Reflections on Technology Facilitator Standard VII

Williamson and Reddish pointed out that educators have reached the connectivity and student-to-computer ratios established by the U.S. Department of Education in the mid-1990s (2009). Nearly 100 percent of schools in the U.S. had Internet access in 2005, and 94 percent of classrooms were connected.

During the past ten to fifteen years, the availability of resources on the Internet related to teaching and learning has blossomed. Before the Internet, teachers had to rely solely on what they learned in preservice training and what was available to be shared among peers or in staff development. With the maturing of the Internet, new tools and resources are constantly made available. According to his 1998 survey, Henry Jay Becker found that 68 percent of teachers were using the Internet to find information for use in building lessons, and more than 28 percent accessed the Internet to do so at least once per week.

What's more important is the perceived lack of access felt by teachers. Most likely, the steps in the intricate process for effectively implementing technology are not being met. As Williamson and Reddish point out, effective technology implementation involves four key steps (2009).

Often throughout this course, I have referenced my observation that school administrators look at technology as a thing to be loaded upon a child, or for teachers to plug in and all of a sudden they are successful. As Matthews points out, school districts will often invest in certain technologies because of their high-tech, 21st century appeal (2004). As the article states, "...when combined with sufficient training and support..." These are the key words of success with technology. School districts have to provide the infrastructure of technology as well as the training and support in order for technology to be used successfully in the classroom.

Each year the principals at each of our schools designate a public information network (PIN) representative. This PIN rep is tasked with collecting the week's news information from the school and emailing it to the Public Information Department. The meeting, accompanied by a manual that is written by department staff, highlights photo criteria, elements of a complete news article, and deadlines PIN reps need to submit information in order for it to appear in the next newsletter. Also covered in this session are the guidelines set forth in the Federal Educational Rights and Privacy Act related to publishing a student's name and likeness. PIN reps need to be fully briefed regarding the district's policy for maintaining students' privacy, and balancing that policy with sharing student's accomplishments at school.

The meeting is usually very informative and successful, with PIN reps coming away armed with their manual as well as best practices shared by other representatives who have served in the role in previous years. Also involved for the first time in 2009 was the explanation of IISD Twitter use for news purposes and the encouragement for PIN reps to partner with school Instructional Technology Specialists to create a school Twitter account and also to follow Irving ISD on Twitter. Instructions given to PIN reps for establishing a Twitter account and following IISD can be found here.

In 2009 our department went from just holding our regular meetings with PIN reps, to offering professional development in Eduphoria professional development system in 2010. This simple shift provided more relevance and credence to the information we annually share with PINs.

In addition to re-formatting the way the PIN meetings are handled, this year we've also had to purchase a new flatbed scanner and I've been tasked to help repair one of the digital cameras operated by the Public Information Department. I led training on the scanner for our department involving how to scan documents, edit them with Adobe Acrobat Pro, and distribute documents via email. Since beginning the scan and email process in late November/early December, we have received nothing but positive feedback...both for our nod to preserving the environment, but also for the ease of reading items that can be "zoomed in", and also that it can be disposed of after reading with the click of the mouse. Regarding repairing the camera, I found that either a new card was needed - which we eventually decided to purchase anyway - or that the current card needed to be reformatted in order for the camera to be properly troubleshot for other overarching problems. Instead of plugging the camera into the computer, I used a multi-card dock to plug the card into the computer. Careful not to open the drive associated with the card because it consistently locked up the computer, I simply right-clicked, selected "Format", and followed the instructions I found on the San Disk website regarding that particular card.

My most direct application of TF VII was as part of a committee to study website content management systems. We began by using a supplied list of CMS companies' references, and contacting school districts using certain systems to determine perceived effectiveness of that system for the contacted district. It was enlightening to see the extreme similarities between three of the content management systems being offered, versus how different the user reviews were for the systems. I contacted six Texas school districts who were listed as references by three different CMS companies. Though many of the features were similar, district personnel had very strong opinions either positive or negative for their respective CMS. You can view the Results Matrix here.

During the design planning meeting, our committee noted several websites from which we wanted the SchoolCenter design team to pull "inspiration". These sites included the websites for Pasadena ISD, Pampa ISD, and Fort Worth ISD. Through a process of picking and choosing preferred elements, our committee was able to communicate to the SchoolCenter project manager a general preference for our home page and landing pages. The design is still in its infancy, but a rough draft has been created and is posted online at https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0Bxc1Nr4Qc6QlZDk3NjAzNW
ItMTY3YS00OTViLTg4ZDctYWJjZWYzNDBmNzlk&hl=en&authkey=CKz1iIsC.

In accomplishing tasks identified in TF VII, I engaged in a few activities outside of what was usually done by the department. Where the procedure for briefing PIN reps usually involved simply passing on printed materials, I integrated the use of Eduphoria professional development program by providing verifiable staff development credit with electronic materials. When the camera seemed broken, I determined a way to fix and continue to use the equipment rather than simply purchasing a new one.

After selecting a CMS, the Public Information Department worked in cooperation with the Instructional Technology Department to assist with the layout and design phase of the district's transition from manually updated website to content management system. Working from the Business Requirements Document provided by School Center, our committee - comprised of the Executive Director of Technology, Public Information Director, Instructional Technology Director, Webmaster, and myself (Public Information Specialist), we began to describe to SchoolCenter designers the preferred layout of the new IISD website.

Following a goal-setting session in which the webmaster and Public Information Director participated, SchoolCenter provided a site architecture framework as well as a Business Requirements Document. The Business Requirements Document identifies goals, objectives, and measures of the project from a customer perspective. The document provides the basis for the creation of the new website and is used to validate whether the customer (district's) expectations have been met.

In the future I will continue to offer electronic instructional materials and expand Eduphoria professional development classes to offer staff development exchange days. I will also attempt to take a more active role in how our department purchases technology, and will volunteer to participate on committees involved in developing the Long Range Plan for Technology.


Becker, H. (1998). Internet Use by Teachers. Teaching, Learning, and Computing. A National Survey of Schools and Teachers. http://www.crito.uci.edu/TLC/findings/internet-use/startpage.htm

Mathews, J. (April, 2004). Why statewide educational networks are important to state and educational leaders. Southern Regional Educational Board. http://www.sreb.org/programs/EdTech/pubs/PDF/04T02-Statewide_Ed_Tech_Net_Important.pdf

Williamson, J. & Redish, T. (2009). ISTE’s technology facilitation and leadership standards: What every K-12 leader should know and be able to do. Eugene: International Society for Technology in Education.