Home PublicationsJRTEPast IssuesVolume 28 Number 5

Edited by Diane McGrath

Volume 28 Number 5 Summer 1996

A Qualitative Evaluation of a Statewide Networking Infrastructure in Education (NIE) Project, Part I

University of Southwestern Louisiana, Lafayette, LA

Abstract

This article outlines the findings of a qualitative and primarily formative evaluation of one state's Networking Infrastructures for Education pilot program to help develop a statewide educational technology network. This evaluation primarily focused on efforts in five diverse school districts to incorporate Internet applications in the classroom at one pilot elementary, middle, and high schools in each district. Although considerable progress was made helping school systems, schools, and teachers develop the capacity to use the Internet in the classroom, much was learned that should facilitate similar efforts in other school districts. Thus, this article describes this K-12 project designed to inform state networking and outlines lessons learned from features and approaches in the sites that participants and evaluators viewed as particularly effective or as needing improvement.

Momentum is growing for educational reform that includes innovative uses of technology throughout the curriculum. Although the excitement for using the Internet and various forms of multimedia is widespread, translating this enthusiasm into a viable curriculum is not an easy task. This article reports on findings and conclusions of an evaluation of a state pilot program whose three main goals were (a) to develop pilot sites in five school systems in one southeastern state as models for the integration of Internet resources into the curriculum, (b) to have these models provide information for the development of the state technology plan, and (c) to develop and field test mathematics and science lessons in K-12 instruction. It describes the nature of this Networking Infrastructure for Education (NIE) program funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF), and includes the findings and conclusions drawn from site visit interviews and focus group meetings, an analysis of a pre- and postproject surveys of project participants, team leader journals, project reports, and publications on recent program developments. The paper also posits new conclusions and recommendations.

This program was a collaborative effort among the NIE program, the state Goals 2000 organization, educators, business partners, community leaders, and university faculty in a southeastern state.It addressed five barriers to the acquisition and use of telecommunications identified in a National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES, 1994) study entitledAdvanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, K-12. These are (a) lack of funds specifically allocated for telecommunications, (b) lack of or outdated equipment; (c) inaccessibility of equipment, (d) lack of inservice or training, and (e) lack of knowledge of ways to integrate advanced telecommunications into the curriculum. Most of these barriers are considerably higher in the state we studied than in most other states. Overall demographics show this state ranks among the highest in illiteracy, crime, and teenage pregnancy; has one of the lowest per capita incomes; and has one of the lowest overall performance rates on the American College Test (Thomas, 1996). It is not surprising that the state has not made a long-range multimillion dollar investment in technology. Although there are pockets of excellence that exist in school technology projects, no equipment, poor equipment, or inadequately used equipment are common characteristics. The state has developed a comprehensive technology plan to bring the necessary access, skills, and knowledge to the state's educational system.

Background

Method

NIE Project Description

The state NIE project was designed to ensure the incorporation of three elements that research indicates are critical to the successful integration of Internet resources in K-12 curriculum: (a) professional development, (b) assistance with curricular integration, and (c) technical support. These three goals match well with the five barriers noted in the NCES (1994) report Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools .

An important part of this project was the selection and implementation of district pilot sites. The purposes of these pilot sites included providing information for the construction of the state's technology plan and providing models for replication to implement similar technology initiatives in other districts. Specifically, they were to serve as testbeds to incorporate professional development, curricular integration, and technical support goals.

Pilot site selection. An out-of-state review team selected the three original district pilot sites from applications submitted jointly by school system and university teams. Each site received $50,000 for hardware, software, and connection costs. In addition, the project selected and allocated $15,000 to two more school district sites that were already connected and using Internet for K-12 instruction. These five sites represent urban, suburban, and rural locations and are geographically distributed around the state. Two of the sites contain a large percentage of students from traditionally underserved populations.

Pilot site teams. Each district-level team consisted of a designated team leader who was a teacher on sabbatical from one of the three schools participating in the project; a lead teacher from each of the elementary, middle and high schools; a school administrator; a university participant knowledgeable in technology; and a university participant knowledgeable in systemic reform of mathematics and science instruction. These seven-member teams attended two three-day workshops during the fall of 1994. At these workshops, Internet use was introduced and sample lessons were tested. A university-level course was developed to be taught in the spring at each of the five participating universities. One of the objectives of the workshops was to create a true team environment so that the objectives of each site could be realized.

Professional development. Professional development was a major component of pilot-site activities. At each site, the local university offered a three-credit university graduate course entitled "Integrating Internet Resources into Standards-based K-12 Instruction" to project participants. Each participant received a $300 stipend for his or her involvement. The participants also received three days of professional development during the spring semester.

Curriculum development. The second goal of the state NIE project was the development of mathematics and science curricular units that integrated Internet resources into K-12 instruction to develop students' critical-thinking skills and problem-solving abilities. Selected teachers from across the state developed the lessons during the fall 1994 semester. These lessons were field tested by the participants in the project and published in Enhancing Science and Mathematics Instruction With the Internet (Cooper, 1995). These lessons provided samples of ways to use the Internet to access information to help solve problems and develop an understanding of current and relevant issues. Teachers involved in the pilot sites also developed their own mathematics and science lessons, which are available online at (http://www.challenge.state.la.us/k12act/lp/index.html).

Development of statewide technology plan. The third goal of the state NIE project was the development of a statewide K-14 educational technology plan. A Goals 2000 and NIE steering coímittee, an advisory council and a Goals 2000 Commission technology subcommittee were established during the summer of 1994. These groups collaborated to assess the current status and projected use of educational technologies and to develop an educational technology plan that would improve student achievement. The plan was designed as a flexible, cost-effective framework to guide and assist all public and private schools and state-agency personnel involved. It was also designed to address requirements of the Goals 2000 state technology plan and support school improvement and standards-based reform efforts.

Evaluation Design

The evaluation's purpose was to understand more thoroughly the lessons learned in the pilot sites, both for the statewide technology plan that was being drafted and for other districts interested in integrating technology more extensively in their pedagogical strategies. The evaluation team members were focused on learning which components worked, which did not work, and why certain components were effective or ineffective. They also identified barriers to success and what strategies districts used to successfully overcome those barriers. They were also looking for evidence that what was being tried in the classroom had improved, or would improve, student learning.

This article summarizes the findings and conclusions drawn from the site visits, pre- and post-project surveys of pilot site participants; journals kept by site team leaders; project reports and publications on the latest program developments; and video interviews of site-team members, other project participants, and students (Bienvenu, 1995,; Cooper,1995; Davidson, 1995; Guerin, 1995; Frantz, Thomas, Friske, Knezek, & Andrepont, 1995; Thomas, 1996; Vantilburg and Cardwell, 1995; and Whelan, 1995, 1996).

The evaluators asked the following questions:

• To what extent did districts arrange for funding in addition to that furnished by the project?
  
• When were hardware, software, and Internet access available for use? To what extent were they functional during the pilot projects? What plans were in place to ensure that they would be fully operational, if they were not already?
  
• What type of access do those on school campuses have to networked software, hardware, and telecommunications?
  
• What training has occurred for project participants, and what were the objectives of the training? Who participated in the training, at what level, and with what resources?
  
• What technical staff members and other support are available to those using the software, hardware and telecommunications?
  
• To what extent are teachers and librarians implementing technology based instruction in the schools? What has been the impact on teachers and other personnel in the schools and the project generally?
  
• What systems are in place to provide information for other school districts to develop their own technology plans?
  
• To what extent is the statewide project effectively designed?

The evaluation team interviewed key site team members; observed classrooms; talked with teachers informally; inspected telecommunications technology; interviewed district officials; and held focus group discussions with teachers, guidance counselors, and librarians. Each of the five sites was visited for one full day during May 1995 by a team of at least two evaluators. More than 80% of the participants were involved in the site evaluation.

In addition, an analysis of case studies and participant surveys was prepared in December 1995, after the final semester of the LaNIE project. The survey assessed the extent to which the goals of the LaNIE project had been met by investigating data that had not been previously examined. That study focused on the status of connectivity at each site, the success of professional development activities, the types and effectiveness of technical support provided, and the indications of project impact at institution and state levels. Interviews with project participants, including principals, teachers, librarians, students, and community partners, were videotaped in April 1995. Excerpts of these interviews provided evidence of the program's success.

Findings and Recommendations

Funding

Each of the original three districts selected as pilot sites received $50,000 from NIE funds and the two others received $15,000 each. The five districts effectively leveraged these funds with other money from a wide array of other sources. For instance, one district committed itself to using its own funds to connect all its schools, not just the three supported by project funds. Another district spent $50,000 of its own funds on hardware and software to connect the two feeder schools to one that was already completely networked and had a LAN (local area network). In another district, technology funds from a bond referendum and sales tax have allowed them to establish a WAN (wide area network) and begin the conversion of connections from modems to an Ethernet network. Districts also used Title I and Eisenhower funds for training.

An awareness of the true costs of establishing Internet connections is essential in this type of project. In many instances, districts had to find money from other sources to cover unexpected expenses, such as new electrical wiring.

Access

The LDE used Goals 2000 /LaNIE funds to provide initial technical support to district- and school-level teams. The LDE developed the wide area networking model, which identifies a resource-efficient method for establishing communications capabilities among local, state, national, and international educational and governmental entities. School systems were encouraged to use one network structure to support both administrative and instructional functions.

According to reports from the pilot sites, participants in all 25 schools were networked and all teachers had been provided with state-of-the-art computers and Internet access by the end of the school year. Some of the guidance counselors had not yet received computers.Local Area Networks (LANs) controlled by dedicated file servers had been installed at each site, and two districts had established Wide Area Networks (WANs). Another was in the final stages of hooking up their LANs to the WAN.

At every site, significant effort and progress were evident in connecting other computers already in the schools to the LANs and the Internet. Each of the five district sites in the project was required to complete a systemwide technology plan. For the future, a state technology plan is being developed for guidance in connecting the sites to the statewide network that will eventually service all schools in the state.

Nevertheless, during the project, sites with less telecommunications experience encountered significant purchasing and technical problems that delayed access to the Internet. One unexpected problem was the paucity of vendors who have had experience with projects of this size and complexity, especially in rural areas. Another was finding personnel to install the specialized equipment. This seriously impeded the integration of technology into the curricula and professional development projects at those sites. Based on consistent comments from interview participants, focus-group discussions,case studies, and surveys, the evaluation team recommended that to help avoid these problems in the future, sites must have the hardware, software and telecommunications connections in place before beginning professional development activities.

Networks

Participants' perceptions of Internet access. Technical problems and purchasing delays and difficulties appeared to affect participants' confidence in the availability of the equipment. Analysis of the pre- and postproject participant surveys revealed that teachers felt less sure about the availability of equipment after the project than at the beginning(Bienvenu, 1995). This confidence presumably would have been significantly bolstered with having hardware, software and telecommunications connections in good working order before professional development commenced, as previously recommended.

The evaluation team made a number of other suggestions that could increase teacher confidence. It recommended that participant training should take place in a training facility, preferably at a school site, to accommodate hands-on access to Internet tools. The class should use the same Internet access tools and platforms that would be used normally by the classroom teacher or other participant. Because teachers would be expected to use graphics and sound in their classrooms and to access World Wide Web resources, it is important that they do so during their Internet training.

The team went further. It recommended that the district arrange for teachers' access to Internet resources at home for practice, general familiarity, and lesson-plan preparation. Districts might arrange to loan computers, modems, and dial-up access for teachers if they need extra time to learn about the Internet.

In their survey responses, participants revealed that the biggest obstacle to using the Internet was time. They felt that they needed more time for learning to search the Internet, accessing the net, practicing their technology skills, developing lesson plans, and correlating lesson plans with the curriculum. Serious consideration should be given by decision makers above the classroom level, including those at the school, district, and state levels to providing sufficient time for project activities. In addition, educators should explore innovative methods of scheduling that exemplify the newer methods of teaching and learning espoused in the innovative programs, such as SIP and NIE, on which this project was based.

Use and access policies. Internet access has a major policy component in addition to the technical considerations.Participants reported several issues concerning the use of the Internet. Some deal with the rights and responsibilities of students, teachers, and others accessing the Internet using the district's telecommunications system. The evaluation team recommended that the state develop a generic acceptable use policy and that districts develop and adopt their own acceptable use policies tailored to their specific needs. Acceptable use policies were formulated at individual sites; an example of these policies is available online: (http://198.41.70.4/eam/AUP.html).

One issue to which pilot sites had not given much attention at the time of the site visits was equity of access to all students within schools. The evaluation team's concern was that students from families with0home computers able to access Internet would be at an even greater advantage than they already might be, as the use of Internet becomes more integrated into lesson plans. The team recommended that the state and school districts consider steps to avoid creating even greater inequities by making Internet access more easily available to those without home access. The equity issue is being addressed with a receipt of new funding to expand the NIE project in these five sites. The state received a U.S.Department of Education Challenge Grant of $4.3 million to develop a Systemic Model to Enhance Student Achievement by Networking the Underserved Community. This project involves each of the same five teams in designing, implementing, and evaluating strategies for effectively increasing access and participation of underserved populations. For more information on this project read the interview with the principal investigator at http://etrc.usl.edu/etrc/libr/reviews/Winter96/conver.html.

Training

University partners to the school district sites in the project provided professional development for the teachers, counselors, librarians, team leaders, and instructional administrators at each site. Each site also had a designated teacher on sabbatical for one semester who served as the site-team leader. Each participant involved took a three-credit university graduate course and received a $300 stipend for participating.University registration fees were paid by the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education through the tuition exemption program. The participants also received three days of professional development during the spring semester. The course focused on using Internet resources and systemic reform methodologies in science and mathematics at all levels. It included essential topics such as Internet training; national and state standards and reform criteria in science, mathematics, and technology; teaching methodologies and pedagogy based on educational research; equity issues such as gender and race; and development of lesson plans that integrated Internet resources. Fifty-three percent of the participants felt that the workshop training was sufficient and15% felt it was not. Regarding the course, 62% felt it was sufficient, 30%felt it was not. Those who were not satisfied with the training felt that the major impediment to success was insufficient access to computers and the Internet. Responses in the participant survey show significant increases in the use of e-mail, FTP, Telnet, Gopher, Archie, Web browsers (WWW, Mosaic, MacWeb, Netscape, Freenet, etc.) and listservs and newsgroups, indicating that participants were provided opportunities to learn about these tools and use them in the professional development activities.

Participants were asked to rank their levels of Internet expertise from novice (0) to expert (10) on the participant survey. When preintervention responses were contrasted with postintervention responses, a statistically significant difference to the 99.9% level of confidence in the ratings was found (z=-7.8002, p=.0001, Wilcox in Matched-Pair Test). This indicates that the participants felt they had increased their level of expertise during the project. Training participants generally were pleased with the telecommunications training provided. Based on interviews and focus group discussions, however, the evaluation team made the following recommendations for improvement in (a) content and methodology and (b) resource support.

Content and methodology. Recommendations concerning the content and methodology of these Internet courses ranged from dealing with participants with widely different levels of computer literacy to providing concrete examples of how teachers could use Internet in the classroom. The team recommended that future participants either be required to be computer literate prior to being selected or be provided introductory computer training before the Internet course begins in order to ensure that all share a common base of knowledge. It also conveyed participants' comments in focus-group discussions that course instructors should provide clear expectations at the beginning of the course concerning how participants should expect to be able to use the Internet training. For instance, they should give concrete examples of how the Internet could effectively be integrated into lesson plans at different grade levels. Such an approach would help teachers understand how the training they receive could be applied.Some preliminary notion of the extent to which children might be using the Internet directly or using resources the teacher provides from the Internet, would help teachers put their training into perspective. Thus, it was recommended that the initial class provide visual demonstrations and model potential Internet applications in a classroom setting.

The team noted that if instructors followed these suggestions,teachers could more easily overcome the temptation to focus on the technology itself and the excitement it generates in the classroom, rather than on the value of the technology to the learning process. It recommended that the university Internet course teach how to access resources and use tools and how to teach using these tools. It is not enough to know how to use the Internet. Teachers need to know how to use current resources in the classroom. Even though the Internet courses could have helped more, teachers trained through the project reported that as their experience level improved, they made a conscious effort to make the transition from technology focus to curriculum integration. The team suggested that the Internet course be structured to ensure early success and to move new users gradually from structured to self-directed activities using current tools, resources, interfaces,and techniques. In addition, the team recommended that instructors train participants to be alert to the quality of the information and information sources they might be using from the Internet.

The team also recommended that Internet courses contain instruction on ethical concerns and techniques to minimize potential for inappropriate access and abuse of Internet access by both students and staff. It suggested that policy on ethical use by faculty and staff in the classroom and library can supplement the school's acceptable use policy as a strategy for controlling inappropriate use of Internet in the school.

A common suggestion by participants was that training needs to model effective classroom strategies for integrating different resources available on the Internet into learning experiences. They also wanted more hands-on instruction.

Teachers and other participants in focus group discussions had different opinions about the structure of the course itself. Some liked the model in which participants met once a week, while others felt that more extensive exposure during a two-day period might be more effective than the weekly strategy. A potentially workable compromise suggested by some participants was a one-day orientation at the beginning, weekly sessions, and an all-day wrap up session at the end. The value of having some time for intense and continuous exposure to the Internet was generally accepted.

There were other participant suggestions. These included the suggestion that the instructor make every effort to minimize errors in the instructions given and materials distributed; even small errors can frustrate novice users. To increase team building and cooperative learning in participants' classrooms, the Internet course might model dynamic groupings within classes by grade level, subject area, or other interest connections. A mentoring approach might be considered; in this approach, each trainee would be paired with an experienced Internet-using participant to supplement the group instruction.

Resource support. The evaluation uncovered the importance of resource support at the institutional level and the participant professional development level. To enhance course effectiveness, the evaluation team recommended that the NIE project provide greater levels of assistance to course instructors and greater opportunities for collaboration among trainers. Professional development participants consistently recommended more resource support for themselves. Initially, districts might hire a person or give release time to one or more librarians to help locate instructional resources on the Internet. Ideally, well-trained mathematics and science supervisors would eventually play that role. In the meantime, it is possible for a district to hire a person specifically to play that role or arrange for release time for a teacher or librarian to perform that function.

The team recommended that the state and districts could cooperate in developing annotated and searchable online directories of resources for teachers at different grade levels. These directories might be indexed to curriculum guides or frameworks for ease of use and should build on the existing Internet directories. The directory could also include approved lesson and unit plans that utilize Internet resources. These would include lesson plans at all levels, and across all curricula. Moreover,they recommended that these lesson plans model a variety of offline and online approaches to using the Internet.

Regarding the course itself, participants recommended providing activity sheets that list step-by-step procedures for using common Internet tools, and that highlight key education resources to facilitate research and classroom integration techniques. They would also like directories of potentially valuable sites for appropriate information, like the Internet Yellow Pages and possibly a matrix of quick references to support curricular objectives.

Technical Support

The LDE used NIE and Goals 2000 funds to provide initial technical support to the district- and school-level teams. They assisted districts in developing networking plans based on each district's specific technology needs. The purpose of this model was to provide a resource efficient method for establishing telecommunications capabilities among local, state, national and international educational entities to enhance K-12 and post-secondary administrative and instructional processes.

Participants universally confirmed the importance of having adequate technical support. Such support is important in setting up the program, and equally important in continuing it. If teachers and others are to depend on Internet access, they need to have expertise readily available when they have problems.

Access to adequate technical staff responsible for networking and connectivity is required for the success of this project. Critically important is quick availability of troubleshooting expertise. Participants at all sites voiced interest in district support for troubleshooting, with a technical-support person on each campus. A common suggestion was that each campus should designate one person to provide first-line technical support. This person might carry a somewhat lighter than normal teaching load. In some cases the person might be an assistant principal, other administrator, or auxiliary personnel. A related suggestion is for districts to consider involving already existing district technical staff in some instructional training activities and to provide them with a greater appreciation of the educational applications of technology. Alternative approaches include contracting for support expertise if sufficiõnt in-house assùstance is not available.

When asked how they would overcome obstacles to using the Internet in the classroom, teachers responded that they did not expect or anticipate assistance in this area, except for technical assistance and equipment. Instead, they reflected personal solutions such as better planning,management, student monitoring, and even finding their own sources of funding.These attitudes could possibly reflect past support-related policies or practices to which teachers have grown accustomed.

Teachers felt a strong need for assistance with curricular integration of Internet resources. Each site should have someone responsible for assistance in this area and available to work with teachers, librarians,and counselors. This person should be knowledgeable in both the technology and curriculum areas, and should be the driving force for the incorporation of the new ways of teaching and learning that the Internet provides, such as cooperative projects, communication across age levels as well and geographic areas, electronic expeditions and discussion groups, online research, access to electronic mentors, and electronic publishing. Attempts should be made to follow the findings of initiatives such as NIE and shaping models developed by them to fit the school's needs, goals, and culture.

Teacher Involvement

Because classrooms at most schools were not connected to the Internet until very late in the project year, teachers generally could not fully implement lesson plans that used Internet resources.Thus, the project did not measure its effect on student learning or attitudes.Bienvenu (1995) reported that the participants' survey indicated that teachers' concerns about using technology decreased and that their amount of computer use increased significantly during the project period. There was a statistically significant difference in the ratings of their Internet expertise between the pre- and postproject surveys (z=-8.533, p=.0001).

Anecdotal information from the site visits and participant surveys is positive. Teachers in schools where classroom access had been accomplished noted a number of instructional benefits. They had a vibrant information source on the Internet that was much more up-to-date, accurate, and extensive than information in the textbooks they had been using. They reported that the use of Internet resources created a more stimulating course and that teachers and students who previously would not have worked well together were engaging in effective collaborative projects.

Observers saw students using the Internet to access information to help them solve problems and develop understandings concerning issues related to mathematics and science. Students were executing the curricular lessons developed in this project and were able to access professionals in mathematics and science.

Teachers and other school personnel were clearly far more sophisticated in their knowledge of and uses of technology than they were before the project began. Videotaped interviews of participants and students exemplify this finding.

The project caused many participating teachers to rethink their roles in the classroom. They are now much more likely to think of themselves as facilitators of learning rather than dispensers of knowledge. Various teachers noted that they are more likely to work collaboratively with children to accomplish instructional activities.

At the same time, however, teachers had concerns regarding the amount of time that the classroom use of the Internet requires, especially where limited numbers of computers are available. Although participants were generally enthusiastic about the potential of incorporating the Internet into the classrooms, as mentioned above, 30% of them revealed in the survey that they were still uncertain about the adequacy of the training they had received thus far.

Survey results showed that participants felt they needed additional and continued training, mentoring, and administrative support. They were also less confident that technical connections would be made and that equipment would be made available than when the project began, presumably because of the technical and purchasing problems previously mentioned.

In addition to the direct benefits to teachers and students,the program provided a number of direct and indirect benefits consistent with project goals. Teachers reported that the project resulted in reducing their feelings of isolation because of interaction among teachers within and among schools in the project, and to some extent, with teachers in other areas of the country by way of the Internet. Teachers and others frequently mentioned that they were rejuvenated by participation in the project, and that this rejuvenation led to increased enthusiasm for their work. Experienced teachers reported substantial increases in personal motivation and improved application of new strategies.

Teachers' concerns about having adequate time to accomplish the varied tasks associated with incorporating the Internet in classroom activities needs to be addressed. Administrative assistance is crucial for provide teachers with adequate time by adjusting or recreating class schedules to provide time during the school day for practicing and "browsing the net" and by planning innovative programs such as cross-curricular classes, multidisciplinary units, or collaborative projects among teachers aand across disciplines (such as science and literature or math and social studies). Administrators will need to recognize the global, interdisciplinary nature of the Internet and begin finding ways to incorporate this new way of thinking and learning into curriculum planning, as well as finding the time for it in each school day.

The evaluation team observed that the project has caused schools to begin or continue to address the issue of how global information access can be effectively integrated into the classroom. It has also spawned a considerable number of examples of multidisciplinary efforts reaching beyond mathematics and science.

At the institutional level, many of the universities and school districts involved are continuing and extending the Internet courses.The project seemed to have generated more activity and earlier activity in training university and school personnel in the use of the Internet and telecommunications generally than would otherwise have been the case. Some progress was noted as well in integrating administrative and instructional networking, although much more remains to be done. This is a particularly difficult challenge.

Technology Plans

The second major component of the NIE and Goals 2000 Project was the development of a statewide technology plan for K-14 Education. The project involves stakeholders throughout the educational community and has solicited input from a wide variety of private sector and community participants. It was initiated through the Goals 2000 Commission and the LDE, both of which combined with the state NIE group steering committee. An advisory council consisting of representatives from statewide education groups, business leaders and the governor's office was formed. A task force was charged with the responsibility of developing the vision,mission, goals, and objectives.

The vision statement for the plan adopted by the steering committee is:

Universal access to technology enables, empowers, and inspires all learners. Enhanced insights and skills will lead to productive careers,economic development, and a more enlightened citizenry. Therefore, all teacher sand learners in Louisiana will appropriately use state-of-the-art educational technology.

a systemic statewide plan which employs state-of-the-art technologies to enhance K-14 student learning and staff development.

1. Develop a statewide plan which reflects the vision.
2. Develop strategies to effectively implement and revise the plan.
3. Ensure statewide coordination.
4. Establish technology standards for infrastructure and curricula.
5. Provide preservice and inservice professional development.
6. Identify and allocate resources.
7. Evaluate progress toward achieving these goals.

These planning efforts will result in systemic integration of technology to support teaching and learning in Louisiana. The statewide planning is being shaped by ongoing insights from local models and developing infrastructures at local levels (Davidson, 1995). This plan may be accessed online from the state Challenge Grant home page at http://www.challenge.state.la.us).

In January 1996, a 21-member State Writing Team composed of representatives from the newly elected governor's K-12 transition team, the Louisiana Goals 2000 Commission, the LDE, and the state technology steering committee began developing a consolidated state plan which will incorporate the state technology plan. During March 1996, a 19-member LEARN Commission was appointed through an executive order by the governor. This group will approve the final draft of the state education plan.

Read more...

Copyright © 1996, ISTE (International Society for Technology in Education). All rights reserved.