1.3 Policies, Procedures, Programs & Funding
Candidates research, recommend, and implement policies, procedures, programs and funding strategies to support implementation of the shared vision represented in the school, district, state, and federal technology plans and guidelines. Funding strategies may include the development, submission, and evaluation of formal grant proposals. (PSC 1.3/ISTE 1c)
Artifact: Action/Evaluation Plan
Reflection:
For ITEC 7410: Instructional Technology Leadership, I developed an Action/Evaluation plan that included three goals to help achieve the previously-created shared vision and were based on areas for growth that were identified in the SWOT analysis. The goals in the Action/Evaluation plan relate to teacher skill, instructional use, and creating a shared vision. I also included strategies to accomplish these goals, as well as ideas of how to measure the success of each goal.
Through the creation of this action plan, I was tasked with synthesizing the research from the SWOT analysis data to create recommendations for specific action steps that would help our school improve technology implementation. I also had to research the specific policies, procedures, programs, and funding strategies that I was recommending to make sure they were feasible for our school in terms of the resources, time commitments, person(s) responsible, cost, etc. For example, one of the recommendations was to assign professional development videos about instructional technology on a program called PD 360. Before making this recommendation, I had to research the program to make sure it included adequate videos that would help accomplish this goal. I also researched the policies and programs already in place at other schools to help develop ideas to include in our own school’s action plan, such as a policy of required peer observations and a procedure for conducting these observations, including the recommended time to complete the observations and any observation worksheets that these schools used. I tried to recommend policies, procedures, and programs that would have little or no cost to the school, but some did require additional funding. As such, I had to research possible funding strategies, such as grant writing or budget allotment, before recommending the funding strategy that would work best for our school. Although the action plan has not yet been implemented in our school, the research that went into creating the recommended action steps was thorough enough that implementation would be as simple as following the recommended steps outlined in the plan. The plan also includes success indicators that would help gauge the effectiveness of any future implementation of the plan.
Through the development of this action plan, I learned that it takes many different components to recommend specific actions for improving any component of a school’s major operations. This plan was not born out of thin air. It took weeks of work in developing a shared vision and analyzing the school’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats to serve as a basis for selecting and recommending the specific action steps included in this plan. Often as teachers we can get frustrated at the amount of time it can take to enact major change in a school. This process has taught me that this is completely justified because of how much careful planning it takes to create such an action plan. I would certainly rather any major plan for improvement be based on a solid foundation of data analysis, research, and common vision than be created in haste. If I were to do create the action plan again, I would want to include more ambitious plans that may require additional funding. I was careful to include as many plans that did not require any funding as I could, but I feel that the school is ready to make a major investment in technology implementation and therefore would be open to action steps that perhaps would require additional funding.
If and when this action plan is implemented in my school, the hard work that went into its creation would certainly have an impact on both teacher development and student learning. The action plan also includes specific metrics that could be used to measure this improvement. For example, the success indicator of the first goal in the action plan is that “100% of teachers will be designing and implementing lessons that include student-centered technology use at least three times per month in each curriculum area highlighted in SIP (Math, Reading, Language Arts,” the evaluation method for which includes observations, pre/post teacher survey, student surveys, lesson plans. The success indicator of the second goal in the action plan is that “100% of students will have experiences with using the IWB for activities that can be identified as Bloom’s taxonomy “Application” or higher and/or Depth of Knowledge “Strategic Thinking” or higher,” the evaluation method for which includes observations, lesson plans, and student surveys.
For ITEC 7410: Instructional Technology Leadership, I developed an Action/Evaluation plan that included three goals to help achieve the previously-created shared vision and were based on areas for growth that were identified in the SWOT analysis. The goals in the Action/Evaluation plan relate to teacher skill, instructional use, and creating a shared vision. I also included strategies to accomplish these goals, as well as ideas of how to measure the success of each goal.
Through the creation of this action plan, I was tasked with synthesizing the research from the SWOT analysis data to create recommendations for specific action steps that would help our school improve technology implementation. I also had to research the specific policies, procedures, programs, and funding strategies that I was recommending to make sure they were feasible for our school in terms of the resources, time commitments, person(s) responsible, cost, etc. For example, one of the recommendations was to assign professional development videos about instructional technology on a program called PD 360. Before making this recommendation, I had to research the program to make sure it included adequate videos that would help accomplish this goal. I also researched the policies and programs already in place at other schools to help develop ideas to include in our own school’s action plan, such as a policy of required peer observations and a procedure for conducting these observations, including the recommended time to complete the observations and any observation worksheets that these schools used. I tried to recommend policies, procedures, and programs that would have little or no cost to the school, but some did require additional funding. As such, I had to research possible funding strategies, such as grant writing or budget allotment, before recommending the funding strategy that would work best for our school. Although the action plan has not yet been implemented in our school, the research that went into creating the recommended action steps was thorough enough that implementation would be as simple as following the recommended steps outlined in the plan. The plan also includes success indicators that would help gauge the effectiveness of any future implementation of the plan.
Through the development of this action plan, I learned that it takes many different components to recommend specific actions for improving any component of a school’s major operations. This plan was not born out of thin air. It took weeks of work in developing a shared vision and analyzing the school’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats to serve as a basis for selecting and recommending the specific action steps included in this plan. Often as teachers we can get frustrated at the amount of time it can take to enact major change in a school. This process has taught me that this is completely justified because of how much careful planning it takes to create such an action plan. I would certainly rather any major plan for improvement be based on a solid foundation of data analysis, research, and common vision than be created in haste. If I were to do create the action plan again, I would want to include more ambitious plans that may require additional funding. I was careful to include as many plans that did not require any funding as I could, but I feel that the school is ready to make a major investment in technology implementation and therefore would be open to action steps that perhaps would require additional funding.
If and when this action plan is implemented in my school, the hard work that went into its creation would certainly have an impact on both teacher development and student learning. The action plan also includes specific metrics that could be used to measure this improvement. For example, the success indicator of the first goal in the action plan is that “100% of teachers will be designing and implementing lessons that include student-centered technology use at least three times per month in each curriculum area highlighted in SIP (Math, Reading, Language Arts,” the evaluation method for which includes observations, pre/post teacher survey, student surveys, lesson plans. The success indicator of the second goal in the action plan is that “100% of students will have experiences with using the IWB for activities that can be identified as Bloom’s taxonomy “Application” or higher and/or Depth of Knowledge “Strategic Thinking” or higher,” the evaluation method for which includes observations, lesson plans, and student surveys.