Running head: TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION

Technology Plan Evaluation

FRIT 7232: Visionary Leadership in Instructional Technology
Dr. Hodges
Georgia Southern University
Group Members:
Brad Boykin
William Foster
Amanda Mears
Meagan Oakley

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION

Technology Plan Evaluation
Annotated List of Resources
Technology Planning: Designing the Direction to Get There.
Norton, S. K. (2013). Technology Planning: Designing the Direction to Get There. Knowledge
Quest, 42(1), 64-69.
After reading this article, one can better assess a technology plans content based on
what is expected. One can also add suggestions to the plan in an area that seems to be
irrelevant in most technology plans, the library. This article describes how the librarian
and school library should be more present in the district technology plan. It also
describes that multiple stakeholders need to be a part and aware of the technology goals
that the school library should help fulfill. The article also provides insight on funding
for technology, and what must be present in a plan in order to receive different types of
federal funding. Lastly, the article breaks down what should be evident in each of the
following sections of a technology plan: Goals and Strategies, Professional
Development, Budget, and Assessment and Evaluation.
A Technology Plan That Works.
Overbay, A., Mollette, M., & Vasu, E. S. (2011). A technology plan that works. Educational
Leadership, 68(5), 56-59.
This article provides five lessons to keep in mind as an administrator when
implementing technology initiatives. According to the article, the five key lessons are:
Its Not About the Technology, Let the Plan Fit the School, Build In Professional
Development, Give Collaboration Its Due, and Become Turnover-Proof. If
administration breaks down this article, they should be able to include elements in the

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION

district technology plan that will assist the implementation of technology initiatives in
regards to these tips. Therefore, the technology plan will be more helpful because it
would contain more forward thinking in the Goals and Strategies section.
New Hampshire School Technology Planning Guide.
New Hampshire Department of Education. (2012). School technology planning guide. Retrieved
from http://nheon.org/oet/tpguide/
This website lists each section that a districts technology plan should include:
Introduction, Goals, Action Plan, Budgeting, Evaluation, and Policy and Procedures.
The website also gives a description of what each section should contain. There are also
several helpful links that are provided on the right side of the site to assist districts as
they develop their plans. Included in this list is the technology plan approval rubric so
that the districts can receive feedback following their submission of the plan.
Technology planning in schools: An integrated researchbased model.
Vanderlinde, R., & Van Braak, J. (2012, December 21). Technology planning in schools: An
integrated research-based model. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(1), E14E17.
This resource emphasizes the importance of using a system to design a technology plan.
The system described discusses the importance of collaboration. The resource has shown
us that it takes a joint effort from many different stakeholders to construct a plan that will
be effective. This resource has also informed us of the importance of creating a plan that
can be constantly evaluated and modified as technology changes and the school system
grows and develops. Lastly this resource has been beneficial in showing us the

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION

importance of stating priorities. With limited budgets it is importance that a technology

plan prioritizes the needs of a system so that monetary resources can be effectively
utilized.
10 Critical Issues in Educational Technology.
Southern Regional Educational Board. (2015). 10 critical issues in educational technology.
Retrieved September 11, 2015, from
http://www.sreb.org/page/1669/10_issues_in_ed_tech.html
This resource is from the Southern Regional Education Board. The resource contains a
list of the top 10 most critical issues in the field of educational technology as determined
by this organization. Each category is described in detail along with its importance to the
systems within its area of influence. There is also a section included within each issue
that describes what can be done to prevent any problems related to that issue and how
schools can continue to move forward in regards to educational technology. We will use
this resource to inform our evaluations of technology plans by ensuring school systems
work to address the issues presented by this organization. This list will also be beneficial
in providing us with ways to approach these critical areas in educational technology in
order to ensure success.
Writing a Technology Plan.
Thirteen Ed Online. (2015). Writing a technology plan. Retrieved September 10, 2015, from
http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/primer/techplan.html
This article is helpful in creating and evaluating technology plans because it includes a
list of important areas that should be addressed in a technology plan from the teachers

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION

perspective. This information will be helpful in evaluating system technology plans and
when creating a technology plan. One important area that is emphasized in this recourse
is the area of evaluation. New technology and new program initiatives have to be
evaluated to determine the level of effectiveness they provide. This is an important piece
of a technology plan that should be included in the details of new technology hardware,
software, and training. This resource also mentions the importance of including a list of
current technology resources in a system so that the technology plan provides a clear
picture of the situation it is representing.
GaDOE Instructional Technology: System Technology Planning 2013 Tech Plan
Rubric.
Georgia Department of Education . (2015). System Technology Planning 2013 Tech Plan Rubric.
Retrieved from http://www.gadoe.org/Technology-Services/InstructionalTechnology/Pages/default.aspx
This resource, provided by the Georgia Department of Education, contains guidelines
along with a sample format for creating a system-level technology plan. School systems
seeking eligibility for E-Rate and grant funding should follow the guidelines outlined in
this document. Additionally, these guidelines are intended to assist stakeholders in
creating a plan that reflects the effective utilization of federal, state, and local technology
funds to promote student achievement. The information provided in this resource is
beneficial for evaluating technology plans because it contains a comprehensive list of
elements necessary for designing effective plans.
The Indispensable Librarian.
Johnson, D. (2013). The indispensable librarian: Surviving and thriving in school

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION

libraries in the information age (2nd ed.). Santa Barbara, California: Linworth.
The book is comprised of relevant information for technology planning and evaluation.
This resource is designed to assist librarians with program assessment, planning,
communications, advocacy, budgeting, and more. However, the information in this book
is applicable for designing and evaluating system technology plans as well. Specifically,
in chapter two the author writes about program assessment and creating long-term
change. He shares a time management matrix which is helpful in prioritizing needs. In
chapter three the author discusses the critical elements of a library/technology plan.
Additionally, the book contains valuable information pertaining to elements typically
included in system technology plans such as CIPA requirements, filtering, acceptable use
policies, good purchasing strategies, and staff development.
Transforming American Education: Learning Powered by Technology National
Education Technology Plan.
U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Technoogy. (2010). Transforming American
education: learning powered by technology. Retrieved from http://tech.ed.gov/wpcontent/uploads/2013/10/netp2010.pdf
The National Education Technology Plan, provided by the U.S. Department of Education,
contains a wealth of resources for creating and evaluating technology plans. The NETP
contains five essential areas from which goals are derived which can serve as an outline
for states and districts during the technology planning process. These five areas include:
learning, assessment, teaching, infrastructure, and productivity. The plan also includes
recommendations for states and districts in order to support the aforementioned five
essential areas. Following these suggestions allows state and district technology planning

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION

teams to align goals with national plans in order to empower stakeholders through the use
of technology.
Technology Plan for the state of Vermont.
Vermont Agency of Education. (2012). Technology for personalizing learningThe 2012-2015
Vermont educational technology plan. Retrieved from
http://education.vermont.gov/educational-technology/state-plan
This three-year plan is from the state Department of Education in Vermont. They have
created a document of goals and visions for incorporating technology into the education
system. Their mission is to enhance learning through student centered instruction by
integrating technology. In addition, this resource includes an evaluation plan as well as
information about how to create and effectively answer indicators in order to ensure that
the education of all students is being maximized.
Sun Associates.
Sun Associates . (2012). Resources for technology planning and evaluation. Retrieved from
http://www.sun-associates.com/resources/evalpln.html
This website offers suggestions and resources for writing a technology plan. In addition
to the resources provided, recommendations for integrating the plans that have been
written are included. Additionally, specific examples that have worked in previous
environments are shared. Along with these examples are linked websites that provide
research as to why the strategy works and how technology enhances lessons as well as
provides a way for students to have a deeper understanding of the lesson.

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION

Rubric for Evaluating School System Technology Plans

Criteria

Level of Expectations Met

1

No clear vision for

Vision for
technology use is
Technology Use
included.

Vision has a vague

focus for technology
use and does not
clearly align to district
goals.

An inventory of
existing hardware,
software,
Assessment of telecommunication
Services
services, and other
services is not
included and needs
are not identified.

An inventory of
hardware, software,
An inventory of
telecommunication
hardware, software,
services, and other
telecommunication
services is provided.
services, and other
Needs are mentioned services is provided.
but lack significant
Needs are identified but
detail that is necessary plans for meeting these
to create effective goals needs lack clarity.
and objectives.

An inventory of hardware,
software,
telecommunications
service and other services
is provided. Suggestions
for meeting needs in
regards to these elements
are clearly addressed and
include recommendations
for solutions, budgets, and
persons responsible.

Learning goals are

either incomplete,
absent from the
technology plan, or
unclear for readers.

Goals reflect the vision

Goals are outlined but for use of technology.
do not reflect the vision Objectives,
for use of technology. benchmarks, and
Objectives are absent strategies for
or incomplete.
implementation are
included.

Goals reflect the vision for

the use of technology as
well as the assessment of
needs. Objectives,
benchmarks, strategies for
implementation, and
evaluation methods are
clearly outlined.

A plan for providing

assistive technology
for students with
disabilities is not
included.

A vague plan for

providing assistive
technology for students
with disabilities is
included. Data from a
needs assessment is
missing.

Goals and
Objectives

Accessibility of
Technology
Resources
(Americans with
Disabilities Act)

Vision has a clear focus

Vision has a clear focus
for technology use but
for technology use that
does not clearly align to
aligns with district goals.
district goals.

A plan for providing

A plan for providing
assistive technology for
assistive technology for students with disabilities is
students with disabilities included and reflects data
is included and reflects obtained from a needs
data obtained from a
assessment. Strategies for
needs assessment.
sustainability and
maintenance are included.

Persons responsible for

Persons responsible for Persons responsible for
evaluating progress of
evaluating progress of evaluating progress of
Persons responsible
goals and objectives are
goals and objectives
goals and objectives are
for evaluating progress
identified. Duties for
Responsibilities
are identified but
identified. Duties for
of goals and objectives
assessment are clearly
specific duties for
assessment are outlined
are not identified.
outlined including a
assessment are not
but a timeline for
specific timeline for
outlined.
completion is not clear.
completion.

Professional
Development

Budget

Plans for professional

development are aligned
to goals and objectives
Plans for professional
Plans for professional and include an outline of
development are
Plans for professional
development outline
strategies to be used as
vague, lacking specifics
development are not
strategies to be used as well as evaluation
about how it will be
included.
well as evaluation
methods. Persons
accomplished and
methods.
responsible for delivery
evaluated.
and evaluation of
professional development
are listed.
A budget is either not A budget is provided, A budget including
provided or gives
but funding sources for funding sources for
minimal information as each project are
each project is

A budget including funding

sources for each project is
adequately described and

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION

to how it will be used

to effectively develop inadequately described. adequately described.
the plan.

Ongoing
Evaluation

A plan for ongoing

No plan is in place to
evaluation is shared,
continually evaluate
but lacks clarity and
the Technology Plan.
depth.

Strategies for sharing

progress and
evaluation results are
not identified. A plan
Communication
for advocacy and
and Advocacy
encouraging
stakeholder
involvement is not
included.

includes a timeline for

reaching benchmarks for
each goal.

A clear, in-depth plan is

in place for ongoing
A clear, in-depth plan is in
evaluation of technology place for ongoing
resources as well as
evaluation of technology
implementation of
resources as well as
strategies and
implementation of
programs. However, an strategies and programs.
outline for making
A plan of action for making
amendments to the plan necessary amendments in
if necessary is not
the future is shared.
outlined.

Strategies for sharing

progress and evaluation
Strategies for sharing
Strategies for sharing are included. A specific
progress and evaluation
progress and evaluation plan for encouraging
results are vague as
results are included. A stakeholder involvement is
well as the plan for
specific plan for
outlined including
advocacy and
encouraging
advocacy of the role of
encouraging
stakeholder involvement technology in increasing
stakeholder
is outlined.
student achievement and
involvement.
mastery of state
standards.

Completed Rubric: Evaluation of Screven Countys Technology Plan

We chose to evaluate Screven Countys Three Year Technology Plan. The link below
provides access to this plan. The highlighted sections on the following rubric reflect our scoring
of the plan.
http://screven3.schooldesk.net/Portals/Screven/District/docs/2012-2015%20Tech%20Plan%20%20SCREVEN%20CO.pdf

Criteria

Level of Expectations Met

1

No clear vision for

Vision for
technology use is
Technology Use
included.
Assessment of An inventory of
Services
existing hardware,
software,
telecommunication
services, and other
services is not
included and needs
are not identified.

2
Vision has a vague
focus for technology
use and does not
clearly align to district
goals.

Vision has a clear focus

Vision has a clear focus
for technology use but
for technology use that
does not clearly align to
aligns with district goals.
district goals.

An inventory of
An inventory of
hardware, software,
hardware, software,
telecommunication
telecommunication
services, and other
services, and other
services is provided.
services is provided.
Needs are mentioned Needs are identified but
but lack significant
plans for meeting these
detail that is necessary needs lack clarity.
to create effective goals

An inventory of hardware,
software,
telecommunications
service and other services
is provided. Suggestions
for meeting needs in
regards to these elements
are clearly addressed and
include recommendations

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION

Goals and
Objectives

Accessibility of
Technology
Resources
(Americans with
Disabilities Act)

10

and objectives.

for solutions, budgets, and

persons responsible.

Learning goals are

either incomplete,
absent from the
technology plan, or
unclear for readers.

Goals reflect the vision

Goals are outlined but for use of technology.
do not reflect the vision Objectives,
for use of technology. benchmarks, and
Objectives are absent strategies for
or incomplete.
implementation are
included.

Goals reflect the vision for

the use of technology as
well as the assessment of
needs. Objectives,
benchmarks, strategies for
implementation, and
evaluation methods are
clearly outlined.

A plan for providing

assistive technology
for students with
disabilities is not
included.

A vague plan for

providing assistive
technology for students
with disabilities is
included. Data from a
needs assessment is
missing.

A plan for providing

A plan for providing
assistive technology for
assistive technology for students with disabilities is
students with disabilities included and reflects data
is included and reflects obtained from a needs
data obtained from a
assessment. Strategies for
needs assessment.
sustainability and
maintenance are included.

Persons responsible for

Persons responsible for Persons responsible for
evaluating progress of
evaluating progress of evaluating progress of
Persons responsible
goals and objectives are
goals and objectives
goals and objectives are
for evaluating progress
identified. Duties for
Responsibilities
are identified but
identified. Duties for
of goals and objectives
assessment are clearly
specific duties for
assessment are outlined
are not identified.
outlined including a
assessment are not
but a timeline for
specific timeline for
outlined.
completion is not clear.
completion.

Professional
Development

Budget

Ongoing
Evaluation

Plans for professional

development are aligned
to goals and objectives
Plans for professional
Plans for professional and include an outline of
development are
Plans for professional
development outline
strategies to be used as
vague, lacking specifics
development are not
strategies to be used as well as evaluation
about how it will be
included.
well as evaluation
methods. Persons
accomplished and
methods.
responsible for delivery
evaluated.
and evaluation of
professional development
are listed.
A budget is either not
provided or gives
A budget is provided, A budget including
minimal information as but funding sources for funding sources for
to how it will be used each project are
each project is
to effectively develop inadequately described. adequately described.
the plan.

A plan for ongoing

No plan is in place to
evaluation is shared,
continually evaluate
but lacks clarity and
the Technology Plan.
depth.

Communication Strategies for sharing

and Advocacy progress and
evaluation results are
not identified. A plan
for advocacy and

A budget including funding

sources for each project is
adequately described and
includes a timeline for
reaching benchmarks for
each goal.

A clear, in-depth plan is

in place for ongoing
A clear, in-depth plan is in
evaluation of technology place for ongoing
resources as well as
evaluation of technology
implementation of
resources as well as
strategies and
implementation of
programs. However, an strategies and programs.
outline for making
A plan of action for making
amendments to the plan necessary amendments in
if necessary is not
the future is shared.
outlined.

Strategies for sharing Strategies for sharing Strategies for sharing

progress and evaluation progress and evaluation progress and evaluation
results are vague as
results are included. A are included. A specific
well as the plan for
specific plan for
plan for encouraging
advocacy and
encouraging
stakeholder involvement is

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION

encouraging
stakeholder
involvement is not
included.

encouraging
stakeholder
involvement.

11
outlined including
advocacy of the role of
stakeholder involvement technology in increasing
is outlined.
student achievement and
mastery of state
standards.

Recommendations
Vision for Technology Use.
This component of the technology plan is detailed and concise. A technology mission
statement as well as the systems vision for technology use is included in this section of the plan.
The mission supports school improvement efforts and the vision for technology use is based on
preparing students for success in a world where technology is constantly evolving. The vision
also includes the integration of technology with meaningful application of NETS and CCGPS
standards.

Assessment of Services.
The Screven County Technology plan includes an inventory of their current levels of
hardware, software, and telecommunication resources. A graph is provided, but we would
suggest including more detail in regards to exact numbers and types of tablets, pcs, laptops etc.
present at each location in the district. The needs are identified and goals have been set. Along
with the goals are budgets, evaluation methods, and persons responsible. This section is very
organized, but some of the goals lack detail in terms of persons responsible. We would
recommend adding detail as to what the exact role the teachers and administrators will be
playing to ensure progress is made to achieve each goal.

Goals and Objectives.

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION

12

The goals presented in this plan clearly reflect the vision of the district on technology and
how it will be used to achieve student growth in learning. Each goal gives clear benchmarks and
lists people who will be responsible for making sure the system is working to achieve these goals
in the time allotted as well as possible budget constraints. Strategies for the implementation of
each goal are provided and include all appropriate details.

Accessibility of Technology Resources (ADA).

This technology plan lacks a clear section that details a plan for providing assistive
technologies for students with disabilities. Other sections of the overall plan include technology
that would assist in remediation and differentiation to help reach students with disabilities but
these plans are not specifically in place to provide more technology services to students with
disabilities. We would suggest providing a detailed needs assessment that works to identify the
needs of the students with disabilities within the school district. Additionally, we suggest
including a dedicated section that outlines the district's plan for continuing to progress in the
provision of effective technologies for students with disabilities that are in line with the needs
identified in the needs assessment.

Responsibilities.
This component of Screven Countys Technology Plan is outlined in the Goals,
Strategies, and Benchmarks section. Each goal that the county has is displayed in a chart. The
chart includes strategies, benchmarks, evaluation methods, funding sources and amounts, and
persons responsible. The technology director is listed along with other department personnel for

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION

13

each goal and strategy. The section also includes the timeline for each strategy. The timeline
displays the expected progress for the goals, and it is broken down for each year that the
technology plan is active. In addition, each strategy listed outlines an evaluation method as well
as the persons responsible for evaluation. However, this section of the plan could be improved
by incorporating specific duties that each person responsible for evaluation will oversee. The
role of each person responsible for aiding in data collection and evaluation is unclear.

Professional Development.
While this component of Screven Countys Technology Plan received a score of four, there is
still room to make a few worthwhile adjustments. For example, the technology director is listed
as the person responsible for evaluating and providing most of the on-site professional
development incorporated into the plan, much of which is needed county wide. Realistically and
logistically, this does not seem like an efficient plan for professional development. In section
two of the plan, which includes the gap analysis, the plan acknowledges a need for an on-site
technology coach at each school to aid in the successful integration of technology, which would
include offering meaningful professional development opportunities. However, this is contingent
upon district funds. In the meantime, the following options should be considered to support the
implementation of professional development plans.
1. The technology director could create online tutorials in order to provide many of the
professional development opportunities. For example, one of the strategies for increasing
administrative uses of technology is to Train teachers and administrators on changes to
the student information system, Infinite Campus. Providing online training to be

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION

14

experienced asynchronously would eliminate the need for any redelivery to absent or new
faculty members.
2. A technology lead teacher could be identified at each school to facilitate the
implementation and evaluation of professional development within the school.
Depending on the budget, this person could be paid an annual stipend similar to that of
members on a leadership team. This alternative would still require funding, however the
cost for an annual stipend would be much less than the investment of a full-time
technology coach at each school.

Budget.
The budget is sufficiently outlined as part of the Goals, Strategies, and Benchmarks
section of the technology plan. The funding source as well as the amount required for each
strategy is included. Additionally, this section of the plan incorporates a timeline with
benchmarks stating what will be accomplished each year to work towards mastery of each
strategy/goal.

Ongoing Evaluation.
This component of Screven Countys Technology Plan is outlined in the Goals,
Strategies, and Benchmarks section. There is a clear outline of what is expected broken down in
yearly increments. However, there is no outline for making amendments to the plan if changes
are necessary. The plan does mention that a group of teachers, administrators, and the
technology department meet as needed to discuss technology initiatives and issues that affect the
entire district. We recommend improving the plan by including a schedule for two evaluation

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION

15

meetings. One meeting should take place in January, and the other should occur during the
summer. These meetings should evaluate county resources and any available data in order to
make adjustments to the plan as needed. Having the requirement explicitly communicated in the
technology plan would help ensure accountability.

Communication and Advocacy.

This component of Screven Countys Technology Plan is thoughtfully outlined throughout
the plan. However, one of the strategies listed under the goal for improving meaningful
communication between schools, parents, and community to facilitate student achievement
should be further developed in order to improve the plan. The first strategy listed under the
aforementioned goal says, Promote Infinite Campuss Parent Portal. This strategy is vague and
does not adequately define how this promotion will occur. More information is needed to ensure
that this strategy is implemented with integrity. For example, will this promotion occur by
advertising the advantages of parent use of Infinite Campus on classroom/school newsletters and
webpages? In order to improve this strategy, specific details such as these should be included.

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION

16
References

Georgia Department of Education. (2015). System Technology Planning 2013 Tech Plan Rubric.
Retrieved from http://www.gadoe.org/Technology-Services/InstructionalTechnology/Pages/default.aspx
Johnson, D. (2013). The indispensable librarian: Surviving and thriving in school
libraries in the information age (2nd ed.). Santa Barbara, California: Linworth.
New Hampshire Department of Education. (2012). School technology planning guide. Retrieved
from http://nheon.org/oet/tpguide/
Norton, S. K. (2013). Technology planning: Designing the direction to get there. Knowledge
Quest, 42(1), 64-69.
Overbay, A., Mollette, M., & Vasu, E. S. (2011). A technology plan that works. Educational
Leadership, 68(5), 56-59.
Southern Regional Educational Board. (2015). 10 critical issues in educational technology.
Retrieved September 11, 2015, from
http://www.sreb.org/page/1669/10_issues_in_ed_tech.html
Sun Associates . (2012). Resources for technology planning and evaluation. Retrieved from
http://www.sun-associates.com/resources/evalpln.html
Thirteen Ed Online. (2015). Writing a technology plan. Retrieved September 10, 2015, from
http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/primer/techplan.html
U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Technology. (2010). Transforming
American education: learning powered by technology. Retrieved from
http://tech.ed.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/netp2010.pdf

TECHNOLOGY PLAN EVALUATION

17

Vanderlinde, R., & Van Braak, J. (2012, December 21). Technology planning in schools: An
integrated research-based model. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(1), E14E17.
Vermont Agency of Education. (2012). Technology for personalizing learning: The 2012-2015
Vermont educational technology plan. Retrieved from
http://education.vermont.gov/educational-technology/state-plan