TECHNOLOGY
EVALUATION PLAN
Tammie Munsen ~ Sandy Nightingale ~ Joanne Ustad
INTRODUCTION
With rapid increases in technology
use, the
White Lake School now has a part-time tech coordinator. A White Lake technology evaluation plan will demonstrate the necessity of a full-time technology coordinator to facilitate the purchase of new technology equipment, provide maintenance to existing hardware and software, and provide support for training and repairs in an efficient manner.
EVALUATION PURPOSE
The purpose of this evaluation is to provide information for a continuous and systematic process to support White Lake’s technology infrastructure, training and implementation of new technologies that enhances student achievement.
EVALUATION
AUDIENCE
The primary stakeholders in this evaluation are
· Teachers
· Administration/School Board
· Technology Coordinator
· Students
· Parents
The secondary stakeholders in this evaluation are
· Community members
· Business owners
·
DESCRIPTION OF EVALUAND
Location of School/District
White Lake School District 1-3 is located along Interstate 90 in south-central South Dakota in a small, vibrant community of approximately 400 people. White Lake was named South Dakota Community of the Year in 2000.
Type/Age of Students
The school is a K-12 academic center with an enrollment of 174 students. The population consists primarily of rural, low-income, Caucasian students. There are 19 certified staff, 5 classroom aides, 8 non-certified staff, and an administrator.
Technology Infrastructure
White Lake School is strictly PC based. There are 2 computer labs. One lab has 23 AXIS 550mhz 128 Meg Pentium III computers. It includes one scanner, 1 Hewlet Packard Laser printer and 1 Hewlet Packard 2500 C Professional Series Color Printer. The additional lab has 16 Compaq 300mhz 128 Meg Pentium IV DeskPro Workstation computers. Each elementary classroom has 5 computers and 1 printer while the junior high and high school classrooms have an average of 3 computers each and 1 printer. Each staff member has 1 computer. Additional technology includes a computer projector, digital cameras, Gateway Destination computers, and a V-TEL system.
The district is wired with a T1 connection providing high-speed Internet access. The school was “wired” in 1998 through Governor Janklow’s “Wiring the Schools Project”. The following network servers are in place: (1) Compaq Proliant 800 model 6/200-4300 (2) Compaq Proliant 3000, and (3) T-Rex Proxy Server. The network server software is Windows 2000.
Computer education begins in Kindergarten. Grades K-2 meet once per week for a 20-minute session. Students in grades 3-6 meet for 50-minutes per week. Seventh and eighth grade students meet twice per week for 50-minute sessions. High school students meet for 50 minutes each day in the following classes: Freshmen – Keyboarding; Sophomores – Computer I; Juniors/Seniors – Computer II (elective); and Juniors/Seniors – CISCO ACADEMY (elective).
Professional Development
Approximately fifty percent of our teachers have a minimum of a computer endorsement. Over fifty percent of our teachers have attended TTL. There are 4 teachers currently pursuing master’s degrees in technology. Two teachers received CISCO training and two completed the Web Master Program. In-services are conducted based on staff needs.
Technology Goals
The White Lake School District will provide an infrastructure that will stay current with the needs of the students, staff, and community by committing to the following goals:
1. Integrate technology in curriculum to provide students with greater learning opportunities
2. Maintain server, hubs and wiring, network, software and computers to keep system running smoothly and stay current with new technologies.
3. Stay current with new software for tutorial, supplemental and operating systems.
4. Provide technical support and hardware and software support through technology coordinator position.
5. Provide staff development training to keep staff current with new technologies.
6. Provide community with technology opportunities.
DESCRIPTION OF EVALUATION APPROACH
There
will be a variety of evaluation methods used to gather data such as
questionnaires, surveys given to teachers and students, checklists, interviews,
and participant observation. The
formative evaluation will be gathering data from students and teachers to
provide feedback on how technology is being used to enhance the curriculum and
stretching students’ capabilities for learning.
The internal evaluation will also provide information about the
equipment infrastructure and software currently in use and what is needed. Another component will be a better
understanding of training needs not only with hardware and software but also
teaching methods as technology is integrated into the curriculum.
Through the summative evaluation process
we hope to provide answers to school board and community questions regarding
the following: (1) the importance of
maintaining the infrastructure, (2) the importance of maintaining/expanding the
technology coordinator position, and (3) justifying the costs. These concerns will be addressed by the
demonstration of improvement in student learning and the advantages provided to
the community as a whole.
The evaluation matrix below is a break down of how the evaluation plan will be carried out and includes specific information about how and what type of information will be collected. It provides a framework for time and lays out how the information will be used in the evaluation.
|
Evaluation Questions |
Why is it important |
Data Sources/ Information needed |
When & how the information will be
collected |
Analysis & Interpretation |
|
What
technology tools are teachers using to enhance student learning? |
à To understand what types of technology are needed in the district. à
GOALS 1 & 2 |
à
List of teacher uses, judgments about what works in their content
area and with diverse students |
à
In January teachers will be asked to complete a hardware and software
audit for their classrooms. (i.e.
rating, quality, frequency of use, content use) |
à
A graph of responses will be created for content areas and grade
levels. à
The information from each survey question will be tabulated and
represented by means & standard deviations. These items will be compared to identify a
true gauge of stakeholder perception on technology use. |
|
How
has technology impacted student learning? |
à
To demonstrate how the use of technology leads to higher level
thinking skills and problem solving and increases students’ enthusiasm for learning. GOALS
1 & 3 |
à
Teacher methodologies and instructional strategies à
Students’ perceptions of technology use in the curriculum à
SAT 9 (Stanford Achievement Test) à
DACS (Dakota Assessment of Content Standards) |
à
Participants will record specifically what is observed (i.e. which
classroom and time of visit, technology used, relationship to content,
engagement of students) à
Student attitude survey of technology used in each content à
In August individual student results from Harcourt will be analyzed
based on mean and frequency distribution. à
In May individual student results from EdVision will be analyzed
based on mean and frequency of distribution. |
à
A list of central themes with regard to the integration of technology
will be created from observations.
Commonalities will be categorized to validate results of standardized
tests, and teacher/student surveys. à
Create curriculum area list of strengths and weaknesses based on
student survey results à
The mean will tell how a student in the classroom performed. Individual classrooms can be evaluated
based on the frequency distribution. A
standard deviation will compare the results according to grade level. |
|
How
often and for what purpose does each teacher utilize the technology
coordinator? |
à
To determine why the technology coordinator is needed, & what
types of training would be beneficial to staff. à
GOALS 2, 4 & 5 |
à
Tech. Coordinator’s log of who requested help, type of problems and
assistance provided, and the number of times help was requested. |
à
In March, log will be collected from Tech coordinator. |
à
Graph the type and frequency of need requests by grade level to be
passed on to the technology committee for dissemination and analysis of
needs. |
|
What
types of professional development are needed to support classroom instruction
integration of technology? |
à
To gather information about in-services and training needs à
GOAL 1 & 5 |
à
Professional
organization and state recommendations, teacher feedback, Technology Coordinator’s log |
à
In August, each
teacher will be surveyed to discover strong and weak areas relating to
integration of technology into his/her classroom. à
In November,
data will be compiled from the tech coordinator’s log concerning which
teachers requested technology assistance and what type of assistance was
requested. à
Data from
professional organizations and state recommendations will be compiled. |
à
A grade-by-grade
listing of teachers’ strong and weak areas relating to technology integration
will be prepared in December. This
listing, along with a grade-by-grade listing of teacher requests for tech
assistance, and recommendations by state and professional organizations, will
be evaluated by the in-service committee to plan future technology related
in-services. |
|
What
types of hardware and software are needed for classroom integration of
technology? |
à
To maintain the infrastructure and keep up to date with new programs. à
GOALS 1 & 3 |
à
State standards
and goals, teacher recommendations, technology audit. |
à
In the fall
state standards will be correlated with teacher recommendations through
interviews. à
A listing of
existing hardware and software and a brief description of each will be
compiled. |
à
In January,
data from teacher interviews will be correlated with state standards. à
A listing of
existing hardware and software for use in the classroom will be given to the
teachers to make them aware of what is already available to them. à
Recommendations
for hardware and software purchases will be made by the tech committee |
|
What
training could be developed to support community needs? |
à
To provide opportunities for community to interact with available
technology à
GOAL 6 |
à
Community members and business owners |
à
Survey community members and businesses to assess needs. |
à
Use percentage responses on survey to determine community technology
strengths and weaknesses that will aid in development of reciprocal training;
i.e. community-lead training in strength areas, staff-led training in weak
areas. |
TECHNOLOGY HARDWARE AUDIT
White Lake School believes a K-12 computer technology program will provide the opportunity to make computers a life-long learning tool. The use of computer technology will provide learning experiences that develop higher order thinking skills, enhance creativity and encourage personal expression.
The following evaluation tool will be used to assess that White Lake’s hardware is meeting the needs of the district and the goals listed above.
|
Is the number of computers sufficient for all students to complete assignments in timely manner? |
Always |
Sometimes |
Never |
|
Does the equipment reflect current technologies available? |
Always |
Sometimes |
Never |
|
Are printers available in all lab settings and conveniently located for single setting computers? |
Always |
Sometimes |
Never |
|
Is the network speed and reliability sufficient to aid in research? |
Always |
Sometimes |
Never |
|
Are equipment repairs made in a reasonable amount of time? |
Always |
Sometimes |
Never |
|
Are the stakeholders involved in the planning and purchasing of new equipment? |
Always |
Sometimes |
Never |
The White Lake School District has the following
hardware:
- Computers (all networked)
- 26 Axis Technology 550 mhz 128 meg Pent. III
- 6 Axis Technology 550 mhz 64 meg Pent. II
- 24 Compaq Presario 166 mhz 64 meg Pent.
- 2 Axis Technology (Spec. Ed.)
- 5 Axis Technology (TTL)
- 1 Gateway Destination 300 mhz 64 meg
- 21 Gateway(new) 900 mhz 128 meg Celeron
- 18 Compaq Deskpro 1.4 ghz 128meg Pent. 4
- Compaq Presario(new, site coord.)
- 1 Gateway P5-100
- 1 Gateway P5-120
- 2 Laptop Computers
- Servers
- Compaq Proliant 800 Model
- Compaq Proliant 3000
- T-Rex Proxy Server
- Printers
- 1 HP 2500C Color Printer
- 1 HP Laserjet 5L
- 1 HP Laserjet 6P
- 9 Lexmark 3200
- 5 Lexmark Z32
- 1 Lexmark Z31
- Compaq U1200
- 1 Epson Sylus 600
- Hubs, Routers, and Accessories
- Bay Networks 350T 16 port
- 4 – 3Com 8 Port Office Connect Hub (not used)
- 4 Smart Stack 24 Port Switches
- 1 Cisco Router Model 1601
- Kingston 24 Port Hub
- Cisco Catalyst 3500 24 Port Hub
- 3Com Super Stack II 24 Port Hub
- 3Com Super Stack II Pathbuilder
- 5 GS531208 8 Port Switches
- Hawking Technologies Print Server
- APC SmartUPS 1000
- APC SmartUPS 1400
- Fax and Copy Machines
- Panafax UF-312 Fax Machine
- Sharp FO-2950 Fax Machine
- Cannon NP6012 Copy Machine
- Cannon NP6050 Copy Machine
- Risograph TR1510 Copy Machine
- 4 Scanners
- 4 TV/VCR on carts
- 2 25” TVs hooked to computer
- TV in Cisco Lab
- 1 Laserdisk player
- V-TEL Equipment
- Boxlight Projector with Cart
- Software
- Windows 95, 98, and 2000
- Office 97 and 2000
- Norton Anti-virus Corporate Edition
WHITE LAKE SCHOOL NETWORK SCHEMATIC
SOFTWARE EVALUATION AND AUDIT
The teachers at White Lake School use their discretion when it comes to software. They are considered to be the “experts” in the field. It is crucial that they purchase software that will enhance student learning and support the curriculum. Teachers are required to stay within the constraints of the yearly budget.
Teachers should ask themselves the following questions when choosing software:
1. What is the purpose of purchasing this software?
Ø Teaching or entertainment
Ø Skill development
Ø Reinforcement
Ø Tutorial
Ø Drill
Ø Assessment
2. Is it grade level appropriate?
3. Is it content appropriate?
In order to attain some level of accountability, teachers should complete the following evaluation when selecting software.
Software Evaluation
Software
Title: __________________________________
Subject
Area: ___________________________________
Frequency
of Use:
q Daily
q Weekly
q Other
Delivery
Methods:
q Lessons/Tutorial
q Drill
q Review
q Simulation
q Testing
q Other
Level:
q Primary
q Intermediate
q Junior High
q Secondary
______________________________________________________________________________________
Rating
Code: 5-Excellent 4-Good
3-Satisfactory 2-Fair 1-Poor
INSTRUCTIONAL
CONTENT
5
4 3 2 1 The objectives of the program
are clearly defined.
5
4 3 2 1 Content is appropriately
sequenced.
5
4 3 2 1 Practice activities and
exercises are appropriate for lesson objectives.
5
4 3 2 1 Level of difficulty is
appropriate for stated age/grade levels.
5
4 3 2 1 Teacher can modify content.
5
4 3 2 1 The content can be transferred
and generalized.
5
4 3 2 1 The program offers variability
for repeated users.
5
4 3 2 1 The program is free of
stereotyping (e.g., racial, sexual, etc.)
5
4 3 2 1 The content of the lesson
represents an important curricular topic.
Comments on Instructional Content:
INSTRUCTIONAL
DESIGN:
5
4 3 2 1 New information is presented in
context and related to previous info.
5
4 3 2 1 Feedback is used appropriately.
5
4 3 2 1 Student and teacher can control
rate, sequence and level of difficulty.
5
4 3 2 1 Summaries and reviews are
provided.
5
4 3 2 1 Uses a variety of displays,
sound, color, and response modes appropriately.
5
4 3 2 1 Sound can be turned on and off
and is used appropriately.
Comments on Instructional Design:
EASE
OF USE
5
4 3 2 1 Students can use program
independently (i.e., without aid of a manual or teacher).
5
4 3 2 1 Help is available online.
5
4 3 2 1 Users can move forward,
backward, or to the main menu.
5
4 3 2 1 Manual is clearly written and
useful.
5
4 3 2 1 User can re-enter program from
previous point of exit.
5
4 3 2 1 Program is easy to install and
set up.
Comments on Ease of Use:
MANAGEMENT
5
4 3 2 1 Student moves through the
program contingent on progress.
5
4 3 2 1 Keeps accurate and useful
records of responses.
5
4 3 2 1 Branches appropriately based
on student scores.
5
4 3 2 1 Program handles a wide variety
of student responses.
5
4 3 2 1 Provides diagnostic/entry level
testing.
5
4 3 2 1 Is used effectively in groups
(cooperative learning or competition).
Comments on Management:
MOTIVATION
5
4 3 2 1 Program holds user’s attention.
5
4 3 2 1 Program does not insult or
demean user.
5
4 3 2 1 Program preserves user’s
privacy (e.g., no loud noises).
Comments on Motivation:
TECHNICAL
ASPECTS
5
4 3 2 1 Screen displays are effective.
5
4 3 2 1 Program avoids unnecessary
delays (e.g., slow loading of graphics).
5
4 3 2 1 Program is difficult to
“crash”.
Comments on Technical Aspects:
Portions
of the document are excerpted from http://www.silverlake.mec.edu/homeplate/sweval.html
and http://www.ed.brocku.ca/~jkerr/sftwreva.htm
The
technology committee will review software requests. This will provide a systematic process and
avoid duplications. The evaluation will
be used as a tool to assist in determining purchases.
WEB SITE
EVALUATION
It is expected that the teachers of the White Lake School District will
share educational websites on the teacher share drive. Since time is precious to every teacher, a
tool should be used to present an overview of the website. Teachers can quickly evaluate whether or not
the site may be useful to them.
Following is a recommended form:
TITLE of the web site:
___________________________________________________________
URL:
________________________________________________________________________
CONTENT/GRADE LEVEL:
_____________________________________________________
Desired Characteristics of Web Sites
0 is low, 1 is sufficient, 2 is great
0 1
2 The format is User friendly:
Clear scope, easy to understand and use, includes appropriate, clearly labeled
links.
0 1
2 The format is Courteous:
Graphics are quickly downloaded and relevant, text is easy to read. Background
is subdued and coordinates with text colors and graphics.
0 1
2 The format is Aesthetically
appealing:
The page is attractive and uses graphics creatively.
0 1
2 The content is Credible:
Information is accurate, complete, and maintained.
0 1
2 The content is Useful:
Content is meaningful, difficult to convey, and/or quintessential.
0 1
2 The content is Rich:
Content is rich and likely to be revisited.
0 1
2 The content is
Interdisciplinary:
Integrates several content areas or disciplines.
0 1
2 The learner process includes
Higher-order thinking:
Challenges learners to think, reflect, discuss, hypothesize, compare, classify,
etc.
0 1
2 The learner process is
Engaging:
Process engages the learner.
0 1
2 The learner process engages
Multiple intelligences or talents:
Effectively integrates at least 3 intelligences or talents. (language, math,
intrapersonal, interpersonal, spatial, musical, physical)
Total the points you gave for each criteria and compare to the scale below.
17-20 points Excellent.
13-16 points Very good.
9-12 points Beware of rough spots.
0-8 points A waste of time.
Portions of this document are excerpted from BlueWeb'n Applications Evaluation Rubric, copyright 1996 PacificBell. Permission granted.
CONCLUSION
As technology changes and advances, White Lake School will strive to keep up with technology in both hardware and software. We realize that we must prepare our students with 21st century skills. The plan provides a systematic process for maintenance, support, replacement cycles, and teacher training. This technology plan supports high achievement for all students, shared decision-making and collaboration among all that have a stake in the success of the district.