The real tech plan

Yes, our district has the 30 page, three-year tech plan. (Why am I not envisioning tons of people jumping on this link?) Creating/revising it is a good process in that we are forced to do a little long-term thinking.

But for day-to-day operations, for prioritizing tasks and budgets, and for creating a means of accountability, we (our tech staff and district advisory committee) put together the one-page plan which consists of annual objectives grouped under out long range (one might say permanent) goals. So far, this is what next year's plan looks like. (Each objective is usually followed by a person/persons responsible. These names have been deleted in this blog entry.)

 

Mankato Long-range Goals and Objectives for 2006-07 for District Media Services

1)    All students will demonstrate the mastered use of technology to access, process, organize, communicate and evaluate information in order to answer questions and solve problems. Action items, 2006-07
a.    Continue work with Curriculum Council on placing information literacy and technology standards in secondary written content area curricula based on survey.
b.    Develop Internet safety campaign for both school and community.
c.    Continue library media study groups to discuss best practices and the media/technology program’s contributions to student achievement.
d.    Pilot DropBox and Turnitin with high school English departments.

2)    Technology will be used to provide the most current, accurate and extensive information resources possible to all learners in the district and community in a cost effective and reliable manner at maximum convenience to the user. Action items, 2006-07
a.    Implement rSchools website for each secondary school.
b.    Implement Bright/Smart Classroom projects. (Long term project to equip all classrooms with IWB, sound systems and data projectors.)
c.    Design community reporting mechanism regarding the outcome of technology referendum.

3)    All district teachers will have the technology training, skills and resources needed to assure students will meet local and state learning objectives and have the technological means to assess and record student progress. Action items, 2006-07
a.    Expand CODE 77 training to include secondary teachers – approximately 125. (3 hours personal instruction and 9 hours group instruction to go with new teacher computers.)
b.    Conduct training in use of data projectors and IWB.
c.    Continue training sessions on Sagebrush Viewpoint software.
d.    Survey staff on Mac/Windows preference for CODE77.
e.    Work with mentors to establish a formal tech training program for new teachers.

4)    The district will use technology to improve its administrative effectiveness through efficient communication, planning and record keeping. Action items, 2006-07
a    Update SASI to 7.0
b.    Replace MeetingMaker, SendMail, and MajorDomo with Microsoft Exchange server.
    c.    Continue Sagebrush data mining project.
            i. Refresh and automate SASIxp and state test data export/import
            ii. Import data Cognitive 6
            iii. Import data DIBELS
    d.     Expand NWEA testing to grades K-1 and 11.
    e.    Expand Read Naturally to all buildings.
    f.     Implement the Versatran transportation system.
    g.    Expand use of facilities scheduling program.

5)    The district will have a reliable, cost-effective, and secure technology infrastructure that supports the learning, teaching, and administrative goals of the district. Action items, 2006-07
a.    Upgrade WAN.
b.     Continue expansion of wireless network as needed.
c.    Implement online technology repair request system.
d.    Discontinue YODA for students; move teachers to Lodestar online storage.
e.    Replace three elementary computer labs.
f.    Supervise technology needs of new classrooms at Monroe, Hoover and Washington.
g.    Hire two building technicians and data processing clerk. Train.
h.    Conduct print audit.

 Somehow the plan lacks much excitement. There is nothing directly in it about using Web 2.0 technologies with teachers. No cutting edge experiments. Lots of support of other initiatives. No teeth in getting more/better IL and IT skills into the curriculum.

But it is plan that has ownership and, if past experience is any indicator, it will get done. Something to be said for that too.