Coming into the course, I was hopeful that I would gain a greater understanding of the role and responsibilities an instructional leader has pertaining to the integration and application of technology use in a 21st Century learning environment. Throughout the course, I felt all information obtained in the readings, discussion posts and responses, video segments and assignments continued to contribute to my overall outcome, and as an end result, feel it was a positive course experience. I believe that the course exceeded my expectations that I had coming in, specifically because it introduced me to so much more that is required of an instructional leader in terms of integrating technology, and the standards and practices that we must follow and be aware of with increased technology integration.
Overall, I feel the course is one that will continue to provide great reflection and resources for me as an instructional leader.
I believe that the outcomes provide a greater significance to the work that I currently do as a teacher, coach and department head, solely based on the fact that I have a greater awareness of how technology can enhance the learning environment, and the many issues associated with increased technology usage. I firmly believe that because I have obtained more information and “education” regarding technology that I can be a more effective instructional leader in all avenues of the job I currently fulfill on a daily basis. Likewise, as stated in reflection 1, I believe this course will continue to provide continued reflection and resources as I move forward throughout the courses, and on to a position as a campus or District leader.
Concluding the course, I would have to say that I cannot completely think of anything specific that I failed to achieve directly related to my learning. I did however not achieve my direct goal of obtaining 100’s across the board on all assignments, but am still in a strong position to complete the course with an A, which was certainly a goal I set forth to achieve at the opening of the course. In terms of what potentially prevented me from achieving the goal of straight 100’s on all course assignments, I would have to say my confusion with some of the rubrics led to that, as well as my misunderstanding of some simple components associated with the rubric. All in all, considering the extensive work required in the course, and the rigor and relevance of the assignments and topics at hand, I am very pleased with my current position and looking forward to achieving my final goal of potentially recording an A in the course.
I was to a strong degree successful in carrying out all the course assignments; however, I did struggle with a couple of the assignments in terms of simple areas of the rubric that I failed to achieve. I think the course had a tremendous amount of rigor to it, and was extremely demanding, however, feel it was certainly necessary since we will be moving towards an increasingly rigorous environment as an instructional leader once we complete the program. I don’t recall ever feeling discouraged during the course, but perhaps overwhelmed at times with the amount of required readings, discussion board postings, and the length and depth of some of the assignments.
Certainly I feel I am a much stronger educator at the conclusion of the course and have a greater self-awareness about technology, its uses, its potential pitfalls and policies associated with successful integration.
I feel I gained a tremendous amount of useful information relating directly to technology standards, usage, integration and application. The areas I specifically think are going to be the most beneficial to me in my continued career as an educator would be a greater understanding of the Technology TEKS pertaining to both educators and students, the NET*S for Administrators, the usefulness of various technology related tools, and ensuring that we are providing a safe environment for our students as they utilize technology in the learning environment.
I have always considered myself a digital native, even though I may not fit all the requirements specifically, but feel that I further advanced this feeling throughout this course, as I became more and more aware of technology trends, its usefulness and importance. I was placed in a position where I had to explore using technology in ways that I have not necessarily done so since college and produce final products using technology.
I cannot really address how it has affected my leadership skills specifically, as I don’t feel the course was directly related to my individual leadership skills, but rather was designed to make me a more effective leader in the future, as I have increased knowledge about the above referenced items I found most useful.
I feel strongly that blogs can be a tremendous resource for all learners, as it provides essentially a forum where discussion can take place, as well as a source for students to submit and post assignments electronically and obtain feedback. Essentially, a blog is an active assignment, one that can consistently change and adapt, always fresh with new information and ideas, and provides an area for immediate reflection on previous statements, learning and information.
Blogs can be an effective tool for educational leaders, as they can extend the classroom beyond the traditional wall set forth on campus and allow students the opportunity to expand their knowledge base and directly integrate with technology 1 to 1.
Blogs can also serve as a great source of classroom information and course requirements, etc. if used correctly and efficiently by educators.
I do believe there are some great concerns with blogs and blogging in education, the most prevalent being ownership, safety and security of those who participate, and ensuring that we are conducting ourselves in an appropriate manner with our postings. Ownership of the information is key, as over the course we have become increasingly aware of copyright and right to use policies, etc. as it relates to the spoke, unspoken and electronic word. It is important that students and end users understand the policies associated with blogging and the use of the material collected from the blog.
Security of the users and safety to ensure that inappropriate material is not published or able to be obtained from the blog is also a major concern and it is important that we stay pro-active in reviewing any blogs that may be accessed by learners, and ensure our own blogs meet appropriate standards.
As we read in the courseware materials, we also want to ensure we are not the next PR nightmare, hence the reason I indicated the importance of conducting ourselves in an appropriate manner with our postings. We want to ensure our information remains educationally sound and appropriate and that we are not posting comments or information that would lead to a negative view of ourselves, our campus or our districts.
Blogs have the ability to serve as an integral part of the communication process and information exchange for instructional leaders. Just as we were able to utilize the blog throughout this course, as an educational leader we could utilize the blog in the same fashion by providing information to stakeholders in regards to many aspects affecting our campus or district. Additionally, the blog would allow for feedback to be obtained from stakeholders and allow us to update information and directly address the feedback in an open forum, continually informing all stakeholders in regards to a said topic.
Blogging can also be utilized by an instructional leader to communicate directly with faculty and staff; allowing one to essentially conduct a continual online campus meeting throughout an entire year.
In final reflection, the course provided a tremendous value to me as a current educator, and I feel it will provide an even better value once I achieve the goal of a campus or district leader instructional leader.
Monday, December 14, 2009
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Action Plan
Part 1, Organizational Flow Chart
Description, Roles and Responsibilities
Technology Services Committee - A district committee that is very similar to a SBDM or a CPOC committee that includes a sampling of stakeholders including community members, staff, administration, and local business partners. The primary role is to review, evaluate and recommend potential changes to the District Technology Plan and provide recommendations to the Superintendent for implementation.
Superintendent of Schools – Responsible for evaluating and reviewing technology recommendations and presenting to the Board of Trustees the plan and requesting funding, etc. to fulfill the proposed recommendations. Has final approval on all technology programs and implementation. Serves as the connection between the Technology Committee and the Board of Trustees and communicates information back and forth.
Board of Trustees – Will approve/disapprove expenditures associated with any technology recommendations presented by the Superintendent of Schools. They are NOT involved in development of implementation of the plan, but simply approve funds required or recommend potential changes to the plan for approval.
District Associate Superintendent of Technology – Responsible for directing and leading all technology services and ensuring that any plan is implemented for including technology into schools. Department is responsible to make sure all the software and hardware section of the plan are addressed and to provide adequate resources to ensure campuses are in compliance.
Building Principal – Primarily responsible for reviewing any technology plan and presenting information in regards to campus needs in order to meet the program requirements. Is directly responsible for ensuring that the plan is adequately and accurately installed at the campus, and will provide feedback to the Associate
Superintendent of Technology and the Associate Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction on the effectiveness/ineffectiveness of the technology program. The Principal is the 2nd most important component behind teachers and students, as she must ensure that her campus needs are being met and promote any needs to the District level.
District Associate Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction – Responsible for ensuring that all aspects of the pan direclty related to curriculum and instruction are carried out and understood. Responsible for evaluating effectiveness of instructional programs and developing technology rich course guidelines.
Associate Principal, Director of Instruction and Assistant Principals – Responsible for ensuring that all faculty and staff understand the importance of integrating technology and how to utilize the resources available. Assist the Principal in ensuring the campus is in compliance and to provide feedback to building principal based on PDAS evaluations and classroom visits.
Director of Campus Improvement and Research – Responsible for collecting and evaluating data collected through various means and developing a comprehensive evaluation of the effectiveness of programs and to make recommendations on changes/improvements.
Director of School Development – Responsible for ensuring schools are moving forward as 21st Century Learning Environments.
District Technology Support Specialist – Responsible for ensuring that everything “works” and responsible for getting any recommendations completed or changes done as stated by the Dir. Of Campus Improvement and Research.
Technology Helping Teacher and Technology Curriculum Coach – Ensures that faculty and staff have adequate access to professional development in incoirprating technology into lessons and instruction. These are individuals who have practical experience with the incorporating technology and can model best practices.
Building Technology Services – The maintenance group for technology. Esnures everything is working and provides service.
Director of Operations – Controls all funding and expenditures and manages the safety of the property and keeps track of inventory.
District Technology Training Specialist and Secondary Helping Teacher – Ensures that adequate staff development opportunties are available and they are meeting the needs of educators and addressing the SBEC Standards.
Technology Coaches – Available to assist and provide on the spot instruction to users without the need to wait for a professional development opportunity.
Teachers and Students – The most important element and the end users. Both are the integral part ot ensuring that a comprehensive technology program is a success or a failure.
Part 2, Professional Development Initiative
In any plan, it is necessary that Professional Development Activities address the SBEC Teacher Technology Standards and the integration of Technology Applications relating to student understanding. As learned in week 3, the ultimate goal of our increased professional growth is to make us a more effective educator while using technology, and in turn, to increase students mastery of the Technology TEKS relating to their learning. As we become more knowledgeable of technology and its uses, we can directly impact the classroom and further students learning.
In order to meet the ultimate goal of a more technologically literate staff population, it is important to establish a dynamic professional development plan that will provide growth opportunities for staff across a broad range of technologically literate levels. The goal is to provide activities that all educators can participate in, and those that will meet their needs. As we identified in week 1 of the course, much of the plan needs to be based on providing activities that will meet staff’s needs for all levels of the STaR Chart. It can also be useful to utilize the NET*S Standards as well, but again, the main focus needs to be on meeting the SBEC Teacher Technology Standards.
Areas that I would directly focus on in developing a professional development plan for our campus are below. This plan is developed after reviewing our responses on previous and current years STaR Chart data, the campus and district improvement plans, and the overall comments from students on technology use in the classroom.
I believe a STRONG emphasis needs to be placed on utilization of current software applications used on campus, specifically the operating system, spreadsheet and word processing, and a large focus on the use of presentation software. Professional activities need to focus on ensuring that all educators can completely navigate the OS and use the software in such a way that will allow them to create various electronic forms of documents or presentations that can then be used for presentation. With this, educators will then be able to better meet SBEC standard 1.3s select and use software for a defined task according to quality,
appropriateness, effectiveness, and efficiency, which should also show an increase in teacher response/performance on the STaR Chart in the area of EP1, EP3, TL1 and TL4. This segment would also include a strong understanding of the Districts grade software and student information software, i.e. COGNOS, and show teachers the access to information about student’s performance on HST and other state and federal markers that drive school accountability and funding.
As we better understand the inner workings of software, we also need to provide opportunities that will promote educators use of multiple input devices to further enrich the amount utilized in the teaching process. As identified in the week 3 report, teachers currently have access to whiteboards, smart boards, airliners, PDA’s, ceiling mounted digital projectors, etc, but all teachers may not have an understanding of how to utilize these. Opportunities need to be provided to get these in the hands of educators. Providing opportunities that would place these in the hands of all educators, and expecting them to demonstrate an ability to utilize these should increase the effectiveness and meet the needs of not only SBEC competencies, but show an increase in educator responses in EP3 and EP5 of the STaR Chart. I also believe the you would potentially see an increase INF 3, since more educators would have the understanding of the technology, they should be more inclined to use it, which would potentially justify more of specific items.
The technology plan must include effective use of the internet as an instructional resource, and should also model appropriate practices in understanding copyright and ownership of electronic media. In week 4, it was tremendously interesting to learn about copyright and then to see the lack of understanding that many on the discussion board. I think it clearly is an area that needs to be highlighted and incorporated into a section over usefulness of the internet and instructional resources avail through online media. Our campus improvement plan includes a specific area that indicates, “to provide increased educator understanding of the internet by providing professional development opportunities.” Opportunities in this area would directly provide more positive responses from educators in areas of EP3, TL4 and TL6 of the STaR Chart, and directly addresses the SBEC Standards of 1.14s, 1.15s and 1.16s.
Finally, I think it is important to include a segment that focuses directly on lesson planning and the integration and utilization of technology. We have many “digital natives” who have a strong understanding of technology, but may not fully understand how to directly incorporate it daily to enrich the learning environment. With this, we provide staff an opportunity to see models of lessons with extensive use of technology, which will increase our ability to make more effective lessons and include the use of technology in the plan.
Implementation of the Technology Plan can take place through individualized campus meetings including departmental and team Technology Meetings, by utilizing Video share sessions, active engagement tutorials where educators have to complete a series of steps to move forward in the development course, or by 1 to 1 face to face interaction in a traditional setting. Ideally, the plan needs to have a mix of ALL of these, and all levels need to have educators interacting with the technology throughout their learning. Just as we want students to have the ability to utilize the resources, we need to make sure that all educators have the actual resource to practice on while learning, which will increase their comfort with the mechanism.
We also need to ensure that we have an accountability standard on educators and require a minimum amount per year of their required professional growth to be technology related. This segment is part of objective 3 of the assignment and is discussed below.
Part 3, Evaluation and Plan
Data that is important in formulation of this action plan must be comprehensive, factual, and pertain directly to the needs of the campus. As highlighted in the week 2 assignment, the following sources of data are valuable in evaluating the effectiveness of current technology plans, and for potential changes, and are used in identifying the Priority areas later in the plan:
• District's current technology implementation
• State Long Range Plan for Technology
• Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills for Technology (TEKS)
• Texas School Technology and Readiness Chart (STaR)
• Comparative data from other school districts
• SBEC Teacher Technology Competencies
• Computer industry developments and forecasts
The plan must ensure we are taking into consideration increases in student enrollment and increase in faculty and staff, as well as current funding and future funding. Likewise, we must consider the importance of meeting the requirements set forth in the Texas Long Range Plan for Technology.
Evaluation must be done regularly and data must be reviewed and plans adjusted to continually meet the needs to teachers and students.
Professional Development needs to be mandated in areas of technology use, and staff must show successful completion of a set number of technology hours each year. Professional growth of ALL faculty and staff is integral to ensure a successful plan.
The plan is structured to identify areas of need in importance of priority. This allows a much more flexible way of addressing needs in a limited resource environment, and can serve to identify areas that are considered one of 4 specific areas. Priority 1, necessary to maintain programs and services. Priority 2, items that can enhance and enrich instruction and are becoming the norm in schools. Priority 3, items that can provide extensions or assistance to current programs. Priority 4, items that would be recommended for future considerations.
In reviewing all information and data affecting our school, the following areas would classify as follows:
In reference to our campus, items that would be considered Priority 1 and need to be given premium consideration are new computers, new software and improved network efficiency, power supplies, video conferencing capabilities, smart boards, airliners, PDA’s, interactive white-boards, digital projectors.
Priority 2 items would be increased online professional development system, printers, document scanners, telephone system, document cameras, wireless overlay.
Priority 3 items would be increased computer access to a 2 to 1 ratio and the ability to improve sound tables on network presentation.
Priority 4 items would be distance learning equipment and a stand-alone achievement management software system.
Although all of these are key, by identifying the most important resources, we can focus our plan on each element and ensure that we will be providing the most important items first that will provide the greatest benefit.
It is imperative that new data is collected each time a priority element is completed and becomes “operational”, so to speak, in the educational environment. From this new data, we can further evaluate and adjust the plan to continually meet the needs of an ever changing diverse population.
The plan is developed with the expectation that everyone will “buy into” integration, growth and development, which will ultimately benefit student growth and campus improvement.
Description, Roles and Responsibilities
Technology Services Committee - A district committee that is very similar to a SBDM or a CPOC committee that includes a sampling of stakeholders including community members, staff, administration, and local business partners. The primary role is to review, evaluate and recommend potential changes to the District Technology Plan and provide recommendations to the Superintendent for implementation.
Superintendent of Schools – Responsible for evaluating and reviewing technology recommendations and presenting to the Board of Trustees the plan and requesting funding, etc. to fulfill the proposed recommendations. Has final approval on all technology programs and implementation. Serves as the connection between the Technology Committee and the Board of Trustees and communicates information back and forth.
Board of Trustees – Will approve/disapprove expenditures associated with any technology recommendations presented by the Superintendent of Schools. They are NOT involved in development of implementation of the plan, but simply approve funds required or recommend potential changes to the plan for approval.
District Associate Superintendent of Technology – Responsible for directing and leading all technology services and ensuring that any plan is implemented for including technology into schools. Department is responsible to make sure all the software and hardware section of the plan are addressed and to provide adequate resources to ensure campuses are in compliance.
Building Principal – Primarily responsible for reviewing any technology plan and presenting information in regards to campus needs in order to meet the program requirements. Is directly responsible for ensuring that the plan is adequately and accurately installed at the campus, and will provide feedback to the Associate
Superintendent of Technology and the Associate Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction on the effectiveness/ineffectiveness of the technology program. The Principal is the 2nd most important component behind teachers and students, as she must ensure that her campus needs are being met and promote any needs to the District level.
District Associate Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction – Responsible for ensuring that all aspects of the pan direclty related to curriculum and instruction are carried out and understood. Responsible for evaluating effectiveness of instructional programs and developing technology rich course guidelines.
Associate Principal, Director of Instruction and Assistant Principals – Responsible for ensuring that all faculty and staff understand the importance of integrating technology and how to utilize the resources available. Assist the Principal in ensuring the campus is in compliance and to provide feedback to building principal based on PDAS evaluations and classroom visits.
Director of Campus Improvement and Research – Responsible for collecting and evaluating data collected through various means and developing a comprehensive evaluation of the effectiveness of programs and to make recommendations on changes/improvements.
Director of School Development – Responsible for ensuring schools are moving forward as 21st Century Learning Environments.
District Technology Support Specialist – Responsible for ensuring that everything “works” and responsible for getting any recommendations completed or changes done as stated by the Dir. Of Campus Improvement and Research.
Technology Helping Teacher and Technology Curriculum Coach – Ensures that faculty and staff have adequate access to professional development in incoirprating technology into lessons and instruction. These are individuals who have practical experience with the incorporating technology and can model best practices.
Building Technology Services – The maintenance group for technology. Esnures everything is working and provides service.
Director of Operations – Controls all funding and expenditures and manages the safety of the property and keeps track of inventory.
District Technology Training Specialist and Secondary Helping Teacher – Ensures that adequate staff development opportunties are available and they are meeting the needs of educators and addressing the SBEC Standards.
Technology Coaches – Available to assist and provide on the spot instruction to users without the need to wait for a professional development opportunity.
Teachers and Students – The most important element and the end users. Both are the integral part ot ensuring that a comprehensive technology program is a success or a failure.
Part 2, Professional Development Initiative
In any plan, it is necessary that Professional Development Activities address the SBEC Teacher Technology Standards and the integration of Technology Applications relating to student understanding. As learned in week 3, the ultimate goal of our increased professional growth is to make us a more effective educator while using technology, and in turn, to increase students mastery of the Technology TEKS relating to their learning. As we become more knowledgeable of technology and its uses, we can directly impact the classroom and further students learning.
In order to meet the ultimate goal of a more technologically literate staff population, it is important to establish a dynamic professional development plan that will provide growth opportunities for staff across a broad range of technologically literate levels. The goal is to provide activities that all educators can participate in, and those that will meet their needs. As we identified in week 1 of the course, much of the plan needs to be based on providing activities that will meet staff’s needs for all levels of the STaR Chart. It can also be useful to utilize the NET*S Standards as well, but again, the main focus needs to be on meeting the SBEC Teacher Technology Standards.
Areas that I would directly focus on in developing a professional development plan for our campus are below. This plan is developed after reviewing our responses on previous and current years STaR Chart data, the campus and district improvement plans, and the overall comments from students on technology use in the classroom.
I believe a STRONG emphasis needs to be placed on utilization of current software applications used on campus, specifically the operating system, spreadsheet and word processing, and a large focus on the use of presentation software. Professional activities need to focus on ensuring that all educators can completely navigate the OS and use the software in such a way that will allow them to create various electronic forms of documents or presentations that can then be used for presentation. With this, educators will then be able to better meet SBEC standard 1.3s select and use software for a defined task according to quality,
appropriateness, effectiveness, and efficiency, which should also show an increase in teacher response/performance on the STaR Chart in the area of EP1, EP3, TL1 and TL4. This segment would also include a strong understanding of the Districts grade software and student information software, i.e. COGNOS, and show teachers the access to information about student’s performance on HST and other state and federal markers that drive school accountability and funding.
As we better understand the inner workings of software, we also need to provide opportunities that will promote educators use of multiple input devices to further enrich the amount utilized in the teaching process. As identified in the week 3 report, teachers currently have access to whiteboards, smart boards, airliners, PDA’s, ceiling mounted digital projectors, etc, but all teachers may not have an understanding of how to utilize these. Opportunities need to be provided to get these in the hands of educators. Providing opportunities that would place these in the hands of all educators, and expecting them to demonstrate an ability to utilize these should increase the effectiveness and meet the needs of not only SBEC competencies, but show an increase in educator responses in EP3 and EP5 of the STaR Chart. I also believe the you would potentially see an increase INF 3, since more educators would have the understanding of the technology, they should be more inclined to use it, which would potentially justify more of specific items.
The technology plan must include effective use of the internet as an instructional resource, and should also model appropriate practices in understanding copyright and ownership of electronic media. In week 4, it was tremendously interesting to learn about copyright and then to see the lack of understanding that many on the discussion board. I think it clearly is an area that needs to be highlighted and incorporated into a section over usefulness of the internet and instructional resources avail through online media. Our campus improvement plan includes a specific area that indicates, “to provide increased educator understanding of the internet by providing professional development opportunities.” Opportunities in this area would directly provide more positive responses from educators in areas of EP3, TL4 and TL6 of the STaR Chart, and directly addresses the SBEC Standards of 1.14s, 1.15s and 1.16s.
Finally, I think it is important to include a segment that focuses directly on lesson planning and the integration and utilization of technology. We have many “digital natives” who have a strong understanding of technology, but may not fully understand how to directly incorporate it daily to enrich the learning environment. With this, we provide staff an opportunity to see models of lessons with extensive use of technology, which will increase our ability to make more effective lessons and include the use of technology in the plan.
Implementation of the Technology Plan can take place through individualized campus meetings including departmental and team Technology Meetings, by utilizing Video share sessions, active engagement tutorials where educators have to complete a series of steps to move forward in the development course, or by 1 to 1 face to face interaction in a traditional setting. Ideally, the plan needs to have a mix of ALL of these, and all levels need to have educators interacting with the technology throughout their learning. Just as we want students to have the ability to utilize the resources, we need to make sure that all educators have the actual resource to practice on while learning, which will increase their comfort with the mechanism.
We also need to ensure that we have an accountability standard on educators and require a minimum amount per year of their required professional growth to be technology related. This segment is part of objective 3 of the assignment and is discussed below.
Part 3, Evaluation and Plan
Data that is important in formulation of this action plan must be comprehensive, factual, and pertain directly to the needs of the campus. As highlighted in the week 2 assignment, the following sources of data are valuable in evaluating the effectiveness of current technology plans, and for potential changes, and are used in identifying the Priority areas later in the plan:
• District's current technology implementation
• State Long Range Plan for Technology
• Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills for Technology (TEKS)
• Texas School Technology and Readiness Chart (STaR)
• Comparative data from other school districts
• SBEC Teacher Technology Competencies
• Computer industry developments and forecasts
The plan must ensure we are taking into consideration increases in student enrollment and increase in faculty and staff, as well as current funding and future funding. Likewise, we must consider the importance of meeting the requirements set forth in the Texas Long Range Plan for Technology.
Evaluation must be done regularly and data must be reviewed and plans adjusted to continually meet the needs to teachers and students.
Professional Development needs to be mandated in areas of technology use, and staff must show successful completion of a set number of technology hours each year. Professional growth of ALL faculty and staff is integral to ensure a successful plan.
The plan is structured to identify areas of need in importance of priority. This allows a much more flexible way of addressing needs in a limited resource environment, and can serve to identify areas that are considered one of 4 specific areas. Priority 1, necessary to maintain programs and services. Priority 2, items that can enhance and enrich instruction and are becoming the norm in schools. Priority 3, items that can provide extensions or assistance to current programs. Priority 4, items that would be recommended for future considerations.
In reviewing all information and data affecting our school, the following areas would classify as follows:
In reference to our campus, items that would be considered Priority 1 and need to be given premium consideration are new computers, new software and improved network efficiency, power supplies, video conferencing capabilities, smart boards, airliners, PDA’s, interactive white-boards, digital projectors.
Priority 2 items would be increased online professional development system, printers, document scanners, telephone system, document cameras, wireless overlay.
Priority 3 items would be increased computer access to a 2 to 1 ratio and the ability to improve sound tables on network presentation.
Priority 4 items would be distance learning equipment and a stand-alone achievement management software system.
Although all of these are key, by identifying the most important resources, we can focus our plan on each element and ensure that we will be providing the most important items first that will provide the greatest benefit.
It is imperative that new data is collected each time a priority element is completed and becomes “operational”, so to speak, in the educational environment. From this new data, we can further evaluate and adjust the plan to continually meet the needs of an ever changing diverse population.
The plan is developed with the expectation that everyone will “buy into” integration, growth and development, which will ultimately benefit student growth and campus improvement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)