• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
/
279-3626May
9,
2005
Mr.
Michael
L.
SubinChair, Montgomery County Council Education CommitteeStella
B.
Werner Council Office Building100 Maryland AvenueRockville, Maryland 20850Dear Mr. Subin:The enclosed Question and Answer document provides answers to the written questionssubmitted by Council members Praisner and Denis during last week's Education Committeemeeting regarding the Technology for Curriculum Mastery initiative.As you know, the strategic reform initiatives under way in the Montgomery County PublicSchools (MCPS) during the last five years have focused on transforming the school system'sability to implement a highly rigorous curriculum, grade-level student assessments, continuousprofessional growth
for
teachers and principals, and greater communication with parents. Acritical initiative in this transformation is devoted to integrating new forms
of
classroom leveltechnology and assessments
to
improve, support, and simplify the work
of
teachers andprincipals in diagnosing the academic progress
of
students. This initiative is called Technologyfor Curriculum Mastery.The Technology
for
Curriculum Mastery initiative is fully integrated with other MCPS strategicinitiatives and reforms
of
the past five years.
We
continue
to
be focused on providing effectivesupports for teachers and principals to improve teaching and learning. The new technologyenhanced assessments are designed to support and simplify the work
of
teachers and principals indiagnosing and monitoring students' academic progress. This automated assessment initiativereplaces long-standing paper-based assessments with intuitive technology used
to
monitor andanalyze student performance. This is consistent with the school system's strategic plan andaccountability framework. The systemwide introduction
of
the technology-enhanced
. a s ~ e s s m e n t s ,
 
including the use
of
handheld devices to record and review data,
is
a key feature
of
-the school system's strategic plan for
all
elementary schools.
 
Mr.
Michael Subin
2
May 9,2005
If
you have any additional questions, please contact me or
Mr.
John
Q.
Porter, deputysuperintendent for strategic technologies and accountability, at 301-279-3581.Sincerely,Larry
A.
BowersChief Operating OfficerLAB:csaEnclosureCopy to:Members
of
the Board
of
EducationMembers
of
the County Council
Dr.
WeastExecutive Staff
 
V
r
Questions from the Montgomery County Public Schools Budget WorksessionTechnology for Curriculum Mastery (TCM) Initiative
•
Mrs.
Praisner asked MCPS
staff
to
provide information on the long-term costs
of
the
rCM
initiative.
Mr.
Denis-I
wouldlike
to
getabetterhandleonthetotalcost
of
thisprogram. Iunderstand that there are expenditures
of
$1.2
million proposed for FY05 and the Board'sFY06 request assumes another
$2.4
million. Is this the total funds associated with
the
program?
What
about beyond FY06? Do these dollars include training? Maintenance?Replacement Costs?
The long-term costs for the TCM initiative are associated with the per student licensing feesfor the assessments; training for teachers new to Montgomery County Public Schools(MCPS) and teachers changing grade levels; and cyclical hardware (handheld devices)replacement. The five key assessments
of
tPe TCM initiative are Running Records,Measures
of
Academic Progress-Reading (MAP-R), the Dynamic Indicators
of
Basic EarlyLiteracy Skills (DffiELS), Stanford Diagnostic Reading Test (SDRT), and Reading 3D.Descriptions
of
these assessments are attached. The current cost for FY 2007 and beyond isapproximately $1,711,974 per year. Since recurring per student licensing fees are requiredfor paper-based versions
of
the assessments, these costs are not entirely new. In addition, thestaff training
is
being incorporated into the overall professional development (grade-level)plan. These costs for FY 2007 are lower
than
the FY 2006 costs because MCPS will pay afurther reduced per student licensing fee for handheld-based assessments and anticipates areduction in staff training costs.
• Why
was
the
TCMproject accelerated before any formal evaluation was done?
To
date,
onlyanecdotal information
has
been offered Our understanding
is
that the program was
to be
tested on a pilot basis during SY04-05.
Mr.
Porter indicated that the program was indeedstill in a pilot phase.
After evaluating various forms
of
classroom level technology and assessments to improve,support, and simplify the work
of
teachers and principals
in
diagnosing the academicprogress
of
students, MCPS determined in August 2003 that the product from WirelessGeneration provided an appropriately sophisticated and mature product. Their mCLASSbased products used the reading assessments (Running Records and DffiELS) that arealready administered by MCPS and had an established and proven track record. MCPStechnology and curriculum staff conducted hands-on product evaluations and referencechecks. Once the mCLASS handheld assessments were judged to be appropriate options,MCPS initiated steps to field-test the technology-enhanced assessments in eight schoolsduring spring 2004.During the field test, staff evaluated various factors including ease
of
use for teachers in aclassroom setting, usability
of
the Web sites for accessing
data,
and the amount and type
of
information available to teachers and administrators. Based on the overwhelming positiveresponse to the use
of
the technology-enhanced assessments from teachers andadministrators, observations
of
teachers using the product, and evidence
of
use
of
the Web
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...