Technology Plan Evaluation

FRIT 7232
Spring 2014
Robin Skelley
Britton Spivey
Leslie Walbert

Technology Plan Resources

1. Bennett, Harvey Everhart, Nancy. "Successful K-12 Technology Planning: Ten essential
Elements." Teacher Librarian 31.1 (2003): 22-26. MasterFILE Elite. Web. 4 Feb. 2014.
<http://proxygsugrl1.galileo.usg.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=fth&
AN=12123760&site=eds-live&scope=site>
This article gives an overview of ten elements to consider when creating a technology plan.
These elements include allocating appropriate funding, creating a technology infrastructure,
and considering technology and the role it will play in the future. This article discusses the
importance of integrating technology into instruction. This article helped bring insight on
important components when creating and evaluating a technology plan.
2. Botts, J. Six-step process in creating a technology plan. Missouri Department of
Elementary and Secondary Education , 01 April 2013. Web. 5 Feb 2014.
<http://dese.mo.gov/divimprove/instrtech/techplan/gettingstarted.htm>
This comes from the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education and
gives step by step instructions on how to effectively plan for technology in schools. The
guiding questions are especially helpful in determining the purpose and the role of the
technology plan development committee. The article helps the committee to develop the
format of the technology plan. Most importantly, this site helps the reader to see how
important looking at raw data is in planning for the budget, professional development, and to
justify purchasing hardware and software.
3. Dexter, S. School-Based ICT Policy Plans in Primary Education Elements, Typologies
and Underlying Processes. British Journal of Educational Technology 2012: 43(3), 505519. Print.
In attempt to bring more insight to information and communication technology policy plans,
researchers gathered data from 31 primary schools. After reviewing the current systems
technology plans and conducting interviews to the informational communication technology
coordinators, the study identified three types of technology plans: 1. Vision blueprints, 2.
Technical inventory, 3. Comprehensive policy plan. The data supports that each system
should create a technology plan based on the needs of their school. This article creates a
better understanding of what goes into generating a technology plan and therefore deepens
the understanding when evaluating technology plans. As technology planning is becoming
a vital to a schools system productivity, clear and common guidelines are beneficial to all
educational organizations.

4. Federal Funding for Educational Technology and How It Is Used in the Classroom: A
Summary of Findings from the Integrated Studies of Educational Technology. United
States Department of Education, 2003. PDF File.
<http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/iset/summary2003.pdf>

This paper is written by members of the U.S. Department of Education. It discusses the
requirements school districts must meet in order to receive federal funding, including the erate program, and how the funding is being used around the country. Theres a large portion
of this document that discusses the need for professional development for teachers.
Teachers around the country lack training in integrated learning systems and using
technology for assessment. This article reminds the reader that professional development
opportunities should be more than just how to use email and presentation programs.

5. Nevada State Educational Technology Plan. Nevada State Department of Education

(2005) 1-24. ERIC. Web. ED492899. 6 Feb. 2014.
<9eric.ed.gov/?q=school+district+technology+plans&ft=on&ff1=dtySince_2005&pg=3&id=ED4928>.

The Nevada State Educational Technology Plan outlines how the state believes technology
should be used in schools. In the plan, the authors describe the desire for technology to be
integrated in all classrooms. It discusses the need for appropriate hardware and technology
infrastructure. The plan addresses the need for technical support to be available, which
includes the need for an on-site technical support person. After reading this article, it
became evident that creating clear and valuable goals was essential to any technology
plan.

6. Overbay, Amy, Melinda Mollette, and Ellen S. Vasu. "A Technology Plan That Works."
Educational Leadership 68.5 (2011): 56. Publisher Provided Full Text Searching File. Web.
6 Feb. 2014.
<http://proxygsugrl1.galileo.usg.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edb&
AN=58108048&site=eds-live&scope=site>
After evaluating 45 schools across North Carolina, the authors of this article offers five
lessons they learned about school technology plans. These lessons include customizing
technology plans to fit the schools needs, building in professional development, and using
collaboration to create technology initiatives. This article reminds the reader that a
technology plan is about more than technology, it is about customizing a plan for the people
who are going to be implementing it.

7. Potter, Stephanie. "Technology Integration for Instructional Improvement: The Impact of

Professional Development." Performance Improvement. 51.2 (2012): 22-27. Web. 13 Feb.
2014. <http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pfi.21246>.
Potter and Rockinson-Szapkiw focus on the importance of professional development with
an emphasis on technology integration in the classroom. The authors provide a framework
for how a school can effectively implement professional development by including three
aspects: technology operation, technology application, and technology integration with
mentor and community support. This articles allows the readers to see the importance of
including effective professional development practices in technology plans.

8. Technology Plan Rubric 2013. Georgia Department of Education. Web. 4 Feb 2014.
Microsoft Word File.

<http://www.gadoe.org/Technology-Services/Instructional-Technology/Pages/default.aspx>.
This is the rubric (found under the System Technology Planning heading) that the State of
Georgia use to evaluate technology plans. In order to qualify for E-rate and grant funding,
school districts must update their plans every three years. The rubric includes creating clear
and concrete goals with benchmarks, an evaluation method, a budget, and a list of people
responsible for implementing the strategies. Using this rubric as a guide helped us form our
evaluation rubric.
9. Wise, Bob. "Technology in Education: Before you Make a Purchase, Make a Plan." The
Huffington Post. N.p., 16 Apr 2013. Web. 13 Feb 2014.
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-wise/technology-education_b_3055037.html>
The article introduces the reader to Project 24, which the Alliance for Excellent Education
recently launched. Project 24 provides schools resources and help with technology
planning. Project 24 suggests that in order to use technology in a purposeful way schools
must first meet schools learning goals and specific challenges. By doing this, student
achievement will improve. This resource helped influence the budget and professional
development sections of our groups rubric.

10. Vanderlinde, Ruben, and Johan van Braak. "Technology planning in schools: An

integrated research-based model." BJET. 44.1 (2013): E14-E17. Web. 13 Feb. 2014.
<http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01321.x/abstract>.
The article attempted to create a single model that encompassed the research results of
several studies conducted during the past year on technology planning in primary schools.
During a seminar, research was compiled, analyzed, and applied to create a holistic model
on technology planning. The model is intended for teachers and school leaders to use when
developing their schools technology plans. The model can also serve useful to policy
makers and educational developers when designing initiatives to support schools in the
technology planning process.

Technology Plan Rubric

Catagory

Goals

Professional
Development

3pts
Target

2pts
Approaching

1pt
Not Evident

Goals are broad,

comprehensive and
realistic in addressing
teaching and learning
needs. Goals clearly
answer the questions:
Who? What? By when?
By how much?
According to which
instrument? Submitted
on time.

Goals are mostly

equipment based
and loosely linked
to improvement
plans. Submitted
on time.

Goals are absent or

seem to be only
equipment based;
are not measurable;
are incomplete,
difficult to
understand; or are
submitted late.

Provides a concrete
plan for professional
development
opportunities for
teachers and staff. It
includes instructional
practices that are
research-supported
and helps student
achievement.
Provides funding
sources.

Plans for
professional
development are
vague. Gives little
information or
examples of
effective
professional
development
practices.

Provides few or no
plans for
professional
development
opportunities.

Evaluation

Provides a prioritized list

of major tech plan
projects, tasks and
timelines. Provides
budget summary
estimate of capital
expenses (hardware,
software, facilities,
infrastructure, staff
development, tech
support, etc.) Identifies
possible alternative
funding resources.
Projects, timelines, and
budgets are realistic and
consistent with plan
goals and objectives.
Submitted on time.

Provides most, but

not all, of the
project, timelines,
and budget
estimate
information.
Appears to be
generally
consistent with
plan goals.
Submitted on time.

Projects, budgets, or
timelines missing;
provides vague or
little information on
project, budgets, or
timelines; projects
appear not relevant
to plan goals; budget
estimates appear
incongruent with
plan or unrealistic; or
not submitted on
time.

Ongoing Evaluation

Provides descriptions
on how each goal is
going to be evaluated.
Evaluations are
scheduled to occur in
a consistent and
timely manner.
Evaluation
instruments make
sense for the goal it is
evaluating.

Provides
descriptions on
how some goals
will be evaluated.
Some evaluations
do not occur in a
timely manner.
Some evaluation
instruments do not
make sense for
the goal it is
evaluating.

Provides no
descriptions on
how goals will be
evaluated. No time
line provided for
evaluations.
Evaluation
instruments do not
make sense for the
goal it is
evaluating.

Accessibility of
technology resources
(Americans with
Disabilities Act)

Provides a detailed
plan for giving
technology access to
students and teachers
with disabilities. Plan
is realistic and
concrete. Plan is in
line with the
Americans with
Disabilities Act

Plan for
technology access
for those with
disabilities lacks
details. Only some
parts of the plan is
in line with the
Americans with
Disabilities Act.

Provides limited or
no plan for giving
access to
technology for
those with
disabilities. None of
the plan is in line
with the Americans
with Disabilities
Act.

An assessment of
telecommunication
services, hardware,
software, and other
services needed

Provides a detailed
assessment of current
available technology.
Provides assessment
of needed technology.

Assessment of
current, available
technology is
vague or only
includes some
schools.
Assessment of
needed
technology is
vague or only

No assessment of
current available
technology.
No assessment of
needed technology.

Budget/
Timelines

includes some
schools.

Organization and
Design

Provides all the

necessary
components required
by state and national
standards. The plan is
well organized and
provides valuable
information to all
parties. Uses a
consistent template
and is easy to read.

Most of
components that
are necessary are
available. The plan
is well organized
and provides
valuable
information to all
parties. Template
present but not
consistent
throughout
document.

Several
components are
missing from the
plan. Information is
available but lacks
in content and
organization. Lacks
any template and
poorly designed.

Long Term Plan

Provides ideas for

future growth. Ideas
are feasible and
elaborates on current
technology reality.

Provides few ideas

for future growth.
Parts of the plan
does not make
sense when
compared to
current reality.

Provides no plans
for future growth.

/21

Technology Plan Evaluation

Lowndes County Technology Plan :
http://www.lowndes.k12.ga.us/files/user/28/file/LCS_TechPlan2012-15.pdf

Category

Goals

Professional
Development

3pts
Target

2pts
Approaching

1pt
Not Evident

Evaluation

Goals are broad,

comprehensive and
realistic in addressing
teaching and learning
needs. Goals clearly
answer the
questions: Who?
What? By when? By
how much?
According to which
instrument?
Submitted on time.

Goals are mostly

equipment based
and loosely
linked to
improvement
plans. Submitted
on time.

Goals are absent

or seem to be only
equipment based;
are not
measurable; are
incomplete,
difficult to
understand; or are
submitted late.

3
The goals are
broad and realistic.
They make sense
based on current
reality.

Provides a
concrete plan for
professional
development
opportunities for
teachers and staff.
It includes
instructional
practices that are
research-supported
and helps student
achievement.
Provides funding
sources.

Plans for
professional
development are
vague. Gives
little information
or examples of
effective
professional
development
practices.

Provides few or
no plans for
professional
development
opportunities.

2
The plan does not
provide enough
opportunities for
quality
professional
development for
both teachers and
administrators. It
gives few specific
ideas about what
type of
professional
development the
staff will
participate in.

Provides a prioritized
list of major tech plan
projects, tasks and
timelines. Provides
budget summary
estimate of capital
expenses (hardware,
software, facilities,
infrastructure, staff
development, tech
support, etc.)
Identifies possible
alternative funding
resources. Projects,
timelines, and
budgets are realistic
and consistent with
plan goals and
objectives. Submitted
on time.

Provides most,
but not all, of the
project,
timelines, and
budget estimate
information.
Appears to be
generally
consistent with
plan goals.
Submitted on
time.

Ongoing Evaluation

Provides
descriptions on
how each goal is
going to be
evaluated.
Evaluations are
scheduled to occur
in a consistent and
timely manner.
Evaluation
instruments make
sense for the goal it
is evaluating.

Provides
descriptions on
how some goals
will be evaluated.
Some
evaluations do
not occur in a
timely manner.
Some evaluation
instruments do
not make sense
for the goal it is
evaluating.

Provides no
descriptions on
how goals will be
evaluated. No
time line provided
for evaluations.
Evaluation
instruments do
not make sense
for the goal it is
evaluating.

2
The plan
discusses how
goals will be
evaluated, but
does not provide
a timeline for
evaluations to
take place.

Accessibility of
technology
resources
(Americans with
Disabilities Act)

Provides a detailed
plan for giving
technology access
to students and
teachers with
disabilities. Plan is
realistic and
concrete. Plan is in
line with the
Americans with
Disabilities Act

Plan for
technology
access for those
with disabilities
lacks details.
Only some parts
of the plan is in
line with the
Americans with
Disabilities Act.

Provides limited
or no plan for
giving access to
technology for
those with
disabilities. None
of the plan is in
line with the
Americans with
Disabilities Act.

1
No evidence in the
plan about
providing access
to technology for
students and
teachers with
disabilities.

An assessment of
telecommunication
services, hardware,

Provides a detailed
assessment of
current available
technology.

Assessment of
current, available
technology is
vague or only

No assessment
of current
available
technology.

Budget/
Timelines

Projects, budgets,
2
or timelines
The plan provides a
missing; provides
budget and
vague or little
timelines. Budgets
information on
are realistic.
project, budgets,
However, the many
or timelines;
timelines are
projects appear
grouped into 1 and
not relevant to
2 year segments.
plan goals; budget
This imprecision
estimates appear
allows for error.
incongruent with
plan or unrealistic;
or not submitted
on time.

3
Provides a very
detailed
assessment

software, and other

services needed

Provides
assessment of
needed technology.

includes some
schools.
Assessment of
needed
technology is
vague or only
includes some
schools.

No assessment
of needed
technology.

current available
technology.
Assessment
discusses what
technology is
available different
schools and how it
is being used.

Organization and
Design

Provides all the

necessary
components
required by state
and national
standards. The
plan is well
organized and
provides valuable
information to all
parties. Uses a
consistent template
and is easy to read.

Most of
components that
are necessary
are available.
The plan is well
organized and
provides
valuable
information to all
parties. Template
present but not
consistent
throughout
document.

Several
components are
missing from the
plan. Information
is available but
lacks in content
and organization.
Lacks any
template and
poorly designed.

2
Plan is missing:
1) Signature page
2) List of
technology
members

Provides ideas for

future growth.
Ideas are feasible
and elaborates on
current technology
reality.

Provides few
ideas for future
growth. Parts of
the plan does not
make sense
when compared
to current reality.

Provides no
plans for future
growth.

2
Parts of the long
term plan do not
make sense when
compared to the
districts current
reality.

Long Term
Planning

Font styles
change
throughout
document.
Parts of the
documents are
difficult to read.

17/21

Recommendations
URL for Lowndes County Technology Plan :
http://www.lowndes.k12.ga.us/files/user/28/file/LCS_TechPlan2012-15.pdf

The technology plan that we have chosen to evaluate is from Lowndes County
Schools. Lowndes County is located in south Georgia, on the Georgia- Florida border.
There are seven elementary schools, three middle schools, and one high school in the
system. During the 2010-2011 school year, the total enrollment was 9,970 students.

Category
Professional
Development

Problem

Recommendations

1. Professional
development goals are
not provided specifically
for teachers.

1. Create new goals that focus on teachers

use and growth of technology in the
classroom. These professional
development goals should include using
technology for assessments and integrating
technology in the classroom. The county
could use both face to face and online
course to provide training.

2. Plan for administrators

is vague.

2. Create a plan that specifies exactly how

administrators will adopt more efficient
administrative uses of technology. Simply
making sure each administrator uses
Google calendar and Google collaboration
tools will not insure the goal. The county
could consider creating training courses
that will encompass Web 2.0 tools.

Budget/Timelines

1. Timelines are grouped

into 1 and 2 year
segments. This
imprecision allows for
much error.

1. Create timelines in 3-6 months

timeframes. If training is required schedule
the months and include the topics on which
it will cover. By creating a more detailed
timeline, it will allow teachers and
administrator to know when they should
expect changes or when there are training
deadlines that need to be met.

Ongoing
Evaluation

1. The plan discusses

how goals will be
evaluated, but does not
provide a timeline for
evaluations to take
place.

1. The county should create a concrete

timeline for administering evaluations. The
time between evaluations should make
sense in order to produce accurate data for
future planning.

Accessibility of
technology
resources

1. No evidence in the
plan about the use of
technology for students
with disabilities.

1a. A detailed and strategic plan that

includes ideas and methods for technology
use for students and students with
disabilities is needed. The county should
research proven methods for providing
students with disabilities access to
technology resources.
1b. The plan must be in line with the
Americans with Disabilities Act. The school
district should research the requirements of
this act. Then they should evaluate what
the district needs in order to comply with
the requirements.

Organization and
Design

1. The technology plan is

hard to read with the font
sizes and styles
changing throughout the
document. The tables a
cramped and difficult to
read.

1. The plan should be formatted and

designed so that teachers and interested
members of the community can find the
information they are looking for. The font
size and styles should be consistent
throughout the document. The tables
should be large enough to easily read. It
would be helpful if large blocks of text were
broken up with subheadings. While this
does not affect the content of the
technology plan, it will more easily allow
people to find the information they need
and know what the school district is
planning.

2. Plan is missing,
approval page with
superintendent
signature, and a list of
technology members
who created the plan.

Long Term Plan

1. Parts of the Long

Term Plan do not make
sense when compared
to the current reality.

2. The signed approval page should be

scanned and placed as part of the
document.
A page that states who collaborated and
created this plan should be included in the
document.
1. The county should compare their future
goals to the availability of the technology
they have now. This requires reevaluating
the technological improvements that can be
made in 3 years. The district might also
have to increase training so that
administrators and teachers can effectively
use new equipment.