Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Technology Vision Statements

44 views
Skip to first unread message

EDTECH Editor-Jones

unread,
Jan 14, 2010, 7:04:43 AM1/14/10
to
From: Jacquie Henry <wanderin...@gmail.com>

I am on our district's technology committee. We have to write a tech plan -
but feel that we should express our vision of what we want before creating
the plan. A sub-committte has been formed to create the statement and I am
assembling some samples for them to examine.

If you know of some really good examples - please share them. I am looking
for statement of the type seen here:

http://www.sun-associates.com/resources/visions.html

Thanks so much for your help!


--
Jacquie Henry, MLS
Ruben A. Cirillo High School
http://wanderings.edublogs.org/
http://www.gananda.org/webpages/hslibrary/

Doll Club
http://mwsdsc.edublogs.org/
For Doll Club Business - please email:
wanderin...@gmail.com

---
Edtech Archives, posting guidelines and other information are at:
http://www.h-net.msu.edu/~edweb
Please include your name, email address, and school or professional
affiliation in each posting.
To unsubscribe send the following command to: LIST...@H-NET.MSU.EDU
SIGNOFF EDTECH

EDTECH Editor-Beil

unread,
Jan 14, 2010, 9:30:15 PM1/14/10
to
From: Jeff Johnson <jjohns...@mac.com>

Jacquie,

Shouldn't a school's vision statement be about student's and student
learning - after all, everything else we are (should be) doing is a subset
of that. The problem I have with creating "technology vision statements"
is that they tend to be about technology, not students, teaching or
learning.

That said, please understand I am a strong advocate of educational
technology and believe that edtech can play a significant, if not major,
role in education. I'm just commenting on where to place the spotlight...

Jeff Johnson
Technology Coordinator
Glendale-River Hills School District
Glendale, WI 53209
jeff.j...@glendale.k12.wi.us

> X-From: Jacquie Henry <wanderin...@gmail.com>


>
> I am on our district's technology committee. We have to write a tech plan -
> but feel that we should express our vision of what we want before creating
> the plan. A sub-committte has been formed to create the statement and I am
> assembling some samples for them to examine.
>
> If you know of some really good examples - please share them. I am looking
> for statement of the type seen here:
>
> http://www.sun-associates.com/resources/visions.html
>
> Thanks so much for your help!

---

EDTECH Editor-Jones

unread,
Jan 14, 2010, 10:55:16 PM1/14/10
to
From: David Marcovitz <Ma...@loyola.edu>

While this doesn't have examples, it has guiding questions for helping to
develop a vision statement:

http://www.ncrtec.org/capacity/guidewww/gqhome.htm

--David
--
David M. Marcovitz, Ph.D.
Associate Professor, Educational Technology Director
Department of Education Specialties
Loyola University Maryland

mailto:ma...@loyola.edu
http://www.loyola.edu/schoolofeducation/facstaff/DavidMarcovitz.html

> From: Jacquie Henry <wanderin...@gmail.com>
>
> I am on our district's technology committee. We have to write a tech plan -
> but feel that we should express our vision of what we want before creating
> the plan. A sub-committte has been formed to create the statement and I am
> assembling some samples for them to examine.
>
> If you know of some really good examples - please share them. I am looking
> for statement of the type seen here:
>
> http://www.sun-associates.com/resources/visions.html
>
> Thanks so much for your help!
>
>

> --
> Jacquie Henry, MLS
> Ruben A. Cirillo High School
> http://wanderings.edublogs.org/
> http://www.gananda.org/webpages/hslibrary/
>
> Doll Club
> http://mwsdsc.edublogs.org/
> For Doll Club Business - please email:
> wanderin...@gmail.com

---

EDTECH Editor-Beil

unread,
Jan 15, 2010, 8:32:44 PM1/15/10
to
From: David Marcovitz <Ma...@loyola.edu>

Jeff,

I think you are confusing a good vision statement with a bad one. If the
vision statement is all about the stuff, then it is probably not very
good. But a good vision statement, in theory, can be extremely helpful. If
your school really has a shared vision, you have a real chance of moving
forward. The problem with vision statements is usually they are not
shared. Either they are nonsensical statements for the sake of writing a
statement, or they are the vision of a very small group of people. The key
is finding a shared vision, allowing everyone a reference point for moving
forward together. With that, purchases, curriculum changes, new hires,
etc. can all be made to help further the vision.

--David
--
David M. Marcovitz, Ph.D.
Associate Professor, Educational Technology Director
Department of Education Specialties
Loyola University Maryland

mailto:ma...@loyola.edu
http://www.loyola.edu/schoolofeducation/facstaff/DavidMarcovitz.html

X-From: Jeff Johnson <jjohns...@mac.com>

Jacquie,

Shouldn't a school's vision statement be about student's and student
learning - after all, everything else we are (should be) doing is a subset
of that. The problem I have with creating "technology vision statements"
is that they tend to be about technology, not students, teaching or
learning.

That said, please understand I am a strong advocate of educational
technology and believe that edtech can play a significant, if not major,
role in education. I'm just commenting on where to place the spotlight...

Jeff Johnson
Technology Coordinator
Glendale-River Hills School District
Glendale, WI 53209
jeff.j...@glendale.k12.wi.us

> X-From: Jacquie Henry <wanderin...@gmail.com>


>
> I am on our district's technology committee. We have to write a tech plan -
> but feel that we should express our vision of what we want before creating
> the plan. A sub-committte has been formed to create the statement and I am
> assembling some samples for them to examine.
>
> If you know of some really good examples - please share them. I am looking
> for statement of the type seen here:
>
> http://www.sun-associates.com/resources/visions.html
>
> Thanks so much for your help!

---

EDTECH Editor-Beil

unread,
Jan 15, 2010, 8:32:44 PM1/15/10
to
From: Joe Frost <Joe....@phoenixchristian.org>

http://www.ncrtec.org/capacity/guidewww/gqhome.htm - The organization
was seemingly disbanded in 2005 and it looks as if the data is from
1996...

Is there another, current, resource available?

Thanks,
*******

Joe Frost
Director of Technology & Operations
Department Chair Technology
http://www.phoenixchristian.org

EDTECH Editor-Beil

unread,
Jan 17, 2010, 12:54:27 AM1/17/10
to
From: Miles Fidelman <mfid...@meetinghouse.net>

Let me echo that sentiment as well. I sat on our district's technology
planning committee a couple of years ago - and it was all being driven by
technologists. There was a complete disconnect between what was being thought
about by the planning group and how education and curriculum were being thought
about (by a completely different set of people).

In my humble opinion, technology planning and vision have to start with a
vision of pedagogy and curriculum, informed by the opportunities offered by
technology.

Most of the vision statements I've seen for technology are of the motherhood
and apple pie variety (e.g., "to provide global access to information" or
"Students, parents, and educators will use communication and information
technologies to enhance and expand the traditional role of education").

These kinds of statements don't capture the true opportunities that technology
offers. Thinking of just a few examples that I've encountered, of how
technology can be transformative:

- learning foreign languages by interacting directly with students in other
countries

- collaborating in scientific research

- curricular materials that can be adjusted semester-by-semester to reflect
changes in the state of knowledge (sort of hard to do with textbooks that get
replaced on a 3-6 year cycle)

The vision for education has to drive the vision and plan for technology use.

Miles Fidelman
//
> From: Jeff Johnson <jjohns...@mac.com>


>
> Shouldn't a school's vision statement be about student's and student learning
> - after all, everything else we are (should be) doing is a subset of that.
> The problem I have with creating "technology vision statements" is that they
> tend to be about technology, not students, teaching or learning.
>
> That said, please understand I am a strong advocate of educational technology
> and believe that edtech can play a significant, if not major, role in
> education. I'm just commenting on where to place the spotlight...
>

>> X-From: Jacquie Henry <wanderin...@gmail.com>
>>
>> I am on our district's technology committee. We have to write a tech plan -
>> but feel that we should express our vision of what we want before creating
>> the plan. A sub-committte has been formed to create the statement and I am
>> assembling some samples for them to examine.
>>
>> If you know of some really good examples - please share them. I am looking
>> for statement of the type seen here:

---

EDTECH Editor-Beil

unread,
Jan 17, 2010, 12:58:35 AM1/17/10
to
From: David Marcovitz <Ma...@loyola.edu>

I haven't found another good resource like this. However, keep in mind
that this is about the process of visioning, not about a specific
technology. The guiding questions that will help you form your own vision
are good ones. The links to external resources are no longer good, but
they were never that important anyway. With that said, if someone has
found something similar and up-to-date, I would love to hear about it.

--David

EDTECH Editor-Beil

unread,
Jan 20, 2010, 11:03:02 PM1/20/10
to
From: Nancy Willard <nwil...@csriu.org>

> X-From: Miles Fidelman <mfid...@meetinghouse.net>
>
>> X-From: David Marcovitz <Ma...@loyola.edu>
>> What I find fascinating about this comment and the one from Miles is that
>> both of these comments claim to be against creating a technology vision and
>> then go and offer great technology visions.
>
> David,
>
> Thanks for the great resource. The first question it starts with is "what
> is your vision of learning" - which crystallizes what's missing from so much
> technology planning. It's somewhat disheartening to notice that the resource
> is dated 1996, and that the organization behind it is not longer around.
> Sigh...
>
> Miles
>

Miles and I are generally on the same page. Think back folks. The reason these
are all dated 1996 is that this is when Clinton launched the Technology
Literacy Challenge. (Let me tell you - the fact that I remember this gives me
pause - agh, what was that last birthday?) Here is a link:
<http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/New/edtech/2pager.html>

Here are my technology planning materials from that era
<http://csriu.org/onlinedocs/documents/transition.php> Here is what I said
then:

This model should include the following:

* Understanding the Critically Important Role of Technology in School
Improvement.

There must be a recognition that technology is not an end it itself,
rather, technology is the means -- a tool for better teaching, learning,
management, and communication. Technology is not a "nice extra." It is an
essential tool for school improvement as we are moving into the Information
Age.

* Technology Planning and Implementation as a Process, not a Product.

Districts must shift from a focus on the development of technology plan,
to the establishment of an ongoing planning and implementation structure and
processes that are effectively integrated into other relevant district planning
and implementation structures and processes.

* Ongoing Assessment of Status, Program Effectiveness, Priorities, and
Needs.

Districts must ensure accountability through regular assessment of
progress towards district goals in technical infrastructure, staff competency,
integration into the curriculum, and other related areas. Routine assessment of
status, program effectiveness, and needs, will provide the district with
information necessary to guide investment and program implementation
activities.

* Ensure Integration of Technology into the Curriculum Across the
Disciplines.

Technology literacy is more than just knowing how to use a word processing
program and instructional use of computer is more than just plugging a kid into
a drill and practice program. Integrating technology into the curriculum
requires considering how technology can be used by teachers and students as a
tool to assist student learning across the curriculum -- English, math,
science, social science and other disciplines -- in a standards-based
educational environment. Successfully integrating technology into the
curriculum will require that technology enthusiast teachers to join forces with
district curriculum specialists in planning, action research, implementation,
and ongoing evaluation to identify effective strategies for the use of
technology to improve student learning.

* Ensuring that Teachers have First Priority for Access to Computers

Teachers cannot learn how to use computers by osmosis. Computers are,
first and foremost, productivity tools. Teachers need access to a networked
computer on their desk to increase their productivity with administrative
tasks, to communicate with other teachers, and to gain sufficient familiarity
with the technology to be able to use it effectively instructionally.

* Establish Effective Programs for Training, Support, and Professional
Development.

There must be a recognition that to achieve necessary instructional goals
and to have a fully functional organizational environment, all educators --
administrators, teachers, and staff -- must be competent in the use of
technology. Training and support structures must be established to accomplish
this. Additionally, teachers need ample ongoing professional development
opportunities and sufficient time to effectively integrate technology into the
curriculum to assist all students in achieving high academic standards.
Administrators need to gain a better understanding of the use of technology for
effective organizational operations.

* Understanding the True and Full Costs Implementation and Operation of the
District's Network Infrastructure.

Too often, during the innovative phase, districts have set forth bold and
ambitious goals, without ascertaining or providing information about the true
and full costs of achieving those goals. The district's technology budget must
that reflect all of the associated costs of technology. Without funds for
training, professional development, support, network operations, equipment
upgrade, repair, and maintenance services, and timely equipment replacement,
taxpayer resources are being wasted on the acquisition of very heavy
paperweights.


Ok, so why are we not farther ahead? (Except that educators are using
technology for productivity.) I think there are four answers. 1. NCLB stifled
all innovation. 2. CIPA - which has resulted in totally ineffective technology
use management. 3. Technology enthusiasts have have always been pushing forward
and have not paid enough attention to what is necessary to help the other
teachers shift to more productive use of the technologies for instruction. 4.
During most of this time, the educational technology staff person has been
associated with technical services - not an integral part of curriculum and
instruction.

I am working on material to address effective Internet use management. This
should help to address one major barrier. Actually most of what I am focusing
on is technology planning. Should be out soon.

Nancy

--
Nancy Willard, M.S., J.D.
Center for Safe and Responsible Internet Use
http://csriu.org
nwil...@csriu.org

EDTECH Editor-Beil

unread,
Jan 22, 2010, 12:44:50 AM1/22/10
to

From: David Marcovitz <Ma...@loyola.edu>

Ok, so why are we not farther ahead? (Except that educators are using
technology for productivity.) I think there are four answers. 1. NCLB stifled
all innovation. 2. CIPA - which has resulted in totally ineffective technology
use management. 3. Technology enthusiasts have have always been pushing forward
and have not paid enough attention to what is necessary to help the other
teachers shift to more productive use of the technologies for instruction. 4.
During most of this time, the educational technology staff person has been
associated with technical services - not an integral part of curriculum and
instruction.

I think that part of the problem is that too few teachers are trained to think like this. When we say the words "technology vision" or "technology planning," most people think of a plan to buy stuff. Maybe we need a new word (call it "technology integration planning," perhaps), but the concepts that you outline are still important. If you say "technology vision" isn't important or useful, I agree with you if you mean by that a vision of what stuff we will buy isn't important or useful. But that's not what I mean by "technology vision." I think the challenge is to get people to think more broadly about technology visions and technology planning and get beyond the "stuff" mentality. I agree that all 4 of the problem areas you outline have been problematic for technology planning, but these problems predate NCLB and CIPA so I am more inclined to think that 3 and 4 are bigger problems. I don't want to downplay the role of NCLB and CIPA in stifling good uses of technology, but they are bumps (probably very large bumps) in a much longer road.

--David
--
David M. Marcovitz, Ph.D.
Associate Professor, Educational Technology Director
Department of Education Specialties
Loyola University Maryland

mailto:ma...@loyola.edu
http://www.loyola.edu/schoolofeducation/facstaff/DavidMarcovitz.html

---

0 new messages