APPLICATION 7: District Technology Plan
Reflection on
Hammonton School District
Technology Plan
Rochelle Henely
June 18, 2006
#6661T2005
It is not so long ago that educators were appalled at the idea of a ballpoint pen being used in the school system, “they will be the ruin of education in our country” (George Lucas Educational Foundation, 2003). This was considered a new and disruptive technology. Even today resistance to new technologies is evident in our school systems. Today, technologies in the classroom range from overhead projectors to interactive smartboards. For the purpose of this paper, technology will refer to computers, the internet, and their use. Although many schools have substantial technology in the classroom, the majority of teaching is still the “sage on stage” method. Unfortunately, for our students, Laura Ingalls could come into our classrooms and still recognize it as a schoolroom (Thornburg, D. D., 1998). The use of technology is relatively new to education and its integration is a slow but steady move towards the ideal classroom of the 21st century. The task of staying abreast of the ever-changing world of technology is something any school can achieve with a well laid out technology plan. The state of New Jersey defines a technology plan as follows:
A local technology plan is a document that is generated by a public school district, charter school or nonpublic school that details all of the components that will lead to appropriate, effective usage of educational technology in the core curriculum areas (NJ Department of Education, n.d.).
These plans are necessary for schools to receive funding in the years 2004-2007 (NJ Department of Education, n.d.) from the E-Rate program ,a government program that provide discounts on telecommunication costs to eligible schools(California Department of Education, 2005). As any well laid out plan, the district technology plan must address all aspects of educations. The spheres of influences of technology are very similar to Joyce Epstein’s framework. The Hammonton School District Technology Plan has a vision for the district, the teachers, the parents, and the state. Epstein believes success is obtained when the student is the center of the spheres. What I found interesting in the Hammonton School District is that the students, probably the most effected by this plan, were not mentioned in the district technology plan summary (Hammonton School District, 2004).
Although widespread use of technology in the business world was seen in the early 1980’s, education did not jump on the bandwagon till the early 1990’s. It seems that with the Clinton administrations commitment to technology growth, schools were soon to follow in this technological revolution (Hart, D., 1997). In 1996, President Clinton challenged America to commit to his technology initiative to prepare education for the 21st Century . His plan included a computer to student ratio of five to one by the year 2000. State and local policy makers were responsible for developing and placing technology plans into the nation’s schools. The NJ Department of Education provides a checklist for administrators to assist in the development of an adequate district technology plan (NJ Department of Education, n.d.). The Hammonton School District Technology Plan is coherent with the checklist and is thorough in the completion of the state survey.
One of the biggest influences on the education of our students is the teacher. If technology in the school system is integral to the success of our schools than more important is the training of our teachers (Laureate Education, Inc, 2004). Hammonton School District Technology Plan states that the school district should prepare teachers with training for technology-infused instruction (Hammonton School District, n.d.). Technology will not be truly integrated into the school system until teachers are given proper training and time for ongoing professional development (Pelavin Research Institute, November 1997). I agree with the thoughts discussed in EDU 6765 Discussion strand (Snider, M., 2001), many teachers are not comfortable with technology in the classroom and much of the real training happens during the actual use of a particular technology. The flaw that I see in our district is that although many opportunities for teacher training are available, teachers are not required to take classes. Many teachers are comfortable with the teaching methods of the past twenty-five years and do not desire to integrate technology into their curriculum. In addition, school districts plan many training sessions after school hours when teachers are not always available to participate. The desired school culture of technology-infused learning will never succeed if this situation is not remedied by both parties.
Another goal as stated in NJ Educational Technology programs is that students will receive technology skills needed to succeed in the workplace (Hammonton School District, 2004). Although I do not see that technology is truly integrated into the required academic classes, our school does succeed in the elective technology courses. Many of the technology courses are project-based. Project-based learning emphasizes student-centered, real world activities (Mehl, J., 1999). Courses such as graphic arts, CAD, and woodworking all integrate technology into enthralling learning experiences that are meaningful to the learner.
The Hammonton School District Technology Plan is written for the timeline of July 2004 till June 2007. Goals are specifically stated with plans for implementation also stated. The Hammonton School District seems to have a good outline for integrating technology into the curriculum. The many resources, services, and activities that are supported for integration of technology are clearly stated and use of these programs are listed and described.
With my newly acquired knowledge of the needs for technology in the school system, I believe that I would like to take part in the next development of our district technology plan. The technology coordinator and I work well together and often cooperatively solve problems within my department. The present district technology plan was developed by administrators prior to our district hiring a technology coordinator. Any good plan will have the many spheres of influence involved in its development and implementation. It would be wise for the administration to have not only the technology coordinator involved in the new plan, but a student representative, a community representative, and a teacher representative as well.
In the world of education, technology is being infused into the expectation of today’s learner. Students, parents, and society in general expect technology to be part of the educational process. Linda Roberts, Director of the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Educational Technology, states in an interview that technology in itself is not the answer to improving our schools systems. The combination of technology, demanding curriculum, teachers, and a supportive community will improve our educational system (Clopton, H., 2002). The success of our schools is dependent on the involvement of students, teachers, and the community ensuring that technology and education work hand in hand in preparing our children to become productive members of society.
Resources
California Department of Education (2005). E-rate: Reference Binder Material Retrieved June14, 2006 from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/et/ft/eraterefbinder.asp
Clopton, H.,(2002). Nobody believes it's the quick-fix for America's K-12 ills. Retrieved June14, 2006 from http://www.4teachers.org/keynotes/roberts/
George Lucas Educational Foundation. (2003). Instructional module technology integration. Retrieved May 16, 2006 from Tech Integration glef.org.pdf (3)
Hammonton School District. (2004) District Technology Plan
Hart, D., (1997). Managing
technology policy at the White House. Retrieved June 14, 2006 from
http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/prg/hart/techwh.htm#introduction
NJ Department of Education, (n.d.), Frequently asked questions for the
technology plan checklist for NJ school districts/charter schools and the
nonpublic schools.
Retrieved June 14, 2006 from http://www.nj.gov/njded/techno/localtech/faq.htm
Pelavin Research Institute. (November 1997) Investing in School Technology: Strategies to Meet the Funding Challenge. Retrieved June 13, 2006 from http://www.ed.gov/pubs/techinvest/title.html
Snider, M. (2001) Technology,
schools and culture. Discussion posted October 24, 2001 at http://www.coedu.usf.edu/~dorn/_disc5/0000004c.htm
Thornburg, D. D. (1998). Brainstorms and lightning
bolts: Thinking skills for the 21st century. San Carlos, CA: Starsong Publications.Pages 11-33
Mehl,J. (1999) Project-based learning with multimedia. Retrieved June 2, 2006 from http://pblmm.k12.ca.us/PBLGuide/WhyPBL.html
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2004). Program Six: Constraints of the classroom [Motion picture]. Exploring new technologies. Los Angeles: Author.