New Leadership, New Directions

Our small independent school is going to be helmed by a a new Head next year...again...for the second time in two years. With it brings new technology direction and an opportunity for me to check myself. Do I want to keep the technology program pointed in the direction it is currently going? I moved around a lot as a kid and my unconventional mother encouraged me to change my name at each school. Yes, really. I've been Ali, Alecia, Annie, Lisa, Allison and Alisha. So, do I want our program to keep moving towards 1-to-1 with laptops? I've been tooting that horn for a while but recently I have been rethinking that. This summer's Philly ISTE conference may shed some light on future directions in tech, but my gut instinct tells me that touch tablet computing, a la the iPad (not necessarily that particular one), is going to change a lot. Of course, we hear that all the time: this is the next big game changer. But in this case, I think it may be true.

The instinctive nature of the iPad and its operating system makes technology so much more accessible and eliminates the need to spend so much time teaching HOW to use the apps. Kids are instead just USING them right away. Yes, there is a lot to be desired in the way of the iPad being an input device, but that's coming. App development is happening more quickly than we can keep track. So, with this new leadership, I think I am going to seek a new direction and turn our ship a little bit. I'll focus, as usual, on faculty development, but from a hardware point of view, I'll exhort a BYOT model. We shall see how this is received.

Evaluations for Digital Projects

As Understanding By Design, and backwards planning teaches us, the goals and assessments should be the point from which we start when designing curriculum. Although I do not follow this exclusively, I do think it's a good practice and one of the areas in which I feel most challenged is grading. Admittedly, I don't grade as rigorously as I would like. This is the result of many different reasons, not just laziness. However one of the reasons is that I've never had it made as straightforward a process as I recently discovered it COULD be: The September/October 2010 Learning and Leading with Technology featured an article about this topic entitled "Where's the Beef?: Adding Rigor to Student Digital Projects." The author, Bernajean Porter, cites the NCREL "Nine Scoring Traits for Digital Projects." Each scoring guide is divided into two parts that make total sense: content and craftsmanship. Perfecto! It's exactly the combination I seek in all the projects I design for students.

The article goes over other important facets of project design but I got the most out of the scoring traits. I'll be trying these out immediately for sure.

What Dictates Success?

Our school's long range technology plan is almost complete. A part of this planning process is meeting with similarly-sized and resourced schools to determine where our own resources are going as compared to others'. It has been an interesting process and got me thinking about what makes for a successful technology department. I tend to think in pictures, so I created these images of what I think is a positive feedback loop and what makes a negative feedback loop. However, I am quite sure they are incomplete or too simplistic. What am I missing?

Technology Planning

Our school's 3 year technology plan expired this summer. This year, I am tasked to create a new one. It looks and sounds so simple, only three small words: create a new one. Yet the task requires herculean research, collaboration and refinement. I've started by making a plan for the plan. Yes, you read that right. One of my first steps is to research other schools' and our state's technology plan. While engaged in that step, I came across ISTE's Technology Support Project. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation created a process that is supposed to "identify effective technology support models for schools while taking into consideration the unique characteristics of the educational environment....The Technology Support Index (TSI) assessment is a tool for schools and districts to profile their technology support programs and to provide solutions based on those unique profiles." I'm not sure how many people have used this tool. but I did find it linked on the School Computing Wiki's technology planning page. There are some helpful web links there that I will not reproduce here, but I will share our plan for the plan:

Tentative Planning Schedule
3 Year Tech Plan

Interested Parties:
Technology Coodinator (ABD), Computer Support Specialist (PO), Lower School Director (SG), Upper School Director (LA), Head of School (JZ), Plant Manager (DH), Business Manager (AG), Development Director (DC), teachers, parents, students, church members and board members.

Steps:
Lunch with students to elicit ideas
Lunch with teaches to elicit ideas
Coffee with parents
Attend Board Meeting or just elicit ideas via email?
National Schools Research—where do you put resources?

McDonough (Baltimore)
Beaver Country Day School (Boston)
Collegiate (NYC)

Research existing Tech Plans (Incl. public school plans)
Work with head to articulate a mission statement.

Timeline:
November hold all lunches and meetings
December draft initial plan, including budget projections
January submit to Head and revise as necessary
February, complete and publish

Questions:
Do we need assistance with the process?

Action items from Oct 10 Meeting:
1. Develop essential questions/ reference previous examples.
2. Identify point people for each focus group.
3. Notify parents of the process.
4. Develop mission statement with Head.
5. Identify board members for input.
6. Schedule dates for focus groups in November.