1.2 Strategic Planning
Candidates facilitate the design, development, implementation, communication, and evaluation of technology-infused strategic plans. (PSC 1.2/ISTE 1b)
ITEC 7410 Technology Planning Project
As an Instructional Technology candidate, I must develop the ability to design, develop, implement, communicate, and evaluate a technology plan for our school. The Technology Planning Project is an artifact which allows me to practice each of these skills which will be expected of me as a technology leader. The Technology Planning Project analyzes the school’s current School Improvement Plan to see if our technology vision for the school matches with the ways we expect to improve as an organization. Then, I write a Shared Vision Paper that proposes research-based strategies for best practices for a technology plan design and its continued development. I communicated the actions that stakeholders in the plan would need to take to accomplish it. The SWOT Analysis helps me identify threats to the plan as well as strengths and opportunities that we already have to implement it. Finally, the Action and Evaluation Plan propose a timeline and criteria for evaluation of the impact of the plan. Completing the plan allowed me to serve the role as a technology leader in my school who makes decisions based on careful analysis of current reality and future vision.
In order to design a technology plan for a school, a technology leader must know where the school stands currently and then compare that with the projection of future goals for the school. When I assessed our current reality, I noticed a gap between it and future goal attainment of the technology plan. So, to develop a plan, I researched best-practices for effective technology use. As a first step, I surveyed the School Improvement Plan (our LSPI) to see what our stated goals were set by our county and school. Then, I designed a plan to achieve the stated goals and set a timeline and defined the people involved in the implementation of the plan. In our case, there was a gap between the rigor of achievement stated in our mission and vision statements and the data: our students progressed academically but with less engagement than is needed for sustained growth. A technology leader’s knowledge and skills are built by researching current trends and studies in the effective use of technology to fill that void of engagement and motivation for both staff and students. And so, the Rationale section of the Shared Vision Paper develops the design by providing commentary on the practices I found that would serve the weaknesses in our school’s current reality. In order to implement the technology plan, I performed a SWOT analysis to determine the best steps. Then, I wrote the Action plan for implementing the opportunities I found after analysis. Fully implementing a technology plan involves communicating how the opportunities will be addressed as well as how the threats, weaknesses, and strengths will be dealt with. So, I would communicate the action steps on a timeline with administrators and our technology team so that we could begin supporting curriculum groups through changes. As a peer technology coach, I could communicate the changes most effectively by working personally with curriculum chairs. Finally, the technology plan implementation would be evaluated using the steps outlined in the Action and Evaluation plan. The focus here would be on how the changes to the ways we use technology have impacted student achievement, and that would most probably be evident in the district assessment scores as well as on a qualitative measure of student engagement in learning material.
Writing the technology plan taught me that a technology leader must consider a wider swath of perspectives than just teachers or administrators who may want to implement a technology right away. In fact, a thorough technology plan is really an inquiry-based approach on behalf of the technology plan designer. She must ask, “what do we have, what do we need, and why would this be of benefit?” These questions must take the designer through a meaningful analysis of the organization’s current reality, including garnering the support of stakeholders in the process. Further, the technology plan artifact indicates that although the technology coach may have opinions on which technologies will suit the organization, the thorough analysis of the entire system is what directs decisions, not just the will of the technology coach. In future technology plans, I would consider involving other stakeholders in the SWOT analysis instead of completing it by myself. That way, I could have a more holistic vision of the threats and weaknesses, in particular. I could also have a more holistic view of the strengths of different departments besides just my own. Thus, opportunities would look quite different, I imagine.
The impact of the Technology Plan can be assessed by using the data from assessments we give after one year’s implementation of the plan. If the technology plan works, and if stakeholders are united in taking advantage of opportunities as outlined in it, then the research-based practices that are in place should result in higher student achievement. Further, the professional development in curriculum teams will lead to greater teacher confidence in new processes. Overall, this dispositional shift would allow for faster change in the organization.
As an Instructional Technology candidate, I must develop the ability to design, develop, implement, communicate, and evaluate a technology plan for our school. The Technology Planning Project is an artifact which allows me to practice each of these skills which will be expected of me as a technology leader. The Technology Planning Project analyzes the school’s current School Improvement Plan to see if our technology vision for the school matches with the ways we expect to improve as an organization. Then, I write a Shared Vision Paper that proposes research-based strategies for best practices for a technology plan design and its continued development. I communicated the actions that stakeholders in the plan would need to take to accomplish it. The SWOT Analysis helps me identify threats to the plan as well as strengths and opportunities that we already have to implement it. Finally, the Action and Evaluation Plan propose a timeline and criteria for evaluation of the impact of the plan. Completing the plan allowed me to serve the role as a technology leader in my school who makes decisions based on careful analysis of current reality and future vision.
In order to design a technology plan for a school, a technology leader must know where the school stands currently and then compare that with the projection of future goals for the school. When I assessed our current reality, I noticed a gap between it and future goal attainment of the technology plan. So, to develop a plan, I researched best-practices for effective technology use. As a first step, I surveyed the School Improvement Plan (our LSPI) to see what our stated goals were set by our county and school. Then, I designed a plan to achieve the stated goals and set a timeline and defined the people involved in the implementation of the plan. In our case, there was a gap between the rigor of achievement stated in our mission and vision statements and the data: our students progressed academically but with less engagement than is needed for sustained growth. A technology leader’s knowledge and skills are built by researching current trends and studies in the effective use of technology to fill that void of engagement and motivation for both staff and students. And so, the Rationale section of the Shared Vision Paper develops the design by providing commentary on the practices I found that would serve the weaknesses in our school’s current reality. In order to implement the technology plan, I performed a SWOT analysis to determine the best steps. Then, I wrote the Action plan for implementing the opportunities I found after analysis. Fully implementing a technology plan involves communicating how the opportunities will be addressed as well as how the threats, weaknesses, and strengths will be dealt with. So, I would communicate the action steps on a timeline with administrators and our technology team so that we could begin supporting curriculum groups through changes. As a peer technology coach, I could communicate the changes most effectively by working personally with curriculum chairs. Finally, the technology plan implementation would be evaluated using the steps outlined in the Action and Evaluation plan. The focus here would be on how the changes to the ways we use technology have impacted student achievement, and that would most probably be evident in the district assessment scores as well as on a qualitative measure of student engagement in learning material.
Writing the technology plan taught me that a technology leader must consider a wider swath of perspectives than just teachers or administrators who may want to implement a technology right away. In fact, a thorough technology plan is really an inquiry-based approach on behalf of the technology plan designer. She must ask, “what do we have, what do we need, and why would this be of benefit?” These questions must take the designer through a meaningful analysis of the organization’s current reality, including garnering the support of stakeholders in the process. Further, the technology plan artifact indicates that although the technology coach may have opinions on which technologies will suit the organization, the thorough analysis of the entire system is what directs decisions, not just the will of the technology coach. In future technology plans, I would consider involving other stakeholders in the SWOT analysis instead of completing it by myself. That way, I could have a more holistic vision of the threats and weaknesses, in particular. I could also have a more holistic view of the strengths of different departments besides just my own. Thus, opportunities would look quite different, I imagine.
The impact of the Technology Plan can be assessed by using the data from assessments we give after one year’s implementation of the plan. If the technology plan works, and if stakeholders are united in taking advantage of opportunities as outlined in it, then the research-based practices that are in place should result in higher student achievement. Further, the professional development in curriculum teams will lead to greater teacher confidence in new processes. Overall, this dispositional shift would allow for faster change in the organization.