|
|
|
School Technology Leaders: Dr. Barbara Holland Chapman, Principal, and Christopher G. Harris, Technology Specialist, completed TAGLIT for School Technology Leaders. | |
|
Teachers: Forty-four teachers (100 percent of the certified instructional staff based at New Hope) completed TAGLIT for Teachers. |
This page provides a summary of some of the findings from TAGLIT, a list of some of the strengths of our school technology program and an action plan that details an area for further work. Although hardware, software and connectivity are important elements of a school technology program, they are not the focus of this page. Elements such as planning, student use, professional development and community involvement receive attention here.
![]()
TAGLIT results are presented on a 4-point developmental scale.
| 1. Embarking | Getting started |
| 2. Progressing | Making some effort and showing some progress |
| 3. Emerging | Making considerable effort and showing considerable progress |
| 4. Transforming | Transforming the way teaching and learning take place |
Schools can be at one stage in some aspects of school technology use, and at other stages in different aspects. Overall, based on TAGLIT and informal data, our school is at the Progressing-Emerging Stage.
![]()
| Area for Attention | Professional Development through Student Use. |
| Action or Objective | To have every grade level team develop one curriculum unit using at least one application. |
| Rationale | Teachers' open-ended answers indicate they need and want more staff development related to classroom applications of technology; however, they see sufficient time for staff development and classroom implementation as a significant stumbling block. Other survey data indicate wide ranges of teacher skill, of technology use in the classroom, and of time spent in staff development. Working in teams, focusing on the integration of technology, will allow teachers to learn from one another's individual areas of expertise. We will do this during one faculty meeting a month and during the weekly planning times when teachers are already working together to develop common units., This approach addresses concerns regarding teachers' need to learn, the desire for applications in the classroom, and limited time for staff development and classroom implementation. |
|
Planning Into Practice: | |
|
Principal Connections: |
| What | Who | Start | End |
| Write action plan into School Improvement Plan | Principal | May 2001 | May 2001 |
| At first faculty meeting: Explain units/projects Introduce & administer ACOT surveys self-assessment classroom observation Allow sufficient time to begin planning for development of units |
Grade Chairs Teachers Tech. Specs. |
Aug 2001 | Aug 2001 |
| Grade level teams & technology specialists meet to plan units (weekly in grade level meetings, once a month in faculty meeting) | Teachers | Aug 2001 | Dec 2001 |
| Units implemented in every classroom | Grade Level Teams | Nov 2002 | Dec 2001 |
| Units presented at faculty meetings | Grade Level Teams | Jan 2002 | Feb 2002 |
| Units presented a tfamily technology nights | Grade Level Teams | Jan 2002 | Feb 2002 |
| Readminister ACOT surveys | Teacher Tech. Specs. Principal |
Jan 2002 | Jan 2002 |
| Readminister ACOT surveys | Teacher Tech. Specs. Principal |
May 2002 | May 2002 |
We will know our objective has been
accomplished when
Minimally:
Teachers will be observed in team planning.
Implementation of units will be observed in every classroom.
Presentations of content of units and process for implementation will be
made at faculty meetings.
Presentations of units will be made at family technology nights.
Ideally:
Teachers will implement other technology units during the second semester.
Teachers will continue to use other teachers' expertise.
ACOT surveys will indicate at least (a) one level of growth for teachers
who began at entry, adoption, and adaptation levels, (b) maintenance for
those beginning at appropriation and invention levels
Home l Participants l Class Page
last modified: 04/26/01