Technology Utilization Audit- Action Plan Final

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 1

Educational Technology Utilization Remediation Plan Jennifer Falestiny, M.Ed. IDT Doctoral Candidate – Keiser University Dr. Ashlee Robertson December 9, 2018

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION …………………………………………………………………………. 4 2. BACKGROUND …………………………………………………………………………… 4 2.1. Demographics ………………………………………………………………………….. 4 2.2. Needs Assessment Summary …………………………………………………………... 5 3. NEEDS ASSESSMENT FINDINGS………………………………………………………... 6 3.1. School Culture And Technology Utilization Capabilities ……………………………… 6 3.2. Technology Utilization Identified Gaps …………………………………………………8 3.3. Needs Assessment Findings and Recommendations…………………………………... 10 3.4. Needs Assessment Summary …………………………………………………………...13 4. TECHNOLOGY AUDIT INSTRUCTIONAL INTERVENTION OVERVIEW………….. 15 4.1. Summary of Comprehensive Instructional Intervention ………………………………..15 4.2. Intervention Timeline …………………………………………………………………..16 4.3. Intervention Targets……………………………………………………………………. 16 5. TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION MODEL IMPLEMENTATION ……………………….16 6. CAD TECHNOLOGY TRAINING FOR TEACHERS……………………………………. 18 7. TECHNOLOGY PLC DEVELOPMENT …………………………………………………..19 8. STEAM LAB PROPOSALS ………………………………………………………………..21 9. INTERVENTION PLAN MANAGEMENT………………………………………………. 26 10. ASSESSMENT STRATEGIES……………………………………………………………..28 10.1.

Informal Observation……………………………………………………………28

10.2.

Formal Observation/ Teacher Evaluation……………………………………….29

10.3.

Teacher Survey………………………………………………………………….30

10.4.

Professional Relationship……………………………………………………….30

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 3 11. LIMITATIONS……………………………………………………………………………..31 12. CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………………………..31 13. REFERENCES ……………………………………………………………………………..33 14. APPENDICES ………………………………………………………………………………34

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 4 Introduction The following document is remediation an action plan for increasing the utilization of technology in a school environment. A technology utilization audit was performed on the school identified in the document. A needs assessment analysis was conducted and serves as the basis for the utilization audit. The compiled information consists of two administrative interviews, teacher qualitative and quantitative surveys, and a review of the current school technology plan. After reviewing the data collected through the needs assessment, a performance gap was identified in the school’s technology utilization. The following document will explain the identified school’s technology culture, explain the data collection methodology, identify a performance gap in the school’s technology utilization, address needs assessment findings and recommendations and present an action plan to address performance gaps identified. Background Demographics The school identified in this case study is a private catholic elementary school in Sarasota County, Florida. Sarasota county is located on the west coast of Florida with a population of 419,119. Out of the county population, 14.4% are school age children. The median household income in Sarasota county is $52,796 with 92% of the population (25 years and older) graduating with a high school diploma (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017). Sarasota county is ranked as #2 out of 62 school districts in Florida (NICHE, 2018). Sarasota county consists of 33 elementary schools, 21 middle schools and 13 high schools. In addition to the public schools in Sarasota county, there are 16 schools associated with the archdiocese of Venice consisting of 4336 students with a 100% graduation rate (Archdiocese of Venice, 2018). Out of the 16 schools in the archdiocese 5 Elementary Schools and 1 high school are in Sarasota county. The anonymous Catholic school

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 5 (ACS) identified in this case study is affiliated with the Archdiocese of Venice and follows the ordinance of the Diocese of Venice as well as the standards set by the Sarasota County School Board. ACS is a co-ed PK-8 elementary school made up of 419 students with 31 teachers. The student to teacher ratio at ACS is 14:1 with an average class size of 22 students. The tuition rate to attend ACS is $6,951 per year and 40% of students receive financial aid assistance for the partial or full cost of attendance by means of private scholarship provided by the school. Needs Assessment Methodology After identifying ACS for the technology utilization case study, a needs assessment was conducted to audit the technology utilization at ACS to identify any performance gaps or needs for improvement in the school’s educational technology utilization. Both qualitative and quantitative data collection methods were used in the technology utilization audit. Qualitative methods included two formal interviews (Appendix A) with the principal and vice principal of ACS, as well as first-hand account responses from the school’s faculty through the faculty needs assessment survey (Appendix B). Quantitative methods in the study include 5 point Likert survey questions, and statistical findings based on fixed survey question results (multiple selection choice questions; not open ended). Examples of 5 point Likert (1 being “not at all” 5 being “extremely”) survey questions include: How comfortable are you with integrating technology into your daily classroom lessons? and, Rate your willingness to integrate new technology into your daily lessons. Upon request, the school provided their school technology plan for review as well. The administrative interview was intended to gain a holistic insight on the school’s technology utilization, capabilities, challenges and goals for improvement.

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 6 Needs Assessment Findings School Culture and Technology Utilization Capabilities All students at ACS K-8 have access to 1:1 Chromebook technology. Administrators stated that although all students K-8 are assigned individual Chromebooks, consistent daily use of the Chromebook technology starts in 3rd grade, and 6th grade and up are able to take their Chromebooks home. The school as a whole utilizes Google suite software for educational technology tools, including Google Classroom, and ClassDojo platform for parent communication and student behavior management. Each teacher is assigned his or her own laptop and iPad for professional use. The school is equipped with approximately 60 additional ipads for student use and are predominantly used as an instructional aid in the Media Center special course utilized in grades Preschool-8th. Each classroom is equipped with a working active board connected to a stand-alone computer (additional to teacher computer and/or laptop). Each classroom is also equipped with an all-in-one scanner/copier/printer machine. A few document cameras are on campus, but it was discussed in the administrative interview that they are not utilized by the faculty for instructional use. ACS is in the beginning stages of designing and integrating a STREAM program. STREAM stands for Science Technology Religion Engineering Arts and Mathematics. STEAM is a multi-dimensional cross curricular hybrid course that teaches core concepts of science and engineering with artistic reasoning and mathematical computation skills using technology as a resource and learning tool. Because this is a religious affiliated school, they have added “R” in the acronym STEAM to integrate religion into the program. Current resource technology in the STREAM lab consists of: 2 CraftBot 3D Printers, a banner printer, 1 of four school ActivePanel boards, 2 sphero robots, 1 Dot and 1 Dash Robot, 1 Code-a-pillar, 1 Ziggy Girl, 1 Bloxel, 2 class

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 7 sets (25ct.) of Ozobot AGV Robots, 50 Merge Cubes, and 1 Makey Makey. The STREAM Lab is not currently a working laboratory structured as a curriculum course. Teachers are able to reserve the lab to work independently with the resource in the room. A separate technology class is offered to every homeroom once a week as a specials course (45 minutes). Students are also offered a library media specials course once a week as well (45 minutes). Teachers at ACS are required to display evidence of classroom technology integration into their daily lesson plans. Teachers are observed and evaluated by the school administrators on their utilization of digital tools by means of the diocese of Venice evaluation standards. In compliance with the Diocese of Venice Schools, ACS administrators require each teacher to plan and integrate 1 STREAM Unit in the Spring and 1 STREAM Unit in the Fall; both of which require a scheduled formal observation. 75% of teachers implement and utilize a classroom Digital Citizenship Policy and ACS has a working School-Wide Technology Plan that is updated annually. It is clear that ACS is doing a thorough job in providing students with 1:1 technology, and teachers with 1:1 technology with the addition of advanced technology resources. As stated in the administrative interviews, each student K-8th grade is provided with an individually assigned netbook, and each teacher is provided with an individually assigned laptop and ipad, therefore providing accommodations for 1:1 technology used K-8th grade at ACS. ACS has supportive staff to help with the up-keep of classroom technology as well as support for technology utilization in the classrooms. Over 50% of teachers at ACS communicated that they feel their school is doing a great job in utilizing educational technology. The teacher population displays evidence of satisfactory attitudes towards the current technology utilization at ACS, however 90% of ACS teachers stated that they would like to have more training on classroom

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 8 technology and how to utilize it in their daily instruction. Specific trainings requested by teachers include: 1. How to utilize classroom technology in daily instruction, 2.On-going technology support for classroom technology integration, 3. How to implement technology in a meaningful and purposeful way, and 4. How to use technology in a way that CHALLENGES students. Additional to this data, there are other findings that identify a technology utilization gap and call for recommendations on improvement. Technology Utilization Identified Gaps After the administrative interviews, it was expressed that a majority of educators utilize technology in the classroom, but a majority of teachers at ACS experience challenge in how to integrate technology into their classrooms in a meaningful and purposeful way. The administrative team at ACS stated that they have a need for more teacher trainings from outside sources on technology integration and to bring excitement and new energy when presenting new technology integration practices. In addition to trainings, the principal stated that her goal for the STREAM lab resource technology would be to change the lab from a resource to a fullyfunctioning curriculum course that can be offered to all students at ACS as a specials enrichment course (similar to that of art, PE, media etc.). In addition to the administrative interviews, the teachers at the school participated in a needs assessment technology utilization survey. Of the 30 teachers at ACS, 85% of teachers have been teaching for over 8 years, and 25% have advanced degrees. 90% of teachers stated that they would like to have ongoing training in classroom technology and how to utilize it in daily instruction, and on-going technology support for classroom technology integration. Additionally a majority of teachers stated that they would like additional training on: how to implement technology in a meaningful and purposeful way, how to use technology in a way that

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 9 CHALLENGES student learning, and the difference between PASSIVE use and ACTIVE use of technology in the classroom. A need for training on the National Education Technology Plan and the Digital Use Divide is evident as only 20% of the teachers at ACS have heard of the Digital Use Divide. According to the 2017 annual report from the NETP, there is a Digital Use Divide between students using technology passively to consume content and students using technology actively as a tool to promote higher-level learning outcomes (NETP, 2017). The NETP urges teachers to ensure that our students understand how to use technology actively not passively (Falestiny, 2018). "Passive use is described as consuming media content passively or simply completing digitalized school work (worksheets, textbooks etc.). Active use is described as using technology in a way that challenges the learner to use technology as a tool to produce innovative learning outcomes" (Falestiny, 2018). The teachers at ACS display awareness of this issue, despite not knowing how to solve the problem by stating comments like: “I think there should be a balance. The students at our school (upper grades) spend all day on technology. I am afraid human contact and communication will become a problem. I am concerned with the amount of screen time these children have in a day”. Additionally, teachers made comments requesting assistance in collaboration to understand how to implement technology in an active and challenging way for students. One teacher states: “I would love to see for our school a continuing education program that teachers are engaged in and ready to learn how to incorporate all sorts of new ideas. I also think a Tech-share (online collaboration space) where each teacher shares one new exciting thing they are trying every couple of months would be greatly beneficial for our faculty”. Other comments on the same request of collaborative Professional Learning Committees (PLCs) for

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 10 technology integration are a consistent trend in the survey results. The following is a break-down of the findings based on the needs assessment conducted through administrative interviews and teacher surveys.

Needs Assessment Findings and Recommendations Condition

Findings

School Wide Technology

• • •

Technology Software Google Suite Class Dojo

Classroom Technology

• •

• •

Active Board Stand-alone computer for Active board All-In-One Printer/copier/scanner Ipads STREAM Resources

• Document cameras 1:1 Simulated instruction • ESOL/ESE Accommodation • Demonstrations • Student Presentations

• • •

1:1 Chromebooks K-8 1:1 Laptops for teachers 1:1 Ipads for teachers

•

•

Individual Technology

Recommendations

•

Teacher and Student training on “Active” Use of Technology vs. “Passive” Use. Develop Professional Learning Communities (PLC)on technology utilization in the classroom and TAP Technology Integration Model

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 11 Resource Technology

• • • • • • • • • • •

2 CraftBot 3D Printers banner printer four ActivePanel boards 2 sphero robots 1 Dot and 1 Dash Robot 1 Code-a-pillar 1 Ziggy Girl 1 Bloxel 2 class sets (25ct.) of Ozobot AGV Robots 50 Merge Cubes 1 MakeyMakey.

• • • • • • • • •

12 Lego Mindstorm Kits 12 Cue Wonder Robots 10 Sphero Robots Makey Makey Class set (12) 2 Maker Bot Printers Lego WeDo Class set Course Development for Pre-K- 8th grade Curriculum Design Teacher training on technology that could currently be utilized by an entire class.

*Pilot: CAD teacher professional development. All students would be able to use K-8. Model Making, Spatial awareness, creative thought process, visual and kinesthetic learning modalities. Step further: with middle school using calipers to replicate physical objects, mathematical computation skills, scaling, creation of organic shapes using inorganic tessellations. Step further: 3D Print designs.

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 12 Educator Proficiency

School Technology Plan

Asking for more trainings: • classroom technology and how to utilize it in your daily instruction • On-going technology support for classroom technology integration • How to implement technology in a meaningful and purposeful way • How to use technology in a way that CHALLENGES my students • The difference between PASSIVE use and ACTIVE use of technology in the classroom

• Develop trainings on utilization, implementation and differentiation of classroom educational technology.

Due for revision after 20182019 school year

• Add school-wide digital citizenship policy • Add findings from this case study/independent technology utilization audit (needs Assessment) • Add STREAM Lab Resource Technology Section (Needs, yearly goals, budget, action steps and long term goals)

• TAP Integration Model Training • PLC Grade level technology integration collaboration • Techy-Talk share space

Needs Assessment Summary Based on the administrative interviews and the survey results, it is clear that there is a gap in understanding how technology should be integrated into daily lesson plans. It is also evident that the faculty needs training on the issue of the Digital Use Divide and the difference between

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 13 active technology use and passive technology use. Additional technology equipment is needed in the STREAM lab program to accommodate the student population and to accommodate the growth of a program. In addition to equipment, curriculum design and teacher training resources are needed for the STREAM Lab and are crucial for utilization of the technology and growth of the program as there is not enough resources for a class of 20 students to utilize. ACS’s technology mission statement states that their mission “envisions incorporating technology into the educational environment to encourage problem solving, exploration, and learning in the classroom; promote student-centered learning; provide access to appropriate technology for all students and staff; and to restructure the learning outcomes” (Appendix C). Additionally, it is a technology goal in the school’s policy to increase access to technology for all faculty, staff, and students, and to provide on-going staff development for the implementation and use of technology. Based on the findings of the needs assessment in correlation with the school’s technology mission statement and goals, an action plan is needed to address these gaps in technology utilization. The short-term obtainable goal (Phase I) will be to conduct two informative teacher trainings on the utilization of a technology integration model (TAP Technology Integration Model: Appendix D) designed to address the Digital Use Divide. In addition to the training sessions, a digital share-space will be created for teachers to use in their PLC meetings. The last step of Phase I, will be to deploy a differentiated STEM project-based learning K-8 training course on 3D CAD modeling (3D CAD Software Rendering and 3D Printer Technology) using the Tinker CAD platform. Because all students are on a 1:1 Chromebook utilization, the pilot program would allow for teachers to customize their lesson using the CAD platform as a technology tool for project based learning. CAD allows students to work on model

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 14 making, spatial awareness, creative thought process, visual and kinesthetic learning modalities, mathematical computation skills, scaling, creation of organic shapes using inorganic tessellations, and much more. Technology Audit Instructional Intervention Overview Summary of Comprehensive Instructional Intervention Based on the needs assessment findings, it is suggested that the school adopt a technology integration plan to aid in curriculum design, and trainings to accommodate the adopted model (Gokdas, & Torun, 2017). To address the need of the implementation of a school STEAM program, a differentiated project based learning K-8 training course will be developed for teachers to learn how to make 3D model renderings using the Tinker CAD platform. It is intended for teachers to then develop a project based learning activity for his or her students while also utilizing the TAP integration model in developing their curriculum. To execute the implementation of the TAP model, complete the CAD training course, and develop a CAD based supplemental project, it is suggested that Teachers work in grade level technology PLCs to collaborate on the use of the TAP Technology integration model, the collaborative share space, and the integration of CAD modeling into a project based learning activity. It is intended for teachers to provide feedback on the TAP Technology integration model and to use the TechyTalk share space as a professional development resource. It is also intended that ACS administration will develop clear expectations on teacher technology utilization and the integration of the TAP model, and continue to monitor and evaluate classroom technology utilization. Intervention Timeline

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 15 Phase I Training on the Digital Use Divide, and how to integrate technology in a challenging and meaningful way, Training on TAP Technology Integration Model(Appendix E), Collaborative Share Space (Techy-Talk.weebly.com), STEM Differentiated Project Based Learning K-8 Training Course on 3D CAD Modeling (3D CAD Software Rendering and 3D Printer Technology) using the Tinker CAD platform. Teachers work in grade level technology PLCs to collaborate on the use of the TAP Technology integration model, the collaborative share space, and the integration of CAD modeling into a project based learning activity. Phase II Follow Up Teacher Evaluations on: Technology Integration Model, & Shared Space Utilization. Development of supportive resource curriculum K-8 with current STEAM Lab Technology. Phase III Ground-level program and curriculum design of STEAM Lab. Program outline proposal. Budget Proposal for technology and equipment order. Update School Technology Plan. Intervention Targets The following document will describe in detail the three specific intervention targets: Technology Integration Model Implementation, CAD Technology Training for teachers, Technology PLCs (Professional Learning Communities) Development, and an improvement design proposal for the STEAM lab. Each intervention target will: address the improvement gaps identified in the needs assessment, describe a detailed action plan to improve the identified gap, and suggestions for assessment of the intervention.

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 16 Technology Integration Model Implementation Summary Of Needs Currently ACS does not use a technology integration model as a guide in planning classroom instruction with technology as a tool. Both administration and teachers at ACS agree that a technology integration model would be helpful in remaining conscious about higher level technology use that challenges our student’s learning (Xie, Kim, Cheng, & Luthy, 2017). Action Plan To address the need of a technology integration model, it is suggested for ACS to adopt or design a technology integration model. In this proposal, it is suggested that ACS pilot the use of the TAP Technology Triangle Integration Model (Appendix E) designed by the author. The TAP (Transformative, Active, Passive) Technology Triangle was developed in response to the National Education Technology Plan’s (NETP) call to action to address the Digital Use Divide (divide between active and passive users of technology). The TAP model is intended to work as a guideline to integrate technology in a meaningful and purposeful way that challenges the technology and the user to develop higher level produced outcomes. Action Plan Timeline and Stakeholder Responsibility: 1. Action Plan is presented to administration for approval and suggestions. 2. Administer teacher training on the Digital Use Divide (Appendix F) and introduction of the TAP Technology Integration Model (Appendix D/E). 3. Teachers work together in grade-level (or subject) Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) to personalize, explore and comprehend the TAP Integration Model.

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 17 4. Teachers use the TAP model to integrate higher level technology utilization into classroom curriculum. 5. Administration sets clear expectations on how ACS is going to follow the model. How are teachers expected to integrate technology? What evidence of learning will be provided? Assessment The TAP model integration will be assessed by means of formal and informal observation. Administration will evaluate teacher technology utilization bi-annually. It is suggested that teachers provide evidence of the TAP model utilization by annotating T-1, T-2 or T-3 (Tier 1,2,3 in the TAP Model) next to technology strategies in written plans. It is suggested to complete a comprehensive teacher survey at the end of the school year on the outcomes of the adopted model, as well as suggested improvements. CAD Technology Training For Teachers Summary Of Needs In the needs assessment, it was found that administration requires each teacher to complete a STEAM project (of which is formally evaluated) twice a year. ACS is in the process of starting a STEAM program and teachers are requested to use STEAM equipment or technology; however, STEAM at ACS is not currently offered as a stand-alone enrichment course. Teachers find that they are requested to use STEAM technology in lessons, but do not have the required training to do so. Unfortunately, due to the lack of available technology (quantity amount), it is difficult to compile trainings to allow for whole class use. It is found that the school has two 3D printers, and although that is not a sufficient number to keep up with

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 18 school population, an applied technology is available through the use of netbook computers. Because all students K-8 have access to a computer a STEAM technology known as CAD (Computer Aided Design) would be a great starter training course (Appendix G) for teachers as it is easy to differentiate for different ability levels and subject areas. This part of the action plan is a teacher training in lieu of a designated STEAM teacher and or STEAM stand-alone course. It is intended that with this technology training, all teachers regardless of subject or grade level, will be empowered to implement this technology into a project based learning activity in his or her classroom. Action Plan To meet the need stated above, a modular style course will be created for teachers to complete training at their own pace. Teachers will then use the TAP model and the CAD training to develop a project based learning activity for his or her students to complete, using CAD as the project platform. Action Plan Timeline and Stakeholder Responsibility: 1. Action Plan is presented to administration for approval and suggestions. 2. Curriculum developer will develop a training course on CAD for education using Tinker CAD as a platform. 3. Administration will deliver the course and set a timeline for completion and expectations on how teachers will provide evidence of course completion. 4. Teachers will then use the TAP model and the CAD training (Appendix G) to develop a project based learning activity for his or her students to complete, using CAD as the project platform.

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 19 5. Administration will evaluate the lesson by means of formal or informal observation. Assessment Administration will evaluate the lesson by means of formal or informal observation. It is suggested for teachers to complete a comprehensive survey after the course and lesson delivery to gain feedback from teachers and from student response to the project. Technology PLC Development Summary Of Needs In the needs assessment it was found that teachers require and desire on-going technology training and collaborative support.

Action Plan To address this need, it is suggested that teachers form technology PLCs by grade level or subject area to work collaboratively on technology integration in classroom instruction. PLCs can work together on the integration of the TAP technology integration model, the CAD course training and on-going technology integration into daily instruction. It is also suggested for teachers to use the Techy-Talk web page (Appendix H) designed for this school to collaborate in this share space. It is intended for teachers to post successful higher level (Tier 2 or 3 on the TAP model) technology integration ideas and lessons used in the classroom. Action Plan Timeline and Stakeholder Responsibility: 1. Action Plan is presented to administration for approval and suggestions. 2. Curriculum developer will design and publish Techy-Talk collaborative share space.

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 20 3. Administration will deliver the expectations of PLCs and the Techy-Talk collaborative share space. 4. Teachers will work in PLCs for self-guided professional development Assessment Administration will determine the expectations of Technology PLC meetings. Administration will determine the expectations on the use of the Techy-Talk collaborative share space, but it is recommended for teachers to post successes and ideas on higher level technology integration in the classroom for other teachers to learn from. It is recommended for teachers to share on Techy-Talk at least once per quarter.

STREAM Lab Proposals Summary Of Needs After interviewing the administration at ACS, it was stated that the STEAM lab Is in the process of being developed and is currently available for teachers as a resource. It is a goal for ACS to transform the STEAM lab into a stand-alone course offered to all students K-8. In completing the technology audit at ACS, it was found that in order to transform the current STEAM lab into a full-functioning stand-alone course to accommodate the entire student population a re-design will need to take place. It will depend on the space, budget for equipment and budget for staff to determine the extent of the course design. The following proposals will be based on three different suggested STEAM lab course designs based on the funds that can be allotted.

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 21 Action Plan To address the need of starting a STEAM lab, a lot of work, time and money are considered. It is suggested to select a base plan to start with and collaborate with administration to tailor a laboratory designed to meet the specific needs and restrictions of the school. The following three plans are suggested to the administration to choose from: Bronze $10,700 startup cost, Silver (recommended and achievable) $15,000 start-up cost, and a Gold plan (Dream Lab) for $27,000. These budget proposals are suggested baselines based on experience with having designed and implemented a few STEM labs before. It is important to discuss a yearly budget in addition to the start-up for longevity of the program and new technology purchases as new technology becomes available years later.

Action Plan Timeline and Stakeholder Responsibility: 1. Action Plan is presented to administration for approval and suggestions. 2. Administration needs to determine budget and what proposed plan they would like to choose. 3. Administration and curriculum designer will work closely together to order and assemble products and equipment. 4. Curriculum designer will work through the summer to design curriculum tailored to each grade specific level and equipment available. Proposed Plans Plan 1 (Bronze) Budget Friendly

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 22 Item

Cost Per

Quantity

Total

Teacher

55,000

Ipad Mini

300

Charging Station

200

200

Itunes Credit

100

100

Sphero Robots

150

Ping Pong Table

300

Lego Mindstorm

450

55,000 14

14

1200

600 300

4

1800

EV3 FIRST Lego League

300

300

Membership and Fees Lego WeDo 2.0

190

14

2660

Electrical Circuit

200

200

1000

1000

1500

1500

parts Office Supply Credit per year Makey Makey Class set Ikea Storage

200

4

800

Total

$10,700 (less salary)

Cabinets

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 23 Plan 2 (Silver) Achievable and Recommended Item

Cost Per

Quantity

Teacher

55,000

55,000

Teacher Assistant

30,000

30000

Ipad Mini

300

Charging Station

200

200

Itunes Credit

100

100

Sphero Robots

150

14

600

Dash Robots

150

14

600

Dash Accessory Kits

60

14

840

Ping Pong Table

300

Lego Mindstorm

450

14

Total

1200

300 8

3600

EV3 FIRST Lego League

300

300

Membership and Fees Lego WeDo 2.0

190

14

2660

Electrical Circuit

200

200

2000

2000

parts Office Supply Credit per year

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 24 Makey Makey Class

1500

1500

set Ikea Storage

200

4

800

Total

$15,000 (less salary)

Quantity

Total

Cabinets

Plan 3 (Gold) Dream Lab Item

Cost Per

Teacher

55,000

55,000

Teacher Assistant

30,000

30000

Ipad Mini

300

Charging Station

200

200

Itunes Credit

100

100

Sphero Robots

150

14

600

Dash Robots

150

14

600

Dash Accessory Kits

60

14

840

Cue Robot

200

14

2800

Ping Pong Table

300

Lego Mindstorm

450

EV3

14

1200

300 14

6300

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 25 FIRST Lego League

300

300

Membership and Fees Lego WeDo 2.0

190

14

2660

Electrical Circuit

200

200

3000

3000

1500

1500

2500

2500

parts Office Supply Credit per year Makey Makey Class set MakerBot 3D printer Replicator+ Maker Bot

1250

2

2500

Replicator Mini Filament

1000

Ikea Storage

200

1000 4

800

Total

$27,000 (less salary)

Cabinet

Assessment Designing and implementing a stand-alone course like this, is a several year process. After the initial budget and plan is selected, administration and the STEAM teacher/curriculum designer will need to meet on an annual basis to discuss new improvements and innovations.

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 26 Intervention Plan Management Action Plan Targets 2018-2019 School Year Intervention/Evaluation Strategy Technology Integration Model (TAP) Training Technology Integration Model (TAP) classroom utilization Technology Trainings CAD Technology Training Course(Classroom STEAM) CAD Project Based Learning Implementation Teacher Technology Utilization Evaluation (Diocese of Venice) Technology Integration Planning with PLC Cross curricular collaboration (Techy-Talk) STEAM Lab Budget Review STEAM Lab Equipment Purchase STEAM Lab Enrichment Course and Scheduling Design STEAM Lab Course Curriculum Design

Frequency One-time training

Compliance date January

Weekly

May

Quarterly Quarter Project

Annual review March

Quarter Project

May

Bi-annually

May

Bi-weekly Quarterly On-going On-going On-going

March March May May August

On-going

August

Longevity Plan (3 years) Goal Technology Integration Model (TAP) Training

2018-2019 School Year TAP model training. TAP model introduced and implemented into a few lessons or projects.

2019-2020 School Year TAP model used as a guide to daily technology integration in classroom instruction. Integration strategy is present in teacher lesson plans and observed during evaluations.

2020-2021 School Year Teacher are very comfortable and conscious about higher level technology integration and students understand the TAP model as well.

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 27 Technology Integration Planning with PLC

Establish Technology PLC with grade level or subject area. Create a goal for the school year to achieve as a PLC.

Technology PLC meets twice a month as a collaborative space to work on higher level technology integration strategies using the TAP integration model. (Techy-Talk post requirement once per quarter)

STEAM Lab

Choose a budget. Buy supplies. Designate STEAM Lab teacher. Establish course identity and scheduling plan.

STEAM is offered as an enrichment special to all students. Establish a strong foundation for students and teachers to understand STEAM Lab procedures and Expectations. Develop curriculum for each grade level.

By this year, the Technology PLC should have a strong foundation of how to integrate higher level technology into daily lessons. Teachers still work collaboratively to continue to improve and grow as professionals. (Techy-Talk post requirement once per quarter) STEAM is now a fully-functioning stand alone enrichment course offered to all students. Students understand the procedures and expectations of the STEAM lab. Curriculum development is ongoing and builds off of prior knowledge from the grade level before.

Assessment strategies The action plan is intended to help aid in closing the technology gaps identified at the school. The identified action plan targets include: the implementation of a technology integration model, a CAD technology training for teachers, the development of technology professional learning communities, and the development of a STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics) lab program. To ensure that the plan is working and or successful the following strategies will be used in assessing the integration of the technology plan: informal

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 28 observation, formal teacher observation, diocesan teacher evaluations, teacher survey and a working collaborative relationship with the administrative team. By means of teacher observations and evaluations, it is intended for there to be a noticeable increase in the frequency of higher-level (Tier 2-3 in the TAP model -Appendix A) educational technology use in daily instruction. After the implementation of the Action Plan, it is intended for teachers to become more comfortable with integrating meaningful technology utilization into classroom curriculum. Informal Observation During informal walk-through observations, administrative team members can look for visual representation of the TAP Technology Integration Model being displayed in the classroom. Administration should be able to see students engaging in higher level of technology utilization. Depending on the administration’s presented expectations of the teachers, there should be evidence in weekly lesson plans of technology utilization as per the TAP model notated in physical lesson plans as well (Ex: “Digital Research (T1) ” representing that a student is performing research which falls under Tier One). In addition to daily lesson plans, administration should be able to see if teachers are participating in the online digital share space platform once a month, and should be receiving copies of Technology PLC notes monthly as well. Formal Observation/Evaluations Teachers at ACS are given a minimum of two scheduled formal observations per year and are also evaluated using the Diocese of Venice Teacher Evaluation Form. Teachers are given the rating scale as well as the categories that they will be evaluated on. In each category, teachers

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 29 can be ranked as: Action Needed, Ongoing Development, Consistent Accomplishment or Significant Accomplishment. There are several applicable categories that the ACS teacher population should show improvement on, such as Digital Tools, Professional Responsibility (professional growth opportunities), and Instruction Strategies. Such evaluation standards in these categories include: •

The teacher promotes creative and innovative uses of technology

•

The teacher incorporates digital tools as a means to increase student rigor going beyond using technology for skill practice, word documents and games

•

The teacher motivates students to think on their own and use digital tools innovatively for research, exploring real-world issues, and solving authentic problems

•

Demonstrates proficiency in verbal and written communications as well as tech programs used for communication

•

Seeks out opportunities for professional growth

•

The learning goals of lessons are clearly communicated to students

In addition to diocesan teacher expectations, the administration at ACS requires teachers to plan, implement, and receive an evaluation of a STEAM project-based-learning activity once per quarter. Teachers can be evaluated on the quality of the technology integration based on the expectations set forth by the administration team in correlation with the TAP Technology Integration Model. As part of professional development in the evaluation, teachers can be assessed on their integration of the TAP Technology Model, participation in Technology PLCs,

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 30 and the completion of the CAD teacher training course. It is advised that teachers take the opportunity to develop one of their evaluation STEAM quarterly projects by using and developing a project for his or her class using CAD as the technology component. Teacher Survey and Feedback It is recommended that teachers participate in a similar survey to the needs assessment survey after a few months of the action plan integration. The post assessment will contain questions from the needs assessment survey to look for growth, as well as specific questions to gather qualitative and quantitative feedback on the integration of all components of the action plan. It is intended to conduct teacher interviews as well to gather feedback on the trainings and TAP Technology Integration Model. Professional Relationship It is intended for long-term professional developmental success in the areas of instructional technology. It is suggested that the administrative team continue to evaluate their own evaluation methods as well as communicated expectations to continue to allow their staff to develop. It is suggested that the administrative team work with the curriculum designer to review collected data, adjust accordingly and continue to develop newer improvements and opportunities for growth. Limitations The limitations of the proposed action plan would be the receptiveness of the teachers, the time and dedication of the teachers and administrative staff, and funding the STEAM lab. Teachers have an abundance of expectations and responsibilities, and integrating a new technology integration model and integrating the model into lesson planning could pose a challenge to the teachers at ACS. The idea of developing new technology PLCs, and conducting

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 31 technology trainings will take time to accomplish, and take time away from other tasks that need attention by the teachers at ACS. According to the ACS administration, the staff as a whole is generally receptive towards new educational ideas and towards improvement change. If the school faculty is motivated and willing to integrate the action plan, that will take away a large portion of the proposed risks. In addition to the teacher professional development portion of the action plan is the proposal for the STEAM Lab start-up equipment. This is a huge undertaking that takes a lot of time, knowledge, and money. If the parties are willing to take the time, hire a knowledgeable consultant, develop a program, and hire a qualified person to write curriculum and run the program, then the only issue will be the cost. Not only is it expensive to develop a program, to ensure longevity, a detailed budget and plan for future financial stabilities must be in place before rolling-out the program. Conclusion In conclusion, the success of the action plan relies on the dedication and effort put forth by all participating parties. The longevity of the success of higher level technology integration depends on the practice and consistency of all participating parties. To keep up with the demand of growing technology, teachers must be willing to continue to push the boundaries of education technology as well. As far as a STEAM lab development, it is achievable if the funds are available, and if someone is willing to put in the hard work that it takes to make it happen. The faculty and administration already demonstrate outstanding teaching abilities and attitudes towards continued self-growth. It is observed that ACS has the aptitude to make this action plan a success and based on observation, is clear that ACS will continue to excel as a leading school

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 32 in the Archdiocese of Venice as they move forward towards improving their already outstanding educational technology plan.

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 33

References Archdiocese of Venice. (2018). Retrieved from https://dioceseofvenice.org/offices/officesdepartments/catholicschools/. Falestiny, J. (2018). Political Analysis of The United States Department of Education’s National Education Technology Plan (NETP) and Policy. Retrieved from https://falesteamy.weebly.com/tap-tech-model.html Gokdas, I., & Torun, F. (2017). Examining the impact of instructional technology and material design courses on technopedagogical education competency acquisition according to different variables *. Kuram Ve Uygulamada Egitim Bilimleri, 17(5), 1733-1758. doi:http://dx.doi.org.prx-keiser.lirn.net/10.12738/estp.2017.5.0322 Private School Review. (2018). St. M. Catholic School Profile (2018-19) | Sarasota, FL. Retrieved from https://www.privateschoolreview.com/ NICHE. (2018).2019 Best School Districts in Florida. Retrieved from https://www.niche.com/k12/search/best-school-districts/s/florida/ U.S. Census Bureau: Sarasota County, Florida; UNITED STATES. (2017). Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/sarasotacountyflorida,US/PST045217 US Department of Education Office of Educational Technology (A.). (2017). Reimagining the Role of Technology in Education: 2017 National Education Technology Plan Update [2]. Retrieved from https://tech.ed.gov/files/2017/01/NETP17.pdf

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 34 Xie, K., Kim, M. K., Cheng, S., & Luthy, N. C. (2017). Teacher professional development through digital content evaluation. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 65(4), 1067-1103. doi:http://dx.doi.org.prx-keiser.lirn.net/10.1007/s11423-017-9519-0

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 35 Appendix A Administration Interview Questions: •

Tell me about the technology you currently use; school-wide, classroom, and resource.

•

Do you have a school-wide technology plan?

•

Do you use a technology implementation model?

•

Do you implement a digital citizenship policy?

•

Are teachers required to show evidence of technology use in the classroom? If so, how?

•

Is technology required in lesson plans?

•

How is technology use monitored and assessed per individual educators?

•

What goals do you have for technology utilization in your school?

•

What challenges are you currently facing with educational technology?

•

What do you see as a need (in your school) as far as educational technology?

•

How receptive is your teacher population to classroom technology integration?

•

What trainings do you currently offer for on-going technology training? What improvements would you like to see as far as on-going technology training.

•

Are your teachers aware of the Digital Use Divide?

•

Are your teachers trained on how to integrate technology in a way that challenges their

learners? (Explain Active vs. Passive Tech. Use.)

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 36 Appendix B Teacher Technology Utilization Survey Grade Band * Check all that apply. ▪

Early Childhood (Pre-K)

▪

Primary (K-2)

▪

Elementary (3-5)

▪

Middle (6-8)

▪

Option 5

Years Teaching Mark only one oval. ▪

0-2 years

▪

3-5 years

▪

6-8 years

▪

9-15 years

▪

16-20 years

▪

Over 20 years

Subjects You Teach * Check all that apply. ▪

All (Pre-K, Primary, Elementary)

▪

Math

▪

Language Arts

▪

Science

▪

Social Studies/ History

▪

Exceptional Student Education (ESE)

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 37

▪

ESOL

▪

Enrichment Course (Art, Music, PE)

▪

Technololgy Course (Computers, STEAM)

▪

Resource Teacher

▪

Religion

▪

Other:

Do you have a Digital Citizenship Policy in your class? * Mark only one oval. ▪

Yes

▪

No

What subjects do you mostly integrate technology into my lessons? * Check all that apply. ▪

Math

▪

Science

▪

Social Studies

▪

Religion

▪

ELA

▪

Enrichment or Specials class

Do you notate technology use in your written lesson plans? (What technology is being used, and why it is being used?) * Mark only one oval. ▪

No, never

▪

Sometimes, but not very often

▪

Most of the time

▪

All of the time

What technology do you have in your classroom (List all, even if there are things you do not always use). *

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 38

What technology do you consistently use in your classroom? * What technology do you wish you had in your classroom? *

I use technology in my class for: * Check all that apply. ▪

Student Research

▪

Digital textbooks

▪

Digital Assessment

▪

Digital textbook support resources

▪

Digital notetaking (Students writing in Docs or Word)

▪

Video examples (YouTube, BrainPop ect.)

▪

Presentation lectures (Teacher Powerpoints)

▪

Project Based Learning (Students)

▪

Student Collaborative Projects

▪

Student Created Presentations

▪

Exploritory Learning

▪

Other:

If Other, Explain: Who uses technology MORE during an average lesson in your room? (Are students consuming information given by YOU, or are students PRODUCING learning outcomes by USING technology themselves?) * Mark only one oval. ▪

The Teacher

▪

The Students

How comfortable are you with integrating technology into your daily classroom lessons? *

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 39 Mark only one oval. 1

2

3

4

5

not at all

very comfortable

Willingness to integrate new technology into your daily lessons * Mark only one oval. 1

2

3

4

5

I would like to stick to what I do now

I would love to integrate new tech!

How often do you use technology in your lessons? * Mark only one oval. ▪

Never

▪

About once a week

▪

A few lessons a week

▪

Every day

How much training have you received from your school on topics of classroom technology? * Mark only one oval. ▪

None

▪

Maybe one training

▪

A few trainings

▪

multiple trainings

▪

multiple trainings with on-going support

Are you aware of a school-wide technology integration plan at your school? * Mark only one oval. ▪

Yes

▪

No

Do you wish to have more training on classroom technology and how to utilize it in your daily instruction? * Mark only one oval. ▪

No, I dont need any training.

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 40

▪

Yes, I wish I could have more training on classroom technology.

Trainings that would be beneficial to me: * Check all that apply. ▪

How to use basic classroom technology (smart board, netbooks, computers, projector ect.)

▪

How to use technology in a way that CHALLENGES my students

▪

The difference between PASSIVE use and ACTIVE use of technology in the classroom

▪

How to implement technology in a meaningful and purposeful way

▪

On-going technology trainings provided by my school or district

▪

On-going technology support for classroom technology integration

Are you aware of U.S. Department of Education's Policy on Technology known as the National Education Technology Plan (NETP) * Mark only one oval. ▪

Yes

▪

No, never heard of it until now.

What Knowledge do you have on the Digital Use Divide? * Mark only one oval. ▪

None, I dont know what that is

▪

I have heard it before, but I am not completely sure what it is

▪

I am aware of the National issue of the Digital Use Divide

What is your opinion on Technology in Education * Mark only one oval. ▪

Technology is detrimental to student achievement and growth

▪

All technology is good in education, and anyway we integrate it into our lessons is beneficial

▪

Some technology is good in education and it matters HOW we integrate it into our lessons because NOT all ways of technology integration is actually beneficial

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 41

▪

Im actually not sure of my answer, and would love to know the facts about

this. What improvements would you like to see for your school as far as technology integration or utilization? *

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 42 Appendix C ACS Technology Mission Statement and Technology Goals (2018-2019) Technology Mission Statement Our mission envisions incorporating technology into the educational environment to encourage problem solving, exploration, and learning in the classroom; promote student-centered learning; provide access to appropriate technology for all students and staff; restructure the learning environment; increase student achievement; support a comprehensive information system; develop lifelong and global learners, improve faculty and staff productivity, and provide the opportunity for faculty and staff to model appropriate technology usage. Technology is used to help enhance student education while helping students achieve a greater sense of understanding.

Technology Goals Increase access to technology for all faculty, staff, and students. Provide on going staff development for the implementation and use of technology. Integrate technology into the curriculum aligned with the FCC Standards, DOV Standards, Florida Sunshine State Standards, and ISTE. Integrate technology to automate paperwork and processing to eliminate as much paper as possible. Identify the resources necessary to implement the technology plan. Establish an ongoing process as a means to evaluate the effective implementation of the technology plan Upgrade, extend, and administer computer network and communications components. Upgrade, extend, and install computer hardware to support user technology needs. Upgrade, extend, and install computer software to support user/system needs. Improve student academic performance through integration of curriculum and technology.

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 43 Utilize technology as a medium to create an interactive partnership between our school parents, community, and business partners. Integrate technology initiatives into Professional Development activities and delivery of instruction.

Appendix D TAP Technology Integration Model

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 44

Appendix E TAP Technology Integration Model

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 45 Appendix F TAP Technology Training Slides

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 46

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 47

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 48

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 49

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 50

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 51

https://falesteamy.weebly.com/tap-tech-model.html

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 52 Appendix G. CAD For All Course Home Page

ED. TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION INDEPENDENT AUDIT 2018 53 Appendix H Techy-Talk Collaborative Share Space