Print

Print


I second Lucie's comment. It's not about the technology but how it can
support digital teaching and learning.  Technology/Content/Pedagogy aren't
exclusive of each other and need to be considered together when
planning...educators, IT, admin, curriculum coaches, should be at the
table.

*Elizabeth McCarthy, MAT*
*Digital Learning SpecialistGoogle for Education Certified Trainer*
Google+google.com/+ElizabethMcCarthy
<https://www.google.com/+ElizabethMcCarthy>



On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Lucie deLaBruere <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> I actually miss the early tech planning days with Frank Watson, Bill
> Rommond, where teachers from the trenches were part of the process of
> envisioning the possibilities  for our kids/schools.  #justsaying
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Drescher, Peter <
> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Hi all...
>>
>>
>>
>> Still some internal discussion on this point here at AOE.. tying it to an
>> *existing* required plan...instead of requiring a stand-alone tech plan.
>>
>>
>>
>> BUT,  here is where it stands at this point:
>>
>>
>>
>> First, some facts and clarification:
>>
>>
>>
>> 1.        E-rate no longer requires technology plans.   We had based our
>> requirement of those on the Federal requirement tied to E-rate.  This was
>> also tied into Title IID which provided some of our Ed Tech funding too.
>> The new E-rate Modernization was where and when this “let go” of tech plans
>> took place.  Title IID tanked in 2011.
>>
>> 2.       That said, I do feel a process should remain in place at the
>> Vermont State level to have some form of planning document at the local
>> level that lays out a clear planning process for a continued focus on
>> planning for learning with technology.  I don’t believe it should be a
>> stand-alone “technology plan”.
>>
>> 3.       All plans on file from 2012 (and some later) are “valid” until
>> June of 2016.
>>
>>
>>
>> We wrote technology plans for the past 10 years.. and in the end, they
>> generally were lists of things and equipment that were desired.  There was
>> a requirement to indicate the professional development and the ways the
>> technology could transform the educational environment, but that was often
>> not tied to anything tangible or learning outcome oriented.  It was
>> stand-alone workshops during in-services that may or may not have took.
>>  Our work with CFP and Title IID gave us a monitoring arm on the tech plans
>> and for the most part folks were following what was written, though often
>> that was very general.   I think what would serve us better moving forward
>> are *learning plans* that indicate how technology helps us achieve much
>> more tangible goals in that realm.
>>
>>
>> That said.. you probably have those kinds of plans in another format at
>> your SU or school already... the school improvement plan, the strategic
>> plan, the five year plan, etc. etc.   How can we leverage a learning with
>> technology element into those plans.
>>
>>
>>
>> What I would like to do instead:
>>
>> I’d like to bring together a small group of individuals and craft some
>> guiding questions and some format that Supervisory Unions or unified
>> districts could embark on to get the most from a planning process as we
>> move forward into the 21st century, especially in a field that is now
>> changing so rapidly.   I think a brief document
>>
>>
>>
>> I plan to do this during this month, virtually, with perhaps one
>> in-person meeting.   I have identified those individuals but would be open
>> to others who might have an interest in this.  I am also crafting a survey
>> to see what “elements” make the most sense in this process. Will get this
>> out in the next couple of weeks.
>>
>>
>>
>> For now, the tech plan document on our website is a fine document with
>> lots of input from the field.  You could easily structure much of your
>> planning using that resource.  In the end, you should tie any tech planning
>> to your local initiatives to make the most sense.   There is also a role
>> here for the Education Quality Standards to be incorporated as well.    We
>> are discussing ways to structure EQR, or Education Quality Review to
>> address this area as well.
>>
>> Whatever you are doing, make sure it ties to your learning outcomes you
>> have for students.
>>
>>
>>
>> General trends you should consider:  (nationally and in VT)
>>
>> Making one to one or full time access to technology possible for students
>> should be a significant goal
>>
>> Moving services, apps, etc. to the cloud is a growing trend—reduces time
>> in front of a server and allows for remote access for practicality.
>>
>> A mix of devices is becoming the norm—moving away from standardizing one
>> platform—the world does not work that way and neither should your schools.
>>
>> Finding ways to incorporate mentoring models and more innovative ways for
>> teachers to share and learn is key
>>
>>
>>
>> More on this later..
>>
>>
>>
>> Peter
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *Peter Drescher*
>>
>> *Education Technology Coordinator*
>>
>> *Vermont Agency of Education*
>>
>> *Transformation and Innovation Division*
>>
>> *219 N. Main St. Suite 402, *
>>
>> *Barre VT 05641*
>>
>> *Ph.: 802.479.1169 <802.479.1169>*
>>
>> *My EMAIL ADDRESS HAS CHANGED—The NEW ADDRESS IS:
>> [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>*
>>
>> *Twitter: VTED_Technology*
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* School Information Technology Discussion [mailto:
>> [log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of *Raymond Ballou
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 9:02 AM
>> *To:* [log in to unmask]
>> *Subject:* Re: TECHNOLOGY PLANS--
>>
>>
>>
>> Dear Patricia (and I see Craig just posted)
>>
>>
>>
>> Our two SUs  WNWSU and OWSU are merging come next July and in part of
>> that transition we are also updating out Tech Plans.
>>
>>
>>
>> So we are looking for guidance from the state and to also kill two birds
>> with one stone, to make sure ours is state compliant.
>>
>>
>>
>> Agreed, multiyear.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> R
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I think it is an important way to share the larger vision for an SU or
>> school district in addition to each school level multi-year plan.
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Search <http://list.uvm.edu/archives/school-it.html>the SCHOOL-IT Archive
>>
>> Manage <http://list.uvm.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=SCHOOL-IT&A=1> your
>> Subscription to SCHOOL-IT
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Search <http://list.uvm.edu/archives/school-it.html> the SCHOOL-IT
>> Archive
>>
>> Manage <http://list.uvm.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=SCHOOL-IT&A=1> your
>> Subscription to SCHOOL-IT
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Lucie deLaBruere
> www.LearningWithLucie.com
> http://twitter.com/techsavvygirl
>
> Google Voice (802) 557 0013
>
> [log in to unmask]
>
> --------------------------------------
> Nothing is really work unless you would rather be doing something else.
>   - James M. Barrie
> ---------------------------------------
> Google Certified Educator / Google for Education Certified Trainer
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Search <http://list.uvm.edu/archives/school-it.html> the SCHOOL-IT Archive
>
> Manage <http://list.uvm.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=SCHOOL-IT&A=1> your
> Subscription to SCHOOL-IT
>