Fall 2014 FRIT 7232

Visionary Leadership
in
Instructional Technology
Module 3 - Team #1
Dawn Johnson, Lauren Brantley, Roderick Smith, Laramy Wells

D. Johnson, L. Brantley, R. Smith, L. Wells

Fall 2014 FRIT 7232

Resources

1.

2.

3.

Fulton County
Tech Plan

Planning for
Technology

National
Education
Technology Plan

Reference
Fulton County Public School System, (2012). Fulton
county technology plan.
https://www.fultonschools.org/en/divisions/it/Documents/20
12_2015%20Final%20tech%20plan.pdf

Whitehead, B. M., Jenson, Devon F.N., Boschee, F.,

(2013). Planning for technology: A guide for school
administrators, technology coordinators, and curriculum
leaders. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Office of Educational Technology, Department of

Education. (2010). National education technology plan.
http://tech.ed.gov/netp/

Relevance of Resource
Fulton County provides a rich and thorough example of
a plan where all standard components of a detailed
technology plan are addressed. For example, all the
goals are tied to the district vision with responsibilities
defined. Technology Goals were in an important part of
our rubric and we looked to this plan as an ideal final
product for certain sections.
The authors of Planning for Technology Guide Book
have practical and formal educational experience. The
book moves beyond basics and discusses how learning
and technology are intricately connected and explained
the importance of leadership, culture, finances, public
relations, and vision for a fluid technology plan. For
example, there are ideas for resource reallocation and
evaluation instruments, promotional material, and
information on seeking resources and grants. (Note:
The link only provides a preview of the book.)
The National Education Technology Plan is guided by
goals outlined by the President that should undergird a
public school plan in America. It focuses on the
interplay of five components and technology: learning,
assessments, teaching, infrastructure, and productivity
to fuel learning reform. The components form a
framework for local plans in that they model the national
plan.

D. Johnson, L. Brantley, R. Smith, L. Wells

Fall 2014 FRIT 7232

4.

Comprehensive
Technology Plan
Podcast by Tim
Wilson
interviewing Larry
Anderson

5.
Needs Survey

6. Writing Goals and

Objectives for a
Technology Plan

7.

The University of
Texas at Austin
Technology Plan Rubric

Anderson, L., & Wilson, T., (2005, August 26). Savvy

Technologist Podcast. retrieved from
http://hwcdn.libsyn.com/p/3/0/3/3034d42e0adbb756/STPLarryAnderson.mp3?c_id=3235606&expiration=14113416
99&hwt=0dbb9a0b231d1bf3a4f13d1fa5124c3b

National Center for Technology Planning. (2008).

Perceived educational technology needs survey.
http://www.nctp.com/downloads/assess.pdf

Butcher, P., Hale, M., Hickey, C., Morgan, K., (2012).

Writing goals and objectives for a technology plan.
http://www.webjunction.org/documents/webjunction/Writing
_Goals_and_Objectives_for_a_Technology_Plan.html/
Technology Plan Rubric. (2005). [Rubric developed by
instructor for class Edu 3853 Instructional Technology
Planning and Management]
http://jabba.edb.utexas.edu/it/fc_resta_courses_files/itpm/
m0_6tprubric.html

This podcast from 2005 by Larry Anderson, a retired

educator, that formed the National Center for
Technology Planning was interviewed on the
importance of an effective, comprehensive technology
plan. He emphasized the concept of leadership
development and community involvement and combing
the community for resources. An advocate of traditional
project management principles, he talks about using
the students as leaders and mentors. Their voice is
critical in deciding what technology and tools can work.
The relevance taken here was that leadership is
important and should be woven into professional
development.
Relevance of this survey is that it could used in groups
and for individuals as a recommendation for improving a
technology plan. It asks questions in a unique way that
would engender conversation among stakeholders.
Used on a large or small scale, it could frame a
conversation about technology needs based on
qualitative data. The responses would be based on
each persons or groups role. The survey was
intended to stay with the person for five days with the
option to put the same responses down for multiple
items if applicable.
The relevance of this resource was that it provided the
group with clear definitions of and the importance of
measurable goals. Recommendations were made to
the plan considering this information.
A technology plan rubric created by University of Texas,
the technology plan consists of 16 standards judged
from a scale of 1-3. 1 is the lowest and 3 is highest.
Relevance was that we used a scale of 1-3 in the
technology rubric.

D. Johnson, L. Brantley, R. Smith, L. Wells

Fall 2014 FRIT 7232

8.

9.

10.

Revolutionizing
Education
Through
Technology

Rubric

Gwinnett County
Public School
Three Year
Technology Plan

Greaves, T. W., Hayes, J. Wilson L., Gielniak, M.,

Peterson,E. L., (2012).
Revolutionizing Education Through Technology:
curriculum leaders., The Greaves Group, The Hayes
Connection, and One-to-One Institute.

Technology Plan Evaluation. (2014) [Rubric developed for

a graduate studies class to evaluate technology plans]
https://www.rcampus.com/rubricshowc.cfm?code=F68X78
&sp=true&

This resource features a vision for revolutionizing

schools through technology integration, an overview of
what makes ed tech successful, how you can properly
implement technology, and what results you can expect,
and nine technology and implementation factors; a
Project RED checklist that, if followed, help schools
achieve meaningful change. Its relevance included
recommendations such as that were given.

The rubric on this website provided us with a foundation

for developing our technology plan rubric as we used
some of the elements. The rubric kept things very basic
with concise and clear wording.

The plan includes an overall mission statement that

communicates the primary purpose, the primary duties,
the core beliefs, values
and accessibility of system technology.
Gwinnett County Public School System, (2012). Gwinnett
The plan includes specific vision statements that
county technology plan.
communicate specific areas of impact and/or
http://publish.gwinnett.k12.ga.us/gcps/wcm/connect/f7343e
improvement.
c6-409b-4f2a-8ace-e0bde9392c12/GCPSTechPlan2012The plan includes a clear description of how technology
2015.pdf?MOD=AJPERES
will be used to deliver rigorous academic courses (e.g.,
GA Virtual School, video conferencing,
video streaming, and web based instruction).

D. Johnson, L. Brantley, R. Smith, L. Wells

Fall 2014 FRIT 7232

Technology Planning Rubric

Team 1 - FRIT 7232

Elements

Vision

Goals

Professional development

Assessment of telecommunication services, hardware,

software, and other services needed

Needs Improvement
(1 pt)

Acceptable
(2 pt)

Exemplary
(3 pt)

Missing or incomplete
vision statement.

Vision statement lists how

technology will be used to
improve student learning and
aide teachers and
administrators, but instructional
outcomes are not stated.

Vision statement is clear, concise,

and comprehensive. The team has
included how technology will be
used to improve student learning
and aide teachers and
administrators. Instructional
outcomes are fully stated.

Missing or incomplete
learning goals.

Goals are broad and

comprehensive but unclear.
They are loosely tied to the
state or district documents.
Goals are not readily
obtainable or measurable.

Goals are broad and

comprehensive, addressing the
teaching and learning needs.
District documents are clearly
supported. Goals are attainable and
measurable.

Missing or incomplete
professional
development
information.

Has a plan for professional

development that lays out a
timeline for how and when all
staff will be trained when new
technologies are acquired.
Does not have funding
allocated to PD.

Has a plan for professional

development and leadership that
lays out a timeline for how and when
all staff will be trained when new
technologies are acquired. Has
funding allocated to PD.

Missing or incomplete
assessment of
telecommunication
services, hardware,

Plan includes some

assessment of
telecommunication services,
hardware, software, and other

Plan includes a comprehensive and

detailed assessment of
telecommunication services,
hardware, software, and other

D. Johnson, L. Brantley, R. Smith, L. Wells

Fall 2014 FRIT 7232

Accessibility of technology resources (Americans with

Disabilities Act)

software, and other

services needed.

services needed.

services needed.
(ie. Internet bandwidth speed,
WAN/LAN connections between all
sites, network security.)

Missing or incomplete
information regarding
accessibility of
technology resources
identified.

Plan includes very little specific

accessibility resources for
students needing assistive
technology.

Plan includes comprehensive

Accessibility Guide and specific
accessibility resources for students
needing assistive technology.

Plan includes a detailed budget

aligned to support the district's
vision and goals. (Identified funding
is aggregated by local, state and
federal sources.)
Evaluation is detailed and
comprehensive. Assessment is
timely and tied to goals.

Budget

No formal budget
identified.

Plan includes a budget with

little aligned to support the
district's vision and goals.

Ongoing evaluation

No formal evaluation is
described.

Evaluation lacks detail and

comprehensiveness. There is
no apparent link to goals.

D. Johnson, L. Brantley, R. Smith, L. Wells

Fall 2014 FRIT 7232

Evaluation of Technology Plan

Team 1 - FRIT 7232

Elements

Vision

Goals

Professional
development

Assessment of
telecommunicatio
n services,
hardware,

Needs Improvement
(1 pt)

Acceptable
(2 pt)

Exemplary
(3 pt)

Missing or incomplete
vision statement.

Vision statement lists how

technology will be used to
improve student learning and
aide teachers and
administrators, but instructional
outcomes are not stated.

Vision statement is clear, concise,

and comprehensive. The team
has included how technology will
be used to improve student
learning and aide teachers and
administrators. Instructional
outcomes are fully stated.

Missing or incomplete
learning goals.

Goals are broad and

comprehensive but unclear.
They are loosely tied to the
state or district documents.
Goals are not readily
obtainable or measurable.

Goals are broad and

comprehensive, addressing the
teaching and learning needs.
District documents are clearly
supported. Goals are attainable
and measurable.

2 Points
Goals are not readily obtainable. All are
not measurable.

Missing or incomplete
professional
development
information.

Has a plan for professional

development that lays out a
timeline for how and when all
staff will be trained when new
technologies are acquired.
Does not have funding
allocated to PD.

Has a plan for professional

development and leadership that
lays out a timeline for how and
when all staff will be trained when
new technologies are acquired.
Has funding allocated to PD.

3 Points
Very comprehensive and detailed.
Funding has been allocated and
identified.

Missing or incomplete
assessment of
telecommunication
services, hardware,

Plan includes some

assessment of
telecommunication services,
hardware, software, and other

Plan includes a comprehensive

and detailed assessment of
telecommunication services,
hardware, software, and other

3 Points
Very comprehensive and detailed.

Commentary

1 Point
This incomplete vision statement
supports the vision of the school district
but the technology department does not
have its own statement that clearly
references technology.

D. Johnson, L. Brantley, R. Smith, L. Wells

Fall 2014 FRIT 7232

software, and
other services
needed

software, and other

services needed.

services needed.

Accessibility of
technology
resources
(Americans with
Disabilities Act)

Missing or incomplete
information regarding
accessibility of
technology resources
identified.

Plan includes very little specific

accessibility resources for
students needing assistive
technology.

Plan includes comprehensive

Accessibility Guide and specific
accessibility resources for
students needing assistive
technology.

Plan includes a detailed budget

aligned to support the district's
vision and goals. (Identified
funding is aggregated by local,
state and federal sources.)

2 Points
Budget is present but appears to be
unclear.

Evaluation is detailed and

comprehensive. Assessment is
timely and tied to goals.

3 Points
Plan describes the use of evaluation
through a technology committee. With
several district stakeholders.

Budget

No formal budget
identified.

Plan includes a budget with

little aligned to support the
district's vision and goals.

Ongoing
evaluation

No formal evaluation is
described.

Evaluation lacks detail and

comprehensiveness. There is
no apparent link to goals.

services needed.
(ie. Internet bandwidth speed,
WAN/LAN connections between
all sites, network security.)

1 Point
There is no mention of the Americans
with Disabilities Act.

Plan we are using: Berkeley Plan

D. Johnson, L. Brantley, R. Smith, L. Wells

Fall 2014 FRIT 7232

Recommendations of Technology Plan

Team 1 - FRIT 7232

After a careful evaluation of the Berkeley Unified School Districts Technology Plan, we would like to suggest the following
recommendations:
Plan we are using: Berkeley Plan

Vision:

This plan does not have what one would consider a Vision statement.
The purpose of a vision statement is to define where you want your district to be in the future. It should provide inspiration to all stakeholders
and set a clear path for the desired outcomes.
The plan does make reference to the districts overall mission and vision, however we recommend that the technology committee develop a
separate vision for technology aligned to the district's goals.
Because of the unique role the technology plays in a school district, having its own vision statement is vital to the districts success and
keeps the technology department focused. The vision should be short clear and concise. For example, Broward County Public Schools
Technology Vision is, Technology, enabling learning for all any time, any place.

Goals:

When planning for success in any organization its important to set goals. However those goals need to be realistic and measurable.
Several of the goals in this plan are not measurable. For example, All teachers will increase the academic achievement of all students.
While I understand the committees desire to have All teachers will increase the academic achievement of all students, its just not realistic
or measurable. Not all students may welcome the implementation of technology and some may find that the technology hinders the learning
process. A more realistic goal might be to have 100% or all teachers follow the districts academic achievement plan to increase graduation
rates by 10%.
Goal 3g is also not easily attainable for the same reasons stated earlier. There will always be students who believe that they are safe and, in
some cases, more knowledgeable than those instructed them about Internet safety. In the case of being measurable, Goal 3g cannot cover
every circumstance a student may face regarding Internet safety, cyber-bullying, online privacy, and online predators. This would make it
difficult to measure whether or not all student understand the concepts.

D. Johnson, L. Brantley, R. Smith, L. Wells

Fall 2014 FRIT 7232

Goal 3d.3 is measurable, however it would be unclear how much the use of technology contributed versus the non-technology based
instruction.
Our recommendation to the committee is to review all goals to ensure that they are realistic and measurable. When reviewing goals the
guiding question should be, how can I measure that? You should be able to apply a number or a percentage to any measurable goal.

Professional Development:

Professional development is very well defined with a clear timeline and objectives.
Our recommendation to the committee is to provide a guideline as to how the Site Technology Leaders will be selected and a clear idea as
to what the duties and responsibilities of this position will entail.

Assessment of telecommunication services, hardware, software, and other services needed:

This is addressed very well within the plan and we feel that no recommendations are needed.

Accessibility of technology resources (Americans with Disabilities Act):

There did not appear to be any clear evidence regarding this issue.
The plan should include a section discussing the purchasing and implementation of assistive technology. Some of the technology that needs
to be included involve computer programs or devices, such as screen readers, text enlargement software, and computer programs that
enable students to control the computer with their voice.
Providing a needs assessment to the Exceptional Childrens department is a good way to gauge what kinds of devices have been used in
the past and are needed in the present to comply with the ADA.
This is a much needed section and failure to consider this in your technology plan could result in lawsuits.

Budget:

Funding items appear to be tightly aligned to technology objectives.

The Estimate annual implementation costs for the three year plan seem underestimated.

Ongoing Evaluation:

This is addressed very well within the plan and we feel that no recommendations are needed.

D. Johnson, L. Brantley, R. Smith, L. Wells

10

Fall 2014 FRIT 7232

D. Johnson, L. Brantley, R. Smith, L. Wells

11