Week 4 Assignment Part 3

Objective: Evaluation to measure professional development
Complete by August 2010


Responsible Parties: Instructional Technology Supervisor, Campus Technologist, Campus Administrators, Teachers, Superintendent, Assistant Superintendent, Department Supervisors (Central Office), Department Heads (Campus), Curriculum Coordinators

Resources: Development of evaluations, surveys, computers with Internet access, funds for professional developments, access to the PIEMS system

Monitoring and Evaluation

• 
  Evaluations must go beyond the Level 1 phase of measuring participant satisfaction.
  Set up goals for each professional development session and use evaluations to determine if those goals have been reached. For instance, if the goal is for teachers to create a personal website, then each teacher must demonstrate that they can complete this task before the session can be seen as successful.
• 
  Survey teachers and administrators about their areas of concern focusing on organization support and change and use of technology, using questionnaires, interviews or personal reflections to gather data. (Guskey, 40)
• 
  Evaluate the outcomes of previously held technology based professional development by examining the trends and changes in student achievement data before and after these sessions were held.
• 
  Campus and central office administrators must conduct walk-through evaluations and formal observations to determine if the new skills are being used properly. This will also help to determine which professional development sessions were the most effective and improve the value of upcoming sessions.
• 
  Evaluate the effectiveness of the professional developments by analyzing student benchmark data through the Item Analysis program. Look at your control group (before the sessions) and your variable group (after the sessions) to verify if these sessions have had the intended results. Also, be aware of “unintended outcomes” as well. (Guskey, 40)

• Analyze “affective and psychomotor outcomes” (Guskey, 41) of students before and after professional developments and technology integration. We will use PIEMS to monitor these trends.

Objective: Evaluations to improve decision making in the integration of technology

Complete by August 2010

Responsible Parties: Instructional Technology Supervisor, Campus Technologist, Campus Administrators, Assistant Superintendent, Department Supervisors (Central Office), Department Heads (Campus), Curriculum Coordinators, Teachers, Superintendent

Resources: Access to the STaR chart data for the past years, access to the statewide STaR chart data from past years, Item Analysis data, AEIS data, computers with Internet access, time and location to conduct analysis research, time to conduct campus visits and walk-thru evaluations

Monitoring and Evaluation

• 
  Analyze Campus Improvement Plans and technology plans to determine the needs of each campus.
• 
  Analyze STaR Chart data to determine the skill level of each campus to plan appropriate campus-based professional developments. (From research conducted using the website data, many campuses in my district did not complete their charts, which must also be addressed.)
  Compare state-wide technology integration data (STaR Chart website) with the district technology integration data to determine areas that need improvement.
• 
  Analyze data from technology driven districts to compare with district data to determine how technology can improve student achievement.
• 
  Survey stakeholders (teachers, students, parents) about their areas of concern and use of technology, using questionnaires, interviews or personal reflections to gather data. (Guskey, 40)
• 
  Evaluate the outcomes of previously held technology based professional development by examining the trends and changes in student achievement data before and after these sessions were held.
• 
  Campus and central office administrators must conduct walk-through evaluations and formal observations to determine if the new skills are being used properly. This will also help to determine which professional development sessions were the most effective.
• 
  Factors from ineffective sessions must be considered to decide why those sessions did not have the desired effect. Improvements should be made to professional development sessions based on the information and data.