You are on page 1of 3

Summary and SMART Goals:

Upon completion of a SWOT analysis for Helping Hands’ (HH) technology integration status, it
is apparent that HH is poised for a meaningful move towards formally establishing a technology
program. It is important to note that since the program is in its infancy, while there will be many
goals to achieve moving forward, there are several that must be initialized as soon as possible.
Currently there is no official technology program or Technology Integrator at HH, which are the
clearest obstacles towards making real headway. Without proper leadership and time devoted to
owning this project, progress will be stagnant. Funding has been secured for a 1:1 device rollout
for several years and the IT team has created strong infrastructure, which only amplifies the need
to take action. We must remember that, as Devaney (2014) mentioned, we as educators have a
moral imperative​ to create a culture that allows students to “​live and learn with technology and
to have access to opportunities made possible through technology.” (p.2)

HH does not yet have a designated area or budget for technology exploration. There is one small
computer lab, centrally located within the school, containing 12 computers which are occupied
daily with Library classes. The lab doubles as library classroom space and the sole standardized
testing site, which leaves no opportunity for class sign-up or extra time to access equipment.
There is also no A/V or device loaning program. The librarian is currently enrolled in a graduate
LMS program and has shown to be very innovative despite limited budget and resources. She
uses the AASL (2018) framework and has proven to be open to close collaboration with teachers
in an effort to achieve synergy throughout the curriculum. One staff member is enrolled in a
graduate ETI program and has shown consistent initiative in bringing technology to the
classroom. The SLP department has also demonstrated extensive knowledge in the area of
assistive technology, which provides a valuable resource when implementing a technology
rollout.

Use of technology in the classroom has been left to individual teachers. There are a small
number who utilize innovative strategies to incorporate technology, although most currently do
not - this may be partially due to a lack of available devices and resources. While many of the
neurobehavioral (NB) population have access to assistive devices, the rest of the student
population has very limited exposure to computers or technology materials of any kind. Students
engage in Library/Media class twice a week in the computer lab, which remains the only
designated access to computer learning. Teachers have just one hour to prepare before students
arrive and one hour to clean up and debrief when students leave. This leaves little time to
complete basic job functions, which in turn means that if teachers are to seek out creative ways
to integrate technology, they must do it on their own time. Teachers also get one hour per week
for a classroom staff meeting, which does not leave adequate time for communication and
collaboration among staff. Very little guidance has been provided to teachers regarding
technology curriculum, and there have been no specific frameworks provided for reference.
There is opportunity here to create familiarity with standards and plans such as ISTE (2016),
AASL (2018), the U.S. Department of Education (2017) NETP, and Future Ready Schools
(2017).

The staff and teacher population is diverse in age and background, which creates large gaps in
base tech knowledge among classroom teams. While there are several teachers who are more
adept with technology, many others may need assistance with basic computer functions. This is
also true of support staff. There has been very limited professional development in the area of
technology beyond required privacy and security trainings, which serves as one of Spaulding’s
greatest opportunities given the generally enthusiastic nature of their teachers and staff. A
technology integrator will be able to work with teachers, staff and administrators to create a PD
program that will cover the ISTE process, outlined by Crompton (2015), of observation, needs
assessment, training, and evaluation.

There are several secondary areas of concern, some of which are a result of the unique
population that HH serves. The first is the expansive nature of student age and ability levels,
which stretches the scope of the technology program much further than most. This will mean a
wider range of devices, apps, software, curriculum, and most importantly much more time spent
for a technology integrator. If timeline expectations from administrators are too high, for
instance, the program will be set up to fail. Another concern is that many students in the HH
population have behavioral/developmental issues and/or have been subject to abuse. This brings
with it an increased risk for inappropriate use of technology, along with increased risk of
physical damage to devices. It also carries filtering risks on two levels. First, there is risk that
any​ inappropriate images, etc. that are encountered during normal web surfing could trigger a
student based on their trauma history. Second, there is increased risk of potentially nefarious use
of technology. HH currently uses a somewhat ineffective filtering system that would need to be
updated or replaced.

While there are many changes to be made, there are also many exciting opportunities for HH.
The CEO has made it a goal to raise community, policymaker, and legislator awareness of the
services HH provides, which in turn brings fundraising and partnership opportunities. She has
also hired a grant writer who has shown to be very effective at securing funding. Most
importantly students and staff alike are hungry to work with technology and the school has the
opportunity to build a technology program together, as a community, from the foundation. As
Marcinek contends in his article, “innovation in the classroom begins with trust,” (p.1) and that
trust is built through involvement from all stakeholders, including students.
S.M.A.R.T. Goals for the Helping Hands Technology Program

1. Over the next year, create budget and description for technology integrator position
and fill the role.

2. Over the next two years, develop strategic plan for 1:1 device rollout and complete
implementation so that every student has the opportunity to learn with technology.

3. Over the next three years, expand technology offerings by providing student access to
a makerspace, A/V equipment to loan out, and a designated area for technology/a
secondary computer lab.

References

Devaney, L. (2014). The ABCs of school technology programs. Retrieved from


http://www.eschoolnews.com/2014/02/28/abcs-school-technology-379/

ISTE. (2016). International Society for Technology in Education standards for students.
Arlington, VA: ISTE. Retrieved from ​http://www.iste.org/standards/standards/for-students-2016

AASL. (2018). National school library standards for learners, school librarians, and school
libraries. Chicago: ALA Editions, an imprint of the American Library Association. Retrieved
from
http://standards.aasl.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/AASL-Standards-Framework-for-Learners
-pamphlet.pdf

U.S. Department of Education. (2017). National education technology plan. Retrieved from
https://tech.ed.gov/netp/

Future Ready Schools. (2017). Future Ready instructional coaches. Retrieved from
http://futureready.org/program-overview/coaches/

Crompton, H. (2015). Know the ISTE standards for coaches: PD and program evaluation.
Retrieved from ​https://www.iste.org/explore/articleDetail?articleid=504

Marcinek, A. (2015, February 6). Future ready: Roadmaps to tech integration. Retrieved from
http://www.edutopia.org/blog/future-ready-roadmaps-tech-integration-andrew-marcinek

You might also like