1. My Technology Flow Chart & Professional Development Plan

2. Superintendent Dr. Anthony His role is to work with campus leaders to increase the role of technology in the classrooms. Provide resources to his district to ensure effective use of technology for teaching and learning. Technology Planning Committee Members are Harold Rowe, Linda Macias, Mary Jadloski, Vicki McComas, Donna Guthrie, Dan McIlduff, Tony Barcelona, Becky Cook, Barbara Levandoski, Pam Edwards, Margaret Reed, Rayyan Amine, Robin McGlohn, Marty Edwards, Jane Flynn, Jay Johnson, Claude Yoas, David Garcia, Debbie Schlutz, Jessica Hughes, Katrina Willard, Mark Calvo, Laura Barrett, Jill Smith, Becky Denton, Glenda Horner, Paula Ross, Fred Brenz, Jennifer Miller, Stacey Stringer, Mike Donnelly, Whitney Timmons, Megan Bittner, Jennifer Bittner, Griffin Judge, Sandra Judge, Christian Rumscheidt, Michelle Logback, Melissa McAnear, Timothy Rocka. The Committee takes input received from students, parents, teachers, curriculum staff, and campus administrators as well as the analysis of the Bond Technology Subcommittee, to identify appropriate goals and objectives associated with a need in each key area from the STaR chart.

3. Principals in district campuses Patty Mooney (my campus principal) Responsible that technology is being used in an effective way for teaching and learning. Principals are responsible to as well to ensure that the objectives and goals of the needs in each key area of the STaR chart are being worked towards improvement. Principals are also held accountable to ensure that there is budgeting for technology on their campus. Parents/Community Parents and community members are responsible to educating themselves on school policies, including the policies covering technology. Parents and community members can benefit as well from technology with 24/7 online learning. They are too accountable for working with the schools to ensure high student performance with the use of technology.

4. Teachers on each campus Mrs. Onyesoh (myself, as an example) Teachers are responsible in completing the STaR chart correctly and honestly. Teachers are responsible as well as using technology in an effective manner for all students to learn in and outside of the classroom. Teachers must acquire appropriate professional development to support their use of technology with all students. The Superintendent and Technology Plan Committee After teachers have completed the STaR chart, not only will the state be evaluating the results, but so will our superintendent, Dr. Anthony, and the members of the Technology Plan Committee to ensure that each campus is improving towards the Target Tech goal. If not, this is an opportunity for technology leaders to step in and give support making changes where needed to start a positive growth towards the use of technology in all campuses within the district.

5. Professional Development Plan

7. Evaluation Methods

8. STaR Chart Each campus in Texas will complete the STaR chart, including my campus. This evaluation will allow us to see our whole campus and how teachers feel technology is being implemented throughout the school. The chart will not be completed until spring. So, this chart will be great to use to brainstorm and to collaborate improvements for the upcoming school year. Teacher leaders from each content area will evaluate the STaR chart and collaborate amongst each other and their content teams on how our individual campus can continue working towards Target Tech for the upcoming school year. As the Long Range Technology Plan reinstates, is that all students in grade 8, should have mastered Technology Applications TEKS. However, unfortunate there is not a state standardized accountability system to evaluate that all 8th graders are literate in the Technology Application TEKS.

9. On the District Level Evaluation The best district evaluation that we have in all content areas will be our benchmarks. Each content team will study data and their results from their benchmarks. As stated above, teachers will reflect on the methods and strategies used to teach each concept and whether or not they incorporated technology. Teams should also ask themselves on concepts readily missed, “How could I have used technology or technology more effectively for students to interact with this concept and acquire a better understanding?” It is one thing to just use power point, but are students using technology for processing and demonstrating an understanding of what has been taught. Teachers must use the data to self reflect and make appropriate changes in their teaching styles and strategies if students are having a difficult time comprehending major concepts.

10. On-Campus Evaluation On the campus level, there will be both formal and informal evaluations. Formally, each team will develop and submit their data digs that are a reflection of data from a six weeks benchmark. Teams will also have the opportunity to document changes and new strategies that will be substituting older methods of teaching. This will demonstrate that differentiation is taking place and technology is being effectively used. Informally, lead teachers and all content teachers will have their professional learning communities to evaluate progress and set-backs. Teachers will have one another to learn from and model new examples and technologies in the classroom. Teachers will share real life experiences of successes and frustrations and be able to collaborate with one another to allow an opportunity for all teachers to be successful facilitators in the classrooms. During professional learning communities, there will be a time for ‘show and tell’ where teachers show off their students’ successes with the use of technology and new strategies being used in the classroom. By demonstrating student made products, it evaluates that a system and strategy is effective. Other teachers can then collaborate and work with a specific teacher to learn more and know how to integrate something similar in their own classroom.