Benchmark 2009-2010: 35,000 logins, 1100 unique users, 31.8 logins per user

  • Survey Baselines: Student and Teacher Technology use survey baseline data will be established in 2006-2007.
  • Benchmark 2007-2008: On average, instructional staff will answer "at least once a term" in response to this item on the District Teacher Technology Use Survey.
  • Benchmark 2008-2009: On average, instructional staff will answer "at least once a month" in response to this item on the District Teacher Technology Use Survey.
  • Benchmark 2009-2010: On average, instructional staff will answer "at least once a week" in response to this item on the District Teacher Technology Use Survey.

(Note: For the narrative, the district is a CSIS compliant district. Also, PLCs can appear in the action plan in support of this objective.)

3h. District Goals to Utilize Technology so Teachers and Administrators can be More Accessible to Parents

3h.1. Goal - The District will utilize technology to make teachers and administrators more accessible to parents.

3h.1.1. Objective 1 - The District will utilize the Zangle student information system to make teachers and administrators more accessible to parents, as measured by Zangle Parent Connection reports.
  • Baseline: 100% of teachers use Zangle daily (at least for attendance). At the secondary level, 100% of teachers use Zangle to post grades. 2700 students had at least one parent access Zangle (over the course of the year).
  • Benchmark 2007-2008: 100% of teachers use Zangle daily (at least for attendance). At the secondary level, 100% of teachers use Zangle to post grades. 5000 students will have at least one parent access Zangle (over the course of the year).
  • Benchmark 2008-2009: 100% of teachers use Zangle daily (at least for attendance). At the secondary level, 100% of teachers use Zangle to post grades. 10,000 students will have at least one parent access Zangle (over the course of the year).
  • Benchmark 2009-2010: 100% of teachers use Zangle daily (at least for attendance). At the secondary level, 100% of teachers use Zangle to post grades. 15,000 students will have at least one parent access Zangle (over the course of the year).
    • Action Plan Note: See Wendy.
    • Note: Concern about numbers being too high... especially without a district mandate to use Zangle.

3h.1.2. Objective 2 - Teachers and administrators will use a variety of one-way and two-way technologies (such as email, instant messaging, video chat, web-based announcements, blog comments, podcasts etc.) to communicate with parents, as measured by the District Teacher Technology Use Survey, Administrator Technology Use Survey, and Parent Technology Use Survey.
  • Benchmark 2007-2008: Develop the District Teacher Technology Use Survey, Administrator Technology Use Survey, and Parent Technology Use Survey.
  • Benchmark 2008-2009: Implement the District Teacher Technology Use Survey, Administrator Technology Use Survey, and Parent Technology Use Survey. Establish baseline data and establish benchmarks for 2009-2010.
  • Benchmark 2009-2010: Continue implementing and improving the District Teacher Technology Use Survey, Administrator Technology Use Survey, and Parent Technology Use Survey. Meet High Productivity benchmarks established in 2008-2009.
    • The Educational Technology Specialist, in collaboration with other members of the ETAC, develops the District Teacher Technology Use Survey, Administrator Technology Use Survey, and Parent Technology Use Survey to measure implementation of the strategies.
    • The ETAC, with the help of technology coaches. administers the Technology Use Surveys to a representative and statistically significant sample of teachers, administrators, and parents.
    • Establish baseline data and establish benchmarks for 2009-2010.

(Note: The Technology Use Surveys will appear as appendixes. These surveys will include questions about email, web-based announcements, blog comments, podcasts, etc.)

3i & j. Timelines and Monitoring Plan for Curriculum Strategies and Methodologies

Note: Timelines are integrated in 3d through 3h above.

Site Level: Technology Coaches

With input from the educational technology specialist, principals will identify one teacher at each school site to serve as a technology coach at each site. Technology coaches are teacher leaders who implement, model, and evaluate technology plan goals and benchmarks at their site. Technology coaches will meet with the educational technology speciailist on a bi-monthly basis, either in a large group meeting, in small (zone-based) meetings, or individually. Technology coaches will support the monitoring and evaluation of this plan by...
  • facilitating the implementation of the above goals at their site.
  • modeling the implementation of the above goals at their site.
  • sharing instructional techniques for implementing the above goals at their site (and with other sites at bimonthly meetings).
  • mentoring other teachers in the implementation of the above goals at their site.
  • implementing District surveys required to measure progress on benchmarks at their site.
  • implementing state technology surveys as necessary.
  • communicating site needs and issues to the district.
  • communicating district needs and issues to the site.

Note: Funding is required in order to provide a 7.5% annual stipend to compensate technology coaches for performing their duties and attending meetings.

District Level: Advisory Committee

The District Educational Technology Advisory Committee will consist of the educational technology specialist, representative curriculum specialists, the professional development coordinator, the TIS director, the director of fiscal services, the director of testing and assessment, the director of adult education, the coordinator of career and technical education, a special education and assistive technology representative, three "lead" technology coaches (one each from an elementary, middle, and high school). The Advisory Committee will be chaired by a senior director of educational services. The committee will meet quarterly to coordinate technology use between programs, to focus on technology needs, and to integrate the implementation of the above goals into existing programs so that the goals do not represent an additional burden for educators and staff. The advisory committee will support the monitoring and evaluation of this plan by...
  • providing support for technology coaches.
  • monitoring and evaluating District survey results to measure progress on benchmarks district-wide.
  • monitoring and evaluating state technology survey results as necessary.
  • monitoring and evaluating site needs as reported by the technology coaches and others.
  • communicating district needs and issues to the technology coaches.
  • acting on their analysis of the above evaluations to improve implementation of the tech plan goals as needed.
  • annually reviewing progress on technology plan benchmarks, evaluating the effectiveness of the technology plan, and revising the technology plan as needed.

A Curriculum Subcommittee will be formed to focus on issues relevant to this section of the plan, and to provide support and guidance in these matters for the Advisory Committee as a whole.

The Advisory Committee chair and the educational technology specialist will report to the Instructional Council and other bodies as needed.

The Advisory Committee chair and the educational technology specialist will report annually to the Board of Education in open session.

Annually, the Advisory Committee will reevaluate and revise the educational technology plan for review and approval by the Instructional Council, Cabinet, and the Board.

The senior director of ed services is responsible for implementing, monitoring, and evaluating this plan.

(Note: Technology Coach Qualifications and Outine of Commitment will appear in an appendix. Also, the role of tech coaches will be discussed further in the PD section and infrastructure sections. For instance: leading training, attending conferences, reporting problems...)