Action Plan for LISD Technology

My Action Plan is Two Fold. Part One focuses on individual school needs; Part Two involves accountability district-wide.
Part One:
After speaking with our Technology Director, I determined that though there are things that must be implemented district-wide each year, there are things that may be overlooked at the campus level. For instance, the Fine Arts areas are not addressed at all in the district’s plan for technology improvement. After much consideration, I would highly suggest taking one day out during February Conference (day 3 for example) to do the following: an all day session that follows through the entire PDAS using the Continuous Improvement Institute Toolbox that has been implemented throughout the district for improvement in other areas. I would suggest this for each campus, having their Technology Facilitator present and leading the session. The outline for the day would look something like this:
Present StaR Chart information to teachers, present LISD Technology 2020 Plan to teachers as well; then, present campus teachers with the extra survey data from the survey they fill out each year for Grant.
Use a Plus/Delta Chart to note positive and negative things about current technology use in the classroom.
Use Imagine Perfect to determine what teachers consider the perfect senerio for technology intergration in their classroom.
Determine top Drivers and Preventers to implementing technology in the classroom.
Use Hot Dot or NGT to determine top 10 items that are on the Delta Chart – things that need to be addressed.
Use a Force Field Analysis to determine what one item can truly impact the most areas of technology in the classroom, as well as what one item we can focus on improving currently. *this one area could take an hour as it is usually involved.
I would then have the teachers, administrators, and the Technology Facilitator come up with a plan for improving this one specific item. I would also charge each campus with determining the time frame for the implementation as well as how to determine its effectiveness.
I would then have each Facilitator give a report as to what each campus determines that they need to improve on to our Superintendents and School Board. I would have the Facilitators show the PDAS that they worked through with each faculty, and how they came to their decisions. (PDAS is about the process more than anything after all.) I would then have regular updates on the "A" portions (at least once every other week). Of course, the final piece of the puzzle would be an additional day during the summer to determine if the plan for the campus was successful, with a report to the Superintendents and Board Members.
I know that my particular plan may be a bit more involved than I was asked to give, however, our current system needs improving in order to be more applicable at the campus level.
Part Two:
I would suggest focusing on the Technology TEKS. Currently, the teachers are actually unaware most of the time that they exist. And, until the StaR Chart has to be filled out, they do not even think about them. I would suggest having the Technology Facilitator for each Pod communicate those TEKS (even if they are embedded in the current curriculum). This way, we do not have a lack of communication as to what they are. The StaR Chart provides some information and clarity that our teachers do not know what they are, but it does not communicate how to teach those TEKS to the students or teachers. Actually, there is not a current data chart or survey that actually takes into consideration how to measure if the teachers are teaching the technology TEKS other than the StaR Chart. And, the StaR Chart is not considered a reputable source from the standpoint of several I have talked to on the issue.
Then, how do you determine if the teachers know what the technology TEKS are and if the teachers are teaching them? As it is now, we must assume that our students’ needs are being met. I would suggest the following plan of action to determine those two items:
Give an evaluation before school begins (a survey if you will). Not in the middle of the school year like the StaR Chart is, but before we even see students walk through the doors.
Have Technology Facilitators for each Pod in the district give a lesson to the teachers on what the Technology TEKS are and how to communicate those to their students.
Have Technology Facilitators work with teachers in cooperative lessons to ensure that the TEKS are being met at each grade level.
Have an online form (perhaps on the L-Net for the district) where teachers continually log on as periodically check off the items that have been covered for their grade level (Technology TEKS). This way, any Technology Facilitator can go online to see where their teachers are in teaching those TEKS to the students in their Pod. *This is an ongoing assessment.
Have the Technology Facilitators meet with Educational Teams periodically to check their status of the online forms and address any issues at that time.
After each 9 week grading period for Elementary and each 6 week grading period for Secondary, I would have a report be given to the teachers, Principals, Superintendents, and School Board. This way, everyone is on the same page in knowing which TEKS have been covered and which TEKS have not at each grade level, campus, and Pod. *This is an ongoing assessment.
It would be a bit time consuming, however, I feel that this would be a good way to assess ongoing technology in the classroom.