home

= __Collaborative Analysis Project__ =

**Introduction**
Across the United States almost every state has adopted what is known as Common Core State Standards. “The standards are designed to be robust and relevant to the real world, reflecting the knowledge and skills that our young people need for success in college and careers. With American students fully prepared for the future, our communities will be best positioned to compete successfully in the global economy.” ([]) Technology is an integrated part of work, school, and life. In order for any student to achieve these standards set forth by our nation’s educational leaders it is vital that students learn how to use the most recent technology to achieve success in college, work, and life. The future of our country depends on it.

Even though our nation as a whole shares the same standards, each school is unique to the students that they serve and it is important to tailor technology to the educational setting. Each state, district, and school is different. Everyone chooses to implement technology in the classroom in their own way. This largely depends on the employees, student body, funding, and the individual goals of the state. The research for this paper has been conducted in four different locations and in two different states. There are two schools from North Carolina; Wilson Early College High School, in Wilson NC and Crossnore Academy, in Avery NC. The other two schools are located in Michigan, Warren Consolidated School District, in Warren MI and Heritage High School in Saginaw, MI. Research has been completed, compared, and presented here on each schools hardware, personnel computer training, evaluation processes, and software. There are many differences and similarities between each school presented. However, one overarching goal is to incorporate technology in the classroom for the success of America’s young people.


 * Hardware**

There are many factors that affect the hardware that a district uses when it comes to technology in education. The simplest factor and probably most important is money. In today’s declining economy, many districts simply cannot afford to change the hardware throughout the district. Some districts have placed a certain amount of importance on technology in education and have found a way to stretch their budgets to ensure there is up to date technology in its schools. The four districts that were covered in this analysis share some similarities while at the same time display some key differences.

Wilson Early College Academy (WECA) has definitely placed a major emphasis on technology in education. WECA uses two platforms, Windows and Macintosh (Mac). Windows is the system that powers the HP laptops and Mac is the system that powers the Ipad tablet, each of which have been issued to every teacher. Both the Ipad and laptop are wirelessly synced to projectors in the school. All of these computers have been purchased recently and have been updated. WECA utilizes a municipally provided broadband Wi-Fi called Greenlight. The hardware provided to the teachers by WECA can be used both in the school and out of school for lesson planning and research.

Warren Consolidated Schools (WCS) have also taken action to make sure the technology in its schools is up to date and used daily. WCS is a large district and just went through a large hardware upgrade. All of the hardware was replaced throughout its schools at the price of ten million dollars. WCS is now exclusively using Dell Optiplex computers. These computers all run on Windows 7, the most recent version of the popular Windows operating system. These are all desktop computers that are installed on carts that are wired to projectors in each classroom. This technology is top of the line but not the most accessible to the students. There are computer labs and mobile labs (carts of laptops) but most of the new technology is designed for the teachers to use during instruction. WCS uses a combination of hardwired high speed internet connection and Wi-Fi in all of its buildings.

Crossnore Academy is working on updating their technology. Crossnore is using older hardware but understands the need to upgrade equipment to help their students excel. Crossnore uses mostly uses Windows based computer systems, with a few Macs. The Windows based computers are still running on Windows XP. The main problem with the hardware at Crossnore identified by Rachel Christian is the computers processing power. The computers cannot be used for multiple functions and they are very sluggish. Crossnore is currently working on a technology plan to use grant money to purchase new equipment for each teacher. Crossnore utilizes a high speed wireless internet connection.

Heritage High School is also currently in the process of updating existing hardware in the building. Heritage is running a combination of HP and Compaq computers. The school chose these computers because the schools IT department felt the customer support was better than the support that the other companies had to offer. The computers are still running on Windows XP but they are working on an upgrade to Windows 7. This upgrade would take place next school year at the earliest.

These schools have some distinct differences in size and budgets, but all four of these schools have realized the importance of technology in education. These schools have made a commitment to its students, that they will be provided the best technology possible. The technology plans of all four of the schools are similar, but each school is in a different stage of implementation.


 * Training**

Technology is a wonderful advantage to any classroom with the right training. From district to district training can range from insufficient to an adequate balance. In this collaborative analysis, the aspect of training takes on all of these faces. When training in a district is found to be insufficient, it can be very frustrating and discouraging to the teacher. The same can also be said for districts that offer too much technology and training. The training portion of this analysis will show that it is the school districts which seek to balance out new technology with proper training prove to be the most successful in utilizing the resources it has available.

According to Rachel Christian and other teachers at Crossnore Academy, there is not enough staff properly trained in technology by the school. Most of the teachers understand the basics of computers, but in the past three years there has been no training and no support for what is currently available. This is mainly due to a lack of new technology being implemented by the school and therefore, the need for training is not necessary. Rachel works with a majority of students that are two-to-three grade level behind their peers. When working with at-risk students, technology can be a benefit especially when used with differentiated instruction (Pitler, Hubbell, Kuhn, & Malenoski. p. 3). Yet if the technology is not present and the only staff to be trained on any new technology is administration, this is a problem. As a result Rachel has sought her own form of training through her master’s program at Central Michigan University.

On the other side of the spectrum, there could also be too much training. At Wilson Early College Academy (WECA), Jason Kessler believes this is the case. WECA is a school comparable to Rachel’s in size. A clear difference is that these students are college bound and even currently enrolled in some college courses. In a school system which seems to promote the integration of technology, WECA has offered five semester long training sessions to staff and students. What is even more amazing is that students are also given the opportunity to teach the staff about new programs. The negative aspect of all of these new pilot programs is that the evaluation process is lost. Teachers are so busy being trained to implement these new programs that there is very little, if any, time given to the evaluation of these programs for their usefulness which can be just as bad as no training at all (Wallace, Blase, Fixsen, & Naoom, 2007 cited in Center for Implementing Technology in Education).

Heritage High School, in the Saginaw Township Community School district, is a suburban school that is larger then the previous two schools yet has some of the same issues with technology training. The high school has approximately 1600 students and there are about 80 teachers and four administrators. There is an at-risk program and the International Bachelorette (IB) program making it almost a combination of the two previous school described. In the school district, technology training was given in abundance at around 150 sessions in the past three years. The major cause for this increase was the installation of Promethean boards into all the middle and some of the high school classrooms. Yet even with the training available, teachers still seemed reluctant to use the technology. In this case the quality of training, not the lack of training itself, was reported as deficient. As a result, most of the new and innovative technology purchased by the district sits unused and any new software that is required is met with resistance by the staff. Just as an ineffective teacher has a negative impact on students, the same is noted when technology training is mediocre at best (Royer p. 234). Teachers are reluctant to try new technology in fear that they will be wasting valuable instruction time instead of enhancing it.

In the largest of the school districts discussed, it is interesting to see how technology training was handled. According to Frank Kyewski, the Warren Consolidated school district has just spent a staggering ten million dollars on upgrading their technology which included training. During the summer, eight sessions were held for training and a third of the staff took part. To continue support for staff, technology specialists were hired part-time for every school. This district took into consideration the level of training and support that would be needed and therefore did not add new software if it was not necessary. This would only serve to stretch thin the training and support available causing teachers to either balk at using the technology as seen with Crossnore Academy and Heritage High or be so overwhelmed with it that they never fully evaluate its usefulness as with WECA.


 * Evaluations**

Society has made technology an essential part of education today. It is imperative to incorporate multiple forms of technology into our school systems to prepare students for a global economy. Correspondingly it is important as educators that we evaluate both student and teacher achievement in technology and curriculum. As well as, evaluate the impact of technology on student achievement.

When comparing the four schools researched, it was found that each school judge’s student achievement based on student results on state wide tests designed around the Standard Course of Study for each curriculum area. Each school also completes individual teacher assessments, and implements some type of evaluation twice a semester or every 6 to 10 weeks.

In North Carolina, Wilson Early College Academy and Crossnore Academy both have invested in a statistical program created by the SAS Corporation called EVAAS. This program creates a predictor score based on previous End-Of-Course exams for each student. Each student must achieve a certain level of growth for the year, which meets or exceeds this predictor score, for the school and in some cases the teachers to be believed effective.

In Michigan, Warren School District and Heritage High School, both implement data collection software programs that seem to also serve as an evaluation process. Warren School District uses a program called Data Director. This is a program that collects and stores data from test that students have completed. It also allows for teachers and the district to use the information for common assessment, in various subjects, allowing for revision of lesson plans if a majority of students had difficulty on specific test. Heritage High School uses the multimedia program Skyward which also gathers statistical data posted and allows for common assessment.

Each school district presented evaluates their students multiple times every year. However, not one of them currently evaluate the teachers and holds them accountable. There is not a clear evaluation process in any of the four schools for evaluating the effectiveness of technology implemented in the classroom and how it corresponds to student achievement. The tools or the “technology” is available for a better orchestrated evaluation process on both the curriculum and effective technology. It is up to us to design and implement a respectable evaluation process in our schools.


 * Software **

The evaluation comparison process has shown how four school districts (two in Michigan and two in North Carolina) approach technology in the classroom. It is striking how diverse the plan each school district has to address the responsiblity of integrating technology into classroom instruction in order to enhance the academic environment provided for their clients. By analyzing the differences in the training and evaluation methods of each school, one can conclude that factors (government, economic, and social) at the state and local levels of decision making have a large impact on adoption of technology plans of each district.

The pattern established with different training and evaluation methods between each school district continues to be present when analyzing software employed in each group member's classroom. The diversity in available software is not coincidental, as it reflects the overall plan each school district has for technology integration into the classroom setting.

It is not surprising that Warren Consolidated Schools, which as indicated earlier in this evaluation has spent ten million dollars for technology upgrades, has the greatest amount of software available to classroom educators. Warren Consolidated Schools provides software for concept mapping (Inspiration, Kidspiration), White Board progams (RM Easitech, Light Pen), data collection tools (Power School, Data Director), and audiovisual/media controls (Media School) for each teacher to integrate into their lesson planning and delivery processes. These software programs allow the educator to enhance student learning and track achievement.

Warren Consolidated Schools has invested greatly into software programs that directly impact both the educator and student. This committment to providing programs for the classroom has made the district employ Microsoft Office Professional 2002 instead of upgrading to the latest version of MS Office. The school district believies MS Office Professional 2002 is sufficient for employees to conduct business activities which require communications involving word processing/spreadsheet activities.

Wilson Early College Academy is a 1-to-1 school where both educators and students have a laptop computer for academic purposes. WECA provides word processing/spreadsheet programs (Microsoft Office 2010) for both educators and students to conduct academic business. The school also has invested in Smart Board programs that allow the educator to create graphic organizers, games, concept maps, etc., all designed to create an active, student-centered learning environment. In addition to these software programs, WECA utilizes SAS Curriculum Pathways which are learning modules designed to engage students with video, interactive games/quizzes, and reading/vocabulary building activities. Staff are required by North Carolina statute to compute student academic progress and attendance in a state-wide database program called NC Wise.

At Heritage High School, educators are able to communicate with students and parents regarding progress by utilizing a software program named Skyward. The school encourages all educators to use this program because it provides a uniform system of collecting and reporting data. Prior too this, educators used Gradequick or their own data collection methods to report student achievement. Heritage High School has software programs for credit recovery of core courses (Compass Learning) which has computer assisted modules to help students behind in their academic schedule, etc.

For word processing/spreadsheet purposes, Heritage High School is in a transition period between Microsoft Office programs to Google Documents. The financial advantages of Google Documents are attractive for organizations of all sectors because individuals are able to create word documents, spreadsheets, presentations, and form filled data collection sheets in a virutal environment without the cost of purchasing a software licensing agreement. In a budgetary climate characterized by less dollars being appropriated to local school districts, the Google Documents alternative to Microsoft Office is likely to grow in popularity.

At Crossnore Academy, teachers employ EVAAS software created by SAS Corporation to design lessons based on indvidual student predictor scores for End-of-Course testing. EVAAS is only a data software program and does not provide any tools for students to enhance their learning. To conduct day-to-day operations, Crossnore uses Microsoft office for word processing and spreadsheet purposes.

Each school district has a different committment to software utilization in the classroom. As addressed in the evaluation portion of this report, no district currently asks for input from classroom educators to rate the overall effectiveness of software on student achievement. The four districts should strongly consider evaluating the software presently in use before making decisions on future software purchases.

This collaborative analysis has allowed the group to see the wide range of technology represented in different school districts with regards to hardware, training, evaluations and software. At Wilson Early College Academy the abundance of software without sufficient evaluation proves to be a matter for further review. At Heritage High School the lack of proper training coupled with new hardware is a source of frustration for staff. Yet this analysis has also helped to light a fire under teachers at Crossnore Academy who are made aware of how far it needs to go in order to upgrade their technology so that their students are equipped with some of the same technological advances seen in other school districts. In spite of all the possibilities either positive or negative of technology integration in the classroom, it is achievable to find the balance necessary to make technology a rewarding experience to teachers and more importantly for student success due to schools like the Warren Consolidated school district.
 * Conclusion**

The similarities and differences of the four schools represented here have also shed light on one common theme: Technology is an integral part, whether it is small or large, to our education system. As more and more states align to the Common Core State standards, it is merely a matter of time before technology follows in this same pattern. In order for students to reach their fullest potential in a more competitive and global society, districts must embrace technology in one form or another.