On Site Tech Work Order - PowerPoint

Document Sample
On Site Tech Work Order - PowerPoint Powered By Docstoc
					Site Tech Coordinator’s Meeting

          Tuesday, February 7, 2006
January Agenda Review

   8:00 - 8:10 AM     Refreshments
   8:10 - 8:45 AM     Welcome and Technology Updates
   8:45 – 9:00 AM     Internet Bypass Filter Password
   9:00 - 10:15 AM    Work Order Training / Web Design
   10:15 - 10:30 AM   Break
   10:30 - 12:00 PM   Contributing Factors – IT Academic Technical Support
   12:00 - 1:00 PM    Lunch Provided
   1:00 - 2:00 PM     Staff Development – Mac Server Authentication
    Agenda Review
   8:00 - 8:15 AM               Refreshments
   8:15 - 8:30 AM               Welcome and Technology Updates
   8:30 – 10:00 AM              A Future for District Supported Instructional Technology

      Tim White, Systems Engineer, Apple Computer

   10:00- 10:15 AM Break

   10:15 – 10:45 AM Discussion / Feedback, Activity: Developing a Future District Policy
   10:45 – 11:00 AM NEW - District UHF Communications

      Raf Waites, Communications Expert

   11:00 – 11:30 AM www.MySpace.com

      Gabby Ibarra – Former CHS Student, MySpace user and student at
       Long Beach State, Elementary Education

   11:30 - 12:30 PM             Lunch Provided
   12:30 - 1:30 PM              Instructional Technology – Using Data to Make Instructional decisions

      Mary White and Colin Sprigg
Tim White, Recommendations
Abc – individual efforts by schools
Technology Line Item
  How do other disitircts do this?
Iron Triangle
  IT, Teachers, Tech (STC)
  This relationship has push pull arrows between
   each other
Most of the time stc and teachers is not
 tied to IT
 Som disitrict IT dept have all the mney
 Some disitrict have many IT layers of people at
  iT level (routers, switches, wires) requires three
  people to assist
 Some disitircts have teacher swith all the oney,
  lots of tech but no one to set-up, they are
  teaching.
 Some disitrcts have STC with all the money,
  special projects emerge that exclude regular
  teachers, differentiaited focus with no
  consisitenacy year after year
Iron triangle –
  Look for how the technology is being used
  The balance is not the issue, but it’s the
   connections to each other that counts, the
   communitions and coordianton, lines of
   cmmunications must go both directons
  If you ave a problme someone in the disitrict
   has the answer, but its finding the answer in a
   timely maner. Can persona a pick up thenphone
   and get their questions answered.
 ABC has informal communications – “food
  network”
  Phone calls to Americo to do work outside on the work
   order system.
 Informal Communications is Key, but can not
  survice alone
 A piece of technology “apple remote desktop”,
  and PC products exist just the same. One
  comptuer can see the screen of another
  computer on the network. You can look at the
  problem of a teacher who call on the phone.
*VNC – Virtual Network Control
  There are free versions available
  Mac and pc can look at each other via VNC
  We have to have unifromity to make this work
    Password
    This means there is a back door into that particular
     machince (this could be controlverisal) privacy
     issues??
    Trust factors
    “screen scraping”
Can lock the screen in a lab, teachers love
Teacher elvel product $200
  Its mine, no else uses it mentality
Disitrict philopshy – every macine in the
 district has remote access, passwrod,
If you have a problem, another users, may
 not even be an IT person, can help.
  Key resource, users helping one another
 Lab adminsitrator has their own password
  Can lock,
  Remote control password – DO people can go over
   network and look at machnes
  Third doorway allows changes to macines
  (every machine has three dorrways into it)
 Americo uses phone remote access to
  Eliminate the driving, time issues vs. remote access
   solve online
  How many more problems can Americo solve remotely?
What the problem? The arrows between
 groups overlap and require trust from each
 triangle.
*District Image
  Leverage resources with a standard image,
   operating sysytem, applicatons, uniform for all
   schools
  Apple can put the image of the machine with
   the image already installed.
  Unifrom across the disitrict
*Software Warranty
  New versions of operating sysytems
  You have to buty software warranty
     This ensures the OS upgrades for free.
     Otherwise this expnse will bite you after the purchase
      and threaten the unifromity of the disitrict image.
  This is key to maintain the disitrct image
*No Office
  “lets not put MS Office on the Image”
  controversial
 Does everybody k-12 use Microsoft office
 Therefore are we going to put the office on every
  image
 If you send an emai tha tyou need MS Office
  and tell me why- I’ll send it you for free.
 50% of motoral did not request the MS Office-
  learning they did not need it.
  May be needed only powerpoint
  Challenge the assumption – do we need MS Office for
   all 100% of every instructional cmputer?
Hit and miss needs for Office in different
 classrooms
Every 6 mo the district reviews the disitrict
 image to avoid layers new and newer
 applciaitons on top of one another. Its is
 being reviewed and clearned.
  You do not want a 60GIG immage
Standard hardware is not required to
 have a disitirct image (explore this idea)
Advantages:
*Our own personal computers with our
 “own stuff”, however, we are talking about
 NETWORK accounts- this stuff has to be
 located where the users can ge tehri
 owrks at any cometuer they go.
  A server that will store users trash (personal
   stuff) any where on the network
  This approach will save work on servers and
   allow instantialy swap out machines
 Donated machines should be connected ot the
  server and all the work is stoed on the server-
  when the machine dies simply sawp the
  machine wihtout threatening the work.
 Network machnes will nnot replace the teachers
  own laptop due to indivual needs
 Do not look at every computer and user as a
  network account – htat does not work
  You have to have mix of network and local accounts
  Require for success
 Network accoutns will solve many support issues
 *Restore Computers
    Deepfreeze (replcing cd restore)
    Netbook and netrestore – allow resotre ove rthe network.
    Philosphical appcoach – I am not going to figure out whats wrong – I’m
     just going to make the computer work- by restoring the computer. (This
     is threatening to some people- they have t know what went wrong)
    We do not have the time to figure ut what wrong any more. We do not
     have te personnell to keep up with the uber of computers.
    Americo solution
    Should everyone do deepfreeze? No.. Because you have multiple
     solutons are required…different tools for different restore
        Mideia la with big files – netboot netrestire is difficeult
        Library with machines and rowser – net bookt and netresore is way to go
         now
 *Break Fix
  One year old computers do not breal often, 4 year s or
   older break al the time (T or F)
  True. This is predictable behaviior of older computers..
   There fore we can change our behavior for our older
   computers
  Disitricts have choices about break-fix
      Warrany. Some disitricts require schools to but a warranty
       3-5 years
      Other disitrict do not buy waranty
      3 year warranty – harware vendors will ie better rpice for 3
       year vs. 5 year
      Some district buy extra machnes, and simply swap out
      What is best for us?
*Technology Refresh / SwapOUt
Dead Fish analogy
Year 4 and 5 parts are low from supplier,
 takes loner ot get parts, required by law to
 have parts for 7 years
A donated computer three years old –
 breaks what do you do?
 200 old computers, I’ll trade you 200 older computers for
  150 new ones.
 Who would not take that deal? “that’s 50 less machines
  we would have to support”
 Stc did not seem to mind that concept.
 Line item – specified amuont weill requrie that palces us
  in an economic situtaiton to use you money for
  maintaince or new machines. (How llong do you want to
  put the fish on ice)
 It’s the numbers of days the machines work is the key.
  Year one – les than 3 year turnaround, later in life – it
  ltakes longer to fix machine. Less days of service.
 HS – How aout I give 400 (older comouters),
  combine with what you have 700 working
  comouters. The 100 that are spare we put on the
  shelf. If any of the computer break down we
  throw out and we hot swap the old computers
  with spares.
 These machines are not warranty- thet are being
  swapped out. The extra macines are coming
  from schools who make trades for new
  machines.
 Disitrict should do all these methods of warranty
  and swap out of old machines.
 Windows and Mac can go over network and do
  “snooping”
  How much hard drive space do you have?
  Hard rive space required on machines fo elbo room.
  If we ask all our computers if there is less that 10%
   space someone proactivlty to take care of.
  This reporting and proactive approach is key to better
   service.
  This can be threatening to some users “snooping”
 *Software Updates
  Controlled by the disitrict IT department where images
   are updates inbetween semesters. Everybody get
   upgraded all at once.
  This means giving up some control to the disitrict who
   controls the image
  Form a committee, date on calendar, collect input, make
   the update, everyone ,oves at the same time.
  Servers push the install sout- atuomated tasks takes the
   labor out.
 *Name Space
   Importing names and passwords
   Americo does this work now for our schools
   What happends when a student joins in the middle of the
    semester.. Schools do this
   Fullerton School Disitirct
      A student registers and the disitrict trickles down the instructional
       log-in use back don to the schools. Teachers and schools do not
       have to worry about this.
      The disitrict dictates the applications the users sue with this method-
       this causes controvery at the school elvel as to hat applciaitons
       should be given to users.
      This can be given to the schools. Let the schools worry about the
       applictions (what the kids expereinces when the kids logs in to the
       coputer – let the schools direct this)
      Distirict whould take care of the name and log in functions.
 Frictions points ahead with the line item ideas:
   Who owns the computer?
   Whose responsibility is it?
   Do I trust the people I have to to rely on?
   Ratio expectations from each of the schools
 Sharing solutions and information is the key to
  making do successful
 Fish smell
 Age of computers and oprtating sysytem is
  bigger issue than the numbe rof the computers.
 Uptime is a stragety not a measurement or
  productity.
  Keeping computers running is key – have a stragety to
   fix eatiehr replace or fix??
The Process
 Process
  Friction will be a part
  Mind set for change
  Line item allows annual predictions
      Strategy required
      Best used practices
  Economies of scale
      One grading program
      One office suite, etc..
      However, people have to compromise with preferences
Vendor success depends on our success
 in this process
2006 CTAP Survey Requirement
    To access the 2006 California School Technology Survey:

       District PIN (number): 695705
       School Survey System Password: desktop
       School Technology Survey Web Address:

    http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/et/rs/techsurvey.asp

    Window is January 4, 2006, through March 17, 2006.
    Last day to complete is Friday, March 17, 2006.
    Failure to complete the Survey on time will put grant eligibility and
     grant funding at risk. (EETT)
Survey Status   = needs to be completed
    Agenda Review

   8:00 - 8:15 AM     Refreshments
   8:15 - 8:30 AM     Welcome and Technology Updates
   8:30 – 10:00AM     A Future for District Supported Instructional Technology
   10:00 - 10:15 AM   Break
   10:15 – 10:45 AM   Activity: 3 Pros / 3 Cons / Discussion
   10:45 – 11:00 AM   District Supported UHF Communications
   11:00 - 11:30 AM   www.MySpace.com
   11:30 - 12:30 PM   Lunch Provided
   12:30 – 1:30 PM    Using Data to Make Instructional Decisions
    Agenda Review

   8:00 - 8:15 AM     Refreshments
   8:15 - 8:30 AM     Welcome and Technology Updates
   8:30 – 10:00AM     A Future for District Supported Instructional Technology
   10:00 - 10:15 AM   Break
   10:15 – 10:45 AM   Activity: 3 Pros / 3 Cons / Discussion
   10:45 – 11:00 AM   District Supported UHF Communications
   11:00 - 11:30 AM   www.MySpace.com
   11:30 - 12:30 PM   Lunch Provided
   12:30 – 1:30 PM    Using Data to Make Instructional Decisions
    Agenda Review

   8:00 - 8:15 AM     Refreshments
   8:15 - 8:30 AM     Welcome and Technology Updates
   8:30 – 10:00AM     A Future for District Supported Instructional Technology
   10:00 - 10:15 AM   Break
   10:15 – 10:45 AM   Activity: 3 Pros / 3 Cons / Discussion
   10:45 – 11:00 AM   District Supported UHF Communications
   11:00 - 11:30 AM   www.MySpace.com
   11:30 - 12:30 PM   Lunch Provided
   12:30 – 1:30 PM    Using Data to Make Instructional Decisions
    Agenda Review

   8:00 - 8:15 AM     Refreshments
   8:15 - 8:30 AM     Welcome and Technology Updates
   8:30 – 10:00AM     A Future for District Supported Instructional Technology
   10:00 - 10:15 AM   Break
   10:15 – 10:45 AM   Activity: 3 Pros / 3 Cons / Discussion
   10:45 – 11:00 AM   District Supported UHF Communications
   11:00 - 11:30 AM   www.MySpace.com
   11:30 - 12:30 PM   Lunch Provided
   12:30 – 1:30 PM    Using Data to Make Instructional Decisions
    Agenda Review

   8:00 - 8:15 AM     Refreshments
   8:15 - 8:30 AM     Welcome and Technology Updates
   8:30 – 10:00AM     A Future for District Supported Instructional Technology
   10:00 - 10:15 AM   Break
   10:15 – 10:45 AM   Activity: 3 Pros / 3 Cons / Discussion
   10:45 – 11:00 AM   District Supported UHF Communications
   11:00 - 11:30 AM   www.MySpace.com
   11:30 - 12:30 PM   Lunch Provided
   12:30 – 1:30 PM    Using Data to Make Instructional Decisions
    Agenda Review

   8:00 - 8:15 AM     Refreshments
   8:15 - 8:30 AM     Welcome and Technology Updates
   8:30 – 10:00AM     A Future for District Supported Instructional Technology
   10:00 - 10:15 AM   Break
   10:15 – 10:45 AM   Activity: 3 Pros / 3 Cons / Discussion
   10:45 – 11:00 AM   District Supported UHF Communications
   11:00 - 11:30 AM   www.MySpace.com
   11:30 - 12:30 PM   Lunch Provided
   12:30 – 1:30 PM    Using Data to Make Instructional Decisions
    Agenda Review

   8:00 - 8:15 AM     Refreshments
   8:15 - 8:30 AM     Welcome and Technology Updates
   8:30 – 10:00AM     A Future for District Supported Instructional Technology
   10:00 - 10:15 AM   Break
   10:15 – 10:45 AM   Activity: 3 Pros / 3 Cons / Discussion
   10:45 – 11:00 AM   District Supported UHF Communications
   11:00 - 11:30 AM   www.MySpace.com
   11:30 - 12:30 PM   Lunch Provided
   12:30 – 1:30 PM    Using Data to Make Instructional Decisions
    Agenda Review

   8:00 - 8:15 AM     Refreshments
   8:15 - 8:30 AM     Welcome and Technology Updates
   8:30 – 10:00AM     A Future for District Supported Instructional Technology
   10:00 - 10:15 AM   Break
   10:15 – 10:45 AM   Activity: 3 Pros / 3 Cons / Discussion
   10:45 – 11:00 AM   District Supported UHF Communications
   11:00 - 11:30 AM   www.MySpace.com
   11:30 - 12:30 PM   Lunch Provided
   12:30 – 1:30 PM    Using Data to Make Instructional Decisions
  STC Data
Presentation
February 7, 2006
                                    CHS API Growth Chart 2004-2005


                                              Number       Numerically                                               Met
            CHS = API 815                     of Pupils    Significant
                                                                                               2004-05
                                                                                                                   Subgroup


                                              Included
                                                              in Both        2005       2004   Growth    2004-05   Growth
                                                 in

 Ethnic/Racial                                2005 API         Years       Growth       Base   Target    Growth     Target
 African American                               109             Yes           662       646      1         16        Yes

 American Indian or Alaska Native                 4             No

 Asian                                          1027            Yes           863       861      A         2         Yes
 Filipino                                       162             Yes           843       803      A         40        Yes
 Hispanic or Latino                             175             Yes           689       646      1         43        Yes

 Pacific Islander                                 7             No

 White                                          179             Yes           731       714      1         17        Yes
 Socioeconomic ally Disadvantaged               132             Yes           682       646      1         36        Yes



"A" means the subgroup scored at or above the statewide performance target of 800 in 2004.
 Introduction
  Who we are
  Our role
  Our Objective
 Intro to API and Proficiency Levels – Julie
   The relationship of API, Proficiency Levels and Scaled Scores

 Lets Talk About CHS Data
  Sub group distributions
  % of students showing improvement or decline
       School wide vs. grade levels
       Gainers, Stickers and Sliders
       Net Gains / Loss by Grade Level
 What questions does the data suggest?
  API Test Weights for Grade Levels 9-11



                                  2004-05
        Content Area
                                Test Weights
CST in ELA                                0.300
CST in Math                               0.200
CST in Science                            0.150
CST in History-Social Science             0.225
CAHSEE in ELA                             0.300
CAHSEE in Math                            0.300
Total                                     1.475
                  STAR CST Scaled Score Ranges
                        English –Language Arts

        Far Below
                    Below Basic     Basic     Proficient    Advanced
Grade     Basic
  2     150-261       262-299      300-349     350-401      402-600
  3     150-258       259-299      300-349     350-401      402-600
  4     150-268       269-299      300-349     350-392      393-600
  5     150-270       271-299      300-349     350-394      395-600
  6     150-267       268-299      300-349     350-393      394-600
  7     150-262       263-299      300-349     350-400      401-600
  8     150-265       266-299      300-349     350-394      395-600
  9     150-264       265-299      300-349     350-396      397-600
 10     150-262       263-299      300-349     350-391      351-600
 11     150-258       259-299      300-349     350-395      396-600

                          Below Grade Level   Grade Level
= below grade level
Schoolwide




             +2 Net Gain




                           -17 Net Loss
-11 Net Loss   -33 Net Loss
Net Gain / Loss   -70   -172
Net Gain/Loss Analysis

                               ELA                                      MATH
Teachers – Grade 10   Grade   Gainers   Stickers   Sliders   NET GAIN   Gainers   Stickers   Sliders   NET GAIN

Teacher A

                       10                                       -25                                       -75

Teacher B
                       10                                       +4                                        -50

Teacher C
                       10                                       -40                                       -25

Teacher D
                       10                                       -9                                        -22

                      Net      146       187       -223        -70                                      -172
             3rd, 4th and 5th Grade Example
 Name          Grade Gain   Stick   Slide Gain/Loss   Ave    Gain   Stick   Slide   Gain/Loss   Ave


Teacher 1      3      1     12       4                 -3       2    15        0                  2

Teacher 2      3      5     9        4                 1        5    11        1                  4

Teacher 3      3      1     4        9                 -8       1    7         5                  -4

Teacher 4      3      0     8        6                 -6       0    7         8                  -8

Teacher 5      3       3     9       4                 -1       5    11        2                  3
              Net     10    42      27       -17      -3.4     13    51       16       -3        -0.6



Teacher 6      4      21    9        0                 21      14    10        3                 11

Teacher 7      4      9     3        1                 8        6    5         2                  4

Teacher 8      4      18     8       0                 18      16    12        1                 15
              Total   48    20       1       47       10.9     36    27        6       30       7.35



Teacher 9      5      2     13      12                -10       3    6        21                 -18

Teacher 10     5      3     9        4                 -1       0    9         8                  -8

Teacher 11     5      7     10       8                 -1       0    7        19                 -19

Teacher 12     5       3    19       1                 2        0     8       18                  -18
              Total   15    51      25       -10      -2.5      3    30       66       -63      -15.75

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Description: On Site Tech Work Order document sample