1

Technology Plan Evaluation

FRIT 7232: Visionary Leadership in

Instructional Technology
Dr. Charles B. Hodges
Fall 2013

By
Hannah Dyal
Gabrielle Guyton-Edmiston
Rhonda Roberts
Melissa Shaw

Table of Contents
I. Annotated Bibliography
II. Technology Plan Rubric
III. Technology Plan Evaluation Rubric
IV. Technology Plan Evaluation Explanations and
Recommendations

I. Annotated Bibliography
Appling County School District Technology Plan
Retrieved from: http://www.appling.k12.ga.us/Default.asp?
PN=Forms&L=1&DivisionID=6973&LMID=280318&ToggleSideNav=Single

Bleckley County Schools Technology Plan

Retrieved from:
http://www.bleckley.k12.ga.us/docs/11techplan.pdf

Chatham County Technology Plan

Retrieved from:
http://technology-supportresources.district.chatham.k12.nc.us/modules/locker/files/get_group_file.phtml?
fid=15936058&gid=2368988

Decatur Technology Plan

Retrieved from:
http://www.decaturcountyschools.org/TechnologyPlan2013_2016DecaturCounty.
pdf

Houston County Technology Plan

Retrieved from: http://www.hcbe.net/media/276859/hcboe%20tech%20plan
%2011-14.pdf
These resources are the original technology plans that we reviewed. We
examined each plan and compared each one with the rest of the technology
plans we reviewed. Each technology plan gave us an insight into what a
technology plan on the district level should look like and the elements it should
contain. We compared the five plans in order to deduce the essential elements of
an effective technology plan.

Kansas Department of Education Scoring Rubric

Retrieved from:
http://www.ksde.org/Default.aspx?tabid=2780
This is a rubric used by the Kansas Department of Education to grade technology
plans submitted by districts within the state. This is not a typical rubric that has
categories and numbers 1-5 for each category. We used parts of this as an
outline for our rubric that was put it in a standard rubric format. Their elements for
evaluation are board approved district policies section, committee
membership/stakeholder representation, district summary of progress and
technology goals, technology needs assessment, district technology
infrastructure goals and objectives curriculum integration goals and objectives,
technology professional development goals and objective, and technology plan
verification for E-rate purposes.
LInc Online Technology Plan Rubric
Retrieved from:
http://ed.fnal.gov/lincon/staff_rubric.shtml
This rubric is from Illinois. It is in standard rubric form and includes all the
required elements of a rubric for the assignment. The elements of this rubric are
vision, current situation, community/school support, engaged learning goals and
activities, professional development goals and activities, timeline,
assessment/evaluation, and design. It was used as a reference for the creation of
the rubric below.
Technology Plan Rubric-The University of Texas at Austin
Retrieved from:
http://jabba.edb.utexas.edu/it/fc_resta_courses_files/itpm/m0_6tprubric.html
This is another rubric used to grade district technology plans. It is in standard
rubric form and is very thorough. Ideas were taken from this rubric and used in
the rubric below. The elements of this rubric are executive summary, identifies
contributors and stakeholder groups, vision statement, mission statement, goals,
objectives,
needs
assessment,
general
issues,
conclusions
and
recommendations, acceptable use policy, technology and learning statement,
technology standards, requirements, and models for teaching and learning, staff
development, technology support, projects, budgets, and timelines, and clarity of
writing.

State Technology Planning Analysis Rubric

Retrieved from: http://naepdc.org/Word%20Documents/STATE%20TECHN
%20PLANNING%20ANALYSIS%20RUBRIC.doc
This is another resource used for creating our rubric. Many elements of this
rubric were used in creating our own rubric. The rubric was easy to understand
and transfer ideas into our rubric. Some of the elements of this rubric are needs
assessment, mission and/or vision, goals and objectives, action plans, program
and curriculum integration, evaluation, funding alternatives, maintenance and
support, and copyright and acceptable use policy.
Executive Summary: National Education Technology Plan
Retrieved from:
http://www.ed.gov/technology/netp-2010/executive-summary
In 2010, the U.S. Department of Education released a National Education
Technology Plan that has five major components: learning, assessment,
teaching, infrastructure, and productivity. The focus of learning is to engage and
empower students through technology in and out of school. Measuring what
matters and using that guide instruction and improvement is whats emphasized
in assessment. The teaching component focuses on preparation through
individual, team, and in-service training in order for teachers to fully connect with
technology and use it as a powerful teaching tool. Comprehensive infrastructure
is necessary for all students to have access to technology and enable them to
access that technology twenty-four hours a day. The productivity goal
emphasizes utilizing technology to increase learning and make more efficient use
of resources.
Six-Step Process in Creating a Technology Plan
Retrieved from:
http://dese.mo.gov/divimprove/instrtech/techplan/gettingstarted.htm
The Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education created a six
step process to creating a technology plan. Getting started includes selecting a
committee and making sure the technology focuses are represented. Next a
clear, concise mission statement needs to be developed that will encompass a
three to five year district technology plan. Then the committee needs to analyze
the data to determine where their strengths and weaknesses are in order to
make recommendations. After that, goals and objectives are written. Next a chart

6
is made to determine action steps, timeline for implementation, and who is
responsible for the implementation. Finally, the plan is communicated to the
district and its implementation is monitored for necessary changes and
improvements.
Anderson, Larry S. (1999). Technology planning: its more than computers
[PDF document].
Retrieved from the National Center for Technology Planning site:
http://www.nctp.com/articles/tpmore.pdf
This article is about technology planning and how its imperative that this takes
place in all districts across the world. The purpose of technology planning is for
each district to constantly seek evidence of growth in technology. A great
technology planning effort consist of incorporating computers and other
technologies because this has the potential of building, strengthening, and
sustaining learners through networks and events that embody the concept of
community. Technology planners must always remember that growth comes from
facing the honest reality of a condition, then working together to build a strategy
for guaranteed success.

Kennedy, M. (2010). Connecting to the future. American School and

University, 82(9). 14-21.
This article summarizes the five main goals of the Department of Education for
technology plans across the country as we enter the second decade of the
twenty-first century. The first goal is learning so that students are using
technology inside and outside of schools to enhance learning and creativity. The
second goal is using assessment data gained through technology for
measurement and improvement purposes. The next goal is to use technology to
maximize the effectiveness of teachers. Fourth, infrastructure needs to be in
place in order for these things to happen for all students and teachers. Finally,
technology will be used to increase productivity.
Overbay, A., Mollette, M., & Vasu, E. (2011). A technology plan that works.
Educational Leadership, 68(5). 56-59.
The authors of this article assert that there are five main lessons that
administrators should keep in mind when implementing new technology plans.
The first is that its not about the technology. Rather, its about the people who
are doing the planning, teaching, and learning. Next, the technology plan needs
to fit the needs of the school including needs of the personnel and the schools
infrastructure. Third, professional development must be built in when new
technology is added to schools, and it must be timely and in the right amounts.

7
Giving collaboration its due is the fourth lesson because teachers can learn from
each other and essentially have professional development that is peer led.
Lastly, schools need to become turnover-proof because technology initiatives
can be killed when theres too much turnover.
Whitehead, B., Jensen, D. & Boschee, F. (2003). Planning for technology: a
guide for school administrators, technology coordinators, and curriculum
leaders. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Corwin Press.
This book focuses on integrating computers in the general curriculum, which
represents a shift from simply providing computer labs. The book provides
valuable information on establishing a technology plan which supports in-class
technology for students and teachers. In addition, a model is included which
supports evaluation and assessment of the technology plan. Professional
development, financial management, leadership and planning strategies are
emphasized.

II. Technology Plan Rubric

Needs Clarification
4 Pts.

CATEGORY

Well-Defined 6 Pts.

Beginning 2 Pts.

Goals

Goals are broad,

comprehensive and realistic in
addressing teaching and
learning needs. Goals clearly
answer the questions: Who?
What? By when? By how
much? According to which
instrument? Submitted on time.

Goals are mostly

equipment based and
loosely linked to
improvement plans.
Submitted on time.

Goals are absent or

seem to be only
equipment based; are
not measurable; are
incomplete, difficult to
understand; or are
submitted late.

Professional
Development

All of the following items are

present:
Plan supports all staff
within the
school/district.
Staff development is
supported through
collaboration with
peers.
Technical assistance is
provided.
Time is allotted to
promote learning and
knowledge acquisition.

Three of the following

items are present:
Plan supports
all staff within
the
school/district.
Staff
development
is supported
through
collaboration
with peers.
Technical
assistance is
provided.
Time to
promote
learning and
knowledge
acquisition is
allotted.

Zero to two of the

following items are
present:
Plan supports
all staff within
the
school/district.
Staff
development
is supported
through
collaboration
with peers.
Technical
assistance is
provided.
Time to
promote
learning and
knowledge
acquisition is
not allotted.

Assessment
of Services
Needed

The plan clearly and

consistently identifies:
Data collection for
effective evaluation
(quantitative and
qualitative).
Goals and indicators of
achievement.

The plan generally

identifies:
Data
collection for
effective
evaluation
(quantitative
and
qualitative).

The plan is missing

and/or does not
address one or all of
the following:
data
collection for
effective
evaluation
(quantitative

Integration into the

curriculum.
Realistic
accomplishments to
individual situation.
The process as
ongoing.

Goals and
indicators of
achievement.
Integration
into the
curriculum.
Realistic
accomplishm
ents to
individual
situation.
The process
as ongoing.

and
qualitative)
goals and
indicators of
achievement
integration
into the
curriculum
realistic
accomplishm
ents to
individual
situation
the process
as ongoing

Accessibility
of
Technology
Resources

Technology resources that are

available to all schools, faculty,
students, and community
members are listed in the plan.

A few technology
resources that are
available to all
schools, faculty,
students, and
community members
are listed in the plan.

Technology resources
that are available to
all schools, faculty,
students, and
community members
are missing and not
listed in the plan.

Budget

Provides a prioritized list of

major tech plan projects, tasks
and timelines. Provides budget
summary estimate of capital
expenses (hardware, software,
facilities, infrastructure, staff
development, tech support,
etc.) Identifies possible
alternative funding resources.
Projects, timelines, and
budgets are realistic and
consistent with plan goals and
objectives. Submitted on time.

Provides most, but

not all, of the project,
timelines, and budget
estimate information.
Appears to be
generally consistent
with plan goals.
Submitted on time.

Projects, budgets, or
timelines missing;
provides vague or
little information on
project, budgets, or
timelines; projects
appear not relevant to
plan goals; budget
estimates appear
incongruent with plan
or unrealistic; or not
submitted on time.

Ongoing
Evaluation

An evaluation process and

instrument are described in
detail, and are comprehensive
in nature. Assessment is timely,
and tied to the objectives.

An evaluation process
and instrument are
mentioned, but not in
detail. Objectives
need clarification.

An evaluation process
is lacking, or is
described, but lacks
detail and
comprehensiveness.
It does not refer to the
objectives

Design

Uses the template, easy to

read and understand
spelling/grammar/punctuation
correct, header/footer
completed.

The design and

elements need
clarification, there are
a few
grammar/spelling
errors, or header and
footer are missing.

The correct template

was not used.

10

III. Technology Plan Evaluation Rubric

Our group evaluated the Forsyth County Schools technology plan for July 1,
2012 through June 30, 2015. The plan can be viewed at:
http://www.forsyth.k12.ga.us/cms/lib3/GA01000373/Centricity/Domain/33/20122015TechPlanforweb.pdf

CATEGORY

Well-Defined 6 Pts.

Goals

Goals are broad,

comprehensive and
realistic in addressing
teaching and learning
needs. Goals clearly
answer the questions:
Who? What? By when?
By how much? According
to which instrument?
Submitted on time.

Professional
Development

All of the following items

are present:
Plan supports all
staff within the
school/district.
Staff
development is
supported
through
collaboration with
peers.
Technical
assistance is
provided.
Time is allotted
to promote
learning and
knowledge
acquisition.

Needs
Clarification 4
Pts.

Beginning 2 Pts.

Score

Goals are mostly

equipment based
and loosely linked to
improvement plans.
Submitted on time.

Goals are absent

or seem to be only
equipment based;
are not
measurable; are
incomplete, difficult
to understand; or
are submitted late.

Three of the
following items are
present:
Plan
supports all
staff within
the
school/distri
ct.
Staff
developmen
t is
supported
through
collaboratio
n with
peers.
Technical
assistance
is provided.
Time to

Zero to two of the

following items are
present:
Plan
supports all
staff within
the
school/distr
ict.
Staff
developme
nt is
supported
through
collaboratio
n with
peers.
Technical
assistance
is provided.
Time to

11
promote
learning and
knowledge
acquisition
is allotted.

promote
learning
and
knowledge
acquisition
is not
allotted.

Assessment
of Services
Needed

The plan clearly and

consistently identifies:
Data collection
for effective
evaluation
(quantitative and
qualitative).
Goals and
indicators of
achievement.
Integration into
the curriculum.
Realistic
accomplishments
to individual
situation.
The process as
ongoing.

The plan generally

identifies:
Data
collection
for effective
evaluation
(quantitative
and
qualitative).
Goals and
indicators of
achievemen
t.
Integration
into the
curriculum.
Realistic
accomplish
ments to
individual
situation.
The process
as ongoing.

The plan is missing

and/or does not
address one or all
of the following:
data
collection
for effective
evaluation
(quantitativ
e and
qualitative)
goals and
indicators
of
achieveme
nt
integration
into the
curriculum
realistic
accomplish
ments to
individual
situation
the process
as ongoing

Accessibility
of
Technology
Resources

Technology resources
that are available to all
schools, faculty,
students, and community
members are listed in the
plan.

A few technology
resources that are
available to all
schools, faculty,
students, and
community
members are listed
in the plan.

Technology
resources that are
available to all
schools, faculty,
students, and
community
members are
missing and not
listed in the plan.

Budget

Provides a prioritized list

of major tech plan
projects, tasks and
timelines. Provides
budget summary
estimate of capital
expenses (hardware,
software, facilities,
infrastructure, staff

Provides most, but

not all, of the
project, timelines,
and budget estimate
information.
Appears to be
generally consistent
with plan goals.
Submitted on time.

Projects, budgets,
or timelines
missing; provides
vague or little
information on
project, budgets, or
timelines; projects
appear not relevant
to plan goals;

12
development, tech
support, etc.) Identifies
possible alternative
funding resources.
Projects, timelines, and
budgets are realistic and
consistent with plan
goals and objectives.
Submitted on time.

budget estimates
appear incongruent
with plan or
unrealistic; or not
submitted on time.

Ongoing
Evaluation

An evaluation process
and instrument are
described in detail, and
are comprehensive in
nature. Assessment is
timely, and tied to the
objectives.

An evaluation
process and
instrument are
mentioned, but not
in detail. Objectives
need clarification.

An evaluation
process is lacking,
or is described, but
lacks detail and
comprehensivenes
s. It does not refer
to the objectives

Design

Uses the template, easy

to read and understand
spelling/grammar/punctu
ation correct,
header/footer completed.

The design and

elements need
clarification, there
are a few
grammar/spelling
errors, or header
and footer are
missing.

The correct
template was not
used.

13

IV. Technology Plan Evaluation Explanations and

Recommendations
Goals
Evaluation:
We chose to give 6 points because we think the goals are well defined and
realistic. The goals clearly state who (the whole district) the goals are meant for
and who will be responsible for implementing the different strategies, what needs
to be done to meet the goals, when these goals need to be met (by June 30,
2015), and the needed instruments to enhance all goals (ME Instructional
Framework, ANGEL, NETS-S, FCS Graduate Profile, 21st Century Media Center,
iAchieve Virtual Academy, Olweus, etc.).
Recommendation:
Our recommendation is for them to specify yearly where they would like to be in
regards to their technology plan along with data.
Professional Development
Evaluation:
We gave the professional development section a 6. The FCSD maintains an
instructional technology support team that includes both an Instructional
Technology Specialist and a Media Specialist for each school within the district
that clearly provides support to the staff within the school and the district. In
addition, this staff also provides technical assistance as needed. The plan also
includes reference to Early Release Days as part of an ongoing method of staff
development. The Technology department is part of a larger committee that
reviews district goals and determines the professional learning goals. Clearly
time is allotted to promote professional learning.
Recommendations:
Although the plan provides a link to a site that includes each schools
professional learning plan, it is cumbersome to review each link for the thirty-five

14
schools. A table that outlines specifically the professional development related to
technology would more clearly identify the professional development in that area.

Assessment of Services Needed

Evaluation:
We gave Forsyth County Schools a 4 for assessment of services needed. A
method of ongoing data collection is in place. While a plan for classroom
observation is in place to identify the level of technology integration at each
school and an online instrument is used to facilitate the collection of data from
the observations, the data collected is not clearly delineated. We were unable to
identify whether the data was quantitative or qualitative.
Recommendations:
We recommend that the observation instrument be included in the addendum to
the plan.
Accessibility of Technology Resources
Evaluation:
We gave Forsyth County Schools a 6 for accessibility of technology resources
because they have made it a priority to make technology equally available to all
students in and out of schools. One innovative way they have bridged the poverty
gap is by partnering with Comcast Internet services to provide affordable Internet
access to less economically advantaged students. Each school also has at least
ten laptop computers that students can check out for home use. They have
technology standards for all classrooms such as four modern computers in each
classroom and a whiteboard, mounted projector, and sound system in each
permanent classroom. Additionally, all full-time classroom teachers have a laptop
computer with Internet access, an e-mail account, and storage space.
Recommendations:
One recommendation is to have whiteboards, projectors, and sound systems in
mobile classrooms as well as permanent classrooms. Also, only middle schools
and high schools are required to have at least one computer lab. We believe that
should be a requirement for elementary schools, too. Finally, since 20% of
Forsyth County students are classified as economically disadvantaged, we

15
recommend the acquisition of more stand-alone computes for students to check
out for use at home.

Budget
Evaluation:
We gave the budget section of the technology plan a 4 because it wasnt
comprehensive and technology needs are not prioritized. While the budget
expectations are realistic and consistent with goals and objectives, alternatives
are not provided in case the pending availability of funds does not come
through.
Recommendations:
The budget needs to be prioritized so that technology decisions can easily be
made if the full expected funding does not come through. Also, the budget should
include alternative funding sources because they are not currently identified.
Possible sources of alternative funding include Digital Wish, WeAreTeachers,
and Donors Choose. Additionally, grants could be requested from Computers for
Learning, Grants for Youth Programs, The Heinz Endowments- Technology for
Learning, and IBM Services Grants.

Ongoing Evaluation
Evaluation:
We would give the ongoing evaluation a 6. This district has set goals and clearly
outlined ways to evaluate and achieve them. They are clearly listed on their
three-year technology plan. Everything in this section is clear and measurable.
Recommendations:
One recommendation is to explain the evaluation of increased student
achievement with percentages used with the goals. Also, a percentage goal
should be set for the retention of a highly qualified work force.

16
Design
Evaluation:
We would also give the design a 6 as well. We think it was very easy to read and
understand. Each section was labeled with the right heading and discussed the
appropriate information related to each section.