The Semi-Annual Meeting of the
Mid-Atlantic Regional Technology in Education Consortium (MARTEC)
State Officers Network
“Professional Development”
January 24, 2001
Temple University Center for Research in
Human Development and Education
992 Ritter Annex
1301 Cecil B. Moore Ave.
Philadelphia, PA 19122
8:30 a.m. Continental Breakfast
9:00 Introduction to the Center for Research in Human
Development and Education (TUCRHDE)
Roy Dawson
Senior Research Associate, TUCRHDE
RD convened the meeting at 9 a.m. welcomed participants hopes his role is purposeful.
Talked to commissioneers of states as designing the lab and
discussion s center around tech assistance to schools having
difficulty with student achievement and standareds. Has had
opportunity to work with officials from states.
Trying to put together martec grant he talked to them last spring. Siad they were very
helpful getting info, and as a result they do have the grant.
Befvore going further, he asked for introductions:
Elileen stovall, reports to Jule,
Barb Reeves,
Wayne Hart
Johhann
Denise, dEl
Norvall
Patty
Stan Johnson
Just got back from Title I directors conference in Arizona and saw many associates of
theirs
9:15 R*TEC System and MARTEC Overview
Johann Sarmiento
Thanks Johann and Patty for efforts.
Johann thanks parts. For being here. Important meeting for martec and to work very
closely with you to work closely with states, not just with regions.
Who could express needs better than you?
Try to explain structure of this center so it becomes clearer.
Introduce Crhde 1984 Shows overhead about center, created by Wong, came from
Pittsburg. Now a link of researchers and policymakers around the
country, lots of projects.
Explain those projects:
CEIC one of first initiatives of the center, active for 10 years,
devoted to research, in past grant the topic was urban education
Now 2 implementation initiatives.
Adult Ed program also started with the center. Offers ad ed in Philly they have classed at night and in the
morning but they serve a special purpose in the state and region. Pioneers in technology and education, got
grant from IB and implemented a lab to integrate tech into adult ed program and it was very innovative that
allowed indiviidualized instruction to particpants. A strong component of Martec to extent beyond k-12
Elementary initiative, not sure how long, it delivers early childhood program to schools in the region,
connected to CFL program. Initialy it offered services for kids that weren’t up to literacy level or had
speech problems. Families with kids getting assistance but now schools integrating it into the programs.
Capactiy of center in region: LSS ERL Martec is similar to some extenet, connected to same dept in USDE
Started in 1995, got second contract with DE, urban education was first topic, second is education literacy.
This will be main agenda of next 5 years. Martic provides services to field, CSR, LSS was one of the
outstanding centers in the country in USDE study.
CFL is CSR model wong created and used in hundreds of schools in country, provide tech assistantce and
prof dev. Assistance to schools. Now have integrated learning systems but this is one of the 10 or 12
models validated in the country. Lots of research done ion the implementation of this program. Same way
as martec devoted to students with low income, this program also implemented in such school. Important
to pay atentrion to all the details. We know that scaling up is not that easy, not just take program and put it
into the school. Need comphrehensive solution.
Last two are related to technology: advanced technologies for learning , our first formal attempt to provide
services in learning tech, started as part of LSS, know we were naïve in wanting to offer it to whole mid-
atlantic region. Usde said it was important to have a consortium and work with states. Took serious
approach to topic of educational tech, imbedded in specific context, prof deve. Tech dev. Infor
dissemination.
Shows website for LSS on screen, core of program research and development, conferences, lessons and
legacy from Dr. Wong to transform declarative knowledge to procedural knowledge.
CFL blends with Martec very well, the network website is shown, gives principals resources they need to
implement the program, gives them all the ihnstruments they need to use the program, assessment and
devise plans for kids. They can see from other participants in country, creates a collaboration network of
all the meembers of the program. Hope to do a similar thing with martec, people collaborate around a
specific need. Conn ect and support the people.
ATL lab page: people part. In prof dev. To get extra support because we know big gap between prof. Dev.
And the teacher in the classroom, they may not have the same resources or need to have a question
answered. We know it is very effective but very challenging.
Asks for questions. Dawson adds that lots of things we do are based ion interaction with sec. Of education.
Annually we meet with valerie from Delaware, and baraba anderson, so that our work is aligned with depts
of education, did likewise with PA and DC to be asured that we are aligned with what you are doing.
Identify some strenghts and needs in the field of prof. Dev. This is a work of 5 years and want to
concentrate on very specific topics. Want to devote today to prof. Dev. A very successful unit at the center
to generate knowledge for the region.
9:30 MARTEC Scope of Work
Meeting the Needs of the States and Fostering Regional
Cooperation: Identifying Regional Strengths and Needs
Johann Sarmiento
MARTEC Co-Director
Mission statement.
Now 5 years old, started in 1995. Est. to help states, administrators, teachers, and other providers (get
overhead) including ad literacy centers. First five years have been v ery ihnterested in this concern.
Rtec expected to do two things
Work in three part. Areas
They may be thinking they are trying to do same things in their states but in ed tech it is even more
challenging. But that is why usde thought creating regional capacity would be valuable. To foster that
collaboration and channel resources to other states. To have idea of coaltion of five states, the original
design there were only six rtex which led to huge regions but they did a fine job in most of the regions and
worked well as a system. The usde thought it was very positive. The first four main topics, computers in
every classroom, interenet, using software, prof dev to teachers. Now regions have changed, there are now
ten regions and are easier to handle and expectations increase of capacity to deliver. Our region now exists
and covers four states and DC same as LSS and can integrate resources with them.
A sample of things the first six rtecs developed—shows overhead—role of the rtec as creator of the tool
and catalyst in national collaboration, this tool could be used in any state. He is talking about Profiler here.
Also specific websites and specific products, a CD rom, dissemination initiatives, most of the retecs in first
round effective in creating tools and coordinating products in the states and can now be used nationally.
Folr this new round, martec (overhead==martec at a glance) the region well est. in educational technology.
No state was perfect but as a blend they each have strenghts that other states could benefit form.
Consortium partners are this center, and two universities in Dickinson and Frostburg Universities. They do
most of our preservice activity and generate knolwledge about how to integrate knowledge into curriculum.
Have 11 schools as demonstration schools in which we will generagte knowledge tht could benefit the
region. Also consider you partners.
The general mission is to address ed reform needs… (overhead)
Important to address workplace concerns in 21str century.
Build knowledge base and capactiy for integration in mid=atlantic region, community of practice with
diversity of topics,
Designed a set of themes as guiding principles as signature in region (overhead)
Building on regional strengths
Connecting schhols and universities, problem of preparing teachers for schools is different but is the same
goal and some are doing it in very different way. Many feel that because we are getting younger teachers it
will in itself solve problems but not true.
Address digital divide
Transforming knowledge
Coming to scale but starting in the most adverse situations, this initiatives is to help those schools first
Connecting schools, communities and families, coming from work in CSR and know effectiveness of doing
this.
Resilience—what are factors that promote success, nothing encouraging tech dev.
Continuing and sustaining teacher dev. Need teachers to feel they are moving towards goals.
Incorporating uniqueness into Action Plans. Even though doing prof dev. We want to do them in unique
way to solve your most serious needs. (see overhead
Projects for each state to solve those needs
1. to meet your needs of the states and foster regional development. Working with you, you may have a
capacity in the region already and we don’t want to replicate that but solidify it so you benefit from our
services.
2. Technical assistance We have to find best way to assist. Some projects listed here.
3. Knowledge based project so schools understand infrastructure problems. Until principals really
understand and how to maximize their infrastructure not going to benefit fully. Think about strategies
teachers need to think agbout subject maatter technology .
4. Prof dev. Specific projects, Dickinson project, don’t want to stop there, it is supposed to generage
knowledge for the whole region to est. similar projects. Webcentric Community project is more about
integrating tech in the curriculum. Students are able to use it too. McCoy will describe Leadership
Dev. Institute project. For teachers to act as leaders in tech. Adult literacy project.
5. Dissemination of info and resources, info services and a website, offer prof sev resources to teachers
online.
Want to devote time to analysis of needs and strengths in the region. After dialogue that Patty had with you
we created a list of prof dev issues. Gives out handout. Decide if in your states and see if you think you
could name that as a strength, a field you have implemented or a need, you feel the pressure to design the
strategies or they aren’t working, or as a botha strengthand a need.
1. Creating prof deliveray network to deliver prof. Dev. Technology Academy spread through state says
blond hair women.
2. Data driven planning, know what your teachers need from assessing them directly, so that you can
target services to them directly.
3. Impact, can you measure impact in your prof dev services?
4. Dev. Visionary leadership, for principals and teahers you see as leaders
5. Disseminating best-practices, not enough to achieve success but so that they benefit the rest.
6. Preparing tech proficient teachers,
7. Attracting and retaining technollogy proficient teachers.
Asks participants to record the decisions on the posters on wall.
Asks about CSR that imbed tech programs. Thinking about delivery services that are integrated.
State requires research based models to get funded. Integrating prof. Dev. With other reform
initiatives. Esp. related to research=based models of schools.
Dawson, said he travels and hears that those that have real curriculum based reform that the teachers want
to be connected with some technology piece, Coonnect model, New American Schools, don’t want to rule
out very comphrehensive school models because ethey don’t have the tech component.
Another, from the business community, integrating tech in content areas but there is still the next stepof
authentic application in occupations, that people use in their workplaces, nhow is tech used in peoples’
jobs? When teachers are developing tasks there isn’t that connection to that use.
Man from DC:In DC they are tackling that too. They are building a new technology high school in DC.
Beyond high schhol, build in how these technologies are used, but even at elementary level, how are kids
looking at data, people aren’t using tools that are dynamic to analyze date. The tasks of what
mathematicians use for instance.
Two things, one in career area and one just using technology competently. Skill area gets built starting in
early years, it shouldn’t be a disconnect between the two.
Integrated and prof dev. With other ed initiative and workplace initiatives. Preparing a science teacher who
understands use of tech for a scientist and also to learn science. Sometimes concentrate too much on
general use of tech but not many developments on creating learning technologies. Like learning about
science. Beyond the Box” thinking about technologies in the special high school being created in DC.
How do we know that folks have a skill set in place for the future? Get people to think creatively about
using the technology.
Gives participants labels to put labels in places where you think it is a need or a strength.
What can we conclude from this exercise? We all have needs, but every state is a little different on the
political climate of the state. In Delaware the state does a lot for the districts on the state level. We have no
delivery on state-wide level in prof dev because we want it on district level. The community college does
in-service training for teachers. Wilimington College program has a program and so does the university, not
really a k-12 program because the districts don’t want it.
Strengths in creating and maintaining prof dev.
Johann asks about prioritizing. Collaboration is area that really stands out. Prepare teachers, know whether
you are successful, have to look at whole system.
DC person, project management and looking for new and effective projects. Has to be careful about what
they put out that it has a track record, but he doesn’t have lots of money to blow and can’t be that
innovative.
Different structures of the states’ education departments concerning operations of technology.
Professional Development: Temple University Center for Research in
Human Development and Education Professional Development Programs
Fred McCoy
Senior Research Associate, TUCRHDE
Project director for prof dev at the lab which has implications for Martec. Concept
of partnering dependent on need because when you have a state like PA which is
extremely diverse, rural to urban, the whole gambit, and then Delaware with small
number of districts. Does prof dev in one area look like it in another area?
We need to look at way to put people together, explore partnership, partner with
entities, like states. There are 3 distinct models of prof. Dev. For the lab:
1. What works workshop refers to lavender handout brochure. They are very
small cite specific very topic specific with collaboration between practitioners
and ourselves to explore a topic. ATL presented workshop to look at project-
b ased learning. We provide a location, cosponsor with an entity like Philly
public schools, invite into setting those persons to provide opportunity to have
speaker present current best practices followed by demonstration. Second part
is to provide roundtable of discussants to share what is happening in their
schools to tie best practices with practitioners.
2. We offer also state of the art seminar to bring people to center to provide best
practices workshop in bigger venue, like how to put together a needs
assessment for teachers, show how to do this to get overview about needs of
participants.
3. Team -Driven multiple day opportunities: Advanced Study Institutes. District
team will select issue that needs to be addressed and a plan is dev eloped at
end of the sessions. What strategies do we need to use to understand what our
teachers capacities are? Madeline Hunter task analysis is the hard part but that
is at the heart of planning. Out of the process comes a task analysis, we need
to talk and survey teachers, watch them, etc. gives the team from district an
opportunity to listen to evaluation people and develop plan to implement in
the district. 10-15 teams come together, consult and guide them through
process. Working with DC facilitators in DC or with DOE in New Jersey, we
can come to you as an entity. Built on partnership and strategy under which
need is identified. Refers to lavender brochure to review.
Question about what is involved in scheduling such a program. Need to contact
McCoy or Johann.
Question about getting notification out and to principals so that know about what
is going on. Usually three mailings a year, asks for memo sent to network people
so that they know ahead of time about upcoming opportunities.
Johann, important to target specific needs.
Technical Assistance: Demonstration Schools
Barry Mansfield
MARTEC Implementation Specialist
Barry works directly with teachers and students to work at schools that aren’t amazing
but working from scratch to get teachers and principals supportive of technology. Shows
overhead of demonstration schools.
The actual goal of demo schools is to build up capacity and then use them as models of
professional dev.
He asks them all to let them know of exemplary models so that they can add them to links
for contacts.
The schools he works with tech support and prof dev. Have specific topics (on overhead)
subject-matter learning, what do we need in technology to support this? Other topics,
ubiquitous computing, working with palm pilots, content learning and organizing.
Spring cove prof. Dev through video conferencing
In DC middle school has high pop of special ed students, looking for adoptive tech for
them.
In Philly, project-based learning technology, we are doing real world activities for the
students and it is going well.
In Camden, working with infrastructure of schools, where does the equipment go and
how to use the network.
We don’t have a very intense history of working with Delaware.
Wayne: how are demo schools selected? Would love to do demo cites with palm pilots.
What type of level of support.
Judy answers: these schools were there already, had already est. relationships with the
schools. In process of expanding this list but haven’t go t to point of asking people to
nominate schools. Needs help in identifying schools, need help in scaling up in the
school who would be willing to work with martec to do this. One in Philly just added.
Dickinson is bringing in 40 schools and Frostburg is bringing in all of Allegheny country
schools. Diversity of models used at present. Wants them to be strategically located,
representative schools.
Wayne: politically he needs a min of three schools in each of the three counties for it to
fly. Judy says there is not money to outfit tech but they can help broker grants to the feds
and take advantage of Bush’s policy initiatives.
Johann: regarding funding, in MD they worked with school to get a grant and they made
the commitment to get the money.
Blond woman (Barbara Reeves) , asks how they got into the school to work with them.
The school asked them. In MD usually things filter through central office but in this case
the school directly asked because they already had a relationship with the school.
Judy: What they did to get grant was build on what they had at the center because they
had a track record.
Part of what is agreed in going to school they negotiate achievement data with the
schools.
Barry: asks parts. If they have special topics they are interested in pursuing. Web-based
courses
Judy: Evaluative database of resources is part of martec’s work. Temple has just est. new
master’s program on technology management.
Giving teachers space on a server is something Frostburg and Dickinson are doing right
now, they are pre-service projects but the secondary gain will be in-service; both schools
have redesigned curriculum with this goal in mind.
Johann: what we do most is tech assistance, not bringing in equipment. Classroom design
and lessons is what the teachers really value.
Johann calls a break.
10:30 Break
10:45 Overview—State Officers Network
Roy Dawson
One of the things they do at LSS is to work closely with state depts of ed. each state dept
is dealing with low performance schools and one thing they do is meet monthly with
CSRD coordinators. In last two years attempted to do bonding to really bridge
communication gap between states. Example: in Delaware there was a design fair and
put developers together to showcase models so schools could talk with them. There were
many people at MD because of our contacts with MD dept. We learn from each other
and don'’ duplicate each other. Example in PA had a design fair and people came from
NJ. They want to do a similar thing here to share information and resources. Developing
evaluation tool to address notion of CSR to use as tool across mid-atlantic region to
evaluate it. Other states and DC have asked them to come in and help evaluate schools.
Plan activities, eg. Title I conference. Good communication and collaboration occurs.
Laboratory for Student Success—Deans and
Superintendents Network
Roy Dawson
(the purpose of this presentation is to provide a concrete example
of another network here at the Center. We will provide the state
officers an example of a successful network, and assure them that
we have the expertise to facilitate such a network.)
Similar strategy here. Coming out of 1995 summit, they attempt to come together and
discuss strengths and weaknesses re teacher prep. Things happening at partners schools
will be disseminated through martec. Each state now has a functional network to try to
solve critical issues. MD focuses on prof dev and they share it with other states.
Frostburg focuses on technology. There may be some overlap in this group so it is
important for Dawson to be involved in this group. One thing to send out brochures to
heads and another to send it to the tech people, chances of having it disseminated to
district people is increased by people here getting info. Same strategies to develop
comraderie.
Other R*TECs and State Collaboration Models
(this purpose of this presentation is to solidify state officers
identity with MARTEC. “Identification is a perception of belonging to
an organization that is triggered when situational cues (e.g.,cooperative
tasks, shared experiences, perceived similarities to others) highlight
common interests or shared outcomes between an individual and the
organization.”
Judy Stull
Hoping to have synergy between LSS and MARTEC. Rtecs vary bet how they define
what they are doing. Some see work only at state level and don’t have any activity lower
than that at district or school level. A few work only through prof assns with some input
from states. We are trying to do something different, more ambitious, work with both
states and school districts and schools. You people know the needs better than we do.
Complaint often that state people don’t know what needs of schools are so it helps to
have this contact. TWe also have an advisory board we different points of view and
agendas. We would like to have what Roy talked about. We see it as negotiation with
you to decide how to pursue work. Est. of listservs to keep communication going. The
thing the labs do is adopt a regional point of view, solutions not only within a particular
state. She refers to Bush’s education plan. Technology and teacher quality and teacher
training, these are regional issues. Some states are teacher importers and exporters.
We want to open up discussion and est regional issues that we can all be a better position
to meet our needs. PA is exporter and MD is imported. We have our own agenda, we
don’t have a vertical structure here. We have two meetings a year to talk about a general
issue. This is the fall meeting and would like to have another before summer.
Discussion with person from DC about his particular problems not being a state in this
consortium—doesn’t have the resources that a state has. RELs are divided up approx.
into equal populations. We have smallest geo area but still 10 percent of pop.
MARTEC Co-Director
11:15 “State of the States” Discussion
Patricia Hendricks
MARTEC Coordinator/Implementation Specialist
Two handouts referred to. NYTimes article by Barbara Stein re teacher training for tech.
Also, Congressional report on power of internet for learning. Prof. Dev. Chapter. 30
percent of budget should go to prof. Dev. Whereas it is not more
like 6 percent.
We all know that just because proficient in tech they are not prof in educational tech.
One underlying theme is that real digital divide is in prof. Dev. Build collaboration on
sharing.
Assessing Teachers’ Technology Proficiency
Denise Allen
Delaware State Dept. of Education
We have all this hardware but are teachers integrating it into the classroom? Took TLFC
grant wanted a way to record successes and determine teachers usage and proficiency and
see growth over time and for the teachers to see it over time. We found that we were
talking to principals and tech people but not teachers. TLCF survey (overhead)
Teachers take the survey online and the results are collected online,
Improving America’s Schools conference in DC they showed a couple of surveys.
They thought it was more effective to teachers to read about themselves.
Wayne: Delaware has 10 cites and 17 schools participating to implement an instructional
management system. The teachers are elementary teachers.
Orval: Curriculum standards program, we hope to create a website that pools the info
together at state level.
She shows copy of the actual survey. Hard to decide what questions to ask to get an idea
of how TFLC grant is being implemented. You can take survey or view it. It will show
pie graph and how you rate with technology. Broken down by school and district. Each
person who takes it has unique login id. Shows participants on internet page how to use
the survey. You can put a tutorial on how to do a particular activity.
When they take the survey there is a box they can check if they don’t want others to see
result on the web, but we can see the results. You can download all the information into
a spreadsheet.
The district report gives summary of info about schools’ results. This will help guide
where to go for funding.
Question about who to contact to do this. Shows them the page to create a profiler
account. They hope that info goes back to schools and that the schools see what their
needs are so the schools will work on prof deve to help the teachers use their resources.
Number of times teachers use internet in a week are actually very low.
Judy comments on survey that terms are too general on survey. Too many opinions.
Delaware have detailed info on achievement, might be better to have more specific
questions. She says rtecs are working to standardize definitions. You have relative but
not absolute questions. Teachers have been honest about their knowledge on these
surveys so they have a good idea about the needs out there.
Orval Foraker
DelaWISE Project Manager. Delaware State Dept. of Education
Wayne Hartshuh
Executive Director Delaware Center for Educational Technology
Profiler came out of an RTEC but if we could come up with something similar it would
be well worth our time. Need to figure out where the need is.
Incentive Programs for Continued Professional Development
Stanley Johnson,
Director of Instructional Technology, Washington D.C.
DC is not a state and so there is a whole host of issues. His position defined under last
administration, his office responsible for prof dev of technologies, library reading
specialists, et.
Technology plan approved by DE in 1997, knew tech was a moving target and didn’t
want folks to lock into def of tech. Need to make sure they had access to latest
technology, building two new schools with innovative tech. (see overhead). Workikng
with Trinity College in DC.
The New Basic Skills: students need to be comfortable with it. The hard skills and soft
skills and use of tech.
What makes us successful is that each superintendent has good knowledge of technology.
Shared vision: the enabler, not the focus, but what you are doing with the tool. Equipping
students with knowledge and skills to compete globally.
Opportunities to extend student use of tech. Need context incorporated.
Students becoming creative.
District doesn’t have finite curriculum but want to have metric in place to measure
success. Principals are held accountable and teachers are too on high stakes assessments.
TLCF using it to provide prof dev and hardware and software. He spends it in equal
thirds. Equip all 2nd and 3rd grade classes and prof dev (see overhead for list of
successes)
Technology Plan, teachers don’t want to give up their MACS . Have corporate support
because of being in DC. He lost money when money for charter schools was separated
from his budget. CISCO is putting academy in every one of their high schools.
Key spending areas (overhead) wireless piece is very big right now, looking at mobile
labs, staff dev,
Over next two years, get resources to grades 4 and 5 (another overhead)
His battle is to increase fiscal resources. The first year he had no money but it has
increased with each new superintendent. Now has 1.9 M to support whole district.
Prof. Dev Can’t do any training during school day until this year. When forced to do
training during evening there was 33% absentee rate. For administrators there is an
online academy once a month and also quarterly workshops .
Intel/ACE program, received computer and digital camera for teachers in program.
Online work takes a maturity: out of 2500 only 300 completed the training.
MCI/Marco Polo Training
Coordinate 3 regional technology centers of the city.
Over 1160 teachers trained, about 1/5 of the work force.
Summer Nature Computer Camp, for 5th and 6th graders to be technology support persons
at their schools. This is funded out of local dollars.
Disseminating Skills, Knowledge and Experiences— Maryland
Technology Academy
Barbara Reeves
Director of Instructional Technology, Maryland State Dept. of
Education
State sponsored model. Focus on elements that may make it unique. Until years ago state provided no
leadership, happening in local schools. This was first opportunity. MTA is a network of people, est by a
legislator and funded by the assembly the following year. Coincided with a technology application grant.
They put out request for proposal for high education partnerships which are MD state dept. Towson
University and Hopkins.
Academy began with leadership program, had 700 applications for the program. Governor increased
funding and now have satellite programs around state.
Based model on Governor’s academy for math and science and MD Writing Project. Question of what
kind of prof dev that they could go into that would be life changing. No vehicle at state level to be sure
state standards were being addressed and wanted to create network of people to teach other teacher those
same skills.
Leadership program one of things most important is that underpinnings textbook, understanding by design,
book builds a habit of mind in teachers with important learning in mind. Frame for designing their projects
and lessons. They have a lot of requirements. Potent things is that high school teachers would talk to
elementary teachers because most potent teaching is occurring at elementary level. Develop instructional
activities and reflect on success of these. Want to get teachers to gather data in classrooms to measure
impact, to talk about how effective tech is in particular situations. Soft version of “action research”
Leadership program is very competitive. Academy fellows must be certified but come from all over.
Curriculum strands (overhead) instructors come from local school systems
Do a lot of team building and have homerooms, Graduation ceremony. They work fact to face at summer
institute. Have electronic learning community Hopkins hosts
Towson University facilities.
Outside evaluator for the academy. And follow-up activities. Regional prof dev network because of
interest in talking to teachers in other school districts.
Satellite Programs have instructional plan that integrates technology.
Independent evaluator is doing follow up with first class of fellows. Also doing online evaluation of
schools. Asks how much teachers at schools are using tech and also asks person at schools about student
use of technology to determine, for example, gathering info, writing , collecting data, is fairly high but n the
Teacher knowledge skill and use is where the gap shows Part of it is an access issue because not all schools
are connected in Baltimore for instance.
Learning experiences that students are getting is where real digital divide is for student. That is why she is
happy that martec is interested in tech in all prof dev. Refers to pamphlet about the academy. They get
enough credits from this for recertification because in MD teachers need to be recertified every 6 years.
Dawson talks about administrators being involved in these programs. They now have principal institutes
being designed. DC Vanguard school teams working with 8 schools and find that there is a grater buy in
when the principal understands what is needed from teacher perspective. Looking to see if there is a
change in technology infusion in schools. Same topic is being discussed with mid-Atlantic Deans.
Developing Technology Leadership—NJ Elite
Eileen Stovall
NJ Department of Education, Educational Technology Coordinator
Passes out handout. 3 year initiative NJ is partnering with Superintendents Assn and NJ
principals and supervisors assn. Start training in March, hiring outside evaluator, two
strands Milken’s 7 dimensions, workshop on each dimension, or 3 core workshops,
summarizing the 7. Design committee. Incentive if attends 3 session they will get a
digital camera for their district.
Content of the workshop to have hands on tech and to guide administrators in making
tech related use decisions in the classroom.
Follow up activities will follow beyond the workshop, website and videoconferences not
fully defined. A lot of web-abed
Have 700 administrators that are interested in the program.
Patty: will be interesting to see how many administrators show up.
Not a deadline yet but letters going out next week, asking superintendents to recommend
principals to go to it. Planning to do these regionally and will do them at business sites,
ASA, PSA facilities. 150 dollars per workshop. ETCs, higher education, and facility
renovation experts.
Question about levels of expertise among administrators and the problems involved with
this. The trainers have to deal with this.
Judy: PA ed dept website has survey about what teachers use throughout the state.
12:30 p.m. Working Lunch—Continued Discussions
1:30 MARTEC and State Officers Network Collaboration Plans
Roy Dawson
Open-ended discussion (with Julia Stapleton, NJ Educational Technology
Director, joining us by video-conference)
”What are the benefits of regional collaboration?”
Don’t have to recreate the wheel.
Nice to know what other states are doing.
Verizon Foundation is beefing up their funding of this.
Delaware got money from Bell Atlantic Foundation.
Wayne: Puts 3/1 match so that grantee has stake in it.
Johnson: idea of calling up someone and getting some resources, appeal to expertise, info
on best practices, idea of prof dev during the work day.
Identifying needs that everyone has.
Share important dates with colleagues
Specific strategies for the State Officers Network
-participate in a listserv (mediated by MARTEC)
-participate in quarterly conference call
This is a way for people to keep mental list of what should be done
Wayne: if something comes up is there a possibility of getting people together to
discuss something specific?
-attend fall/spring meetings—Wayne asks them to be scheduled far in advance. He
has a busy schedule in October. End of September. Judy wants to have calendar on
their website re tech events.
the fall meeting will introduce a specific topic,
Question about assessment or impact of tech. Definitions of identifying
proficiencies is still a question. This is a regional need esp in terms of teacher
certification. each state will present projects and state initiatives currently being
implemented;
the spring meeting will be a working meeting to produce a regional document,
definition or plan illustrating the mid-Atlantic regional standing on that topic.
Next Steps—Professional Development (assignments)
Review the ISTE standards for a technology proficient teacher—this will be
starting place for the May discussion of martec. Don’t want to write states’ plans
but want to identify where they have common ground. Judy: wants to have a
discussion around a working arrangement. Suggested preservice skills that all
teachers should have. Need to define what you mean by “proficient”
Discussions about needs and expectations about teachers. Judy: prototype for
discussion held on broader national level,
Dawson: idea of sharing the common themes is very helpful.
Barry: tools, like Profiler are very helpful, what these kind of tools can do for
everyone in the region.
Judy: can see negatives about some of these tools. Become educated consumers.
Preview center by grade level and subject level online database to make available to
teachers. Also ongoing reviews of tech tools
Electronic publishing , Learning Online a journal that comes out monthly,
Judy: trouble with those is that there is a lot of search for that and raises difficulties of
sorting out quality from junk.
Teachers want to know that there are things of quality that they can use and not waste
their time.
disadvantages for using a regional assessment tool.—developing a collaborative plan
to determine what a technology proficient teacher is hard work.
Wayne: this is in part a political question, have to deal with state bureaucracies.
Judy: identify the commonalties. First step is to discover what we have in common.
We don’t know how far we can go yet.
Orvall: younger teachers may know how to use tech but not necessarily how to use it
in the classroom.
Barbara: Performance assessments force you to think concretely about what you
want. Assessment causes the redesign. Preservice teachers could use as a resource,
schools could use it.
Judy: Dean of Ed school is supportive of this and it is in their interest to be supportive
of this. Commitment in concept acknowledging need for regionalism at some level
and to try to figure out how it can be operationalized.
Wayne: What makes a successful technology enhanced classroom?
Barbara: There has to be a reason for us to be talking regionally—has to be a reason
that goes beyond best practices. Focus on teachers makes sense because of the
interconnectedness of the region. Her reason is focusing on teachers, whether
preservice or in-service.
Judy: LSS, joint project re teacher quality
Eileen: hesitant about policy issues. Likes idea of tools they can all share
Barry: use of technology database in states is useful
Martec is doing needs assessment every year.
Patty: Want to put efforts into developing tool or developing policy?
Judy: prof dev activities, will make effort to meet needs that participants come up
with. Example, workshop for training at state level about how to use data.
Barry: students from diverse background, think it is a nice opportunity to connect
students as well, via videoconferencing for example.
Involving students and teachers in discussion, identifying appropriate venue for it.
Coalition to overcome the digital divide, have project-based learning on how to
overcome it, not just feelings about it.
Judy asks about how closed or open the listserv is.
3:00 Adjournment yes!