EdTech Update from TEA by Anita Givens (9 Feb 2005)

Anita
Givens
TEA edtech
update

new national plan says every
student and teacher should have an opportunity to participate in
elearning
– need to develop quality
measures and accredititation standards for elearning that mirror those
traditionally required for course
dcredit

5- need to encourage
broadbadn access
— if it is not available,
many of the other goals of the plan cannot be
achieved
— need to have high quality
digital bandwidth
— need to ensure
adequate technical support (this was the thing every single focus group talked
about)
— we all know most schools don’t
have the technical suppor

6- need to
move toward digital content
— ensure that
teachers and studetns are adequately trained in its
use
– in Texas we are real fortunate that
our textbooks
– need to ensure that all
students have ubiquitous access to
technology
– we need to consider costs and
benefits of online content, alighted with rigorous state academic
standards

7- Integrate data
systems
– make the data systems talk
together, must be able to integrate and talk to each
other
– need to use assessment
appropriately
– SIF (school
interoperability framework) should be requirement of all RFPs and purchasing
decisions

Lots of data collected in
National EdTech plan
– see the website for
white papers and resource documents
– there
are research here that can support using Educational technology to achieve
various goals

writers also talked to
business leaders and other
stakeholders

Another national
organization: Partnership for 21st Century
Skills
–
www.21stcenturyskills.org
– has created
“the mile guide” to insure you are providing what is needed for 21st century
leadership
– Also is an ICT literacy guide
(ICT = information and commmunciations technology
literacy)
— in TEKS we define this as the
TA-TEKS
— we also need to know the
international language embedded in the ICT
document
— this is a great guide for
policymakers

Many websites will help
you find these resources

Learning for
the 21st Century
– we are IN the 21st
century now
– we need to emphasize coree
subjects, emphasize learning skills, use 21st century tools to develop learning
skills, teacher and learn in 21st century context, teach and learn 21st century
content, use 21st century assessments that measure 21st century
skills

kids have to learn how to
learn

always have a child in mind as
you think about what needs to be
done

What do you mean by 21st century
context: math problem about train leaving chicago at a time and another one
leaving LA, when do they cross each other
–
trains are no longer an essential part of kids
context
– instead, ask kids about
downloading files over broadband versus dialup
connection

Need 21st century
assessments
– we have typically measured
things that were easy to measure, what we need to do is measure what we
value
– if we value 21st century learning,
then we need a whole new host of tools to measure
that
– we have to have both to be
effective, to know what students know and are able to
do

9 steps are outlined to build
momentum
1- embrace a powerful visiion of
public education that includes 21st century
skills
2- align leadership, management and
resources with educational goals
3- use
online assessment tolls to determine where schools are
now
4- develop
priorities
5- develop professional
development plan
6- make sure students have
equitable access to 21st century
education
7- begin developing assessments
to measure student progress in 21st century
skills
8 collaborate with outside
partners
9- plan collectively and
strategically for the
future

David Thornburg today at
lunch talked about average student to ocmputer ratio is
4:1
– average ratio at home is
2:1
– students are twice as likely to have
access to computers at home than
school

We must be developing these
new assessments

All part of the 21st
century mile guide

Federal Budget for
Educational Technology
– 2005: $191 million
cut to Title II D, 28% reduction in state allocation, reduced funds for formula
and competitive grants
– new Bush budget
recommends ALL of Title II D gets cut (completely) in
2006
– this is one of 48 programs that are
to be cut

OMD offered rationale to
cut this:
– said that schools today have a
greater level of technology than they ever have before, “we are there”, we don’t
need this funding stream
– districts can
use other funding grants like Title I and

Texas
Activites
– Long range plan for technology
in Texas
– we had one of the first in the
country, setup in 1988
– this plan fostered
computer literacy in our middle schools, TENET, T-STAR, TCET, tech allotment,
tech demo programs, texas library connection,
TETN

second plan was
1996-2010
– senatet bill 1, hosue bill
2128, house bill 85
– Goals 2000,
eRate
– technology applications, SBEC
standards, comissioners plan for information
access

NCLB Title II Part
D
– state technology plan had to be
alighted to the antioinal teducational technology
plan
– 2002: had to make minor updates to
that plan for 96-2010 (updates)

This
plan has 4 categories
– teaching and
leanring
– educator prep and
development
– administration and
support
– infrastructure for
technology

to help districts prepare,
we developed the 2002-2003 Texas STaR
Chart
– developed by the Educational
TEchnology Advisory Committee (ETAC) as a planning
tool
– 796 districts completed that
chart
– this gave us a picture of where
districts told us they were

most of
larger districts said it was VERY hard to do entire district, we needed campus
star chart
– over 5000 campuses in
2002-2003 completed the campus star
chart

in 2003, not only did every
campus complete a Texas star chart, but they also had the chance to do their
tech plan with an online system
– over 7600
campuses completed Texas Star chart in that
year

graphs shown of
results
– vast majority of campuses are in
developing or advanced levels (levels are early, developing, advanced, and
target)
– this data tells some people: “we
are already there”
– we want all schools to
be in the target area

Have used this
data and other sources to prepare required report for state legilsature:
“Progress Report on the Long-Range Plan for Technology
1996-2010”
– get this online and download
the progress report, this will give you incredible data to support decisions
that are made on the local level

Last
legislative session made a big difference budget-wise in
Texas
– this report was released in Dec
1st
– we made the

Teacher STAR chart was the next
setp
– this was released this year:
www.tea.state.tx.us/starchart
– this is for
teachers to self-assess

My thought:
this is probably why TEA wouldn’t let us use LOTi in TIP
grants

most common feedback: teachers
really know for the first time what is expected, because someone else always
took care of that
– in fall 2004 it was
released
– as of last week, over 120,000
teachers in Texas have completed this
–
that is almost 50% of all the teachers in our
state
– it is open through May 30 of
2005

after that, we will have an even
richer data set to look at
– we have almost
300,000 teachers in the state
– we know
people are at all different
levels

There is a helpdesk housed at
ESC12 which deals with teacher STAR chart
issues

Texas received over $400
million in discounts from eRate last
year

go to Technology planning and
erate support center website to learn
more

even though Texas receives a lot
from eRate, we still have some districts that don’t apply for eRate for various
reasons

Educational Technology
Advisory Committees are also important
–
provide leadership in the development, implementation and evaluation of a new
long range plan for technology 2006-2020 that aligns with national educational
tech plan 2004 and NCLB of 2001
– now we
know we need to take another look at where we are going statewide with
technology
– now looking at this new
plan

2020 sounds like a long way
away, but we need to begin planning NOW for
this
– our current plan will be 10 years
old by the time this new plan is ready
– we
have to be engaged in this online planning
procedure

Co-Chairs of committee are
Don Knezek and Ann McMullen
– are 30
members from the education community
– they
need to reach out to all stakeholders to make sure we plan effectively to
everyone
— professional orgs, business and
community groups, teachers, students,
parents
– Oct 13,14 2004 and Jan 18-19 2005
met, also using TETN, come back in April to
Austin
– visit the ETAC section of the
website

Need feedback
now
– just looking at current
recommendations now
– need to determine if
recommendations need to stay, go, or be
revised
– do we need to add new
recommendations based on current
progress?
– do we need to align with
antional paln
– identify
gaps

Next
steps
– gather stakeholder
input
– determine impact of 79th
legislature
– develop vision for
2020
– align goald and objectives to
vision
– share drafts for
feedback
– revise and develop draft
plan
– share plan for public
comment
– review comments and revise
plan

may call the plan “vision
2020”
– everyone needs to have a voice
about what goes in this plan

in Sept
2006 this will go to SBOE
– eventually in
Dec 2006 it will be given to the legislature, so in the 80th session it will be
available
– finalized revisions due in
August 2007

Sent input to
etac@tea.state.tx.us
– there are real, live
people behind these mailboxes

Go to
TEA website and ETAC pages

We want
your input, we will share it with the committee, we want to hear from
you!

Now: Technology Immersion Pilot
Project (TIP)
–
www.txtip.info
– emerged from state
leglislation last session and federal
funding

highlights
–
this has captured attention of some state legislators and may affect some
legislation that is introduced in this
session

Traditional edtech
implementiation cycle: we are in a constant cycle, the research says you need to
do these things simultaneously rather than in a cycle ot have a greater impact
on student achievement

Are 6 critical
components to the TIP
package

eTXTIP
–
middle school campuses serving grades 6-8
–
66 campus awards: 22 experimental, 22
control
– 1400
teachers
– 19,000
students

TIP
project
1- whole district: Clarskville ISD
(high schoolm middle school, and
elementary)
2- vertial team: elementary,
middle, and high school feeder pattern (Irving ISD, already had middle, are
implementing for high school and
elementary)
3- single secondary
campus
4- middle school campus serving
grades 6-8

Theme: “Pioneering 21st
Century Schools Today”
– almost 100% of the
22 experimental campuses have
had

National level: we don’t have the
type of reearch we need to show connection to student achievement (we all know
that it impacts, but we don’t have the scientifically designed research to show
this)
– $15 million study of the effects of
educational tech, using rigorous scientifically based
emthodologies
– NETTS (National Educational
Technology Trends Study)

State level
study
– ESETP (Evaluating State Educational
Technology Programs) grant
— this is what
we are using to evaluate TIP

Research
questions
– what are the characteristics of
particapating shcools and their contexts
–
what is the nature of tech immersiion, and how is it
implemented
– what is the effect of tech
immersion on stchools, students,
teachers….
– does it affect student
achievement (measured various
ways)

Studying teachers,
adminstrators, students….
– have their
been changes in attitudes about using
technologies
– is it business as usual with
lots of tech in the classroom?

For
students: tech access and use, tech proficency, self-direction, peer
collaboration, etc…

Texas Center
for Education Research is the partner
–
lots of baseline data gathered
– will go
back out in the spring
– hope to track
students for at least 5 years, but we don’t know about
funding

Texas was one of 9 states to
get these grants, we have many opportunities to share what we have learned so
far, with national and
international

Eval website:
www.etxtip.info

we don’t want to
reinvent the wheel each
time

Electronic Course
Pilot
– next Monday is due date to
participate
– this is followup to
eSchools
– we want to find out how to count
virtual ADA
— if a student is not sitting
in a seat, how do you calculate the student’s
attendance

ME: THIS IS A KEY
QUESTION!

are many people in our
legislature right now talking about promoting virtual schools and online
learning in our state

eLearning
Initiative is the most exciting thing going
on
– historical overview: the charge was to
investigate the existing and in-development products, processes, services and
technologyes that can improve teacher effectiveness and student learning
including those that are related to:
– the
planning and elivery of curriculum, instruction and extended enrichment
materials
– ongoing assessments, including
diagnostic tools and classroom, campus and districdt-based
assessment
– professional develoment for
all educators
– management and
disssemination of info
– communication
among all
– infrastructure
necessary
– any other
topics?

asked business leaders to
give him a plan
– first meeting in Nov
2003, wanted plan in Jan 2004

This
has produced a VISION document (this is Grussendorf’s
group)
– all students must have the
opportunity to ahcive….

Digital
classroom tools should include….

–
TELLY initiative spent over a year coming up with this vision and
recommendations for how this should be carried
out
– this includes 1:1 computer
access

Special sessions last summer
did not address technology last year, they were primarily on school
finance
– last week on Jan 31st, the new
recommendations are:

– restructure
the technology allotment
— $300 per
student per year for districts that are
“ready
— $50 district
match
– $165 million per year increase for
the 06-07 biennium, which cost increments in each subsequent biennium, by 2011
all campuses in state will reach this
level
– new smaller advisory
committee
– one recommendation is moving
entire TAKS system to online
— ongoing,
interactive assessment

have
recommended that Fund Proclamation 2001 be
funded

supporting digital, electronic
instructional materials

recommend we
don’t have to tie online materials to the traditional adoption cycle for
textbooks

key: change Texas
educational code from “textbooks” to “instructional
materials”

regardless of grant
program: you can use them to appropriately use and integrate
technology
– on Jan 31, 2005, these
recommendations of the TeLI group were delivered to
Grussendorf

This is the Texas
eLearning Initiative
– in Dec 2004 TCEA
hosted special EdTech expo specifically for
legislators
– over 100 companies came here
that day, had a very small audience, just leglisators and their
staff
– they were astounded at what was
available in educational
technology

Jan 2005: had Texas
Capitaol Schoolhouse (last week)
– 15
school districts brought students and teachers to the capitol and conducting
schools
– this was a very rewarding
experience
– released final TeLI
Report
– students were introduced on floor
of the legislature
– a lot of people got a
healthy education about what can be done with
edTech
– lots

Watch the internet schoolhouse
website to see what kids were able to
do

Feb 2005: TCEA Convention as well
as Texas Technology Week
(recommended)

Current
status
– House Public Education Committee
and Senat Education committee have
addressed:
– tech
apps
– status of tech in schools, TIP,
electronic textbooks, textbook adoption process, online assessment, virtual
schools, SIF, technology
allotment

What will they
do?
– now the tech allotment is $30 per
student per year
– last session the fund
was changed from textbook fund to TIF
fund
– TIF is still collecting revenue on
your phone bill
– unfortunately there was
not enough to pay it last year, so it is $28 and some
change
– HB 2128 which created TIF will
expire in 8-31-05 unless it is reauthorizzed by the
legislature
— this is in the
utilitiescode: SB 332 and HB 789 adress TIF and TIFB through
2010
— lots more in there about
deregulation of telecom industry

–
looks like they are proposing keeping a TIF
board

also HB
2
– introed last week: “Roadmap to
Results”
– remember legislation goes
through a lot of changes before it becomes
law
– we are just beginning to see the
dialog on this
– is a summary on the House
website, go there on a regular basis to view summaries and track what is
happening
– increased funding for
instructional technology including electronic
textbooks
– would change allotment for tech
from $30 to $70 per student
– in 06-07 the
instructional materials and technology allotment should be created at $150 per
student

HB 2 does not say anything
about how the funding will work

HB 3
is going to be the funding bill, that has not been introduced yet unless it was
introed today

some said we should
have a statewide education portal
– there
wasn’t any money, so now there is not a
portal

lots in HB 2 about
accountability too
– directs TEA to create
clearinghouse of model lessons aligned with state
standards
– this is a big difference from
what TEA has done in the past
– best
business practices, top performing districts
methods
– we should see what is working
elsewhere
– calls for statewide student
electronic info system to allow secure transfer of student records and better
tracking of completion truancy and
dropouts

HB 2 also addresses
academics and assessment
– converting all
state tests to online tests, starting in spring 2006 (next school
year)
– change high school assessment to
end of course exams instead of current end of year
tests
– also better educational
opportunities for GT students
– funding for
SAT/ACT taken by kids

Also.. (HB 2 is
100+ pages long)
– lots to do with schoool
finance and funding
– elements about
teacher and principal excellence
–
mentoring and induction support for beginning
teachers
– temporary certificates for
adminsitrators

section on governance
and efficiency
– improved financial
accountability
–
cooperatives
– Nvember school board
elections
– univorm school start date after
Labor day

www.house.state.tx.us and
www.senate.state.tx.us

It is too soon
to see how this will come out, but you can see many things have been proposed in
this legislative session that could have a profound impact on schools and esp on
educational technology
– we felt it was
important

This presentation will go
up on our EdTech website

no
discussion about payscale for technicans in school
districts

We do NOT have any federal
money this year to extend TIP to high
schools
– additional fund would have to be
state dollars

if we move to online
testing, we don’t want the technology taken away from instructional
use
– other states have some experiences
with this