1 / 11

Mobile County Public School System District Technology Plan

Mobile County Public School System District Technology Plan. James Willcox Joanne Kline Yoko Nagashima. The District. 95 schools and 4000 students 80 miles north to south 120 building sites 62% of students on free and reduced lunch $18 million a year in Title I funds

beryl
Télécharger la présentation

Mobile County Public School System District Technology Plan

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Mobile County Public School System District Technology Plan James Willcox Joanne Kline Yoko Nagashima

  2. The District • 95 schools and 4000 students • 80 miles north to south • 120 building sites • 62% of students on free and reduced lunch • $18 million a year in Title I funds • High central office efficiency: 2.5 % admin rate • Largest district in the state • Wide statewide variance in size

  3. MCPS Technology Timeline • 1991: Initial district-wide plan focus on teaching and learning • 1993: Revived and expanded of Technology Committee: included central office • 1996-1997: State planning requirements • 1997: Comprehensive District Technology Plan • 1998: WAN to all schools complete • 2001: Wireless network in progress

  4. Impetus for Acceptance • Start Point: Business needs/efficiency • Failing mainframes • Windfall $ from the state “with no strings attached” • New leadership • Lifetime total cost not a main concern • Political support • Need + Funds + Politics = execution • Combined need was key • Net Day • Big support from Bell South • Early participant

  5. Technology Plan Today: Finances • Major support from the federal government • “E-rate is a godsend” • High poverty district gets more e-rate $$ (wiring) • Allowed shortened installation timeline (7 years to1) • Title 1 funds: $18 million • Local foundation grants and corporate donations • Some grant support (10-30K/school) • Mainly Title I schools

  6. Professional Development • 30% of tech budget reserved for tech training • Tech training/staff supports skills and integration • Voluntary, focused teacher training: computer incentives • Teacher tech literacy standards enforced • Coordination with credentialing programs/schools of ed • Established standards for classroom tech integration • Measuring tech use in classroom (survey, observation, eval.) • 1st results pending • Selection process of site IT team / tech teachers • Criteria: knowledge = job

  7. Technology & Research Partners • Partnership with USA • In-service teacher technology training • Insufficient research support • UNC – software research • Publish info to teachers and schools

  8. District Technology: 2001 • District installation of wireless network (upgrade from T1) • Network overloaded by extensive use • Lower maintenance cost (included in package) • Lower installation/upgrade expense • Voice over network (savings over 150K / year) • Classroom hardware standards • Minimum: 2 PCs • Goal: 4 PCs • Super Computer Authority • Provides ISP services through the State of Alabama

  9. Future Concerns • Personnel Struggling with long term/ongoing costs of IT • End equipment for distance learning • Will E-rate continue? • Tough tradeoffs in budget • Site-based management issues

  10. MCPS Decision Making • Committee based decisions • school/teacher participation • Lifetime costs de-emphasized • Business and T&L needs combined • Dependence on • Outside research/review • Federal funds • Dedication to training/integration/standards

  11. Policy Implications • Long term support plans critical • Flexible policy with accountability are key • Alternative / worst case should be identified • Reserve funds for training, integration, measurement • Plan, execute, evaluate, update • Coalitions / combined needs critical • Approval • Efficient use of tech / funds / sustaining support

More Related