Back Cover

Back Cover (print on heavy card stock for durability)

✯ Wireless Networking Made Simple

This is a very fun, no-nonsense session where I attempt to demystify the whole concept of wireless networking. We’ll move from the necessary nomenclature used in wireless networking, through the examples of success where wireless has made “all the difference” in elementary and secondary schools, to the basic “how-to” for a simple wireless network. As a “grand finale,” I enjoy showing participants how to build wireless antennas from such basic components as a Pringles™ can or a coffee can. This session is always HUGELY appreciated, especially as we witness a proliferation of wireless networks. One reason this session/topic is so well received is that wireless networks are no longer applicable only in schools, but also in educators’ homes. That concept, alone, brings the mystery of wireless into the reality of meaningful home computing.

To book any of these presentations, contact Dr. Larry S. Anderson Email: [email protected] Phone: 662/844-9630 Mail: P. O. Box 2393, Tupelo, MS 38803

Effective date: December 17, 2004

technology audits; internal and external scanning strategies; technology self-assessments; web-based evaluation/updating tools. Also, participants will gain great benefit by examining success stories from schools that have updated plans that are working well. Workshop participants will be given some tools and aids designed to assist them in their technology planning update efforts. Also, listings of resources will be distributed to participants. As a result of this workshop, participants will enjoy a renewed capacity to manage and lead local efforts. They will leave the workshop rejuvenated and empowered to enhance, powerfully, their local technology planning responsibilities.

✯ Maximizing Community Resources

Community is supremely important for education at all levels. In this session, we focus upon numerous areas where the richness of a community can be captured in order to benefit learning: • talent identification • surveys • online information gathering • resource sharing • business partnerships • civic involvement • recognition programs • shadowing as well as other considerations brought forth in discussion with session attendees. The focus of this session is to identify and illuminate community resources, then determine strategies for employing the best a community can offer to enhancement of an educational environment.

✯ Students as Your Best Technology Support Resource

Throughout the United States, many examples exist where students have become one of the most indispensable elements of successful technology adoption by faculty. Most often, we teachers think that students enter our classes solely to learn the numerous concepts we present to them. Students are not encouraged to develop their own learning schemes, because they would wander too far outside the parameters we have established as being most important to our showing “Adequate Yearly Progress” in student achievement. However, many schools are breaking the mold. How? This session will provide a multitude of examples of how students have become much more than ‘in the seat learners.” We highlight schools where students are the ones who work closely with teachers to develop interactive instructional materials, to architect scenarios in which teachers can use technology to save many hours of time or to get certain points across to diverse learners in a facile manner. Too, we discuss instances in which students have become invaluable mentors to teachers, helping them to overcome a bevy of technology-related dilemmas. This session is about the power of the student learner when channeled appropriately by insightful educators.

✯ Leadership: A Team Sport

Far too often, classroom instructors don’t see themselves as institutional leaders. Quite to the contrary, they are crucial elements who contribute to the overall success of a venture. In this session, we illuminate key principles that demonstrate the essential nature inherent in the “teacher as leader” concept. Through the use of numerous examples, case studies, scenarios, and even team role playing, we learn how to understand our leadership potential, to nurture it, to apply it properly in circumstances that face us, and to use it in a collegial fashion to advance the institution’s success. We employ the metaphor of sports—a concept everyone can understand—to draw parallels between roles performed by athletes, their coaches, and the team concept and roles performed by members of an educational community. A summative objective is that all attendees see themselves, afresh, as winners on the “Leadership Team.”

✯ Technology Policy:

Keeping Your School—and You—Out of Trouble

The main purpose here is to discuss technology-related policies that guide our decisions. I usually begin with the AUP—a policy with which all or most educators are familiar. Yet very few educator practitioners realize fully what a potentially dangerous thing an AUP is, especially if the school installs filtering software on their computers. I give evidence of the famous landmark U.S. Supreme Court case, Tinker v. Des Moines, which deals with student rights and .. according to the Computer Law Association in Washington, is a great model for a HUGE wave of classaction lawsuits that have the potential for sweeping across the country. Certainly, there exists a plethora of other well-established benchmarks for determining the ill-comprehended perils lurking amidst the deployment of technology policies in school districts across America. Anyway, it’s a chance to discuss really important topics…then to seek others’ technology policies in existence and provide an avenue for sharing, much as we have done with exemplary technology plans over the years.

Effective date: December 17, 2004

Other sessions/workshops available from Dr. Anderson In addition to the keynote address(es) Dr. Anderson delivers, he can conduct breakout sessions for a school (often at no additional charge), especially if these sessions are in conjunction with the keynote event. The following is merely a sampling of the successful sessions he has conducted in the past. Any of these can be delivered either as a keynote, a breakout session, or a workshop. To acquire a more comprehensive listing of other sessions Dr. Anderson has conducted, refer to his résumé at http://www.nctp.com/resume.

✯ Digital Media:

Bring the Excitement of Hollywood to Your Classroom

It is an easily recognizable fact that today’s young people gravitate naturally to highly-interactive, engaging experiences. The proliferation of Game Boys, Playstation 2 units, DVD players, CD players, MP3 players, and the magnitude of media that are used on these devices have all captivated the attention of modern learners. Digital media (video, audio, and interactive devices) represents an extremely powerful teaching and learning opportunity. This can be either as intricate or as simple as we choose. In this session, we will explore a variety of ways digital media can be incorporated into classroom activities with a focus on authentic, relevant, meaningful use. We shall discuss methods of evaluating student (individual and team) efforts with digital media. We shall examine some premiere examples of projects created by both students and teachers elsewhere in the U.S. Digital media represents an area with perhaps the most untapped potential in all of education. This is an exciting session that gets participants actively involved in the process, so it’s fun for everyone in attendance.

✯ Misfits in Your Classroom: Who’s to Blame?

No two students learn in the same way. No two teachers teach the same way. No two schools function in the same way. We, as professional, dedicated educators, know these facts to be true. Yet, for some unexplainable reason, we seem determined to treat all students, teachers, and schools as though they were exactly like all other students, teachers, and schools. We seem reluctant to make allowances for the special “gifts” that creative learners bring to the instructional experience. This very highly popular and successful presentation illuminates real-life examples that show clearly why we should be aware of—and alert for—learners who possess one or more of the multiple intelligences identified in the highly-respected research conducted by Dr. Howard Gardner. Of all the keynote and breakout sessions given by Dr. Anderson, this is clearly the most popular. It is engaging, participatory, and shows the acute importance of seeing the “misfits” not so much as obstructions to learning/teaching, but rather as a strong resource to the entire educational enterprise.

✯ Technology Integration: Bridging the Gap to Your Curriculum

During this session, we will examine a variety of avenues and resources that aid instructors who desire to bring technological solutions into their teaching practice. This may manifest itself in the form of reconfigured lecture patterns. It may come in the form of students’ using technology solutions as they prepare reports, perform research, work with student peers, or a multitude of other ways. In the past, I have delivered this session so it is focused upon particular curricular areas: language arts, foreign language studies, math, science, social studies, and even co-curricular activities, especially in a high school environment. At the higher education level, we poll faculty to determine the panorama of instructional areas and then discover, together, solutions for integrating technologies in a sensible fashion into those areas. In addition to direct curriculum integration, I have led sessions in finding meaningful integration into administration, both at the institutional level, as well as the classroom level. In this session, we incorporate a vast span of devices and resources to reinforce the importance of meaningful, authentic integration.

✯

Technology Planning: Secrets for Evaluating and Revising Your Existing Plan The concept of technology planning is no longer a foreign or novel concept to educators. Most of us have written our technology plans, either for E-Rate funding, for some kind of grant, or to satisfy requirements of our State Department of Education. Far fewer of us, though, have known the proper strategies to use in updating our plans on a regular basis. Currently, many states are requiring school districts to submit updated technology plans, so the process this second or third time around is not nearly as clear-cut as it was when we drafted our first plan. To make matters more complicated, the educational technology professionals have learned more about technology planning than they knew originally, so the expectations placed upon schools are more stringent. This poses quite a dilemma for school personnel throughout the world, as we make attempts at "modernizing" a technology plan that, as it turns out, wasn’t so "hot" in the first place. Participants in this workshop will receive information concerning (and, in some cases, get hands-on experience using) a variety of techniques that have been used successfully by multiple schools and districts to upgrade their technology plans. We shall examine such notions as: technology audits; internal and external scanning strategies; technology self-assessments; web-based evaluation/updating tools. Also, participants will gain great benefit by examining success stories from schools that have updated plans that are working well.

Technology Audits Made Easy (TAME) • a “Seminar for You” that teaches no-stress techniques for demonstrating accountability •

•

If you knew you could make your work easier, would you?

•

If you found a way to show your colleagues a simple, step-by-step method for demonstrating your accountability with technology, would you share it with them?

•

Would you like to know how to take the pressure off yourself and make sure that a technology audit could be conducted in the most cost-effective, thorough fashion in your school?

•

If you discovered a secret that would make your school district actually look forward to an audit, would you like to make sure that everyone in your school understood this secret?

All these things are possible. All are available to you. You can take advantage of this great opportunity by contacting Dr. Larry S. Anderson at NCTP to book your reservation in an existing seminar or to establish and host your own seminar (this provides the best advantage to you). TAME™ seminars are either: 1-day (team approach—“the basics”); or 2-day (team or small group--more extensive and detailed) Registration fees (based on minimum class size of 36—ideal seminar size is 42 people): $99* per person (single registration) per day $79* per person (in a team of 6 or more from one school district) per day $69* per person (in a team of 12 or more from one school district) per day * preregistered, prepaid rate. On-site registration rate is more.

What’s included in your registration fee: • Workbook/Audit Guide • CD w/forms, charts, & electronic resources • 6 hours per day of intense instruction

• Snacks & drinks • Lunch on your own • Interaction with fellow educators

To schedule a seminar in your area (the best “deal” for you and your school) or to sign up for attendance in an existing seminar, contact NCTP via email ([email protected]), phone (662.844.9630), or online (www.nctp.com). Remember, take advantage of these introductory rates. Note: Pricing shown is an Introductory Rate. Prices are subject to change without notice. However, a contracted rate agreed upon by client and NCTP will be honored by both parties. Effective date: December 17, 2004

Order additional copies of this book for your: • teachers • technology director • parents

• administrators • school board • community leaders

Ordering is easy! Choose one of the following methods of getting more copies of the Technology Audit Survivor’s Guide: • Online—go to http://www.nctp.com and click on the link to buy, then download, your electronic copy of the book • Online (hard copy)—go to http://www.nctp.com and click on the link to buy your hard copy. It will be mailed to you via First Class Postage. • Fax—Fill out the form below, then fax it to NCTP at 662.844.9630. Be sure to specify whether you want electronic or hard copy. There is a price difference for hard copy. • Attend a Technology Audits Made Easy™ seminar, led by Dr. Larry S. Anderson, and purchase additional copies or purchase a license for duplication at a reduced rate. If there is no seminar scheduled already in your area, contact Dr. Anderson at NCTP soon to set this up. If you are the host(ess) for a seminar, you will receive a quantity of complimentary copies.

Order blank for Technology Audit Survivor’s Guide Name: ____________________________________________________________________ School/Organization: ________________________________________________________ Address: ___________________________________________________________________ City: _____________________________________ State: _______ Zip: ___________ Email: ______________________________ Phone: ___________ Fax: _____________ Qty: ____ copies (electronic download) @ $30 = $_____________ ____ copies (hard copy) @ $45 = $_____________ [Bulk purchase of book on CD, with license to duplicate, is available at reduced price. Contact NCTP for rates.]

In 1992, Dr. Anderson created the National Center for Technology Planning (NCTP) in response to pleas for assistance from around the globe. He had conducted some important research that revealed the significant importance of a school’s having a well thought out written technology plan. So, through NCTP, he created a wealth of information that was available by free download. Those early efforts were expanded into numerous articles, interviews, seminars, and keynote addresses in multiple nations. After working with thousands of schools and other agencies (government, military, corporate, medical, library, agriculture, and public service) on technology planning, it became quite obvious to Dr. Anderson that some mechanism was needed to help schools demonstrate their accountability for the funding they had received in support of educational technologies. Plus, this needed to be accomplished by incorporating a positive approach to accountability. Thus, in the mid to late 1990’s, Dr. Anderson devised the notion of an educational/instructional technology audit. He has worked on refining his original ideas by staying very closely in touch with educators around the world at all levels and in all kinds of schools. These activities evolved into what you now hold in your hands—a book that is a compilation of thousands of hours of research, information gathering, writing ideas, focus group interviews, online forum debates, and suggestions from practitioners. Dr. Anderson’s biography can be found at http://www.nctp.com/bio.html—and perhaps the most appreciated accolade that has come his way is one that recognizes the many contributions he has made to this profession for many years. He has been called the “Johnny Appleseed of Technology.” For more information on Dr. Larry Anderson or to book him for a speaking engagement, seminar, or consulting services, go to www.nctp.com.

About the Author Dr. Larry S. Anderson began his professional career in education as a junior high school industrial arts teacher in his hometown of Starkville, Mississippi. Actually, by the time he took his first teaching job in 1973, he had gained quite a bit of experience teaching young people. By working with youth in church activities, then especially when he drove a school bus for many years, he learned how to employ the key characteristic of patience as he helped others to develop their skills and interests. Dr. Anderson taught industrial arts for eight years, and then was named Principal of Armstrong Middle School in Starkville, MS, where he served in that role for three years. He was then recruited to join the Technology and Education faculty at Mississippi State University. For 17 years, Dr. Anderson taught and designed courses ranging from Basic Electronics to computer literacy to the full spectrum of courses he created for the graduate Instructional Technology degree program. He retired from university teaching in December 2000 and now devotes 100 percent of his time to public speaking, writing, and consulting. “Dr. A,” as he is affectionately called by many of his former students and colleagues, is a man who experienced many “firsts”: • created the first interactive videodisc in Mississippi, along with Dr. Dan Brook and Keith Tartt; • co-founded the Mississippi Educational Computing Association (MECA), the first and only professional organization in Mississippi dedicated specifically to help teachers and administrator in public, private, parochial, and higher education institutions to learn how to make practical and powerful uses of the technologies that became available; • first President of MECA; • first doctoral student at the University of Alabama to be named Outstanding Graduate Student two years in a row; • first Chairman of the Mississippi Council for Education Technology, an advisory group formed by the MS Legislature in 1994; • first higher education educator in Mississippi to be named an Apple Distinguished Educator; • first higher education educator in Mississippi to be named to the prestigious Impact 30, a group of the 30 most influential people in educational technology in the U.S.; and • helped organize and deliver the first performing arts concert (Mark Applebaum Jazz Trio) that was broadcast from MS on the World Wide Web.

Reflections/Thoughts from this book: On this page, record some of your key thoughts and ideas generated as you worked through this book. Keep these great ideas handy so you can provide leadership to your local audit team and to your other colleagues, both at school and in your community.

Technology Audit Survivor’s Guide

Copyright © 2004—National Center for Technology Planning All Rights Reserved

Page 245


December 8, 2005 April 15, 2005 January 31, 2006

Broadband wireless access available 24x7 throughout

All personnel have portable computing capability

Activity fund operations occur electronically throughout


Evidence

Lessons Learned

Copyright © 2004-2005 • National Center for Technology Planning Unauthorized Duplication, Use, or Distribution Strictly Prohibited Dr. Larry S. Anderson, Founder/CEO, NCTP • [email protected]

Andy Carvin, Comptroller

Porter Roberts, Support

J. Moreau, LRC

Evelyn Briscoe, ITA

DRI

Note: This matrix portrays hypothetical information only. It is not intended to serve any purpose other than illustration.

District-wide professional development

Technology student government created to

Teacher incentives in place for innovative

Virtual mentor online program (homework helpers) deployed fully

March 15, 2005

Time

Broadband network access in each physical plant facility (related to instruction)

Action

Timeframe: AY 2005-2008

Technology Audit Accountability Matrix

Appendix L. Technology Audit Accountability Matrix

Page 244

Appendix K. Benefit Inventory

BENEFIT INVENTORY In the space below, I have listed the many ways my school benefits from a technology audit. I have considered benefits in at least the following areas: • • • •

people community staff extra-curricular

• • • •

finances students facilities fine arts

• • • •

policies faculty curriculum purchasing

• • • •

technology plan infrastructure public relations problem-solving

1.

__________________________________________________

2.

__________________________________________________

3.

__________________________________________________

4.

__________________________________________________

5.

__________________________________________________

6.

__________________________________________________

7.

__________________________________________________

8.

__________________________________________________

9.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________



Page 243

Appendix J. Letter of Audit Verification

Learning Innovation Associates, LLC 465 Holcomb Avenue, Suite G • Raleigh, MS 79494

TO:

Dr. Martin Speights, Superintendent Smallwood School District

FROM:

Dr. Roscoe Feeney, Lead Auditor

SUBJ:

Verification of Technology Audit

Learning Innovation Associates, LLC (hereafter, LIA) conducted a comprehensive technology audit in the Smallwood School District during the period of October 12-28, 2008. This audit was conducted under terms of contract between your school district and LIA. Having completed all aspects of the contracted technology audit, LIA certifies that the audit was successful. Further, we verify that the Smallwood School District rates a passing score on your audit. At the conclusion of our on-site visit, LIA delivered a full written report on the aspects of technology audit where we found commendations and recommendations were warranted. LIA looks forward to continued working relationships with your district in the future. Further, we wish you success in implementing your technology plan so that student learning can accelerate for the good of your entire community. c: Mrs. Rhonda Cotton, School Board President



Page 242

Appendix I. External Auditor Screening Matrix External Auditor Screening Matrix (to be used when selecting an external technology auditor)

Directions: Consider the characteristics listed below, then choose “Yes” or “No,” based upon your perception that the candidate’s evidence of qualification makes his/her suitable for your use. In the “Comments” column, make note of any observations, questions, or special remarks that will help your team in deciding. Finally, in the “Score” column, enter a numeric value (one that is meaningful to you, not that is prescribed by others) that expresses how well the candidate meets the characteristic criterion. You will total this score when you finish so you can have a good measure of how each potential candidate “stacks up.”

Characteristic Y N Comments ❏ ❏ Likeable, approachable personality ❏ ❏ Good sense of humor ❏ ❏ Visionary ❏ ❏ Natural leadership skills ❏ ❏ Classroom teaching experience ❏ ❏ Can provide evidence of school-based experience (that matches or supports your school goals) ❏ ❏ Understands school culture ❏ ❏ Understands school/community connection ❏ ❏ Understands school finance ❏ ❏ Understands importance of curriculum & learning ❏ ❏ Understands & shows an appreciation for school improvement ❏ ❏ Healthy philosophy regarding special populations ❏ ❏ Good organizational skills ❏ ❏ Task-oriented (but not excessively—can still enjoy mingling with teachers, students, and others) ❏ ❏ Works in a timely fashion ❏ ❏ Technology expertise in alignment with (or in excess of) your needs ❏ ❏ Free of any conflict of interest problems ❏ ❏ Operates independently from any federal, state, or local agencies, as well as the local school Effective public speaker (useful for speaking to community and media) ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ Writes in a clear and effective style ❏ ❏ Has earned respect from peers in his/her field (demonstrates impeccable character) ❏ ❏ Honest ❏ ❏ Demonstrates integrity ❏ ❏ Makes decisions quickly ❏ ❏ Familiar with current & emerging trends in technology, especially used in learning. TOTAL (tally the number of Yes & No boxes. Also, Score sum the score column) TOTAL You may want to “weight” some of these items that are worth more to you than others, then use a “multiplication factor” in determining scores on individual characteristics. Then, after you have an overall score, you can determine cutoff values for the candidate pool. Candidate selected as a finalist?



Score

Page 241

Item

Serial No.

Type equip. (computer, printer,

Purchase Date

Planned Obsolescenc e Date Cost

DRI: __Margaret Goolsby, Director of Technology___ Source of funds

Location

Date:

Technology Department Inventory Summary Intended Purpose

Actual use

Appendix H. Technology Department Inventory Summary



Page 240

Appendix G. Sign-off Sheet

Smallwood School District We, the undersigned, agree that the technology audit of the Smallwood School district has, with the full and energetic support of all parties, been: √ approved by local administration and school board; √ completed by the local audit team, as well as the external audit team of Learning Innovation Associates, LLC; and √ reported to local school personnel, community, administration, and school board by the external audit team of Learning Innovation Associates, LLC Parties: Dr. Martin Speights, Superintendent

Date

Mrs. Rhonda Cotton, School Board President

Date

Dr. Roscoe Feeney, President Learning Innovation Associates, LLC

Date



Page 239

Appendix F: Interview Synthesis Form [Note: This is a sample form that could be used in an interview held by either a local or external auditor. This sample interview is conducted with a teacher to obtain his/her perceived value of technology-oriented professional development.]

Interview Synthesis Form Interviewer:

Date:

Interviewee:

Begin Time:

Occupation:

End Time:

Purpose/Topic of Interview: Interview occurred: ❏ alone ❏ online Interview form: ❏ oral

❏ in a group

❏ face-to-face ❏ via phone

❏ other __________________________________

❏ written only

❏ oral & written

❏ other ______________________________________________ Core questions (“starters”) • • • •

Have you attended professional development in the last academic year? If so, how many? _________ Were any sessions related to technology? Was the quality of the technology pro-d sufficient that you were able to improve any part of your teaching? • Were all presenters of high quality? (expertise, delivery style, ability to connect theory with practice, involvement of attendees in pro-d activities) • Have you attended any professional conferences related to technology during the past year? (If so, which ones?) • Did your school support your attending a professional meeting to learn about technology? • Who in your district coordinates professional development? • How has professional development improved teaching/learning in your school? • What specific skills, strategies, and understandings did you gain from pro-d? • How, specifically, did pro-d benefit you? • What technology pro-d strategies resulted in improved student achievement? • If you could select just one technology pro-d session to repeat so that it would help your teaching more, what would it be? Why? • … Common/recurring theme(s): Unexpected findings: Discrepancies/disparities:


Y

N

Y

N

Y Y

N N

Y

N

Y

N

Comments:


Page 238

Appendix E. Technology Plan Alignment Form

Technology Plan Alignment Form Major/Key Focus Elements

Tech Plan Ref. (p. #)

Target Date

Evidence from Practice

Congruence? (Y/N)

63% of teachers have completed. (2/1/2005) 4 of the 7 campuses have this currently (2/1/2005) Only in sparse instances do lesson plans address technology Supt. has stated a commitment to this; few school budgets, though, line item technology

Y

• All teachers will complete 6 hrs. of technology-oriented professional development • Each school campus will have ubiquitous networking capability

27

4/15/2005

38

6/1/2005

• 80% of students will receive technology-enriched instruction from their teachers

19

1/8/2005

• All school budgets will reflect a strong commitment to technology for learning

7

6/28/2005

Y

N

N

• • • •



Page 237

Appendix D. Local Team Document Inventory Form

Document Inventory Form Local Technology Audit Team

Level I ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★

II

★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★

Document Commitment Letters - from school board - from Superintendent Personnel Plan & Report - Professional Development Plan & Report Curriculum/Learning Plan & Report Facilities Plan & Report Funding/Budgeting Plan & Report Technology Policies Report E-Rate Report Compliance Report Inventory Reports - Computers - Peripherals - Network - Other Devices Budget: Allocations & Activity Upgrade Reports - Hardware - Software Infrastructure Plan & Report Community Involvement Report External Funding Report Health & Safety Plan & Report Security Plan & Report Examples of Student Work (w/technology) Examples of teachers’ using technology Welcome Letter to Auditors Schedule of Activities for Auditors


Collected


Ready for viewing

Page 236

E-Rate Report

    

- E-Rate discount plans appear clearly in the technology plan. - Evidence that E-Rate participation has been approved by State Education Agency. - Evidence that the technology plan has been evaluated by an external entity, in accord with E-Rate regulations. - Evidence that student achievement has improved as a result of E-Rate funds inflow. - etc.

School/Community Participation

 

- Focus groups (parents, students, teachers, administrators, staff, business leaders) have been formed and are functioning. (Evidence) - etc.

Other

 

- Infrastructure readiness—the school networking facilities for High-Speed Internet (HSI) are working well in order to support local team and external audit team activities. - etc.



Page 235

Technology Plan

     

Elements: - Easily locatable in key offices, etc. (accessible to teachers, administrators, staff, community). - Available online. - Major goals/objectives (3-8) are identified easily very early in the document. - “Targets” (what you plan to do--strive for) are easily identified. - Tight correlation is evident between what is stated in the plan document and what is witnessed as activities in the school. - Evidence of technology use philosophies stated in the plan is found in the curriculum.

School Organization



- A school organizational chart, showing chain of command, reporting lines, and information flow is provided.

 Personnel Plan

  

- A thorough report on all employees (associated in any way with instructional or administrative technologies) is provided. - Evidence of hiring procedures appears clearly. - etc…

Curriculum/Learning Plan

   

- Evidence of technology integration into the curriculum (via lesson plans) in an authentic, meaningful manner. - Evidence of technology use by students in their learning activities (projects, etc.). - Evidence that teachers are employing technologies in their instructional practices. - etc…

Facilities Plan

    

- Evidence that the school makes an effort to keep facilities safe. - Evidence that the school has invested appropriate funding to ensure that facilities support pragmatic use of technologies. - Evidence that schools have a long-range plan for facilities maintenance and improvement. - Evidence that facilities accommodate disabled individuals. - etc.



Page 234

Appendix C. Technology Audit Checklist

Technology Audit Checklist Audit Level: I II (circle one) Date: _______________ School: _____________________ Local Audit Leader: _______________ _____________________ Lead Auditor: ___________________ [Note: This checklist is designed and offered as merely a sampling of considerations that audit teams and auditors will face. As you create a checklist for your use, you will want to add numerous components tailored to your situation.]

Criterion

Comments

Commitment

 

 

- A letter from the School Board indicating their commitment to fund the audit and to support its outcomes is available for inclusion in audit document collection. - A letter from the local Superintendent indicating commitment to support the technology audit by leading the local effort, in the form of coordinating selection of initial committees. The letter also indicates his/her support of audit outcomes. - A document room, established by the school in support of the audit, is designated as a central meeting point for use by auditors, as well as a location to host interviews, etc. - The local school audit team has compiled a comprehensive collection of data, anecdotes, and evidence to support the technology audit.

Vision Statement (for tech use)

    

Elements: - Vision statement is easy to locate in school documents. (Technology Plan) - Vision statement is easy to understand. - Evidence of vision is addressed in tech planning goals. - Evidence of vision is addressed in tech planning activities. - Evidence of vision is addressed in tech planning funding/budgeting.



Page 233

Employee

School

Area(s) of Certificatio n Area(s) of Assignment

Class of Certification Total yrs. service Total yrs. In this district

Yrs. In current position Degree(s) held

Degree area(s)

Yr. of most recent degree/cert.

Smallwood School District • Personnel Report Currently in area of cert? (Y/N)

Appendix B. Personnel Report Form



Page 232

Appendix A: Audit Levels Comparisons

Technology Plan

Facilities Plan

Curriculum/ Learning Plan

Compliance

Level I Correlation: tech plan with budget/funding

Growth elements

["challenge," “expansive"]

Technology Plan

Personnel assessment/ evaluation

Facilities Plan

Correlation: tech plan with budget/funding

Technology Policies


E-Rate

Compliance


Technology Policies

Inventory Report: Other Devices

Inventory Report: Network

E-Rate

Level II Growth elements


Inventory Report: Computers

Inventory Report: Peripherals

Infrastructure Plan & Report


Facilities inspection

External Funding

Budget: Allocations & Activity

Health & Safety

Upgrades: Hardware & Software

Security Plan & Report


Community Involvement

Correlation: Software & Hardware

Integration of Essential Components

Page 231

Appendices



Page 230

15.3 Links: • American Institute of Certified Public Accountants — http://www.aicpa.org • AuditNet: Resources for Internal Auditors — http://www.auditnet.org/ • Consortium for School Networking — http://www.cosn.org • IT Audit, a service of the Institute of Internal Auditors — http://www.theiia.org/itaudit/ • National Center for Educational Accountability — http://www.nc4ea.org • National Center for Technology Planning — http://www.nctp.com • The Institute of Internal Auditors — http://www.theiia.org/



Page 229

15.2 Reference List: [Note: I do wish very much that I could offer you a long list of references on the topic of technology audits in schools. However, as I have mentioned previously, there has been almost nothing of a substantive nature written on this particular topic. While you will find a considerable amount of writings on topics such as accountability, school leadership in technology, and similar issues, we just don’t have much of anything at all—until this book—available to help us move through technology audit processes. NCTP, like several other organizations and individuals, has released helpful documents on topics like technology planning, technology administration, and school improvement via technology. I have not included any of those here, because my goal is to focus upon technology audit, alone. I covet your assistance in locating more references. If you will share them with me, I certainly will include them in future editions of this book, as well as via the NCTP web site. I have spent many weeks searching through online databases, search engine results, and professional publications in an attempt to find something. The majority of what can be found is some mention of technology audit, usually buried deep within an article or some education agency policy statement. We practitioners simply don’t have much to draw upon—until now!]

• Gardner, Henry B. (Winter 2000). Technology Audits … Grappling with Accountability. Technos: Quarterly for Education and Technology. • Ysseldyke, J., Krentz, J., Elliott, J., Thurlow, M. L., Erickson, R., & Moore, M. L. (1998). NCEO framework for educational accountability. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. Retrieved [December 15, 2004], from the World Wide Web: http://education.umn.edu/NCEO/OnlinePubs/Framework/Frame workText.html • Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation — http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/jc/ (this is included as a reference, because the JCSEE has published documents on their site)



Page 228

3.

What does my audit trail look like? Who is the DRI (Directly Responsible Individual)? How will this affect policy from here on?

4.

Are there some new (or revised) policies, procedures, or operational characteristics?



Page 227

15.1 Frequently Asked Questions General 1.

What is the relationship between a technology audit & tech policies? Are there any policies in place that relate directly to auditable items, concepts? What policies would we recommend to be developed, evaluated? Is the update/examination/revision schedule for tech audit policies different from other policies?

2.

What does an audit cost a school? What is its monetary value to a school? Is there a calculable cost-benefit ratio?

3.

To whom is an audit valuable? How? In what way(s) does that party perceive it to be successful?

4.

What is the "shelf life" of an audit? How long will this audit serve you before a new audit is called for?

5.

To whom must audit results be reported? How frequently? Who in the district is responsible for this?

Phase Two—Self-Targeted 1.

Equipment/software purchase Can I substantiate my purchase? That is, can I show where the purchase fits into and enhances the functionality of the technology plan?

2.

Do I have a well-established, broadly understood tracking system in place to track all technology purchases and activities?



Page 226

15.0

Bibliography/Resources This section of the book is devoted to a limited compilation of resources, tools, and ideas designed to aid you as you anticipate your technology audit. Perhaps this format is a bit different than what you are accustomed to when you see a bibliography/reference section. That’s okay, though, because our purpose here is much less about having absolutely correct formatting than it is about giving you excellent ideas and materials that will bring positive energy to your audit activity. Enjoy! Then, when you find something new to contribute to others, just send it to us (email to [email protected]) and we will compile your input, then distribute it in future versions of this book (yes, there will be future editions of this book, because we all are learning as we go and I want to share with you as much as we can gather during the coming months and years), as well as on the NCTP web site (http://www.nctp.com). The first set or resources is a set of questions that you and your local team can use to guide your work, initially. As you move through the various phases of your audit, you will think of additional questions, so please send them along.



Page 225

Reflections from Chapter 14.0 •

What concept(s) in this chapter did you find particularly provocative?

•

What concepts can you take back to your school and share with your colleagues?

•

List several things you will do as a result of information in this chapter.

•

Record, in the space below, your thoughts from this chapter.



Page 224

BENEFIT INVENTORY In the space below, I have listed the many ways my school benefits from a technology audit. I have considered benefits in at least the following areas: • • • •

people community staff extra-curricular

• • • •

finances students facilities fine arts

• • • •

policies faculty curriculum purchasing

• • • •

technology plan infrastructure public relations problem-solving

1. ____________________________________________________________________________________ 2. ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3. ____________________________________________________________________________________ 4. ____________________________________________________________________________________ 5. ____________________________________________________________________________________ 6. ____________________________________________________________________________________ 7. ____________________________________________________________________________________ 8. ____________________________________________________________________________________ 9. ____________________________________________________________________________________ 10. __________________________________________________________________________________ 11. __________________________________________________________________________________ 12. __________________________________________________________________________________ Figure 14.1 Benefit Inventory Form



Page 223

appear like magic in your school. Some of them occur as a result of what you and your colleagues do to get ready and to carry out the audit successfully. This reminds me of the excellent adage:

If it is to be, it’s up to me!

Challenge: Help yourself! Invest a few moments in your schools’ success. Turn to the Benefit Inventory Form shown on page 223 and fill that out. Just start writing! I feel sure ideas of how your school benefits from an audit will flock to your mind. Capture these ideas on paper. Then, refer to them often—as you prepare for your audit, during your audit, and afterwards. Refer to your list often. Keep adding benefits to the list. Become a benefits champion!



Page 222

number of schools actually take the time necessary to calculate the total cost of ownership (TCO) relative to not only the purchases they make, but also the expenditures of time, talent, materials, and a host of other resources at their disposal. It is a natural—and potentially dangerous—function of educators that when they are asked, “What does that computer cost you?,” they respond with the purchase price. Or, an example that is really easy to understand is to consider the cost of a printer. We might be tempted to think immediately only of the amount of money we paid for the printer when we bought it. However, a much more comprehensive—and realistic—view is to pause and enumerate all the costs associated with operating that printer. Of course, we would mention things like (assuming, for a moment, that this is an inkjet printer): initial cost; inkjet cartridges; paper; paper holders; surge-protected power strips; specialty paper supplies (labels, etc.); printer stand; network connection; and printer interface cables. Let’s not stop there, however. Surely, if we paused long enough, we would remember other costs necessary to make the printer fulfill our needs: electricity; maintenance; upgrades; technical support personnel wages or salaries; utilities, such as gas or electric heating and cooling for the environment where the printer resides; printer supplies storage cabinet(s); … and the list goes on. If all these items can be quantified, then compiled, we will be able to calculate an actual total cost of ownership. Then, and only then, will we be able to determine sensible avenues your school can take in order to achieve necessary efficiencies. Total Cost of Ownership is a very serious matter. It is a powerful benefit! When a school community can come to grips with TCO, especially as a result of this technology audit, everyone wins. Improvement is a sure by-product of this form of honesty. For more information on TCO, go to the Consortium for School Networking (CoSN) web site at http://www.cosn.org.

Wow! This is so exciting!! The ideas mentioned above are but a few of the many ways in which a technology audit can yield significant benefits. Not all these benefits



Page 221

we all know this to be true—the audit doesn’t really pay for itself. Rather, we are the ones who improve some element(s) of our operation so that our return on that investment—in time, talents, facilities, or people—generates more income than we spent on it. So, it is we who make it pay!) There are so many examples we can imagine in this area and I feel sure you will create your own list of benefits in the realm of finances. Just remember, you would likely not have discovered these financial benefits had your school not engaged itself wholeheartedly in the technology audit. 9. Data gathering techniques — Since your school has had to collect and process so much data, then turn those data into meaningful information, it stands to reason that you will have developed brand new tools and techniques to help you with data collection. Perhaps you have improved the effectiveness and efficiency of existing tools, as well. Maybe your local team members created new data collection forms. Maybe it was a new process that cut the time required for collecting those data significantly Or, it could be that someone devised a relational database utility that allowed data entered at one particular moment to be replicated through many other files (ex: a school name, a computer serial number, a software package license number). 10. Politics — Let’s face it: you, as a school leader, have to be involved in political matters. The number of benefits you acquire in this realm is staggering. As you move through the audit, be ever alert for opportunities to demonstrate to elected politicians at the local, state, and national levels the tremendous value of what your school is doing for society. Hunt for ways to tie your successes to programs or efforts with which the politicians are familiar. If you create a great plan, then work your plan well, you will be able to “feed” great information to politicians in hopes that they will use your words in their legislative deliberations. I feel sure that when you stop to ponder this benefit, you will come up with a long list of ways that your technology audit will enhance your political position. 11. Total Cost of Ownership — This benefit has been saved for last. Why? It is entirely possible that, among all the benefits you can list, none is more revealing than this one. In the research conducted at NCTP, we have discovered that a surprisingly small



Page 220

teachers. In addition, you may find excellent examples of how administrators and staff use technologies to streamline their work. You will be able to demonstrate how these enhanced efficiencies benefit not only your school, but also how they can serve as examples to other schools. As was stated earlier in this book, you and your entire school become excellent, enthusiastic PR agents hunting for every opportunity possible to brag on your school. Plus, the more you have reason to brag, the more reasons there are that surface. So, it’s a cyclical (and enlarging) benefit. 4. Camaraderie — As your personnel have labored diligently on collecting data, writing reports, and preparing for the audit, they have grown stronger, probably, and become a more close-knit “family.” This is a significant long-lasting benefit that you can leverage for many more ways to build your school’s effectiveness. 5 . Self-understanding — No doubt, your entire school community understands itself better. It knows clearly its strengths in the technology arena and can intensify labors that make you stronger. It recognizes its weak points and can work to eliminate them or decrease their impact. 6. Validation — You will gain a clear validation from the external auditors that you are doing some things right. Perhaps you weren’t absolutely sure that the procedures you had been using were the best they could be. So, when the audit team compliments your efforts in a particular area, that validates your hard work. For example, you may have conducted a reallocation of resources, hoping that your plan works. Auditors may commend you on this, so now you know you’re on the right track. A great benefit to you! 7. Efficiency — Your audit may point out some areas in which you could increase your efficiency, thereby resulting in a cost savings. Or, you may gain an efficiency of time. Regardless, having someone externally come in and scrutinize your operations may yield a significant, long-term, positive benefit. 8. Financial — Every education leader has to be concerned with saving money, finding new sources of income, and maximizing the dollars you do allocate. A comprehensive technology audit has the potential of paying for itself in very short order. (Actually—and



Page 219

14.0

Benefits of a technology audit

Beginning on page 63, we examined a few of the benefits that can result from a Level I audit. In this section, our purpose is to aggregate all levels, scopes, and forms of technology audits so that we can step back and look at the overall benefits. Remember when we started this journey and we talked about how audits, in a traditional sense, have a negative connotation? Well, now that you have been through the materials presented so far, no doubt you have changed your whole way of thinking so that you can envision the positive benefits of participating in a technology audit. Let’s enumerate just a few of the benefits you may experience as the result of your recent technology audit. This is only a partial list and the items are in no particular order. 1. Information storehouse — You have amassed a significant quantity of data about your school. These data are now organized into a meaningful fashion, so the data are transitioned into information. 2. Advice and insight from external source — With the collection of interactions by external auditors, consultants, and community members, you gained a great deal of insightful perspective. 3. Bragfest! — Your preparations for the technology audit will cause you to search throughout your school for the very best examples of technology-enhanced learning. This will enable you to showcase the superb, compelling work of both students and Technology Audit Survivor’s Guide


Page 218



•


•


•




Page 217

driven results the auditor will be seeking. We can make the auditor’s job easier so s/he can spend time on activities around our school that will help us the most, rather than surprising us with requests for data, waiting on us to gather them, and then investigating. Auditors want to help schools improve; therefore, they will help your school transition from the pure audit phase into a phase where you formalize action based upon the audit team findings and recommendations. Auditors, working with school leaders, may discuss plans/strategies for improvement in the school’s technology plan (format, content, operational ideas). Since we remember how important the technology plan is in the technology audit and how it should be a blueprint for future action, we will welcome this opportunity to sharpen one of our most important tools. Another very positive result of this technology audit is the enhanced relationships that have been built among your local personnel. Any time people are faced with major challenges, they always seem to succeed when common goals are made clear to them. No doubt, this has occurred in your school.



Page 216

toward improvement immediately when their local audit teams begin work and have identified areas where improvement is needed.

High-performing school leaders truly believe

strongly—and act courageously—to support the adage:

Do the things today that others won’t do so you can have the things tomorrow that others won’t have! School improvement is assumed here to be a continuously progressive function. Thus, when the auditor’s final report is delivered, the school will be in gear already to make the good things better and the better things best!

13.3 First reports, then action What does a school do after the auditors’ final report is in hand? As we can see, auditors must examine mountains of reports and seek a great deal of information from many people, all in a very short time. Imagine that you were an auditor, going into a school you really didn’t know, and that you had only 3-5 days to gather all these data. It seems like a daunting task, doesn’t it? Knowing the tremendous burden placed upon your auditors (from whom you want to receive the highest-caliber work possible), this is one reason why it helps us to be informed regarding a sampling of the kinds of data-



Page 215

Learning Innovation Associates, LLC 465 Holcomb Avenue, Suite G • Raleigh, MS 79494

TO:

Dr. Martin Speights, Superintendent Smallwood School District

FROM:

Dr. Roscoe Feeney, Lead Auditor

SUBJ:

Verification of Technology Audit

Learning Innovation Associates, LLC (hereafter, LIA) conducted a comprehensive technology audit in the Smallwood School District during the period of October 12-28, 2008. This audit was conducted under terms of contract between your school district and LIA. Having completed all aspects of the contracted technology audit, LIA certifies that the audit was successful. Further, we verify that the Smallwood School District rates a passing score on your audit. At the conclusion of our on-site visit, LIA delivered a full written report on the aspects of technology audit where we found commendations and recommendations were warranted. LIA looks forward to continued working relationships with your district in the future. Further, we wish you success in implementing your technology plan so that student learning can accelerate for the good of your entire community. c: Mrs. Rhonda Cotton, School Board President Figure 13.1 Letter of Audit Verification



Page 214

13.2 Reports filed by auditors The external audit team will be filing several reports with your school upon completion of the formal technology audit. Of course, there is the major final report, but it may contain supplemental documents. Or, the other mini-reports and forms may be included as a part of the main report. This is a listing of the reports and other documents that may be submitted by your external auditor upon completion of the formal audit. 1. Letter of audit verification (send to school client) (sample provided—Figure 13.1 on page 214 & Appendix J)

2. Report on Findings 3. Report on Commendations 4. Report on Recommendations 5. Notice of Closing the Audit 6. Letter to superordinate agency(ies)—Validation of Technology Audit for Smallwood School District This complete package of letters and reports should be submitted to your school and all business closed out no later than 14 days after the completion of the site visit. It is sheer folly to believe that high-performing schools will not have taken any improvement action on their own, prior to the release of the auditor’s final report. As a matter of fact, I believe that most schools (and most schools are high-performing schools) will begin taking positive steps



Page 213

• Technology security usually can be divided into three areas: a) hardware; b) data; and c) people. Does the school demonstrate clearly that they are aware of these areas and engage in policies, procedures, or actions that address them? What evidence supports this? • Has the school identified someone to oversee technology security matters? Who? Who made the designation? • Does the school have any policies for technology security? What evidence is there for this? • How up to date is the security plan? Is it evaluated for revision on a regular, scheduled basis? • What evidentiary artifacts show the school’s commitment to security? • Does the school have in place any contingency plans, in the event of a security breach or problem? • How and to what extent are students involved in discussions involving security? What evidence supports this? • How and to what extent are parents involved in discussions involving security? What evidence supports this? • How and to what extent are teachers involved in discussions involving security? What evidence supports this? • What funds (and how much) are used to deal with security? • What technology upgrades in the past year have been made that deal with security, specifically? What evidence supports this? These are just a sampling of the kinds of question-related results and reports that auditors may be using in the preparation of their final report(s).



Page 212

• Do students believe the school technology environment is a safe environment? What evidence supports this? • Do parents believe the school technology environment is a safe environment? What evidence supports this? • Do teachers believe the school technology environment is a safe environment? What evidence supports this? • Do administrators believe the school technology environment is a safe environment? What evidence supports this? • Do school board members believe the school technology environment is a safe environment? What evidence supports this? • Is there general agreement among these various populations that the school technology environment is a safe environment? Is there a “disconnect” between or among any two or more of these populations regarding their opinions? If so, why is this? Who can explain the disconnect, if/when it is posed to them? • What do the various populations believe “safety in a technology environment” means? What evidence supports this? • Is the technology safety environment in the school a matter of policy, of practice, of tradition, or happenstance? What evidence supports this? • Is there evidence to support the conjecture that the school is interested in, and making active pursuits in, the health and safety concerns where technology use is involved? • Has technology been used in any way to ameliorate any health or safety concerns in the schools (ex: asbestos abatement issues, where wireless networking was used as an alternative to drilling holes in walls to run network wiring)?

Security report (Level II)

✯✯

• Does the technology plan address security? If so, how?



Page 211

✯✯

Community involvement report (Level II) • Has the school defined who it considers “community” to be? What evidence supports this? • Does the school have a plan for involving community members in their technology-related activities? What evidence supports this? • What examples of community involvement appear in this report? • Is there a clear link between the school’s technology plan and community involvement? Is the community mentioned in the plan? Where? How? What activities are related to this involvement? • Is community involvement a mutual partnership between the school and the community, or does it appear to be a one-way street? What evidence supports this? • Does the community involvement report indicate that the school has attempted to identify technology-related talents within the community? What evidence supports this? • How frequently does the school, in some fashion, contribute technology prowess to the community? What evidence supports this? • Who has been given responsibility for coordinating community involvement activities associated with technology? • Have community involvement activities resulted in any financial benefit to the school? If so, what, how much, how often, and by whom? Find artifacts to support this.

✯✯

Health and safety report (Level II) • Do schools “appear” safe? Do you have data in your student management system that indicate any accidents, especially technology-related, occurring in your schools? • Do schools “appear” healthy? What evidence can you provide from your student management system related to student absenteeism related to anything involving technologies?



Page 210

• Does the infrastructure plan include provisions for upgrade? • Does the infrastructure plan include operational policies? • Does evidence exist that the infrastructure has been maintained well in the past? — upgraded, as needed and appropriate? What evidence supports this? • Is there a discernable link between the technology plan and the infrastructure plan? How? What evidence supports this? Are there documentary examples to support this? • Who has been given responsibility and authority for the infrastructure? What evidence supports this? • Does the infrastructure plan state clearly the way in which it supports instruction—by design, by policy, by practice? What evidence supports this? • How does the infrastructure support administrative functions? What examples/evidence exist to support this?

✯✯

Upgrades report (Level II) • Does a plan exist to address upgrading of technology assets? • Does the upgrade report include reference to teachers’ upgrading degrees or certification that pertain to their technology-oriented teaching? • Who has responsibility for preparing the upgrade report? Is there a correlation between this responsibility (for the report) and a responsibility for upgrades, themselves? • Are upgrading decisions made unilaterally, or is there some form of consensus-based decisioning included? What evidence supports this?



Page 209

Level II audit results

✯✯

Inventory reports (Level II) • Are all hardware, software, and network electronics components that are on inventory accounted for? • Is the chain of responsibility/authority for hardware and software readily apparent? • If so, is this uniform across the school, or is there a “division of labor” approach—different people responsible for different things? • Was the inventory report you were given up to date? When was it last revised? How often is it revised, updated? • To whom in the school is this inventory report made available? • Is the report published in written or electronic form? • Is the school network utilized in maintaining the immediacy and accuracy of the report? • Who is responsible for internal inventory of technology assets? • Does an observable link exist between the technology plan and technology inventory? • What is the ratio of technology assets for instruction vs. administration? • What plan does the school have for obsolescence of technology assets? What evidence exists to support this?

✯✯

Infrastructure plan (Level II) • Does a thorough plan exist for a structured network? evidence supports this?



What

Page 208

certifications (A+, MSE, Cisco Networking, Apple Certified Technician) that are expected and often necessary for the type work they perform in the school? • Does the personnel plan interface with the technology plan, especially as it relates to recruitment, hiring, and placement procedures that are associated with technology integration? • Are personnel given incentives through the personnel plan for strengthening their technological prowess? • Are the proper personnel in the right positions performing the right jobs with/for technology? What evidence supports this? • Has the technology plan been used to reassign some teachers or other personnel? If so, what are/were the district reasons for this? Does the school provide evidence to support this? • Does the technology plan speak clearly and specifically about personnel? What is the evidence? In what ways does the technology plan reference personnel?



Page 207

• Are technology policies communicated to school personnel? If so, how? How often? • Are policies relevant and up-to-date? How is this substantiated? • Are policies developed by consensus, mandate, or another method? What evidence supports that? • Are technology policies referenced in the technology plan? What evidence supports this? • Has the school been successful in demonstrating that they delineate clearly policy from procedure? What definite examples support this? • What evidence exists to show that the school board is involved in technology policy?

E-Rate (Levels I & II)

✯ ✯✯

• What is the school’s discount rate? What is the source of that evidence? • For what are E-Rate funds expended? What evidence supports this? What is the source of that evidence? • Does the school designate a particular individual to coordinate ERate efforts in the school? Where is that documented? • How does the technology plan speak to E-Rate? • Has the school planned for any contingencies, in the event that ERate funding discontinues or is delayed? What evidence supports this?

✯ ✯✯

Personnel (Levels I & II) • Are all personnel certified appropriately—teachers who need computer education or similar certification for their instructional tasks? Do technical support personnel possess the specialized



Page 206

• Does a floor plan or site map exist for each building—and do the plans show locations of all pertinent technology resources? • Do facilities support technology-based learning or do employees have to work around the facilities? • Are facilities referred to in the technology plan? Did school leaders point this out or did auditors have to discover this information on their own?

✯ ✯✯

Budget/Funding (Levels I & II) • Does the school budget include a line item for technology? • Are district funds sufficient to support technology-based learning? • How reliant is the school on external funding for technology? • Does the school have evidence that grants and other external funding sources are pursued that will expand the leverage of existing school funds? • What evidence exists to show that budgeting and funding are sufficiently an important part of school goals that they are mentioned in the technology plan? • Purchases are important to technology. Is there documentation to show the “decision path” when money is spent on technology? • How much influence does the technology director exert when technology funds are spent? Is s/he a “control freak” with money or does s/he welcome input from school personnel when purchases are made?

✯ ✯✯

Policies (Levels I & II) • Does the school have any technology policies? What are they? Where do they exist?



Page 205

• Is it clear that somebody in the school has responsibility for evaluating, updating, and revising the technology plan? • Is the plan a static, paper-based plan, or is it a living digital document?

✯ ✯✯

Curriculum plan (Levels I & II) • Is it clear and easy to see where technologies are used, in a natural and authentic way, in teaching and learning? Has the district provided examples to support this? • Is the curriculum plan “connected” with the technology plan? What evidence supports this? • Is any one person (or committee) designated by the school to oversee the integration of technology and curriculum? • Is there a documented “connect” between upgrade of the curriculum and upgrade of technologies? • Do curriculum and technology appear to be integrated seamlessly, or does either one or the other appear to be “tacked on”? • Do professional development activities exist to promote and support the pragmatic use of technologies in the curriculum? • Is there evidence to support that the curriculum director and the technology director meet to discuss strategies for using one to support the other?

✯ ✯✯

Facilities plan (Levels I & II) • Are buildings safe—or appear that way? Do you have data to indicate how frequently building safety comes into play? Do you maintain records of accidents in buildings, repairs that restore buildings to a safe condition, reports from personnel that indicate problems with buildings—and the subsequent resolution of those reported problems?



Page 204

13.1 Results categories from auditors Auditors will have examined many documents and conditions during the pre-visit and on-site visit stages. When the time comes to provide their reactions, they will share reports that reveal to us how they answered some of the questions below. Since it is possible for a school to have either a Level I (✯ ) or a Level II audit (✯✯ ), we will separate the questions according to levels. You may want to refer to the diagram on pages 113-114. Technology plan (Levels I & II) • Is it clear? • Is the plan current and up-to-date? • Do the main goals and objectives of the plan appear in a concise fashion early in the document? Is there an overall mission? Does it support the district’s mission? • Was the plan developed by a broad base of stakeholders or by one person? Did the school provide evidence to support this? • Does the plan emphasize student achievement? Does it support instruction? • Has the plan addressed ways that it interfaces with the other plans, policies, and procedures in the school? • Does the plan appear to be workable? • Is funding addressed? Is there a connection between funding and learning activities and outcomes? • Is an evaluation component included?



Page 203

lay it on the table while several others are sitting with you. Open your plan and, within 60 seconds, tell me exactly and precisely what that document says you will accomplish during the tenure of the plan. Better yet, give your plan to someone else who is not familiar with it—or even your district—and ask them to tell you, within 60 seconds, what you intend to do. Far more often than not, the individuals in the workshops are at a total loss to convey what the plan’s central focus is. The ideas are buried in a bunch of narrative information. This is really not a condemnation; rather, it’s just the nature of the beast, because we educators tend to cloud simple facts with effervescent rhetoric (see what I mean??). My encouragement to you is to pull out the essential elements of your plan and position them clearly in bullet lists very early in the document. Or, you may decide to create some kind of graphic element that shows what you will accomplish via your plan. Recently, I encountered a school technology planner who suggested asking someone with “fresh eyes” to evaluate your plan by reading the first three pages, then report to you the word they saw the most frequently. Was it learning? Computers? Money/dollars? Students? That will tell you a great deal about the condition, authenticity, and practicality of your technology plan. If your plan is a “mush” of facts and “educationese,” how do you think the auditors will deal with it? Let’s remember that the technology plan is the premiere document that auditors will use in their audit, because the plan should function as your blueprint for action.



Page 202

13.0

Results/Reports

Now that your technology audit is over, the real work begins. You have learned some strategies that work and don’t work…. One of the best imaginable results of your technology audit is your realizing that you now have a solid, valid reason for revising your technology plan.20 This time, when you revise your plan, your desire will be to streamline the plan—to make it more concise, more usable, more applicable to the way you use technology on a daily basis for instruction and administration.

Your new technology plan will have a fresh,

sharpened focus—a focus upon your vision and the efforts required to make visions become reality. Develop major "pillars" of your new technology plan. You may not want to call the key elements of your plan “pillars,” but call them whatever you wish. The main point, though, is to arrive at a clear, more focused, more defensible direction for your plan. Too, your plan should be simple and communicable. Many times, as I have conducted workshops on how to “sharpen up” a technology plan, I have asked participants to bring their technology plan, 20

NCTP offers a very helpful manual, Visions & Revisions: A Workbook for Updating and Evaluating Your Technology Plan, that will walk you through a scenario for taking your existing technology plan and making it better in the next version. This is a three-part workbook that you and/or a group will be able to use for preparing your revised plan. You can download the manual at http://www.nctp.com, then click on the proper links.



Page 201



•


•


•




Page 200

• Convene meetings with the local planning teams • Convene meetings with the district administrators, especially principals and technology coordinators) • Convene focus groups (community teachers, etc.) • Using pre-established and agreed-upon forms, evaluate the technology plan for alignment with real practice [using, as a basis, examples provided by teachers] Post-visit • Search for forms, surveys, etc., that other districts or organizations may be using to help them in their audit activities so this information can be sent back to the school client • Continue to record observations, in a general, broad-brush fashion, gained during work with the school • Share a collection of “lessons learned” in each audit conducted so these comments can go into a large, and growing, community of auditable organizations

12.4 Summary Now, with this information solidly in your hands, you can be assured of a much more profitable relationship with your auditor. All parties involved in the audit will have a clear understanding of what is expected from each player. The result? Greater school improvement! Isn’t that the entire purpose of this technology audit?



Page 199

• develop, modify curriculum • dictate change—the auditor’s role is to prepare findings and suggestions, not dictate or provide very negative-sounding reports!

12.3 How does an auditor prepare for the audit? In addition to the “menu of expectation” presented above, it may be helpful for you to review a few activities that may occur as the auditor gets ready for the audit. Some of these functions occur prior to a physical visit, others take place while the site visit is underway. Still other preparation events occur after the visit has taken place and as the auditor is winding down the formal phase of this audit. Pre-visit • Correspond regularly, in writing or via phone, fax, or email, with the district administration or their designees • Read all documents and supporting materials that the district sends • Fill out pre-visit forms (reflective of reading documents and examining other supporting artifacts) that help guide the school through early phases of the external audit [Purpose: to conserve as much time as possible; to streamline the audit process when auditors arrive on the school scene) • Prepare (if necessary), submit, retrieve, and interpret/evaluate surveys of people within the school community. During visit • Convene meetings with the superintendent



Page 198

• Deliver presentations, written and oral, to school leaders, teachers, students, and the community that portray audit results and improvement strategies • Submit report to superordinate authority Perhaps this list provides a general overview of what you may expect from an auditor. Of course, these items may not reflect exactly what you experience. The point, though, is to give you an example profile of some things that may occur. You have the liberty to customize this “task list” to suit your needs. To review a sample schedule of auditors’ activities, refer to the Schedule

for External Audit: Smallwood School District (Figure 6.2 on page 71).

12.2 What does an auditor not do? It may not be enough for you to know what your auditor will do. Perhaps you, also, need a perspective upon the things that you cannot expect from the auditor. If you and the auditor both agree on the following points, you will avoid many pitfalls that can occur sometimes when people just make assumptions. Your auditor will not/cannot: • provide legal advice • provide financial advice • serve as a mediator • serve as an agency to which an appeal is submitted (appellate)



Page 197

• Accept documents/reports from school client • Compare reports from the local audit team and the school district against the school’s technology plan • Receive, read, compare, and contrast the documentation against what is witnessed (practiced) • Identify areas of success, strength, accomplishment • Identify areas of weakness, non-compliance, omission • Assure school compliance with Federal and State mandates • Travel to school site and inspect, interview multiple “residents” at each site to validate what the local audit team has deduced prior to external auditor’s physical visit • Collect data • Interview students, teachers, administrators, staff, community members • Meet with focus groups • Stay abreast of all pertinent State & Federal laws and guidelines • Identify resources available to help schools • Ferret out examples of student achievement using technology • Investigate areas where shortcoming is alleged, suspected • Organize data, information, findings • Synthesize findings • Interpret data for non-statistical audiences • Prepare final report



Page 196

12.0

What does an auditor do?

12.1 Expectations You’ve hired an auditor. Now, what? What should you do? What should your auditor do? Do you feel like the ball is now in your court and you have to instruct your auditor in what to do next?

No !! During your auditor selection process, you reached agreement with your auditor regarding what would be accomplished. A portion of the agreement specifies what you and the school will do. Another portion details what the auditor will be doing. The following points represent a partial listing of those things in which you can expect your auditor to engage. As you examine this list, you may want to add or customize items so your needs are met more directly. • Negotiate contract with school client—negotiating financial and working condition arrangements so all expectations are clear and can be fulfilled • Work with school to promote high standards—in all areas • Seek alignment between plan and practice—and policy, where appropriate



Page 195



•


•


•




Page 194

External Auditor Screening Matrix (to be used when selecting an external technology auditor)

Directions: Consider the characteristics listed below, then choose “Yes” or “No,” based upon your perception that the candidate’s evidence of qualification makes his/her suitable for your use. In the “Comments” column, make note of any observations, questions, or special remarks that will help your team in deciding. Finally, in the “Score” column, enter a numeric value (one that is meaningful to you, not that is prescribed by others) that expresses how well the candidate meets the characteristic criterion. You will total this score when you finish so you can have a good measure of how each potential candidate “stacks up.”

Characteristic Y N Comments ❏ ❏ Likeable, approachable personality ❏ ❏ Good sense of humor ❏ ❏ Visionary ❏ ❏ Natural leadership skills ❏ ❏ Classroom teaching experience ❏ ❏ Can provide evidence of school-based experience (that matches or supports your school goals) ❏ ❏ Understands school culture ❏ ❏ Understands school/community connection ❏ ❏ Understands school finance ❏ ❏ Understands importance of curriculum & learning ❏ ❏ Understands & shows an appreciation for school improvement ❏ ❏ Healthy philosophy regarding special populations ❏ ❏ Good organizational skills ❏ ❏ Task-oriented (but not excessively—can still enjoy mingling with teachers, students, and others) ❏ ❏ Works in a timely fashion ❏ ❏ Technology expertise in alignment with (or in excess of) your needs ❏ ❏ Free of any conflict of interest problems ❏ ❏ Operates independently from any federal, state, or local agencies, as well as the local school Effective public speaker (useful for speaking to community and media) ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ Writes in a clear and effective style ❏ ❏ Has earned respect from peers in his/her field (demonstrates impeccable character) ❏ ❏ Honest ❏ ❏ Demonstrates integrity ❏ ❏ Makes decisions quickly ❏ ❏ Familiar with current & emerging trends in technology, especially used in learning. TOTAL (tally the number of Yes & No boxes. Also, Score sum the score column) TOTAL You may want to “weight” some of these items that are worth more to you than others, then use a “multiplication factor” in determining scores on individual characteristics. Then, after you have an overall score, you can determine cutoff values for the candidate pool. Candidate selected as a finalist?

Score

Figure 11.1 External Auditor Screening Matrix



Page 193

numerous articles about teaching and learning, particularly as they are impacted by technologies. Maybe s/he has taught multiple professional development sessions where s/he provided leadership to other teachers who are struggling with technology integration issues. The point here is that technology auditors, certainly the lead auditor, are not in the early years of their professional careers. It is not unusual for that person to have twenty or more years of working experience in education and related fields already. Thus, they will bring that vast experience to your school and it will be to your strong advantage. To assist you in the screening process, a sample Auditor Screening Matrix is included as Figure 11.1 on page 193 and again as Appendix I. I hope this checksheet will help you as you make this crucially important decision.



Page 192

Your technology auditor should not have any interests (financial, or otherwise) in the school that would adversely affect his/her ability to be completely objective and unbiased. In addition, there should be no hint of any conflict of interest concerns. The auditor must not be kin to, have any business partnerships with, or engage in frequent social activities with any school employee. The cloud of suspicion just cannot rest upon either the school or the auditor as a result of a relationship that is too close.

• Should your auditor be just like I? Not necessarily, but there also is not anything particularly wrong if an auditor has professional similarities with you. For example, you may be a technology coordinator and the auditor may hold a position as a technology director in a different school. Actually, there may be some benefits if your auditor and you have similar professional profiles. If so, you won’t have to work so hard to communicate concepts or statements of reality. Both of you will have a firm grasp upon the conditions in which you operate. Thus, this fact can be a big help to you. Since the role of the auditor is one of such high calling, it is likely that your auditor, while not being exactly like you now, may at one time have worked as a technology director. Also, s/he may have been a classroom teacher, as well as a university professor, lecturer, author, consultant, and employee of a state education agency. S/he may have written



Page 191

• What understandings should an auditor be able to show me? As you begin conversations with potential auditors, you may want to stay keenly alert and see if the candidate can show you, by words or by practice or by experience, the following:  understanding of school culture  understanding of school-community connection  understanding of personnel and the critical importance of each role  understanding of school finance—and how it impacts student learning  understanding of curriculum as the vehicular framework for learning/achievement  understanding of technology  appreciation for school improvement  ability to write and communicate well  understanding of the influence of various factors upon student achievement  ability to treat interviews confidentially  basic understanding of student management systems There certainly is no guarantee that a candidate for auditor who can show you these things will be the best for you. But, this one thing is for sure: your chances for success with this individual are much greater than with one who doesn’t have the ability or background to show you.

• Should an auditor be independent? Yes! Plain and simple.



Page 190

Second, just because a person has been an auditor doesn’t guarantee that the person is well matched to your needs. And, in the midst of all the pressing decisions that face school administrators, it is just too easy to be hoodwinked even by seasoned auditors. There are other, and more important, considerations. Experience as a classroom teacher is a “must”—if any observations of teaching are a part of the audit. When you select an auditor, perform a background check to see if the candidate has ever taught school or has any kind of classroom-level instructing experience. Now, this is not to say that if a person has never taught school, s/he can’t be hired to be your auditor. However, what if you had a choice between an educator who is quite familiar with the educational uses of technologies and knows a variety of ways that those technologies can be used to enhance student learning…or a person whose main claim to fame were merely a string of lofty-appearing credentials and a track record of experience as a participant in multiple organizational audits? On the surface, this seems like a no-brainer. However, as is the case so many times in our profession, it would behoove you to examine the full panorama of both these individuals’ characteristics (as well as their claims of experience). Why? Because, when you make your final choice, you are turning over the future of your school district to the opinions and reputation of this individual. Your school and its future are too important to take this selection with a grain of salt.



Page 189

conducting the audit is aligned with what you want/need from your audit. As you evaluate potential technology auditors, look for these minimum qualities in that person: •

Honesty

•

Integrity

•

Sense of humor

•

Firm, fair, and friendly

•

Able to make decisions quickly

•

True desire to help schools improve

•

Familiar with current trends, regulations, and practices in education, in general, and educational technology, specifically

• Must I limit my search to only experienced auditors? An auditor doesn’t necessarily have to have been intimately involved in an audit previously. You may find some people or organizations (even professional organizations) who will tell you that it is essential that your auditor has extensive experience participating in technology audits. While this may sound good and pacify their consciences for awhile, it simply is not true! First, if we buy into this false (and harmful) philosophy, then we would never expand the number of auditors available to help you. Plus, this would only protect the “sacred cow” of the fraternity formed by these few self-anointed pundits.



Page 188

their technology plan. The auditor uses the school’s technology plan as the base document, then compares/contrasts other components of the school culture with that technology plan. The auditor will also investigate to assure compliance with regulations. Too, s/he evaluates processes and procedures within the school to determine the effectiveness, accuracy, and legality within the school system. The technology auditor is a person who has earned profound respect among his/her peers in the profession. The audit activity demands absolutely impeccable character on the part of the auditor and any additional members s/he may bring onto a team.

• What qualities should I look for in an auditor? A huge difference exists between a technology auditor and someone you can hire to audit your school! The distinguishing factors may seem miniscule at first; however, when you stop to think about it, they are huge.

Many people, especially those who are accustomed to

performing external consulting work for a school grant, will gladly tell you that they will run an audit for you. Often, they are seeing this mainly as an external funding opportunity for their bank account. But, before you leap at this opportunity, engage in a thorough conversation with this person to ensure yourself that you are hiring a person or group who truly know(s) what they are doing—and that their purpose for



Page 187

❷ International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). 480 Charnelton Street, Eugene, OR 97401-2626. Phone: 1.800.336.5191. Email: [email protected]. Web: www.iste.org ❸ National School Boards Association. 1680 Duke Street, Alexandria, VA 22314. Phone: 703.838.6722. Email: [email protected]. Web: www.nsba.org ❹ American Association of School Administrators. 801 Quincy Street, Suite 700, Alexandria, VA 22203-1730. Phone: 703.528.7000. Email: [email protected]. Web: www.aasa.org ❺ Consortium for School Networking (CoSN). 1710 Rhode Island Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20036-3007. Phone: 866.267.8747 (toll free). Email: [email protected]. Web: www.cosn.org ❻ American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). 1211 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10036-8775. Phone: 212.596.6200. Web: www.aicpa.org

• What is an auditor? It depends upon whom you ask. “Auditor” is a term associated most frequently with accountants, because we think of IRS audits or bank audits or some other kind of financial audit. Even when the school goes through an audit, it is usually an audit of the financial records. Occasionally, a federal program, such as Title I or Special Education will have an audit, but that is mostly an audit to determine if the school is functioning in alignment with regulatory requirements or guidelines. For our purposes here, an auditor is defined as the individual possessing sufficient expertise and professionalism that s/he is hired by a school to conduct a thorough analysis of the ways and extent to which the school is using technologies wisely to accomplish the goals stated in



Page 186

And another…. The job duties for the Sr. Technology Auditor position are as follows: The Senior Technology Auditor will work with other technology auditors to plan and execute information technology audits within the global organization. The Senior Technology Auditor will interact with all levels of information technology management, identifying issues and opportunities, and providing recommendations. Experience in conducting audits in a mainframe and client server environment is highly desirable, as is a working knowledge of the investment management and banking industries.

Goodness! That doesn’t sound much like a person who would be at ease going into a middle school classroom and evaluating a teacher’s teaching methodologies in integrating technologies into a daily lesson, does it? Now that we have gotten over being thoroughly disgusted in our exasperating experience of hunting for an auditor, we return to the original question: Where can we find an auditor? For each school, the process may be slightly different—at least until the realm of technology auditing settles down a bit and becomes more standardized and organized. Until then, you may want to begin with inquiries to some of the following: ❶ National Center for Technology Planning (NCTP). P.O. Box 2393, Tupelo, MS 38803. Phone: 662.833.9630. Email: [email protected]. Web: www.nctp.com



Page 185

I performed this search, I was thinking I might uncover some evidence that would lead me to find a technology auditor with experience conducting audits in America’s schools—and who could demonstrate authentic, relevant credentials as an educational or instructional technology auditor. Not so! In more than 10,800 pages of search results, not one single reference pointed to any resources for finding the kind of technology auditor that we seek. While I confess that I didn’t dig through all 10,000+ pages in great detail, the indication is very clear that technology auditors are, for the most part, engaged in highly technical, and very elaborate, areas, rather than the learning landscape in which we are interested. Yet, I know that we have some quite exceptional educator friends who have experience with tech audits, either as auditors or auditees. It’s too bad their names don’t pop up quickly in these searches. By the way, when I narrowed the Google search to “technology auditor” +education, the number of pages shrank to only 2,140. Alas, still no “meat on those bones.” Job Description At the present time we have immediate needs for full time employees that are able to perform audits of complex Information Technology (IT) programs, controls, and operations. The IT Auditor will be responsible for the design, methodology, and approach of the audit engagement. Experience utilizing government and industry best practices to develop cost-effective, innovative solutions is preferred. Additional responsibilities include providing technical guidance and consultation to other team members and client. Candidates must posses a financial background and CISA (Certified Information Systems Auditor) certification. Furthermore, candidates may be required to pass a background investigation. Requirements: •CISA certification •Bachelors Degree in Accounting, Finance, or a related field •Two plus years in a technology-related role (as a business analyst, information systems auditor, systems implementation specialist, etc.) a plus.



Page 184

11.2 Questions/Considerations for choosing auditors Is it easy to find a good auditor? Not really. Are such people even available? Yes, indeed! Why is it so hard to find an excellent auditor? Only a handful of technology auditors are sound investments for schools to hire.

You may have to ask three or four—or maybe even ten or

twenty—people to recommend someone who will provide a sound balance between information technology and pragmatic infusion into learning. • Where (and where NOT!) should I look for an auditor? If you browse the World Wide Web, you will see many references to an “Information Technology Auditor.” W A AR RN NIIN NG G!!!! That is definitely NOT what we are seeking for your audit! Most often, these individuals, great as they are, will specialize in the “techie” part of technology and will know little to nothing about the other various considerations that you must address (personnel, curriculum, student achievement, community involvement). To illustrate this fact, refer to the actual IT (Information Technology) Auditor job description that follows (on the next page) and see if this looks like the profile of a person who will be able to help your district in the kind of technology audit we are describing in this book. Hardly! These job descriptions were located by performing a simple Google search, using the phrase “technology auditor” as the search term. When



Page 183

because of a particular strength or talent that s/he can bring to the work of the team. Although the school district will not be selecting this person, you should inquire about his/her background and specialties so you know exactly what you’re getting. After all, you will be paying this individual, so you deserve to see his/her credentials prior to the beginning of the audit. 3. Data manager Often, an audit team will require a person whose designated task is the handling of data as they are gathered by the team. Further, this data manager will be the “librarian” for all reports, documents, and artifacts that the school provides.

Often, the data manager will use electronic

spreadsheets and databases to aggregate and arrange data. This is a critically important member of the team, for it is the data that serve to provide substantiation to the many claims and findings that the team reports to the school. Earlier, we mentioned that auditors may use PDAs as good tools for harvesting data. It will be this data manager, then, who performs the syncing of a PDA with the central database server. 4. Others The lead auditor may expand the basic team to include other members on the team for specialized purposes or simply to increase the number of auditors available. The new members may be additional assistants or data managers, or it’s possible that specialists in particular areas (networking, policy, etc.) could be added.



Page 182

comprehensive, authentic technology audit within a reasonable time and at a reasonable cost. A basic external audit team may include as few as three people: the lead auditor, an auditor assistant, and a data manager. Of course, to support audits that occur in larger schools or where the scope of the audit is much broader, the team will be larger. For right now, though, let’s examine briefly what each of these persons does for the audit experience. In the next section of this book, we will discuss in greater detail what these individuals do. 1. Lead auditor Every team must have a leader. The lead auditor is the individual with whom the school has the initial contact. S/he makes all the arrangements with the school regarding the scope, level, and duration of the audit, as well as all contractual agreements. This person coordinates all activities in which other auditors participate. S/he is the liaison person between the audit team and the client school. As well, s/he represents the entire team in all interactions with the community, at large. The lead auditor is responsible for preparing and delivering the final audit report. In short, this individual serves as “CEO” of the external audit team. 2. Auditor assistant The auditor assistant performs functions that support the lead auditor and the other members of the team. The lead auditor may choose this person



Page 181

Yes, it’s true that some schools in the U.S. have engaged in a technology audit. However, their numbers are relatively small and represent a minority of schools. Too, the nature of these audits are so dissimilar that practically no value or conclusions can be drawn from them to aid the nation’s education picture. It’s almost like we were to have a clothing audit, yet the focus of some audits was on the length of skirts while others were focused on the fabric of the clothing and yet still others audited the age of clothing. Now, with such disparity, what conclusions could we draw that would inform, in an authentic manner, the decision making bodies that provide resources to the clothing industry?

Nothing!

Unfortunately, such is the case with technology audits. The individuals who are conducting the audits are fabulous people. They represent terrific organizations. Yet, the downfall of the whole landscape is the disjointed nature inherent with technology audits, in general. That reality is precisely the reason that this book has been written. Now that we agree upon the facts presented here, we move forward with learning how to choose an auditor who will give us meaningful results from their observations.

11.1 Auditor team First, it seems prudent that we step back and examine the makeup of an external audit team. Rarely will your external auditor be just one person operating alone. Most frequently, you will need a team to complete a



Page 180

11.0

Choosing an auditor

Okay, let’s suppose that you have just received approval from the school board to move forward with a technology audit. One of your first steps will be to select an external auditor. Most likely, you will have a team of auditors, not just one. Most likely, too, you will eventually contract with an individual consultant or agency and that firm will organize a team to serve your needs. Critical point: Choose an auditor like you choose a doctor! Find the best one available. Don’t let price be an issue. Remember the adage: Would you buy a parachute at a discount store? Also, if your spouse were going to have surgery, you wouldn’t hunt for the cheapest surgeon. A well-paid auditor who produces high-quality work will be a much more economical venture for you than if you sought an auditor from the discount shelf! The bitterness of poor quality lingers lo-o-o-o-ng after the sweetness of low price is forgotten! Very few educators know how to choose an auditor.

This is no

condemnation, though. Why is this true, then? Because very few educators in the past have really understood what a technology audit is or that they needed one or anything at all about how to go about coordinating an audit. The technology audit idea simply has not been on the national landscape as an essential activity.



Page 179



•


•


•




Page 178

the community, as requested by the superintendent or other chief administrative personnel Summary As you can see herein, there are many and various roles and responsibilities that are to be assumed if this technology audit truly can function to help the schools improve. To the extent that each person and group take their responsibilities seriously and carry them out diligently, the audit will be a delightful experience during which multiple celebrations of excellence can be showcased.



Page 177

Auditors An entire section in this book is devoted to “what the auditors do.” However, the following is a brief synopsis of a few main roles and responsibilities that fall to auditors: • Maintain a professional, unbiased attitude during the technology audit, remembering your purpose for being included in this process and that your goal is to help the school become stronger through its use of technologies • Maintain open communications with school representatives constantly, from the time the auditing contract is signed through the acceptance by the school board of the final, summative report • Receive reports and read them carefully • Ask questions; seek answers • Seek ways that the school can improve as a result of your observations and analysis • Make suggestions as you go along in the audit; don’t wait until it’s over, especially if you see something that you feel can be corrected or improved immediately • Focus on documentable, defensible evidence of how the school’s technology plan is either in or out of alignment with what is practiced in the schools, as you observe it. • Focus on how the technology plan is in or out of alignment with other plans (facilities, personnel, infrastructure, etc.) presented as evidence by the school • Prepare a thorough, yet concise written summative report upon conclusion of your observations and present it to the superintendent and then, at his/her scheduling, to the school board • Prepare an oral presentation regarding your audit findings and be ready to deliver that to the school board, school employees, and



Page 176

understanding in the community regarding the effective use of technologies in the schools) • Contact state and federal lawmakers to inform them of the schools’ successes—and invite them to be guests at school technology galas

Support staff Members of the support staff have many and varied responsibilities, depending upon their particular job functions. When technology audit time arrives, the following is a listing of a few of the responsibilities these people can take on: • Assist in hosting auditors when they visit • Help to coordinate the scheduling and use of school resources during the audit • Serve as “safety scouts” during the site visit, especially, ensuring that all precautions are taken to protect students, employees, visitors, and equipment • Compile, then report, examples of how they use technologies to aid their work—to enhance their productivity or maybe some application that they just really like • Report examples of how, as they are working in the schools, they see students using technologies wisely and/or teachers applying technologies in a meaningful way • Provide suggestions to school decision makers about how technology can be used in a better way to streamline the school’s work



Page 175

voices of students. Most of the time, students are unblemished by “the system,” hence, they just tell the plain truth. The following are just a few ways in which students can exhibit their responsibilities as a part of the school technology audit: • Help teachers compile an "evidence pool" of student work that demonstrates how well they use technology to support and enhance their learning • Report any successes–or failures–in the way the schoolprovided technologies work to support learning • Serve as “pages” or “runners” for auditors or members of the local audit team • Serve on district technology advisory groups so the school leaders will have the benefit of students’ perspective • Convey to your teachers and administrators your opinions of how the technologies are being used in an authentic way by teachers

School board member(s) Just a few of the responsibilities that school board members can assume in the technology audit process are: • Authorize and allocate funds (for both the technologies, themselves, as well as for the audit) • Approve policies that promote the effective and efficient use of instructional and administrative technologies • Accept the final report from the auditors • Participate in local forums and town hall meetings regarding the audit • Encourage people in their “sphere of influence” to attend audit meetings and to volunteer to help the school (this will broaden



Page 174

•

Test all computer hardware and software that might be checked during the on-site visit by auditors to make sure that all components are in working order and are capable of being used to support instruction

Parents/Community Parents and community members will make significant contributions to the school’s audit project if they will: • Volunteer time and talents to help the school achieve a meaningful audit • Demonstrate a willingness to serve on advisory committees • Report any examples of technology-related project work that students may have created at home • Report any comments that students make at home regarding the effectiveness or lack of effectiveness associated with any computer hardware, software, network, or any other technology application at school • Assist the district in hosting and/or entertaining external auditors when they come for their site visit • Promote, among their peers in the community, the events when the district or the auditors deliver presentations to the public in which they give information regarding the technology audit

Students When we examine the effectiveness of instructional technologies, we may read many words written and hear many speeches delivered by educators, but we will never read or listen more closely than when we encounter the Technology Audit Survivor’s Guide


Page 173

will follow his/her leadership. If, however, the tech coordinator adopts a negative attitude, a failed audit is almost assured. A truly effective technology coordinator will not stop at the short list of roles and responsibilities enumerated in this book. Rather s/he will be involved in an aggressive search to do anything necessary that will assure a successful audit. S/he realizes that success breeds success and when the audit is successful, it serves as a reflection of how the entire school community pulled together for a common goal that will reap significantly positive benefits for many years to come. Classroom teacher(s) As is true with any part of the instructional purpose of a school district, the classroom teacher is at the core of importance in the school’s achieving its essential goals. Thus, in a comprehensive technology audit, the entire school’s image depends upon the collection and submission of compelling evidence by teachers. When external auditors arrive at the school site, audit teams leaders should make sure that auditors get to spend as much time as possible with classroom teachers so they can truly see the extent to which those elements that are dreamed of in the technology plan are coming to a full and fruitful life through efforts of the teachers. In addition to the “ordinary” things teachers do, they have these additional responsibilities as a part of the technology audit: •

Collect and submit examples of student work using technology

•

Collect and submit examples of teaching with technology

•

Check curriculum plans to locate examples of alignment with the school tech plan



Page 172

coordinator is a district-wide position, the roles and responsibilities naturally will encompass audit items for the entire district. It follows, then, that a building-level coordinator will be responsible for only that particular site. Yet, both levels of coordinators will need to work extremely closely, and in conjunction with the local audit team, to ensure that system-wide audit functions flow smoothly and correctly. The following is a brief enumeration of responsibilities s/he must manage before, during, and after the technology audit: •

Ensure the technology plan is up to date and accurate

•

Gather building blueprints or floor plans that will be used in conjunction with the facilities plan

•

Keep the Superintendent (and other appropriate administrators) informed of audit status at all times

•

Communicate with district personnel regarding preparation for the audit, progress during audit, and results after audit

•

Coordinate technology inventory activities

•

Assure auditors of required network access

•

Assure the collection of examples to verify that the technology plan and curriculum plans are in alignment

•

Proofread the local team report for accuracy and completeness prior to its going to external auditors

•

Be prepared to assume a bold leadership role in carrying out any recommendations that emerge from the audits

Perhaps more than any other single member of the school leadership team, the technology coordinator is pivotal in the success of your audit. If s/he assumes a positive attitude about the audit and what its results can mean to the school, chances are heightened that the entire school community



Page 171

The principal, then, will be able to become the eager reporter—that one who gets to tell the story to all who will listen. S/he will compile a comprehensive report detailing how the school, in its entirety, is using technology meaningfully. The principal becomes not only the #1 cheerleader, but also the news anchor! 7. Other responsibilities — In addition to the specific areas mentioned above, the principal will be judged by the local district audit team and the external auditors with respect to his/her effectiveness in the following areas: •

safety

•

cleanliness

•

orderliness

•

timeliness

•

organizational skills

•

accuracy

•

leadership effectiveness

Technology Coordinator(s) Many of the responsibilities that accrue to superintendents and principals apply to the technology coordinator, as well, just not to the same level of specificity or the scope of function.


In instances where the tech


Page 170

from the school teams needs to pass into the administrative ranks. The principal is the logical person to ferry information to/from central administration and school teams. This is not a mechanism to keep the school team away from central administration; rather, it is an attempt to ensure that the principal is not excluded from the information loop.

To repeat, the principal has ultimate

responsibility for this local audit, so she must be included. 6. Reporter—Who is going to tell the great stories that occur in your school? Will the successes remain secrets? As each local school site audit occurs, somebody has to take on the role of cataloguing the evidence. This is a job for the principal. As is the case with other situations, I am not saying that the principal is the one who must put out the clarion call for examples, then go from room to room, clipboard in hand, to gather stories and documents that demonstrate how well students are using technologies for learning. Rather, the principal is just the one who initiates, then supports, the framework in which others in the school can have these tasks delegated to them. Immediately, then, with more hands applied to that metaphorical plow, the job or task is transitioned into a real celebration.



Page 169

possible. The principal will establish the team and name the team leader. Once the team is formed, she will issue the charge to the team so they understand what they are called upon to accomplish. 3. School data organizer — Many kinds of data will be gathered at the school level. Someone must take responsibility for collecting and organizing everything. The reports that go forward to the district audit team will come from the data that are organized. This is an extremely important function in the school audit process. So, it is the responsibility of the principal to ensure that the data have been organized appropriately for use anywhere or any time within the audit. The principal may designate a faculty or staff member to handle this, but the ultimate responsibility lies with the principal. The extent to which the data are organized properly is a reflection upon the leadership capability of the principal. 4. Coordinator/facilitator of team meetings — While the principal may not attend each meeting of the school team, she has the role of ensuring that the team is meeting and working. She must provide all necessary support to make the team’s work easier. 5. Liaison — Each school team will function with a certain, healthy amount of autonomy. However, from time to time, information



Page 168

• And other tasks, as assigned—Part of what comes with the territory in a superintendent’s job is all the “other stuff” that has to be done but which was never mentioned as a job function on the original contract. We have chuckled about this notion for years, but it really is true. Since the superintendent is the organizational leader, it is his/her responsibility to ensure that all necessary chores are completed.

Principal A principal is the instructional leader in a given school building. While she19 may lead in instruction, she also has responsibility to ensure accountability for all aspects of that school’s operation.

Hence, with respect to this technology audit, the principal will fulfill, as a minimum, these roles: 1. Cheerleader — First and foremost, the principal should be the main encourager, to demonstrate to the school that this audit will be good for us. 2. School audit team organizer — The school needs a team. The team must function at the highest level of efficiency and professionalism. Thus, the school team needs the best leader 19

Note: I make no attempts to stereotype by gender, but for lack of “going overboard,” I shall choose one of the genders, for no particular reason, then use that gender for the examples.



Page 167

In the event that the school desires an oral presentation by the auditor, it will be the superintendent’s responsibility to arrange that, as well. Of course, the opportunity for a report to the entire school personnel and/or the community at large may be a possibility, as well. The superintendent will just have to make a judgment call regarding the timeliness and appropriateness of such a report. • Finances—Superintendents have the responsibility to arrange all the funding for the audit, complete from the initial meetings of local teams through the final report and exit of the external auditors. Current conditions in school don’t seem to indicate that superintendents would include a technology audit as an item on the school budget each year; however, that situation will change soon. The superintendent should gather his/her best advisors and determine exactly the scope of a technology audit that will serve their school in the best fashion. Then, they will have the job of associating monetary figures to the activities they desire to complete. • Public relations—Well, PR is certainly no new task for superintendents; therefore, s/he can merely direct some of the existing public relations resources to the technology auditing efforts. Perhaps the superintendent will want to make a series of speeches in the community that describe the nature of their audit. Maybe there will be presentations to civic groups, school advisory panels, and other audiences. Regardless, all these opportunities for public relations are responsibilities of the superintendent.



Page 166

the district is getting cheated. You want to get a true picture of how well you are measuring up to the highest standards possible. Choose your auditors carefully! (Refer to the section “Choosing an auditor” later in this book—Chapter 11.) • Coordinate auditors’ visit(s) — The superintendent will have many opportunities to interact with external auditors before they arrive on campus.

However, when the site visit occurs, it is the

responsibility of the superintendent to initialize, orchestrate, and coordinate the auditors’ visit. Now, to take some of the pressure off the superintendent, it should go without saying that s/he doesn’t actually have to perform all the functions related to the visit. The magic word is: DELEGATE! The superintendent has a terrific opportunity to tailor conditions surrounding the on-site visit, so s/he should jump into this situation with both feet and really create a magical experience. The good news is that, if the visit is well planned and a guaranteed success, the entire district will profit. All the personnel who have worked so long and hard on the local audit, as well as those who have supported their efforts, will reap the benefits of the superintendent’s “event planning.” • Orchestrate auditors’ report to the school board (and school/community, perhaps)—Upon completion of the formal audit, the auditing team will submit to the school a written summative report. It is the superintendent’s role to work closely with the auditors in getting this report submitted in a timely fashion. This is one of the elements that should be understood early in the negotiation process for selecting an auditor.



Page 165

A few of the ordinary expectations of the superintendent during an audit are: • Share responsibility—but not ultimate responsibility. That belongs to the superintendent and cannot be relinquished. • Organize local audit team — This can and should be performed in concert with the Technology Director. In very short order, your local team will have been formed, representatives from all across the district will be among the members, a team leader will have been chosen, and the requisite tasks will have been enumerated and assigned for accomplishment. • Provide support — You will want to ensure all those around you who are working on the audit—the local audit team, your fellow administrators, and school staff—that you won’t get in their way but that you offer support to them during their efforts. You may occasionally want to call an early morning meeting of the local team so you can glean their temporary or partial feedback—and you’ll buy their breakfast! Small evidences of support—repeated as needed—will result in amazing results. One of the by-products will be enhanced loyalty. • Select the external auditors — In some cases, the superintendent will be allowed to select external auditors. Sometimes, though, an external agency (SEA, Federal government, etc.) will simply notify a district that an audit is forthcoming. In that case, the auditors will probably be chosen for the district already. If the superintendent chooses auditors, s/he must remember that the auditors chosen should be as objective and as honest as possible. If auditors are tempted to “go easy” on the district, then



Page 164

In this section, we will examine each person (or group) involved in the audit and point out some of the expectations that we can reasonably place on him/her/them.

Superintendent We all know that the superintendent is the chief academic officer in a school. Therefore, s/he has ultimate responsibility for the entire learning program—from the students to the teachers to the supplies to the buildings to the … well, you get the point. I suppose we could just say that the superintendent is responsible for it all! In the event that you are the superintendent, you may feel overwhelmed when you read this document. Do not feel that way, though. There is tremendous satisfaction in knowing that you provide keen, effective leadership for a group of dedicated cadre who are striving diligently to improve the conditions of each learner in their care. When this technology audit comes along, the superintendent has the unique opportunity to provide positive, motivating leadership for all people in the school community (students, teachers, staff, parents, business partners, community members, and other constituents). We have heard the famous comment, “The buck stops here.” Well, NCTP contends that we can alter that a bit to read, “The buck starts here!” Leadership starts with the superintendent!



Page 163

10.0

Roles/Responsibilities In order for your technology audit to be successful, each person or group involved should know his/her/its role. This will help to ensure that the audit goes smoothly. Few things can cause more disruptions than when nobody knows their job in the process, so few things get done and what does get done will probably be done poorly. Julene Reed, Director of Technology for St. George’s Independent Schools in Collierville, Tennessee offered a particularly salient perspective on the importance of all team members learning, accepting, and excelling at their roles: Recognizing that every person’s role in a technology audit (whether it be that of superintendent, principal, board member, teacher, staff member, student, or parent) is one that is valued as essential to enhancing student learning and achievement helps to set the tone for collaboration and communication.

You just can’t say it any clearer than that, can you? She reminds us that the purpose of our role fulfillment is to enhance lives of students—and that our school community reaps huge benefits when we excel in our roles. Critical point: Titles used in the remainder of this section pertain to traditional position titles in U.S. public schools. I realize that this book will be used by people who represent a wide variety of educational organizations around the world. Some of you are in private, independent, Christian, or parochial schools. In those cases, you may use a different vocabulary for the leadership positions. This is important to you. So, as you move through these next sections, just make the mental transition from the nomenclature you see here to the nomenclature with which you are comfortable and familiar.



Page 162



•


•


•




Page 161

Figure 9.8 Technology Department Inventory Summary



Page 160

Item

Serial No.

Type equip. (computer, printer,

Purchase Date

Planned Obsolescenc e Date

Cost

DRI: __Margaret Goolsby, Director of Technology___ Source of funds

Location

Date:

Technology Department Inventory Summary Intended Purpose

Actual use

All team members are pleased with the results of this visit and look forward to the next one when they will be examining: budget, policy, community involvement, professional development, personnel, and student services sections of the technology audit. Team #4 packs up their PDAs and computers used to capture data and prepares to depart Willow Twig. They realize how much simpler this audit process has become by using software applications, such as HanDBase on the Palm™ along with Excel, Filemaker Pro, and NetGrab on the laptop computers.



Page 159

minimum expected and have been showing the subgroup members some amazing examples of students engaged in highlevel problem solving. It becomes obvious to the subgroup members that the teachers who use technology in this way are not only more excited about learning, but also their students appear to be much more excited about and involved in the natural learning occurring in their classrooms. While this finding by Subgroup B is something that doesn’t fit neatly into an assessment/evaluation matrix, they do make note of the phenomenon so it can be reported properly when all the gathered data are compiled at the team level. Information such as this is simply too important to be omitted just because the forms used for the audit don’t have a place to record information of this nature. By the end of the day, the subgroups have visited every classroom and talked with every teacher. Further, during some “lull times” of the day, the team members were able to talk informally with the school custodians, the school nurse, and the secretary.

From these conversations, the team

gleaned some extremely helpful information that they would never have harvested if they had stuck strictly to minimum expectations of this site visit. Mr. Tucker and his assistant finish gathering all the data from both subgroups, then aggregate the data in time for a wrap-up meeting of all team members before they depart Willow Twig.



Page 158

Therefore, the subgroup members make a note of the professional development that is needed to maximize effective use of the technologies. In addition, they discover that while some computers are functional and have helpful software installed on them, they are not connected to the school network. The subgroup records and reports this very helpful information. Subgroup B begins checking the alignment of curriculum delivery with what was written in the technology plan. The team is seeking evidence and examples of how technology is integrated into teaching and learning in a natural way. They have a copy of the technology plan, along with a report prepared by Mrs. Fisher that journals how teachers are bringing technology solutions into their lessons.

As the

subgroup proceeds through this documentation, they make notes of specific teachers to interview so that the information recorded by Mrs. Fisher remains current and accurate. Too, they examine the facts of what truly is occurring in the classrooms at Willow Twig and compare/contrast that with the contents of the technology plan. Subgroup B discovers that, while some teachers are using technology in their classrooms, the use is not in alignment with curriculum plans. Some teachers are merely allowing students to use the computers, but there is no orchestrated strategy for infusing students’ activities into some meaningful learning plan. Other teachers are going well beyond the



Page 157

two areas of the audit: equipment inventory and curriculum/ learning. So, the team of eight people divides into subgroups. Three members begin checking inventory and three focus on curriculum. That leaves Mr. Tucker and one member, acting as his assistant, to stay in the office and coordinate the audit. They will be setting up the data aggregation software so that, as team reports come in, the data can be entered and prepared for summary. Subgroup A sets out to check inventory. They have been given two reports: one from the district technology director that shows equipment assigned to Willow Twig and one from Mrs. Fisher showing a synthesis of data compiled from teacher input. So, they go from room to room and attempt to verify the reports or to identify any discrepancies. They have a choice: To move quickly and check each room or to conduct “spot checks.” They decide to visit every room. As they complete the inventory of each section in the school, they log into the team server over the wireless network and upload the data they have collected so far. These data feed into the master file being maintained in the office by Mr. Tucker and his assistant. During the audit by Subgroup A, they discover several pieces of equipment that are either broken, need to be upgraded, or are in need of some maintenance.. At the same time, they learn that some teachers don’t know enough to feel comfortable using some of the equipment in their building.



Page 156

1.

auditors assure their familiarity with all forms, frameworks, and requirements of the audit

2.

auditors take delivery of local team documentation

3.

auditors peruse audit documents and evaluate the accuracy, completeness, and relevance—according to requirements

4.

auditors conduct a site visit, performing spot checks on some data and seeking confirmational details on others

5.

auditors visit schools in the district and collect their own observational data which will be compared with data submitted by the local team

6.

auditors aggregate data, yielding information for the summative report to schools

The following scenario may help in understanding how a local audit, conducted by a local team, might occur.

Smallwood School District Local On-Site Audit Willow Twig Elementary School Marshall Tucker is the leader of local audit team #4. This team has met and examined all forms and requirements for the data collection task they are beginning at Willow Twig Elementary School. Mr. Tucker has scheduled the audit dates at Willow Twig with Mrs. Ramona Fisher, Principal. The team gathers early in the morning at Willow Twig, meeting in the principal’s office for coffee and to verify the agenda for the day. Today, the team will be collecting data on



Page 155

Thus, auditors will not find it necessary to customize anything sent to and used by the local school teams. Gathering process: Local team The local team may use the following general steps to guide them as they move into and through the data collection process: 1.

local team subdivides tasks to small teams/working groups

2.

working groups begin collecting data to fill in the forms that they have

3.

working groups compile data, then submit them to the local team

4.

local team aggregates data and enters them into forms

5.

local team compiles local documents and evidence to support findings

6.

local documents, along with completed forms and any requisite narrative summaries are assembled in a central location, awaiting inspection by external auditors

Gathering process: External auditors Most of the data gathered for the technology audit will be performed by the local school teams. However, the external auditors will have a process to guide them, as well, once they receive packets of information from the school. The following are some steps through which auditors may progress as they collect and process data for the formal technology audit:



Page 154

Local team audit. As a first step in any audit, it is necessary for a local team to gather a host of data about your school. So, where does the team begin? Well, perhaps there are two options. Each option hinges upon the structure in which the data are to be organized. Certain forms, tables, and frameworks help to “channel” data into their proper place. Option 1 is appropriate when the team has no mandated structure for compiling the data gathered. They will have to create a framework that makes sense, then advance into the audit process searching for facts and placing those facts into the proper slot. So, option 1 dictates that the team engages in form/framework construction prior to the data gathering activity. Option 2 occurs when the external auditors or a superordinate agency (such as a State Education Agency) prescribe a framework for data gathering. All the forms, worksheets, questionnaires, and accompanying organizational instructions may (this is optional) be given to the team well in advance of a site visit. The local team goes forth with data gathering; however, they are using materials provided them from an external source. It should go without saying that the local team has the privilege of customizing the frameworks and/or forms sent to them. The only limiting factor here is that all data requested will have to be provided, but the local team can add to the minimum requirements. If it is necessary to change formats significantly, the local leaders should be prepared to explain their modifications to external auditors and, if appropriate, to outside agencies. Under option 2, external auditors will be using the forms and guidelines prescribed to the school by either the auditors or the external agency. Technology Audit Survivor’s Guide


Page 153

As the PDA is taken back into the field, loaded with new data, and returned to the upload point, this is called “syncing”—a method of synchronizing what is on the PDA with the growing body of data in the audit database.

Syncing is one of the most helpful and accurate

capabilities existing in the auditor’s arsenal. Of course, the school can use this capability throughout the year, not just during the audit session. A PDA can be an effective tool in the hands of auditors as they collect data around the school. In order for them to realize maximum benefit, however, it may be necessary that each school has a high-speed network connection, particularly for the uploading of aggregated data into a central database that sits on a server connected to the high-speed network. When an auditor syncs his/her PDA to the host computer, an automation routine should be written that takes those new data and transports them immediately to the central server for on-the-fly aggregation.

9.3 Data collection process Now that we have seen what kinds of data are valuable to a technology audit, as well as a few of the tools that help in handling all the various data, we can move on to study how auditors (either the local team or external auditors) actually gather and process these data. Our discussion here will not be totally inclusive of all possible situations, but I hope you can learn from these examples a few strategies to employ when you undergo or conduct an audit of your own.



Page 152

this is just for the spreadsheet. Imagine what happens when we bring databases, graphics programs, and word processing into the picture. PDA-based data collection applications With increasing frequency, applications are being developed and customized that deal specifically with assessment-like activities. Certainly, a technology audit is, to a large degree, an assessment activity. And, that these applications are available for Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs) is a comforting—and exciting—realization. The most common and familiar PDAs are made by Palm™. That is why many people, when referring to a PDA, simply make a statement such as, “I keep that information on my Palm.” In reality, the brand name of their PDA may be Handspring, Sharp, Compaq, or any one of several other brands. Regardless of the brand, a PDA can be of inestimably positive value to auditors. So, how would they use such a thing? An auditor enters the school, classroom, interview session, etc. to make an observation. Then s/he launches the PDA application (such as the database, HanDBase), makes an observation, and enters the result of the observation into the PDA application. Then, at some point, the auditor carries the PDA to a computer that has a cradle attached to it. With the press of one button, those data are uploaded to a server or other location such as a local database. Regardless, the data are placed in a location where they can be retrieved quickly, aggregated with other data, or observed on their own merits.



Page 151

will be significantly less. An example of this is an Excel™ spreadsheet. There are many others in the general category, though. Just use your imagination to locate as many as possible, then secure assistance from your colleagues in determining which of these integrated applications will be of optimum value to you. You could, for example, use that Excel™ spreadsheet to handle data related to your computer hardware inventory (most technology advisors would tell you that this function would be better accomplished by using a database management program, though—but this example is used to show that you

can expand the ordinary operations of application software). On each row, you could enter data that reference: type of equipment; original cost; cost of repairs; cost of upgrades; etc. Then, when you apply the amazing calculating power of the spreadsheet to these data, you would be able to sort the spreadsheet according to date of purchase, then reveal how much you had spent on hardware in a given period of time, how much it has cost you to maintain that equipment, and several other averages that you can calculate. It’s pretty easy to perform the calculations that show: average cost of computers over a five-year period of time; range of computer costs; average unit cost for dollar of maintenance (repair, upgrade) funds expended. Then, you can sort and re-sort those data to yield quite revealing information about the equipment you have on hand. Similar kinds of calculations can be performed that deal with student achievement, student interaction with multiple technologies, teacher professional development, and the list just goes on and on and on. Plus,



Page 150

clarification on this matter. S/he may even suggest particular wording for your non-liability agreement. If the attorney has no specific recommendation, check with your state school boards association and/or state-level administrators organizations.

9.2 Tools 9.2.2 Software Computer-resident applications Computer software these days covers an amazingly broad gamut of applicability. You can leverage this capability and apply it to your technology audit so that your job of managing the audit becomes significantly easier. As you peruse the software offerings for computers, you may find some “vertical” applications—programs that address auditing procedures directly. These may come in the form of project management software, inventory control software, personnel management programs, facilities design or Computer-Aided Drafting (CAD) software, event scheduling programs, or a host of others that are dedicated programs targeting some specific purpose. On the other hand, you should find quite rapidly that some of the “general” applications (word processors, database management programs, spreadsheets, graphics programs, etc.) can provide some of the same functions as vertical software and the per-instance cost of these programs



Page 149

Smallwood School District We, the undersigned, agree that the technology audit of the Smallwood School district has, with the full and energetic support of all parties, been: √ approved by local administration and school board; √ completed by the local audit team, as well as the external audit team of Learning Innovation Associates, LLC; and √ reported to local school personnel, community, administration, and school board by the external audit team of Learning Innovation Associates, LLC Parties:

Dr. Martin Speights, Superintendent

Date

Mrs. Rhonda Cotton, School Board President

Date

Dr. Roscoe Feeney, President Learning Innovation Associates, LLC

Date

Figure 9.7 Sign-off Sheet



Page 148

Sign-off sheets These sheets can have several purposes, depending upon the level of your audit and the extent to which you want to get multiple constituencies involved in the audit. A basic sign-off sheet (Figure 9.7 on page 148 and Appendix G) that every audit should include is one that is placed at or near the beginning of your summative audit report. It is a declarative document signed by members of the board of education (school board, or whatever that ruling body in your school is called) to indicate that the audit has been: approved; completed; and reported. The sign-off sheet should be dated. You may decide to construct a sign-off sheet for a variety of activities occurring during the technology audit. You and the external auditors have a great deal of latitude in determining what forms you will need for signoffs. The sheets could be used for things such as, denoting: receipt by external auditors of the local team audit report; receipt by external auditors of district documents; as well as fulfillment of sequentially oriented requirements by the district. Non-liability agreement Your auditors may need (or require) a form that indicates that they will not encumber any liability while conducting the audit. This could be a form statement that clarifies that auditors are not employees of the school, are conducting “work for hire” functions (if this is, in fact, the fiscal arrangement you have with them), and/or that they will be held harmless for any physical damage that may occur while they are on site. NCTP recommends highly that you consult your school attorney to gain specific



Page 147

[Note: This is a sample form that could be used in an interview held by either a local or external auditor. This sample interview is conducted with a teacher to obtain his/her perceived value of technology-oriented professional development.]

Interview Synthesis Form Interviewer:

Date:

Interviewee:

Begin Time:

Occupation:

End Time:

Purpose/Topic of Interview: Interview occurred: ❏ alone ❏ online Interview form: ❏ oral

❏ in a group

❏ face-to-face ❏ via phone

❏ other __________________________________

❏ written only

❏ oral & written

❏ other ______________________________________________ Core questions (“starters”) • • • •

Have you attended professional development in the last academic year? If so, how many? _________ Were any sessions related to technology? Was the quality of the technology pro-d sufficient that you were able to improve any part of your teaching? • Were all presenters of high quality? (expertise, delivery style, ability to connect theory with practice, involvement of attendees in pro-d activities) • Have you attended any professional conferences related to technology during the past year? (If so, which ones?) • Did your school support your attending a professional meeting to learn about technology? • Who in your district coordinates professional development? • How has professional development improved teaching/learning in your school? • What specific skills, strategies, and understandings did you gain from pro-d? • How, specifically, did pro-d benefit you? • What technology pro-d strategies resulted in improved student achievement? • If you could select just one technology pro-d session to repeat so that it would help your teaching more, what would it be? Why? • … Common/recurring theme(s): Unexpected findings: Discrepancies/disparities:

Y

N

Y

N

Y Y

N N

Y

N

Y

N

Comments:

Figure 9.6 Interview Synthesis Form



Page 146

demonstrate a true alignment between the technology plan and the elements of your program that are being audited. Cost-benefit calculation sheets This worksheet may be a bit trickier to create and use than others. Here, you would record the costs associated with conducting a particular initiative. Then, you would attempt (and here is where the real stretch comes in) to determine a “benefit factor” to the initiative that could then be compared with the costs to calculate something akin to a cost-benefit ratio or a Return On Investment (ROI). Although you will likely have more difficulty creating this kind of document, the concepts that underlie the form are worthy of your discussion. Interview synthesis sheets Auditors will be conducting multiple interviews with district employees, students, parents, and other community members. As they conduct these interviews, a form (Figure 9.6 on page 146 & Appendix F) is needed that will allow them to collect data quickly, organize the data into a meaningful order, and facilitate the transfer of those data from the form into the various reports that the auditors will be preparing. Common categories of data collected on this form may include: name; occupation; date of interview; topic of interview; name of interviewer; time of interview; sample questions; recurring themes; discrepancies/disparities in data gathered; unexpected findings; and extra comments.



Page 145

[Note: This form shows only partial information and serves as a sample of what your report might express. The key here is that column one should spell out the major concepts and goals that you wrote in your technology plan. Then, with information provided in each column, a determination can be made as to whether congruence occurs between what you have stated in your plan and what is observed, actually.]

Technology Plan Alignment Form Major/Key Focus Elements

Tech Plan Ref. (p. #)

Target Date

Evidence from Practice

Congruence? (Y/N)

63% of teachers have completed. (2/1/2005) 4 of the 7 campuses have this currently (2/1/2005) Only in sparse instances do lesson plans address technology Supt. has stated a commitment to this; few school budgets, though, line item technology

Y

• All teachers will complete 6 hrs. of technology-oriented professional development • Each school campus will have ubiquitous networking capability

27

4/15/2005

38

6/1/2005

• 80% of students will receive technology-enriched instruction from their teachers

19

1/8/2005

• All school budgets will reflect a strong commitment to technology for learning

7

6/28/2005

Y

N

N

• • • • Figure 9.5 Technology Plan Alignment Form



Page 144

Document Inventory Form Local Technology Audit Team

Level I ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★

II

★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★

Document Commitment Letters - from school board - from Superintendent Personnel Plan & Report - Professional Development Plan & Report Curriculum/Learning Plan & Report Facilities Plan & Report Funding/Budgeting Plan & Report Technology Policies Report E-Rate Report Compliance Report Inventory Reports - Computers - Peripherals - Network - Other Devices Budget: Allocations & Activity Upgrade Reports - Hardware - Software Infrastructure Plan & Report Community Involvement Report External Funding Report Health & Safety Plan & Report Security Plan & Report Examples of Student Work (w/technology) Examples of teachers’ using technology Welcome Letter to Auditors Schedule of Activities for Auditors

Collected

Ready for viewing

Figure 9.4 Local Team Document Inventory Form



Page 143

the external auditors, themselves. Regardless who creates the forms, it is important to remember that each form must be designed in such a way that: meaningful data are the only ones collected; collection and recording of data are made easier; the purpose of the form is in alignment with the purpose of the technology audit; and all forms are evaluated for relevancy and validity on a regular, periodic basis. Also, the forms need to take full advantage of technologies…the enter-in-once/use-it-over-and-over-in-amultitude-of-formats process, such as databases, web servers, etc. The following is a brief, incomplete listing of some of the types of forms that may be available to auditors (both local team auditors and external auditors). Checklists Checklists can be used for such things as process completion sheets (to record, step-by-step, tasks or functions completed in each phase of the audit), document inventory (to record which documents must be collected, then to check off when they are ready for viewing or use by the audit team) [Figure 9.4 on page 143 & Appendix D], and a host of other uses that will come to your attention as you move through the audit. Tech plan alignment matrix/grid On this form (Figure 9.5 on page 144; Appendix E), you can list all the major, central focus points of your technology plan, then record where there is congruence between your plan and your activities. This form may also contain an indication of a timeframe in which specific portions of the plan are to be completed. The primary purpose of this form, however, is to



Page 142

9.2 Tools All the theory in the world about technology planning and auditing will not necessarily make an audit successful. Experience of the auditors, as important as that is, will not, either. Neither will the determination, alone, of district administrators, staff, and teachers. In order for the actual, physical audit to yield the greatest benefit, all parties involved need to have an arsenal of tools that are tailored for the work at hand. Two specific areas of tools we will examine are forms and software. Certainly, other kinds of tools come into play, such as hardware, documentation, and interview strategies. However, for purposes of clarity and importance, we will discuss forms and software, because they are of the most immediate need. Further, they hold the power to demonstrate the most rapid results. 9.2.1 Forms Auditors will profit greatly from having a hefty collection of forms at their disposal. Not only will these forms aid in gathering data more rapidly, but they also will make it easier to retrieve, report, and interpret the data after all the observations have been completed. Some of the forms may be prepared by external agencies (such as your State Department of Education or other groups that may be formed when technology auditing becomes more institutionalized in the education arena). Others may be created by your local audit team or even individual teachers or administrators in your district, while some may be designed by



Page 141

Data Point Technology Plan

Personnel Plan Budget/Financial History & Practice (bidding, purchasing, external funding) Infrastructure Plan

Professional Development Plan

Community Involvement Plan

Data Collection

Findings

• Major goals specified very clearly and succinctly • Evidence of budget/funding (local team identifies location in tech plan) • Evidence of personnel procedures (hiring, etc.) • Evidence of policies (specify) — examples where policies are applied, accompanied by evidence. Extra points given if policies are developed with broad input from constituents. • Evidence of curriculum plan • Evidence of emphasis upon student achievement • Evidence of broad-based input into development of the overall tech plan, as well as integral components • Evidence of a planned evaluation strategy to revise/update the tech plan on a regular, ongoing basis • Correlation with technology plan • Correlation with technology plan • Technology listed as a budget line item • Annual adjustments made to accommodate shifting costs of technologies • Correlation with technology plan • Network philosophy • “ plan • “ policies • “ funding • “ responsibility/authority organizational chart–chain of command–assurance of support & services • Correlation with technology plan • Calendar • Statistics showing participation • Alternatives to traditional professional development • Correlation with technology plan • Evidence of community membership on committees, task forces, etc. • Evidence that community input has been received and is being used somewhere in the school culture

Figure 9.3 Data Collection Checksheet



Page 140

Therefore, when they see a technology director, for example, using her PDA (Personal Digital Assistant) to make and keep appointments, store phone numbers, collect data, and house important memos, your personnel will be reminded of how permeated your district has become. When you penetrate the human culture barrier, you are really discovering meaningful integration of technology into society.

9.1 Data collected by/for auditors 9.1.11 Charting the Data Collected The partial chart (Figure 9.3) on the next page shows a framework you can use to organize your data collection activities. You will want to customize this chart for your own use, but this provides an excellent example of how to guide your local data collectors in their efforts.



Page 139

examples of how they see administrators and staff using technologies as

normal parts of their everyday lives at school. Administrators.

You should find that administrators are using

technologies (computer hardware and software, specifically) to prepare memoranda. Memos and other communications between or among or with principals, other administrators, and school staff should be created and disseminated electronically. Perhaps they are using email or an intranet to distribute memos. This would mean that they are “layering” technology use—that is, using technology as a means to disseminate something that was created with technology. This is good. No doubt, you will discover that there are many more uses to which technologies are put as a regular component of what people do. Make a note of these. Report them in your audit documentation. These uses (electronic memos, etc.) save not only time, but also money that would be spent on printing, otherwise. Too, they provide an audit trail for intra-district communication. As the number of examples for normal use rises, so do the potential savings increase. Staff. As various school district staff members have gotten a computer at their desk or point of work during recent years, we would expect to see them using those computers for an increasing number of tasks. This is an area where you can glean a great deal of information from members of the local planning team. They will have close contact with staff in each school and, perhaps tangentially, the staff members who serve the district at large.



Page 138

students can architect their own learning opportunities. If students are doing this out of their intrinsic desire to learn, create, explore, and present, then you have student achievement occurring at high levels that often defy the ability of standardized tests, external entities, and self-proclaimed prophets of some new-wave learning style to measure realistically. Celebrate this! Showcase this! Encourage this! In conjunction with this element of student performance, you are encouraged to consider the impact of student learning outside school, as well. Robert Hudson, Director of Federal Projects and Technology in the Hawthorn CCSD, Vernon Hills, IL, reminds us that “inside school” and “outside school” learning by students are both crucial comparisons to examine. In many locations, students have ready access to interactive technologies outside school; thus, they are engaged in technologysupported learning most of the day. The external influences of technology on students’ lives are profound. Hence, to ignore the “out of school” technology use is to ignore a quite large piece of the achievement puzzle. Administration and staff It is truly exciting to witness administrators who, while watching computers and other technologies permeate the classroom learning environment, grab onto the power that comes with these technologies. So, in order to show auditors a more realistic picture of how technology integration truly has penetrated the culture of your school, just start looking around. Further, ask your colleagues to begin cataloging



Page 137

promote educational excellence. Doing this will make you a real leader in your area. Auditors will notice this, I assure you. Further, you may want to consider holding such an event during the time that auditors are on-site. When examples of student work are showcased, students can demonstrate how they celebrate creative, non-traditional achievement. Most students truly enjoy “plowing in” their own creativity to school projects, often showing how their voice makes all the difference between the work being just an ordinary “project” and being a true masterpiece! You may want to seek testimonials that explain how students' lives have improved, how a transformation has occurred in their engaged learning activities. Perhaps. teachers, as well, can offer compelling testimonials regarding the improvement they have noted in students’ willingness to learn in new ways and the particulars of how technology-enhanced engagement in authentic learning has given new life to student achievement. Auditors might want to dig a bit deeper into the circumstances surrounding the examples of student work you show them. So, you might “get the jump on them” by answering this question: Was the work performed by students something that was central to curriculum and teaching, in the form of an assignment, or was it elective in nature? While it may not seem like there is much difference in the responses you would give to this question, I contend that there is a huge difference. If you have students who are creating amazing work on their own, not due to the insistence of some teacher, that tells me that you have some magic occurring in your schools, that you have created an environment where



Page 136

9.1 Data collected by/for auditors 9.1.11 Examples of Success Using Technology Student work Here is your chance to really shine! No doubt, you have a plethora of examples that demonstrate how students have incorporated technology in a meaningful, authentic fashion as a part of the learning/achievement activities.

Perhaps this manifests itself in the form of electronic

presentations (using Powerpoint™ or some similar presentation software); interactive hypermedia projects; school newspapers; yearbooks; digital media/movies/videos; musical compositions and/or performances; robotically-controlled devices; scientific experiments; assistive devices or projects for handicapped or disabled individuals; or just the “ordinary” practice of creating, then submitting, homework using technology tools. Regardless of the specific nature of the work, you should ferret out these examples from teachers and staff so students’ work can be showcased not only to the external auditors, but also to the community at large. An added benefit here is that you will be able to demonstrate student work to statelevel education leaders, as well as personnel in other school districts who have not achieved the level or extent of success that has occurred in your district. Create a bragfest! Consider this: you can hold a type of community-wide event where student projects are showcased. Benefits accrue to not only the school, at large, but also to the students, teachers, technology support staff personnel, teacher aides, and all in the community who strive to



Page 135

9.1 Data collected by/for auditors 9.1.10 Community Profile What would your school be without support from the community? How has the community both contributed to and profited from your school? How does technology fit into this picture? What level of technology is used within the community and its workforce? You may want to consider preparing a section of your report that describes your community from a demographic perspective. In addition, you may decide that it is a good idea to profile particular individuals or projects that originated in the community but which have bolstered some aspect of school life tremendously. As your school makes plans for the future, to what extent is the community involved in your decisions? Do you have community members on advisory councils, planning teams, or volunteer coordination teams? What do they do? Can you enumerate some specific ways in which they have helped your school achieve some technology-related goals? Perhaps your community is populated by some individuals who possess particularly keen and beneficial technology-related skills. Or, maybe you have sought assistance from certain members of the community who can serve as “preliminary auditors.” You may use some of these people to “test run” your audit between the time the local audit team prepares its findings and reports and the time the external auditors arrive for the on-site visit.



Page 134

their schools through distance learning—which requires this level of network robustness.

9.1 Data collected by/for auditors 9.1.9 Organizational Chart Auditors will want to gain an understanding of how your district functions from a comprehensive administrative standpoint. They will want to see an organizational chart that shows lines of authority and levels of administrative responsibility. In other words, they want to know the “chain of command” in a district. This information will be essential, because it is often very important to watch information flow and to see if it follows the prescribed chain of command or whether the technologies employed have burst the barriers that are imposed sometimes in a strict, “layered” organization. A great example to use as you show how information flows through the district is to follow the path associated with technology purchases. Perhaps a teacher submits a requisition for a new inkjet printer for his classroom. With the proper organizational chart, this purchase can be followed through the steps of: selection, requisition, purchase order, approval, appropriation, ordering, arrival, payment, inventory, and deployment. Further, your organizational chart (and accompanying report prepared for the auditors) will show clearly how the financial responsibility landscape looks all along the way of this purchase. This includes who makes decisions and handles the money, as well as the extent to which this purchase is aligned with your technology plan.



Page 133

student learning. There are many other advantages that you may have realized by having a well thought-out infrastructure plan, so NCTP suggests that you and your local team work diligently to uncover as many positive advantages as you can think of. In addition, it will make your report more sensible and believable if you tell stories about obstacles you have overcome, bad decisions you almost made (or did, in fact, make), and sacrifices you had to make in order to possess the infrastructure you have currently. Critical point: In this section, as well as most others, you must remember to focus upon the fact that infrastructure exists to serve people! It is not merely so we can brag about our having the coolest technology. Technologies will come and go, but people are our raison d'être. This fact not only should never be forgotten; it should become an increasing part of our documented stories. In concert with the philosophy expressed above, you may want to ensure that your infrastructure plan is written so that it stresses the importance of: • the instructional reasons for network components and other technology expenditures; • the SAN (Storage Area Network) that exists so students can store their multimedia projects that are too large for single media devices and in order for students to store projects over time so they graduate with a portfolio of their work; • the annual budget for software, to ensure that software licenses are continued and upgraded as curriculum needs dictate; and • the district-wide network speed so that it allows students in alternative school programs to continue classes with teachers at



Page 132

In current times, people who work in an educational setting are coming to expect high-speed network accessibility.

This requires a strong

infrastructure. For the auditors’ review, you should consider preparing an overview of the infrastructure, including internal links to the information in your audit documentation that refer to your networking philosophy, as well as the particulars of your network wiring, electronics, and access points. You would be well advised to ensure that you address the following, as a minimum: •

location of wiring closet(s)

•

number of network drops per classroom

•

type of wiring in each leg of each network

•

type of wiring used in the wired portion of your entire network (for example, if there is a mixture of fiber optics and CAT5-type wiring)

•

type of wiring between buildings

•

any special arrangements affecting the infrastructure, such as VPNs (Virtual Private Networks), firewalls

•

the presence of wireless (networks, devices) and the impact they have had upon: a) the current infrastructure; b) the planned infrastructure; and c) school culture

•

coverage patterns (propagation) of wireless

•

funding models of support for infrastructure

As a wrap-up to the section on infrastructure, you may want to consider stressing the importance that your total infrastructure has had upon



Page 131

9.1 Data collected by/for auditors 9.1.7 Physical Plant Layout Your physical plant report should include: • map of district, showing physical location of buildings • floor plans at each site • simple diagrams of each facility, indicating location of areas important, specifically, to technology (ex: wiring closet, inventory warehouse, repair facility, junction points) • designation of access and egress points, especially for handicapped individuals • LAN, WAN, MAN diagrams showing the type(s) of network(s) that exist

In addition to the historical aspect of this report, you will want to demonstrate for auditors how you are planning for future expansion, on either a large or small scale. Beside the maps of physical plant, you may want to include some narrative information that reveals something about the operational costs of buildings, including renovations, etc., that you have incurred as a result of adopting technologies. Also, are there ongoing costs associated with the network? If so, how are those costs budgeted?

9.1 Data collected by/for auditors 9.1.8 Infrastructure Plan For modern technologies to be used effectively, it is essential that every part of the school community has a robust and readily-accessible network.



Page 130

the case at all. Without a doubt, though, equipment is important—it’s just not the main thing. In this document, we offer you a sample form (Technology Department

Inventory Summary, Figure 9.8 on page 160 and Appendix H) that can be of significant value to you as you collect and organize data associated with your inventory report. Basic kinds of information that you should include on the report are: • Name/type of equipment (computer, projector, printer, scanner, cell phone, router, etc.) • Serial number • Date of purchase • Date of planned obsolescence (if appropriate) • Cost • Source of funds • Location of equipment • Purpose for which the equipment is intended • Purpose for which the equipment is actually used (and its location) • Inventory number • Cost (and dates) of upgrades to equipment

After the inventory report is prepared, you should make sure that not only the technology director certifies the validity of everything on the report, but also representatives at each school represented in the district report. The main purpose here is to ensure that you have achieved broad-based consensus that equipment records are complete and accurate. Technology Audit Survivor’s Guide


Page 129

specific objectives that align with school and district plans and that include technology goals? How do you measure professional development program effectiveness? Do you have any indicators to show the positive impact of your professional development upon either the personal or professional lives and/or demeanor of personnel? For all the claims you make about your professional development program, do you have all the artifacts of evidence gathered appropriately so that your local team and the external auditors can access them easily? Further, do your data support a contention that professional development has resulted in effective integration in student learning programs? To make the evaluation of professional development plans and programs easier, the external auditors may need to provide the school a pre-visit “toolkit” with aids and directions for completion. As tools such as this are developed and disseminated among audited schools, we all will be able to obtain and maintain a better “grip” on the impact that professional development has upon effective technology use in schools.

9.1 Data collected by/for auditors 9.1.6 Equipment Inventory When most people hear the phrase “technology audit,” their minds automatically jump to the concept of equipment, first, then to finances. Somehow, we expect an inventory of equipment to be an infallible demonstration of how the school is using technologies. Such may not be



Page 128

9.1 Data collected by/for auditors 9.1.5 Professional Development Plan & Calendar How much effort has your school put into technology-related professional development activities during the past few years? What is your current plan? What do you have planned for the future (for the years during the tenure of your current technology plan, anyway)? Who is in charge of professional development? Have efforts been made to use professional development time to show how technology is integrated, in a very natural sense, into student learning and overall school achievement? Has all professional development occurred on-site, or has some taken place at alternate venues, even at professional conferences or seminars? Have you incorporated technologies, such as videoconferencing, into the planning for and delivery of professional development?

How are

instructional (and administrative) technologies used to support professional development? What is the cost of professional development (by the way, this is a very expansive question—many concerns are embodied in this question, so use it to examine your operation in the most beneficial manner possible)? What are the financial advantages that you see accruing from an effective professional development program? Who is participating in your professional development programs? Is participation voluntary or required? How do you track attendance and participation? How are topics chosen? Are topics related to the district or school site technology plan(s)? Do teachers have personal plans with



Page 127

Perhaps you have been conducting some formal research with regard to the impact of technologies upon student learning, engagement, and achievement.

9.1 Data collected by/for auditors 9.1.4 Budget While it may not be necessary—or even practicable—to give auditors the entire school budget, you will definitely want to send them your budget in which you indicate which funds are available for technology purposes. Does technology have a line item in the school budget? What are the sources from which technology-related funds are gathered (what is the source of funds?)? Is there a tracking mechanism in place to monitor the avenues in which technology funds are expended? Do you have an audit trail functioning consistently? Increasingly, schools are depending upon external funding sources to provide monies for technology. Does your school receive grant funds that show up in the finance picture? What about gifts that support technology? While these may not seem to be “real money” at times, they certainly impact the total pool of money, so you are advised to include these funds in the financial picture you prepare for auditors.



Page 126

Kristen Vassos17 and Raylene Renfrow,18 both reviewers for the draft version of this book, suggested: …also, include any required staff training

related to technology, the prerequisites, ways of attending the training and ways to “comp out” of that training. Especially note any training sessions that are integrated technology, such as math or science trainings where technology is an integrated part of the learning for teachers, which will then be integrated with students. Good advice!

9.1 Data collected by/for auditors 9.1.3 Student Achievement Synopsis/Profile With all the attention on student achievement, you will want to address this matter. In a broad stroke fashion, you can demonstrate (perhaps through the use of supporting data) the impact technologies have upon student learning. Of particular interest is the way computer technology captures and builds upon the “creativity factor” that is so active among young people.

Certainly, interactive technologies are empowering

students and giving their “voices” new platforms that were unimaginable previously. In this report, you may want to go back three years and then forecast conditions within the coming two years. By doing so, you will provide a “panoramic” landscape view for the auditors, as well as for your own audit teams. 17 18

Kris Vassos, Technology-Using Teacher, Mount Laurel, NJ. Raylene Renfrow, Technology Consultant, Marques, TX.



Page 125

Figure 9.2 Personnel Report Form



Page 124

Employee

School

Area(s) of Certification

Area(s) of Assignment Class of Certification

Total yrs. service

Total yrs. In this district

Yrs. In current position Degree(s) held

Degree area(s)

Yr. of most recent degree/cert.

Smallwood School District • Personnel Report Currently in area of cert? (Y/N)

An excellent way to prepare this report is to create a matrix or table that shows all pertinent data for all appropriate personnel. Categories of information included in this matrix might be: • Name • School • Area(s) of certification • Area(s) of assignment (subject taught or responsibility) • Class of certification • Total years of service • Total years in this district • Total years in current position • Degree(s) held • Degree area(s) • Year of most recent degree or certification attained • Teaches/works currently in area of certification? (Y/N) You would want to include a “marker” that indicates personnel who are in technology-related instruction or support roles, as well. This gives auditors a sense of what instructional personnel are available for and are working currently with technologies. You will want to include reference to the district hiring plan. This enables you to show emphasis the school places upon technology capability among the individuals who are recruited and hired for employment in the district. By including this information, you will show both the philosophy and the

practice regarding hiring. If you like, you can include not only hiring, but also retention and promotion plans, as well.



Page 123

what makes sense for their school and community against what external agencies force them to do. In order for the school to know if auditors are looking for anything in particular in their technology plan, the auditors should provide the district with an audit grid, for example, and any other special forms prior to their site visit. The audit grid is a possible tool that auditors could design specifically for the district to aid school leaders in knowing how to categorize information in such a way that the auditors can locate, study, and make decisions more easily. This is a very good reflection upon the leadership capacity and efficiency of your school.. Once the auditors have examined the technology plan, they can move on to other documents. It should go without saying that the auditors will be alert to determine how all other components are aligned with the technology plan.

9.1 Data collected by/for auditors 9.1.2 Teacher Roster After your technology plan has been scrutinized, auditors will want to study the landscape of instructional cadre in your school district. So, to facilitate this examination, you should collect, aggregate, and present relevant data to the audit team (of course, this will be needed by the local audit team, as well).



Page 122

Technology Audit Accountability Matrix) in mind have referred to these elements with particular titles, such as Pillars of Progress or some similar name that defines what they desire to convey. You may even want to consider developing a graphic or logo that personifies what these elements are.

By being this specific, you are accomplishing several things

simultaneously: • bringing focus to your technology planning efforts; • unifying district personnel in accomplishing a limited number of goals; • removing the nebulous nature that is so much a part of many district plans; • heightening the possibility that your school will achieve success in accomplishing important goals that your school puts forward; and • ensuring that your technology audit will go much more smoothly. NCTP contends that once you make this specificity a part of your plan—and place this information very near the front matter of your planning document—you will never go back. The benefits are so numerous that the advantages completely overshadow any possible disadvantages. Auditors will use your technology plan as the first document they examine so they can get a clear idea of what your technology activities are focused upon. Auditors should be sensitive, though, to those elements of technology plan design that are mandated by SEAs or Federal agencies, even when such design doesn’t really make sense for the school. It is a fact of life that some technology directors have struggled with juxtaposing



Page 121

and begin creating a planning timeline. Perhaps you can determine that your existing software library contains a program that allows you to make a Gantt chart so you can lay out your progress visually on a timeline grid. Column three, labeled “DRI,” is where you record the name of a person who volunteers to lead the effort to accomplish the action shown in column one by the target date shown in column two. As a word of encouragement, NCTP suggests that you don’t “designate” or “delegate” this action off to somebody. Rather, encourage your team members sufficiently so that one of them will step forward, raise a hand, and say, “I’ll do it! I’ll lead us through this activity.” This is yet another of the positive spins that can be put on planning and auditing activities. Columns four and five are shown simply to let you see that you can add as many columns as you wish. In the example given here, you would be able to record data about any evidence that you are making progress to realization of your action goal. Then, the final column provides space for you to keep a diary of the lessons you learned during the process of moving from dream to “done” on the particular action item. Feel free to take this matrix, add your own customization to it, and put it to good use as you proceed through the audit of not only your technology plan, but also many other aspects of your school operation. NCTP believes this simple form can be of inestimable positive value. Some schools that have built their technology plan with these targeted elements (or, you may prefer to think it terms of the action items on the



Page 120

Figure 9.1 Technology Audit Accountability Matrix



Page 119

December 8, 2005 April 15, 2005 January 31, 2006

Broadband wireless access available 24x7 throughout

All personnel have portable computing capability

Activity fund operations occur electronically throughout

Evidence

Lessons Learned

Copyright © 2004-2005 • National Center for Technology Planning Unauthorized Duplication, Use, or Distribution Strictly Prohibited Dr. Larry S. Anderson, Founder/CEO, NCTP • [email protected]

Andy Carvin, Comptroller

Porter Roberts, Support

J. Moreau, LRC

Evelyn Briscoe, ITA

DRI

Note: This matrix portrays hypothetical information only. It is not intended to serve any purpose other than illustration.

District-wide professional development

Technology student government created to

Teacher incentives in place for innovative

Virtual mentor online program (homework helpers) deployed fully

March 15, 2005

Time

Broadband network access in each physical plant facility (related to instruction)

Action

Timeframe: AY 2005-2008

Technology Audit Accountability Matrix

technology plan? What do you really plan to achieve during the life of your plan? If someone picked up your technology planning document, would s/he be able to tell, in short order, precisely what your school will do? Are these elements clearly identified? Are they pulled out, perhaps in a bulleted list, so all who read your plan could immediately spot the central focus of your activities? If so, that’s great. If not, then you now know an area where you can concentrate efforts that will help you in the long run. Earlier in this book, you found a reference to the Technology Audit

Accountability Matrix. On the next page, you will find this form. It is an excellent tool to use when you want to really simplify and sharpen your technology plan. People who have used this matrix have been amazed at how easy it is to finally get a clear idea of what they really want and intend to do with their plan. Then, when the focus of the plan is sharpened, the natural by-product is that they can truly audit what they said they were going to do. Oh, that all of life were this simple! On this form, you will notice that there are three columns, basically. Two additional columns appear to help you record the gathering of ancillary but supportive data. In column one, you will simply record the main, key points of your technology plan, as mentioned in the “Critical point” paragraph. Just list those main goals, items, or objectives in the column labeled, “Action.” This is what you plan to do. Column two, labeled “Date,” is where you will designate a target date by when you hope to have achieved this action. Concurrent with completing this column, you might want to locate some project management software



Page 118

order to have a head start on the basic kinds of data that are most beneficial in a comprehensive technology audit. These are presented in no particular sequence, except that the discussion of technology plan comes first. All others follow, but you may decide their order.

9.1 Data collected by/for auditors 9.1.1 Technology Plan Your technology plan is the nucleus of all things associated with this technology audit. If your plan has been prepared correctly, it provides a blueprint for what the auditors will discover as they conduct the audit. It has been pointed out previously here that the very first document that should be of value to both your local audit team and the external auditors is your technology plan. If for no other reason than this, alone, it will behoove local technology planners to create a planning document that facilitates the audit. NCTP has produced some materials (written and spoken) that give schools some excellent guidance in both the format and content of a meaningful technology plan.16 Critical point: What are the “main things” in your technology plan? What are the 3, 5, 8, 10 (or however many you identify) key elements of your 16

The Guidebook for Developing an Effective Instructional Technology Plan has been used by thousands of schools and organizations around the world as they work through the process of creating a technology plan. After their plan is in place, though, they must consider the steps to follow in revising and updating their plans regularly. This is where the second book, Visions and Revisions: A Workbook for Updating and Evaluating Your Technology Plan comes in handy. Both of these books are available as downloadable PDF (Adobe Acrobat™) files from the NCTP web site. An audio program, Planning for Gold, is available for purchase directly from NCTP.



Page 117

9.0

Data Collection & Analysis

A superintendent or technology coordinator might wonder, “If I am going to coordinate a technology audit for our school, how should I proceed with collecting, organizing, analyzing, and interpreting the data that will support our belief that we are using technology effectively? For those of us who have been educators a long time, we know the value of data. An entirely new face has been put on data collection, though, as a result of the Scientifically Based Research (SBR) requirements that are so much a part of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act.15 Much of the data used in a technology audit are on hand already. Others will be collected as a part of the audit. Chances are good, though, that they will be helpful for NCLB data gathering activities. Thus, we have another reason for understanding benefits of a technology audit.

9.1 Data collected by/for auditors When auditors begin their work with your school, they will need access to several kinds of data so that their perception of the school is both complete and accurate. Since you want to portray the best possible image of your school and community, you will want to study the following sections in

15

Public Law 107-110 is the official name of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2002. It is an act designed to close the achievement gap with accountability, flexibility, and choice, so that no child is left behind. For a full version of the act, go to http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/index.html



Page 116



•


•


•




Page 115

Technology Plan

Facilities Plan



Compliance


Technology Policies

Inventory Report: Other Devices

Inventory Report: Network

E-Rate

Level II Growth elements


Inventory Report: Computers

Inventory Report: Peripherals

Infrastructure Plan & Report

Facilities inspection

External Funding

Budget: Allocations & Activity

Health & Safety

Upgrades: Hardware & Software

Security Plan & Report

Community Involvement

Correlation: Software & Hardware

Integration of Essential Components

Figure 8.2 Level II Audit Components

In summary, the scope of a technology audit is determined by several variables. No two schools are exactly alike; hence, no two technology audits will be exactly alike. This is not a weakness of the audit design; rather, it shows that an audit is purposed to bring about greater school strength and improvement. The fact that audits may be different from one school to the next is not an indication that audit designs lack either reliability or validity. In reality, the vast majority of items covered in audits are identical from district to district. It is in the subtleties of the audit where variations occur.



Page 114

a Level II audit, whereas they may just want to see that it exists as a part of the scope of Level I. Difference in scope between Level I to Level II. The chart below illustrates some of the variation, in terms of scope, that exists between the two levels of audit. Naturally, this chart is only representative: it does not show all the areas audited in each level. Rather, it gives a cursory indicator of differences you may encounter from one level to the other.

Technology Plan

Facilities Plan


Compliance

Level I Basic, essential elements ["compliance," expected"]



Technology Policies

E-Rate

Figure 8.1 Level I Audit Components

As you can see from comparing these two diagrams, the breadth of coverage is greater in Level II. It contains everything included in Level I, but extends to more specific territories of school operation.



Page 113

related materials) that will help them gain a broader, more comprehensive understanding? The following are some suggestions that deserve your consideration. Who knows? There may be some “pearls” in this list that simply energize your thinking so that you arrive at some exciting examples that you can use to showcase excellence.  Live student project presentations  Kiosks  CDs, DVDs of student work, movies of teachers demonstrating best practice in their teaching, examples of community involvement  Special technology emphasis evening program to which auditors are invited, recognized, and thanked  Students volunteering to be “pages” for auditors -- & students’ use of cell phones, PDAs14, & other technologies to stay in touch with each other  Digital Storytelling Festival (plan an external audit far enough in advance that this can coincide with the site visit) Community influence. Embodied in the scope of a technology audit is the impact of local stakeholders in a school. To understand better some of the considerations that auditors face as they ponder the scope of their work are the following questions: What part of a community might an auditor be interested in investigating? PTA? PTO? School Advisory Councils? If so, what kinds of information are audited? For a Level I audit, you may satisfy auditors by merely showing evidence of community involvement in your school. For a Level II, though, you may want to give details of the variety of ways that community involvement enhances school life and culture. Auditors may want to see how broad the community impact is for

14

A PDA (Personal Digital Assistant) is usually a handheld device, such as one of the products manufactured by Palm, Compaq, Handspring, and others, that is used to store contact lists, phone numbers, appointment calendars, memos, to-do lists, and other similar applications. Some of the more recent PDAs incorporate cell phones as an integral part of the device.



Page 112

future? When we discern the answer to this question, are we then

committed to that answer? Breadth vs. depth. The scope of a Level I audit is understandably, less than a Level II. It is not as broad as Level II. As a matter of fact, it is rather cursory in nature. As you can see in the Figures 8.1 and 8.2 that follow (pages 113 & 114), the Level II audit covers far more concepts than a Level I audit. Similarly, the Level II audit “drills down” more in the areas examined in Level I, but this depth is extended to the concepts examined in Level II. So, it is safe to say that a Level II technology audit is both wider and deeper than a Level I. This explains, partially, why Level II is not only more extensive than Level I, but more expensive, as well. What/who are auditors examining? First and foremost, auditors are looking to see if a school is, indeed, doing what it said it would do, as evidenced in its technology plan. Second, auditors attempt to verify that sound, principled techniques are being employed to carry out the school’s activities. Auditors employ their vast experience in working with other schools to discover areas for improvement that may have eluded the local school. Auditors attempt to work with the school to highlight and enhance opportunities for school improvement. In rare circumstances, auditors may find evidence of wrongdoing or violation in a particular area. If so, they will investigate that and file the necessary report(s) to appropriate officials. To extend the scope of an audit in your school, you may wonder what you can show the auditors (outside the parameters of regular, ordinary audit-



Page 111

Perhaps when school leaders and teams understand clearly the scope of an audit, whether it is a Level I or Level II technology audit, they will be able to determine how to establish areas of responsibility throughout the district. Teams, and their leaders, will work more effectively when they know the area of emphasis for which they have accepted leadership responsibility. Further, they will know the ways in which their chosen areas are unique, as well as where there is overlap into another area being led by a different team. Overall, the clear understanding of audit scope yields clear understanding of the audit, itself. So, what is a positive benefit of this understanding? The results of the audit will be used meaningfully by the entire school community to speed up and enhance progress for the school. This is winwin all the way around. What all gets audited? How do we know what to audit and what is, perhaps, ancillary to central activities? How do we delineate data from information, in preparation for an audit? What is the difference between data that provide a cursory overview (used as supportive documentation) and data that deserve thorough investigation? Ex: cursory/background -- school personnel report on teacher certification auditable -- a specific teacher’s certification record

Are we collecting data and information merely for the auditors, or are we understanding that this information is, first and foremost, to enhance our understanding of our current condition and to serve as an indicator of our



Page 110

8.0

Scope of an audit A typical audit is intended to assess the alignment of plan and practice. It is designed to document “celebration points” for schools that are functioning effectively and in accordance with their plans, as well as with requirements imposed by external agencies (such as State Education Agencies). It is NOT the purpose of a technology audit to be punitive, or even negative. Some people fear an audit so much because our society has perpetuated the concept that auditors are somehow “out to get you.” Taxpayers shudder at the thought of a tax audit. So, if we embrace the philosophy that an audit is good, we will welcome the audit. We need to know, however, the coverage of a technology audit—how much it will include, its scope. As has been pointed out previously in this document, an authentic, comprehensive technology audit would include (actually, its main purpose and focus are to be) a basic investigation into congruence of the technology plan with the following, as a minimum: • facilities • personnel (hiring, certification, etc.) • curriculum/learning • financial/budgeting (including purchasing) • student success • community involvement • professional development



Page 109



•


•


•




Page 108

community talent that is made available to your school; engaged students in preparing to demonstrate their technological prowess to the auditors; mobilized teams of employees and volunteers who will care for the auditors while they are in your school; hosted a visiting team of auditors; and listened to the auditors’ final report. You have been through the three phases of a comprehensive technology audit and now are poised to engage in a full-thrust school improvement plan that results from audit findings. An authentic technology audit focuses upon school improvement in all areas touched by technology. Hence, you can subscribe to the wise adage given me by a former graduate student:

The road lies ahead of you, so why are you looking back?



Page 107

• improve the areas where the audit team (or local team prior to the auditors’ inspection) noted a need for improvement; and • continue and expand upon the excellence that exists already. You may want to take advantage of this phase to provide ample opportunity for school personnel to debrief and discover/discuss adjustments they can make, as a result of the visit. Capturing the intellectual energies of school employees not only gives you the best of the thinking while the audit is fresh on their minds, but it also enhances their own sense of worth to the district. When people truly are made to feel a part of an organization, then loyalty is no problem: it is a “given.”

7.4 Summary When these three phases have been completed, you may feel that the very best thing you can do now is to take a deep breath, get away for a few days, and then regroup. While that is an attractive enticement, I suspect that instead of getting away, you will want to “get to it.” You will, most likely, want to waste no time in gearing up for advanced levels of improvement. No matter whether the results of the audit were encouraging, average, or “in need of improvement,” you have opportunities lying before you. And, what would we do in our society without opportunities? So, you have now: assembled top-notch teams; created systems that work for gathering, organizing, synthesizing, analyzing, and reporting information; compiled great quantities of data; completed inspections of facilities; evaluated your local policies; taken inventory of all the



Page 106

the auditor’s visit, but it has a phenomenal side benefit: the entire school community gains a fresh understanding of just how great this school is! As you build upon successes like this, your technology audit will become an opportunity to multiply success.

7.3 Phase Three: Results & Follow-Up (Post-Audit) At this phase, you have already compiled all the necessary and pertinent information, then organized it into reports and other summary documents as a part of Phase One. Then, in Phase Two, you hosted the auditor team in a site visit where they examined everything and made sure there was proper alignment between what you pledged to do (via your technology plan) and what was actually happening. Now, the time has come for you to receive the results of all this work. The lead auditor will send you a complete written report detailing the team’s findings in all areas. Further, the lead auditor will volunteer to come back to your district and deliver an oral presentation to any bodies you deem necessary. At a minimum, this would be for the school board, but it also could include a presentation and planning session with district administrators in order to establish a path for continued improvement. Since the central purpose of a technology audit is to recognize and promote school improvement, the aggressive program begins here. This final phase gives you a good opportunity to: • establish new courses of bold action;



Page 105

Shortly after the auditors arrive on-site, they will want to begin work. You should expect them to begin early and work late. They have only a limited number of days/hours to spend with you, so all of you want to make the most of the time available. Auditors should have received all necessary reports and forms that apply to the audit prior to their arrival. If this has been accomplished correctly, the only thing(s) left for them will be to validate information you provided, to interview key individuals associated with various programmatic aspects of technology integration, and to go through a series of checklists that ensure that all items included in the audit have been examined. The duration of this on-site visit is covered elsewhere in this document; however, in most cases, the visit should last no longer than 3-4 days. Of course, this depends upon the size of the district, both in terms of student enrollment as well as geographic size. As the site visit time winds down, auditors will be organizing their findings so that a summative report can be prepared and submitted. In this case, they will need help with getting papers, reports, etc., organized so the information makes sense to all parties involved. Since you will want to wrap up this site visit and get back to your exciting routine of activities, it is a good idea to make sure the auditors have plenty of assistance in finalizing their work in your district. During the actual visit, you should leverage the talents of students and teachers so you can showcase excellent work. This will help get ready for



Page 104

appropriate finger foods and light beverages. Or, you may opt for a sitdown dinner at which you have carefully selected speakers to present pertinent information to the auditors. Regardless, this is an excellent opportunity to have students demonstrate, perhaps through a multimedia presentation, how they use interactive technologies to support and enhance their learning. Somehow, we adults pay more attention when stellar young people speak to us. They don’t bring with them the same political baggage that we cherish, so they can speak freely and without the knowledge of innuendos that sprinkle our conversations. Auditors surely will hear a strong, clear message from these students, so I recommend that you don’t miss this opportunity. As an aside, if you don’t already have a robust program functioning healthily in your school where students are making movies and using the digital media technologies that are so much a part of their lives…well, here’s a signal to you that this is one place to start. Get that digital media program going! Find an energetic, knowledgeable teacher in the district to lead such an initiative. But, by all means, get it going. You will NOT be sorry! And, if you don’t feel competent to usher in this beginning, we at NCTP can assist you there. We have plenty of experience creating and delivering workshops, presentations, and symposia in the field of digital media, including digital storytelling (a truly powerful strategy) and will be glad to assist you in any way possible.

Think of yourself as an auditor, then treat auditors accordingly. If they are not driving their own car, how will they get around within the district? Will they have office space available for their work? Will they have open network connectivity, so they can use email and other online resources to facilitate their efforts? If they have questions or problems, do they have a list of phone numbers they can call to get help? Will they be given “runners” from the district who can perform errands for them (obtaining reports, duplicating materials, arranging interviews, etc.)?



Page 103

The on-site visit is a perfect opportunity for you to “show off” your excellence. This can be in the realm of administrative decision making that is supported by technology. Also, it can materialize in the form of teacher proficiencies. Or, it may come to life through the engaging, interactive project-based examples created by students. Regardless, now is your chance to demonstrate clearly that you are “in sync” with your technology plan—and are even going beyond your initial plans in some areas. Auditors should be able to sense an air of excitement almost immediately. In recognition of that fact, here is a real benefit that can accrue to you: external evaluators see your strengths and become PR agents for your school. Just imagine how terrific that will be! It should go without saying; however, as soon as auditors arrive on-site, you should make sure that they are treated comfortably. While this may be the auditors’ first visit to the school site, they will have been in contact with your school well before the visit and should already know quite a bit about how operations function in the school. Nonetheless, you should take every opportunity to accommodate their every need and request—within reason, of course. This may include your hosting a welcoming reception to which you invite community leaders, parents, local governmental officials, teachers and employees of the district, and a selection of key students. This will be an opportunity for auditors to witness, first-hand and with freshness, just how the various parts of your community work together to support effective schools. This event can be as informal as an afternoon tea, complete with



Page 102

ready to aid you in achieving organizational goals. I suggest strongly that you simply consider this as another stage in your pursuit of meaningful school transformation! Great leaders achieve great results-—and that is precisely what you desire. Try to imagine how the auditors will see things--look at things through their eyes. Imagine that you are an auditor in another school. Pretend that one of the auditors is a very close friend who will share candidly with you all the secrets of the auditors. What would the auditors do? What would they say? What would they seek? How would they interpret what you give them? What would they recommend? As you and your team of advisors go through these considerations, you will have prepared yourself well for what lies ahead. You will no longer fear the technology audit, nor will you consider it a negative event. Rather, you will see this as a profoundly important opportunity to engage in systemic improvement, as well as great improvement at the individual level. Bring it on!!

7.2 Phase Two: On-Site Visit Ah! The time has come finally when auditors arrive at your school and are examining both the reports (data, information, evidence) and the actual reality of technology integration. What can this mean to you and what should you expect during this time?



Page 101

Maybe you are a school superintendent and you have just learned that a technology audit will be coming to you during the upcoming school year. What are you to do? Where do you start? Who do you ask? How can you make sure the audit is a positive thing for your school and community. Perhaps you should consider convening an informal gathering of advisors to help you think through this before you “pull the trigger.” You might call upon a sampling of classroom teachers, school staff, and maybe a few of your central office co-workers. You may want to just “level” with them by telling them that a technology audit is coming and you want to obtain their very best thinking about some strategies that will assure success for the school. At this meeting, assign someone to record copious notes or else have your secretary sit in on the meeting and take notes that can be typed and given to you for your thinking after the meeting has ended. During this meeting, you might want to engage in a simple brainstorming activity--asking everyone to call out, as fast as they can, all the areas where you use technologies in your school. You might ask them to be frank and candid in their comments, then ask them to pinpoint areas where they perceive that improvements could be made. If/when they mention some examples, ask them for substantiating evidence that may give you clues to other things needing attention. When you assemble the very best people who comprise the very best teams, you have a unique opportunity to watch stellar leaders emerge. As these top leaders rise to the top in your organization, you will have developed a tremendous pool of talent that is always at your disposal, ever



Page 100

want to form a group of teams to perform specific functions; a physical location may be specified as a “gathering point” for evidentiary documents; a series of focus group meetings may be scheduled so school leaders can poll teachers, students, parents, and community members so they can voice their opinions and give their perspectives regarding the school’s status; and you may create a system where all the hard work of engaged people, the data and reports you collect, and the supporting systems can be perpetuated--so you don’t have the start over each time an audit is called for. Enrolling team members. To make your technology audit a success, it is essential that you have good teams. Good teams will be made up of good people. The good people on the team will choose good team leaders. Good team leaders will ensure a strong and fluid cooperation among teams, all working on a common end goal. Team building13 is neither an inconsequential nor an insignificant activity. All school leaders should realize this fully. Yet, we often are in such a hurry to get a project started so it can be finished, we neglect perhaps one of the most important rules: Get the best leaders who will build and grow the best teams so they will accomplish the best results!

13

To locate excellent resource material on team building, NCTP recommends the work of John C. Maxwell (http://www.maximumimpact.com). Maxwell has written books and created audiotapes, CDs, and videos that teach others how to be successful in key areas of leadership and team building. His outstanding books include: The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership, Developing the Leader Within You, Developing the Leaders Around You, Becoming A Person of Influence, and The 17 Indisputable Laws of Teamwork.



Page 99

7.0

Phases of an audit

To understand better how a comprehensive, effective technology audit works, we can break the process down into its various phases. As a reminder that may make this entire process easier to comprehend, you may want to draw a comparison between the audit process and the activities associated with school accreditation. As you know quite well, when time approaches for your accreditation visit to occur, you segment this into three pieces: 1) getting ready; 2) the on-site visit; and 3) results & follow up. You realize that the greatest quantity of work occurs during the first phase. Such is the situation with a Level II audit. Therefore, we will examine the three phases, accordingly.

7.1 Phase One: Getting Ready (Pre-Audit) Whether the technology audit has been triggered by an internal desire on the part of the school to assess its accountability or whether the impetus has come from outside the school, the initial phase is the same. The school must get ready for the audit. Thus, this phase is sometimes called the “preaudit” stage. At a macro level, the school will want to establish a set of systems that can be put in place to make your time more valuable, more efficient. You may



Page 98



•


•


•




Page 97

to your family or friends on school computers.” “If your lesson plan doesn’t show that you are using that computer in your lesson, it had better be turned off!” -- and in the same speech --“Those computers are expensive. We spent most of our school money on those things. Now, I don’t know much about how to use those things—I came along at a time when we had to use our minds—but I expect you to use them every day if we paid for them.” What kinds of signals are these comments sending to faculty?



Page 96

In the school reports, you may want to include case studies of sampled teachers and/or staff. These case studies can tell stories of how “the plan” has impacted them in the past and what the future holds. Naturally, you would want to capture teachers’ stories that illuminate how technology truly is integrated into learning in a natural way. Subjects of the case studies will remain anonymous in the reports, although their names will be retained in local, private documents. Growth model -- Your school will want to show a charted growth plan for the future, with plenty of community input.

Not only does this

demonstrate clearly how you are integrating technology into student learning and achievement, but it also portrays how the meaningful integration has led you to envision a brighter future with a still broader enthusiasm for stakeholder participation. In this section, you may choose to use statistics that involve demographics of the school, community, business climate, and area tourism and economic development figures. Effective use of the statistics show that the school is on the move to more positive achievements--and that technologies are supporting this move. Evidence of integration:

Memos (electronic, perhaps) from the

superintendent to principals that mention technologies. From the memos, is it clear that top administration supports technology use in a meaningful fashion? Example: I heard two superintendents recently tell their faculty, “I had better not learn that any of you are using your computer for personal reasons. If I hear that you are playing Solitaire on your computer, you will be fired!” “Computers are for school use only. Do NOT be sending email



Page 95

• shadowing programs—opportunities for students to spend time with professionals in some career field. • technical support—from professionals who have children attending the schools or who simply are school supporters. Often, these professionals will be experts in a technical field needed by the technology programs, so there is no excuse for failing to take advantage of the gifts of the professionals. This strategy has the potential of saving great quantities of money, as well. Integration of Essential Elements: The school’s technology plan will be pulled back out to see how the integration of all components that contribute to technology-supported learning is occurring. Then, evidence of this integration will be sought. This is an area where the school can really shine! Technology lends itself quite well to interdisciplinary project-based learning by students. Then, many of these projects can serve as the showcase elements. The funding model (actual budgeting and expenditures history and plans) will be studied by auditors. This goes beyond merely the existence of line item budgeting within the district budget. It includes a clear strategy for funding, as evidenced within the technology plan. Accompanying the text that describes the district’s financial commitment should be a discussion of a district funding model and including graphic diagrams, where appropriate, to show clearly the relationships and interdependencies among elements of the model.



Page 94

Although the prior scenario is rare, auditors will want to ensure that schools can celebrate the fact that their hardware and software purchases are aligned reasonably. Community Involvement (Partnerships) Has the school energized community talents by involving supporters in focus groups, advisory committees? Is there evidence to support this? Auditors will want to know—and to see documentation. Effective, meaningful documentation could include such things as minutes of meetings, newspaper clippings showing successes in this area, and/or letters of testimony from individuals who had been included in these activities. Business partnerships have been popular for many years. One danger, though, is that schools will enter a partnership with a local business and expect completely to be a “taker” from that business. Partnerships, by definition, are two-way arrangements. Schools should gain from business partners, but should be ready immediately to share, as well. Can your school demonstrate that your business partnerships are two-way, or are they just gimmicks to get “stuff” (money, discounts, etc.) from the business? What is the school contributing? These partnerships are excellent opportunities for students to gain firsthand knowledge of the way schools and businesses support each other. Two excellent strategies for using partnerships and community involvement for leveraging value are:



Page 93

• Security of people • Security of facilities The auditing team will want to see documentation that demonstrates to them how the school intends to handle all three of these concerns. A good thing for the school to have ready for evidence is a working security policy. Too, the aspects of security may be discussed in the school’s technology plan. Privacy issues may be of such concern that the school has a policy related to privacy. If so, this is good information to share with auditors. Correlation: Software & Hardware Suppose your district has spent quite a large sum of money on computers, specialized furniture, professional development, and specialty technology equipment. Then, you will have invested a hefty sum of money in software, as well. But, the big question is: was the software purchased via a plan—with consideration for the hardware upon which the software would function, and with attention to the instructional purpose? While this situation is in a minority, there have been horror stories reported of occasions when a substantial holding of hardware was on hand, yet someone associated with purchasing had approved spending money on software that simply would not function on the computer hardware on hand. When something like this occurs, it is usually the result of some “slick” vendor having come through with a really good deal and was able to convince a person holding authority but devoid of true understanding.



Page 92

measuring equipment, they may simply want to see what measures the school has taken to protect users. At a minimum, this matter may be written into the school’s technology plan and have some sort of planned strategy for dealing with potential problems involving radiation. An example of this might be the school’s informing classroom teachers that radiation is an actual possibility so they will guard students from excessive exposure. Dust. As silly as this may sound, dust is a major health issue, especially for asthmatic individuals. Dust can accumulate behind computers, printers, monitors, and other peripherals that are moved rarely. Too, the fans inside computers may be configured in such a way that they draw dust into the insides of the computer. So, when efforts are made to clean a computing lab or facility, often that dust is released into the air. It may seem like dust is just a small thing; however, when the cumulative effect of dust is considered, it then becomes a premier matter of concern. While auditors may not conduct a “white glove test,” they will, no doubt, be impressed when they note that the school is quite concerned about accumulations of dust, particularly as it represents a health issue. Thus, the school gets “points” for being sensitive to users’ needs and conditions. The school may even be spending money on such things as air filtering machines that strip the dust from the air, capture it in disposable filters, and return cleaner air to the airspace where personnel are working. Security Security has three basic components that concern auditors: • Security of data



Page 91

Cord and cable bundling. In many schools, the “rat’s nest” of wires, cables, and cords used to connect computers to a power source and a network, as well as to connect peripheral devices (mouse devices, monitors, printers, external hard drives, scanners, digital cameras, etc.) can ensnare users. Auditors may want to see if the school has taken necessary steps to secure the wiring properly. Further, they may desire to inspect labs and other public areas to see if traffic flow is free of these obstacles. Wires should not be dangling from desks or tables, hanging from ceilings, or protruding from raceways or channels. Asbestos. In schools where network wiring is run from server/wiring closets down hallways to classrooms or public areas, there is a possibility that the wires have to pass through walls. If the school is several years old, auditors may want to be sure that when the walls were penetrated for wiring, that action did not release any harmful effects from asbestos. To serve as a safeguard against any questions in this area, the school technology staff or district maintenance personnel will want to prepare a complete report that addresses the issue of asbestos. Then, auditors will simply need to check a few places and determine if there is a clear pattern of operation that would show how the school has taken special care to cover the consideration. Radiation. Many technological devices emit harmful radiation, often at levels that would surprise us. Long-term exposure to these devices may cause physical, or even psychological, damage to the user. This radiation can come from computers, cell phones, and especially computer monitors. While it is highly unlikely that auditors will come equipped with radiation



Page 90

• How do you go about seeking external funding to support technology? • What kinds of financial incentives have you offered employees who attempt to use technologies wisely? • Has the district supported technology-related activities engaged in by students? If so, what were the factors that led the district to provide this support? • Does the technology budget include remuneration for parent, student, and/or community volunteers? • How has the pattern of funding (including amounts available) changed during recent years? • Can you demonstrate vividly and irrefutably that technology spending is correlated well with goals spelled out in the district’s technology plan? • Do current technology purchases and implementations commit to support costs beyond the current year? • Will funds be available for on-going costs after original purchase, such as annual software licensing costs? • Is obsolescence considered and planned for? • Does the level of technology implementation match the level of technology of the community? [Note: This is not an absolute necessity; often, it may be true that the technologies available to students far outstrips the technology capacity, understanding, and utilization in the community.] Health & Safety Issues Since health and safety of students and employees are major concerns in any school system, the Level II technology audit will include these items. A few of the areas that auditors may examine include:



Page 89

In a Level II audit, we want to specify clearly who is responsible for what. For example, the technology coordinator has a budget, but does s/he really touch that money? Doesn’t every request for spending go through some kind of approval chain? Or, does the technology coordinator have complete and unbridled control over all finances? Since these funds, often, are receipts from public taxation, it seems to behoove district administrators to detail completely how funds flow. Auditors will, most likely, want to see the money trail documented and adhered to. When Federal funds are involved, the scrutiny intensifies even more. A good suggestion to school leaders is to ensure that documentation for this level audit includes a detailed flow chart showing how funds are spent. (Who recommends, chooses, orders, approves, signs off, receives, and accounts?) It is prudent to lay this plan out completely and clearly; perhaps you can learn something about your budgeting and funding situation when you create a mechanism that allows you to examine it definitively. As you prepare your financial patterns document(s), you might consider some of the following questions that may be on auditors’ minds: • Who decides which account the technology funds come from? Is there a trend? What are the rationale for deciding which funds are used? • Are any emergency funds in existence? • How, and to what extent, does accountability for the technology budget get explained to the people served by the technology programs?



Page 88

•

Are the maintenance and upkeep costs of facilities in line with ordinary averages? Has the district engaged in a planned method of keeping facilities working properly, or has the historical action by the district occurred in a haphazard fashion?

•

Are the network outlets arranged in such a way as to enhance instruction? For example, in one school, the network outlets were underneath the “cubby cabinets” and, therefore, almost totally unusable.

These and many other questions will serve as drivers to the kind of detailed information auditors will be seeking with regard to facilities. Money-Funds Money! What a mixture of blessing and curse! Success in many schools hinges upon their having a strong base of financial support and resources. At the same time, money problems can be identified as the culprit in numerous situations. To make matters worse, the occasional financial blunder by a school executive causes a nightmare ripple to scatter across the education landscape. Even the most minute evidence of wrongdoing—or even fraud—by a school leader casts the shadow of suspicion upon the vast, overwhelming majority of leaders who exhibit the most impeccable of moral fiber in this regard. The few evildoers, by their scurrilous actions, convict the masses of “good guys” who would never dream of committing wrong deeds. Nonetheless, money is a major issue, especially where technology is concerned.



Page 87

desire that the location where students spend most of their time (at least, in a traditional sense) during the school day will be designed for maximum “creature comfort” in an appropriate fashion. Auditors may ask questions such as: •

Is the wall coloring appropriate for learning? Colors that are too bright, too dingy, or that have excessive glare will actually detract from students’ ability to function maximally.

•

Are floor coverings appropriate? Much research has been conducted on the optimum type of covering floors should have. For example, carpets provide comfort, warmth, and economy; however, the wrong kind of carpet (non static-free) can be more damaging than “ordinary” coverings, such as wood or linoleum tile. Carpeting has many advantages, but wise designers of learning spaces will consider the natural tendency of carpet to trap food, dust, lint, airborne microorganisms, and other foreign matter that are retained in the students’ environment and which, potentially, may release damaging effects over time.

•

Is lighting appropriate? Did room designers take into consideration the shadow casting, whether it works to the advantage or disadvantage of students and teachers as they work and learn? What about natural light? Is light entering the room from the proper direction so that it benefits rather than hampers learning? Is lighting direct or indirect? What steps has the school taken to evaluate their lighting situation? Are accessory lights (torchiere, sconce, task) readily available, if needed?

•

Are room and building layout such that traffic flows easily? Are there any obstructions existing that cannot be overcome simply by moving furniture or other temporary impediments?

•

Have accommodations been made for disabled or handicapped individuals?

•

Are some of the spaces designed to accommodate flexible uses? For example, can teachers meet together in various locations throughout the school for planning and cooperative, collaborative work? Do the physical design and network layout facilitate this “natural” way of collaboration?



Page 86

desktop videoconferencing enhances real-time, just-in-time relevance for students. Facilities The “where” of technology integration is often on an even par with the “what” and maybe even at times, the “why.” In order for people to become comfortable with using technologies in a natural way, we have to be comfortable in a physical sense. Thus, many questions about physical plant will drive the activities of a Level II technology audit. Perhaps an initial view of facilities in a school would focus upon the physical buildings, their location in proximity to other buildings in the district, their condition (age, worthiness), how they are positioned, physically, on their plots (orientation to sunlight, etc.), and architectural details related to such concerns as accessibility. From this “macro” evaluation of physical facilities, the audit team may drill down and examine particular considerations at the site level. Numerous questions will drive the work of auditors, so school leaders must be diligent in aggregating information that will assist the audit team in arriving at their findings more rapidly (and more accurately). Room design is of paramount interest in an audit. Such criteria as: safety, compliance, appropriateness for learning, ease of traffic flow, ample storage space that is used pragmatically, and the existence of any “open spaces” that provide for flexible student learning will help demonstrate the extent to which those spaces that are designated for student learning actually yield a positive impact upon student achievement. Naturally, we



Page 85

I’m going to put in systems that allow me to keep things that way.” We cannot be so naive as to believe this is universally true, though. The harsh reality, however, is that this mentality/philosophy can leak into the classroom learning environment, often barring teachers from doing things like saving student projects on classroom computer hard drives, installing that new reading comprehension assessment tool or a demo CD of new software that s/he received at the recent state computing conference. Is a culture of MIS vs. instructional computing being cultivated? Or, is there open cooperation and mutual support? It is quite one thing to have such a conflicting situation occurring. It is quite another to have this environment cultivated. During a recent conversation with Raylene Renfrow, retired Executive Director of Technology Services from the Grapevine-Colleyville (TX) School District, she mentioned: This is why the IT folks need to be

reminded that they are there for learning and teaching. Also, this provides a good argument for hiring a Technology Director who has the big picture of education in mind and an instructional focus. The instructionally focused Technology Director who also can understand networking, etc., and manage IT staff is not easy to find! This certainly is true. Is the district using such accoutrements as Voice over IP (VoIP), virtual private networks (VPNs), streaming of media and content, external access (teachers logging in from home), interactive videoconferencing, etc.? We know from many years of solid evidence that classroom-level or even



Page 84

cost savings expected to offset initial installation and implementation fees? Is the purpose for going with wireless to facilitate user convenience, or is there some instructional purpose? How do handheld devices fit into the network? Is the inclusion (or exclusion) of handheld or Palm™ devices a technological decision, an instructional decision, or some other category?

Philosophy of network design. A school network exists as it is for some particular reason. Is there clear evidence of a networking philosophy that guides decisions about the structure of the network and its associated resources? Unfortunately, in many schools, there is a “great gulf” that divides individuals whose main interest is instructional technology from the information technology professionals (many of whom carry some sort of specialized certification(s) to demonstrate their advanced level of competence in managing a host of technology resources).

The

instructional technology enthusiasts want all the technology to function in a fashion that supports instruction. On the other hand, information technologists often strive to make sure the network is a safe, secure place where all assets are accounted for and everything is flowing beautifully. One negative aspect of this philosophy (although it is admirable at a base level) is that information technologists (often referred to as “the MIS guys”) are viewed often as seeming happiest when they have full and total control of the network and attached resources. Individuals not in the MIS camp often make the blanket condemnation that the MIS guys look at things from the perspective that “all these resources are mine to control, so



Page 83

What is its topology12? Are the topology and implementation of the network in line with the school’s philosophy for their network? [Note: although a LAN is the main reference here, it is quite possible that a school would implement a Wide Area Network (WAN) or even some elements of a Metropolitan Area Network (MAN); however, in any of these or similar networking scenarios, it is a basic assumption that a LAN is at the heart of the school’s network plan.] Does the district have wiring diagrams and/or maps that show where all networking resources (electronics, wiring closets, networked devices) are located? Is there a responsibility chart or matrix that shows clearly who has oversight on what components and what the decision tree looks like when troubleshooting, maintenance, or upgrades become involved? Has the school deployed any kind of wireless networking? If so, why? Where? How does the wireless component interface with the wired network? What provisions are made for data security? What decisions have been made about user access? What are the costs associated with wireless and how do these impact the overall networking plan? Is there a 12

Topology is the physical or logical shape of a local-area network (LAN) or other communications system. LANs have four basic types of topologies: 1) bus topology—All devices are connected to a central cable, called the bus or backbone. Bus networks are relatively inexpensive and easy to install for small networks. Ethernet systems use a bus topology; 2) ring topology—All devices are connected to one another in the shape of a closed loop, so that each device is connected directly to two other devices, one on either side of it. Ring topologies are relatively expensive and difficult to install, but they offer high bandwidth and can span large distances; 3) star topology: All devices are connected to a central hub. Star networks are relatively easy to install and manage, but bottlenecks can occur because all data must pass through the hub; and 4) tree topology—A tree topology combines characteristics of linear bus and star topologies. It consists of groups of star-configured workstations connected to a linear bus backbone cable. These topologies can also be mixed. For example, a bus-star network consists of a high-bandwidth bus, called the backbone, which connects a collection of slower-bandwidth star segments. Source: http://www.pcwebopedia.com/TERM/t/topology.html



Page 82

in stocks or bonds and have the full expectation that the return on that investment would be positive and significant. This is no less true with a Level II technology audit. 6.2 Level II 6.2.3 Components In order to gain a clearer understanding of what constitutes a Level II technology audit, perhaps it would be a good idea to examine just a few of the areas included in this audit that are not a part of the Level I audit activities. Again, this level audit includes everything embodied in Level I, plus the following. What follows, though, is certainly not an all-inclusive enumeration; rather, it simply demonstrates what some of them might be. Infrastructure “Infrastructure” can mean a host of things to various people. However, for our purposes in this document, we will define infrastructure so that it relates to the computer networking and underpinning frameworks (topology and wiring/wireless mapping). Network basics. What type Local Area Network (LAN) plan is in place?



Page 81

Why, though, is a Level II audit more expensive? A school district that enters into a Level II audit is expecting some extremely detailed information. Both the quantity and the quality of results should be greater. In order to obtain this more detailed and extensive body of findings, it is necessary for the costs to rise in the following primary areas: • more school-based personnel will need to spend more time gathering more information and compiling more reports than in a Level I audit; • auditors need more time to scour the larger body of documentation; • auditors need more time to investigate—to validate the facts presented in reports and data presented by the school; • the duration of an on-site visit by the auditors will be greater, thereby increasing the cost of simply managing local assets to support the audit visit; and • the hosting of special events surrounding the audit, such as community meetings, student exhibitions, etc. Lest we fall victim to looking at the cost side of the equation and totally ignoring the benefits side, we should remember again that the focus of a technology audit is to seek every possible way in which school improvement can be achieved. Our releasing funds to support an extensive Level II audit, then, should be considered an investment rather than merely an expenditure, much in the same way we would invest money



Page 80

Yes, all these things impact technology implementation in a district, but they are not frequently associated with the many other items that are audited regularly for their impact. Nonetheless, it is crucial to dig into each cranny in order to illuminate as many places and ways as possible where technologies touch lives of students, teachers, administrators, and other personnel in the school. Often, we don’t think about such notions as choice of textbooks as having pivotal impact in technology integration; however, if we step back periodically and consider what effect this might have, perhaps we will learn something new and important about our school and how we use technologies to advance student achievement and, in turn, the entire school environment. In Figure 6.4 (page 78), we can see that the selection and purchase of textbooks are important decisions that have a direct effect upon student learning. Only tangentially do we see impact regarding technology. For example, the district may decide not to buy texts, but rather to purchase a license for electronic versions available via a computer or a computer connected to an online resource. This may be an effective way for schools to spend money, but technology use by students is not a central consideration during the textbook selection process. 6.2 Level II 6.2.2 More extensive and expensive than Level I It should not be a mystery to understand that a Level II audit costs the district more money than a Level I audit. Of course, the payback is greater, as well.



Page 79

Indirect Impact The things that are not so easily and irrefutably connected with students’ use of technology are harder to identify. At least, their application to technology-supported learning is more difficult to describe and defend. Examples of indirect impact include: choice of textbooks by the school; hiring practices for bus drivers, cafeteria workers, office personnel, and custodial staff; energy expenses; costs for extracurricular and co-curricular activities.

Direct link

Textbook purchases

Student learning

Indirect link

Technology use

Direct link

Hiring practices

Effective schools

Indirect link

Technology use in effective schools

Figure 6.4 Indirect Impact Model



Page 78

Direct Impact Direct impact includes such things as an inventory of computers and other technology devices, the number of teachers holding special certification for technology, the amount of the budget that is allocated to technology, the amount of time students spend at school using computers and other relevant technologies, the type and extent of the local area network, the types of devices that can be connected easily into the school’s network, and the record of upgrades to both hardware and software over the past few years. These are only a few examples. I feel sure you can think of many others. All the items I have just listed have a recognizable connection to the school’s delivery of technology-enhanced instruction. As you can see in the diagram below, a clear link exists between the item and the application of technology for learning or administration.

Hardware Purchase / Upgrade

Technology Budget

Technology for Instruction & Administration Software Upgrades

School Network Networked Devices

Figure 6.3 Direct Impact Model



Page 77

The Level II audit requires intensified effort and commitment in terms of people, facilities, reports, finances, and other elements involving preparation and follow-through for such an event. But, the intensity doesn’t stop with only those elements mentioned above. The benefits of a Level II audit are more comprehensive, as well. That’s good news to all those who are responsible for accountability of success in a school district. So, the basic difference between a Level I and Level II audit lies in the comprehensive nature—the complexity, coverage, and depth—of the audit being conducted. This differentiation extends to the tasks and duties of the local audit team, as well, although the involvement of external auditors is naturally more extensive in Level II. 6.2 Level II 6.2.2 Completely comprehensive (inasmuch as possible) In theory, a Level II audit covers everything. But, you might ask, “How is that possible?” Well, that’s why it’s called theory. The theory states that the highest level audit available will cover all aspects involved with the program being audited. Reality is often slightly different, though. In reality, a Level II audit includes everything that is even remotely associated with the use of technology within a school or district. By having this expansive view for the audit, we are able to determine not only

direct impact, but also indirect impact. What’s the difference?



Page 76

their quest for improvement. To auditors, as well as superordinate agencies, this will have profound impact.

6.2

Level II Specific details of what is included in a Level II technology audit may be arranged by collaborative agreement between the auditor and the client school. While some basic components of this audit will be uniform from one district to another, there may be various, particular elements that are "tailored" to address specific needs of a school. The existing technology plan (and its component goals/objectives) is of inestimable value in making this determination. While a Level II audit is more detailed in many ways, it also provides a broader range of benefits. Once again, NCTP reminds you that an audit is a tool for improvement. Thus, a Level II technology audit intensifies the possibilities that schools and the communities of personnel involved will become better in many dimensions. Now that we know a great deal about what is involved in a Level I audit, perhaps it is a good idea to discover how a Level II audit differs.

6.2 Level II 6.2.1 All elements of Level I, plus... A Level II technology audit is merely an extension of a Level I audit, in every dimension. It should go without saying, then, that the foundational basis for a Level II audit is everything that was included in a Level I audit. Then, we build upon that.



Page 75

These figures are not carved in stone. While it is possible that an external audit can be conducted for significantly less money, we should remember that the central goal is improvement. Then, if an audit is handled in an accountable fashion, this represents an investment rather than an expenditure. 6.1 Level I 6.1.6 Length of on-site visit As we have mentioned previously, the on-site visit may last approximately 3-5 days. This should be sufficient time in most districts to verify items found in the document collection provided by the school or to investigate areas of particular interest. If a school has particular desire to have the auditors study a specific area that will take longer, that certainly is open to negotiation among parties. 6.1 Level I 6.1.7 Letters of assurance/commitment The technology audit will have diminished value unless there is a commitment made by local leaders to carry out some of the suggestions presented in the summative report from auditors. One of the best ways to secure this commitment is for district leaders to include, in the audit report, a statement/letter of commitment or assurance. The letter should state that school leaders, teachers, and the community

assure that positive progress will result, that the schools guarantee a strong commitment to improvement. It is advisable that school leaders seek direct letters from community members who support the school in



Page 74

of data that auditors may desire access to are test scores, attendance data, dropout rates, achievement profiles, etc. One word of caution: if access is given to the auditor, it should be read-only so that no district data are disturbed. When the auditor arrives on site, s/he will need unfettered online access. The IT department may need to run some tests to ensure that any general or special access is provided, such as email, web access, video conferencing, etc. 6.1 Level I 6.1.5 Relative cost It is nearly impossible to predict the cost of an internal audit. That will vary significantly depending upon a host of variables that come into play at the local level. So many considerations impact costs: the number of team members; the number of days devoted to the audit; possibility of release time and payment for substitute teachers; internal transportation; duplication of materials; and a plethora of other variables. For an external audit, there seems to be an “average” cost floating around in the profession. Many audits conducted currently involve a team of experts coming into a district for one week, then there is the preparation time to be considered. All in all, an average cost seems to be in the range from $35,000-$50,000. Regardless of the cost, it is important that this expense appears in the school budget as a planned item, to ensure that funds are available when the audit payments are required.



Page 73

6.1 Level I 6.1.4 Level of preparation Particularly for an external audit, the local school district personnel will need to be extremely well prepared. Conducting their own internal review will be of inestimable positive value; however, those faculty and staff who have not been intimately involved in the local audit will need to be given a briefing so they are prepared for what occurs during the external audit phase. An excellent strategy would be to post the internal audit report on a district web site so anyone who desires to read the findings, recommendations, and future plans will have an “edge” in coming up to speed. Just doing this one act should show the external auditors that the school is: a) interested in improvement; and b) a leg up on most other school districts who have not accomplished this. All personnel who come in contact with the auditors should become very familiar with the internal audit information and be able to discuss these matters with the auditor, if requested. This includes individuals who serve as escorts, ambassadors, or interviewees. An additional area where preparation might need to occur is making arrangements for the auditor to access school data online. This may necessitate the establishment of a Virtual Private Network (VPN), or if this is not feasible, just providing private access to particular information. Some of these data may be sensitive; many of them will be private. Types



Page 72

Schedule for External Audit: Smallwood School District While the days listed here are sequential, they are not necessarily contiguous. In all likelihood, there will be “gaps” between some dates.

Day 1:

School district & auditor agree on contract for services and establish a tentative schedule for off-site and on-site work, along with follow-up reports.

Days 2-6:

Auditors receive internal audit and other required documents for off-site review. [1 week minimum for thorough review of documents.]

Day 7.

Auditors meet with local audit team (perhaps via phone or video conference) to discuss the specific design for the external audit. At this juncture, auditors may ask interviewlike questions of the team.

Days 8-12: Auditors conduct the on-site visit. [Duration of this visit will depend upon the size of the district and other factors. Under ordinary circumstances, the on-site visit should last 3-5 days at a maximum. Regardless, a tight and detailed schedule should be arranged prior to the auditor’s arrival.] Days 13-23: Auditor prepares summative report, and then submits it to the district. [Duration: 2 weeks -- 10 working days] Days 24-25: Auditors return to district to make final presentation to the administration, the local audit team, and the school board. A presentation can be made to the community, as well, if the school leaders so desire.

Figure 6.2 Schedule for External Audit



Page 71

audit design may give rise to our communal understanding of new ways we can expand the things we do with technologies. Also, we may learn fresh ways to exercise frugality and efficiency while retaining—or even expanding—effectiveness. The schedule of an audit, like content, may have variations from one district to another. With the internal audit, for example, the local team may have good reason to stretch out the duration of their activities in order to examine particular aspects more closely. For an external audit, however, time is of the essence. Why? First, the school is paying for these auditors and the longer auditors are engaged, the greater the expenses become. Second, auditors know that their being on site in a district is an intrusion. Auditors know that the sooner the district implements recommendations, the sooner the learners benefit. All parties involved have adopted the core belief that the main purpose for an audit is

improvement. As a rough general rule, a draft schedule for external auditors is as follows:



Page 70

Personnel Plan



-

A thorough report on all employees (associated in any way with instructional or administrative technologies) is provided.

 

-

Evidence of hiring procedures appears clearly.

- etc…

Curriculum/Learning Plan



-

Evidence of technology integration into the curriculum (via lesson plans) in an authentic, meaningful manner.

  

-

Evidence of technology use by students in their learning activities (projects, etc.).

-

Evidence that teachers are employing technologies in their instructional practices.

- etc…

Facilities Plan

 

- Evidence that the school makes an effort to keep facilities safe.

  

- Evidence that schools have a long-range plan for facilities maintenance and improvement.

- Evidence that the school has invested appropriate funding to ensure that facilities support pragmatic use of technologies.

- Evidence that facilities accommodate disabled individuals. - etc.

E-Rate Report

  

- E-Rate discount plans appear clearly in the technology plan.

 

- Evidence that student achievement has improved as a result of E-Rate funds inflow.

- Evidence that E-Rate participation has been approved by State Education Agency. - Evidence that the technology plan has been evaluated by an external entity, in accord with ERate regulations.

- etc.

School/Community Participation



- Focus groups (parents, students, teachers, administrators, staff, business leaders) have been formed and are functioning. (Evidence)



- etc.

Other



- Infrastructure readiness—the school networking facilities for High-Speed Internet (HSI) are working well in order to support local team and external audit team activities.



- etc.

Figure 6.1 Technology Audit Checklist



Page 69

Technology Audit Checklist Audit Level: I II (circle one) School: _____________________ _____________________

Date: _________________ Local Audit Leader: _________________ Lead Auditor: _____________________

[Note: This checklist is designed and offered as merely a sampling of considerations that audit teams and auditors will face. As you create a checklist for your use, you will want to add numerous components tailored to your situation.]

Criterion

Comments

Commitment

   

-

A letter from the School Board indicating their commitment to fund the audit and to support its outcomes is available for inclusion in audit document collection. - A letter from the local Superintendent indicating commitment to support the technology audit by leading the local effort, in the form of coordinating selection of initial committees. The letter also indicates his/her support of audit outcomes. - A document room, established by the school in support of the audit, is designated as a central meeting point for use by auditors, as well as a location to host interviews, etc. - The local school audit team has compiled a comprehensive collection of data, anecdotes, and evidence to support the technology audit.

Vision Statement (for tech use) Elements:

    

- Vision statement is easy to locate in school documents. (Technology Plan) - Vision statement is easy to understand. - Evidence of vision is addressed in tech planning goals. - Evidence of vision is addressed in tech planning activities. - Evidence of vision is addressed in tech planning funding/budgeting.

Technology Plan Elements:

     

- Easily locatable in key offices, etc. (accessible to teachers, administrators, staff, community). - Available online. - Major goals/objectives (3-8) are identified easily very early in the document. - “Targets” (what you plan to do--strive for) are easily identified. - Tight correlation is evident between what is stated in the plan document and what is witnessed as activities in the school. - Evidence of technology use philosophies stated in the plan is found in the curriculum.

School Organization



- A school organizational chart, showing chain of command, reporting lines, and information flow is provided.



- etc.



Page 68

improvement. Thus, an annual check on school improvement seems to be a logical, sensible approach. 6.1 Level I 6.1.3 Contents/schedule Each audit, conducted at a wide variety of school buildings and districts, will have several elements of similarity. Yet, due to their uniqueness, no two schools will have the exact same audit contents. Some schools will want to engage in a more thorough audit than others. Some will want to give their audits a particular “flavor.” For example, the school may be on the cusp of launching an initiative for technologies in the arts. So, this district may want to “test” schools’ readiness for adopting the program adaptation. For this reason, the school would engage in a tailored audit. If we adopt the notion that schools should face an audit format that is uniform at some basic level, then elements on the Technology Audit

Checklist (Figure 6.1 on page 68 and Appendix C) represent a good starting place. From this list of suggestions, school administrators can work with the local audit team (for the internal audit) and the external auditors to fashion a workable and helpful audit content list. The content can be as simple or as complex as you desire. This does not mean that, from a national or global perspective, the content and format of technology audits suddenly are given license to abandon core principles and become helter-skelter. Quite to the contrary: a bit of flexibility in



Page 67

6.1 Level I 6.1.2 Frequency One question that is asked frequently is “How often should an audit be conducted?” Earlier, we determined that, in the best of all possible worlds, an audit should be ongoing. It should not be stopping. It is merely in one phase or another of a cycle that perpetuates itself. Currently, at least for educators in the United States, there is no strict requirement coming from the Federal government level that dictates how frequently a formal audit must be conducted. Thus, NCTP suggests that an internal audit, followed by an external Level I audit should occur annually. An external Level II audit is needed less frequently, perhaps once every three to five years. Conditions that call for an audit may change, however, and a formal, external audit may be called at any time. Barring the initiation of governmental regulations, though, a good rule of thumb to follow is to prepare for an annual external audit. It has been mused that perhaps the frequency of an audit should be different for an internal audit than for the external audit. How often do we expect a business or non-profit agency to be audited—to demonstrate their accountability? Annually. In a perfect world, the internal audit is occurring constantly: the external audit is scheduled each year at a time convenient to both the school and the external audit team. To repeat what has been emphasized previously, the purpose of an audit, basically, is



Page 66

You have identified your shortcomings. Now, they can be entered into a type of improvement strategy. You have illuminated your successes. Now, they can be extended for even greater success. School teams can lay all these items out on a metaphorical (or actual, if that works for you) table and prioritize them so that work can begin immediately. Next, timelines can be established as guiding points. DRIs (Directly Responsible Individuals) who volunteer to provide leadership to an effort can be identified and empowered. Finally, an evaluation and reporting scheme can be initiated so that as progress is made on these items, the news can spread throughout the school and a momentum of positive energy will be created. Taking the time to plan for the future, right on the heels of a completed audit is a clear investment in the lives of the schools and those students they serve.



Page 65

• Your school will have amassed a great deal of information. Now, when all the smoke clears, you will find that you have built a bulleted listing of the key principles of technology, curriculum, personnel, and facilities plans–and how all these elements integrate/correlate and build upon each other (articulate) to produce a much stronger school with a clear vision for what you desire to accomplish. • The school will have received quite a bit of extremely helpful advice, information, and input during the audit. The onus is upon the school now to take these data and establish new directions, correct minor deficiencies, but mainly to focus upon strengths and build (extend) these to higher levels. • A collection of evidence has been built that will: prepare schools to hold a “bragfest,” showcasing stellar performance by students and teachers; applaud successes of teachers, staff, and administrators; and highlight school-community collaborations that contribute to a strong learning community that now has the potential to be sustained and expanded. NCTP recommends that when the audits (internal and external) have been completed, the teams and administrators in the district convene to determine “what we learned here in this process.” This debriefing holds great promise, because local decision makers can now engage the energies of the entire school district community to make possible the dreams that have come to light during this time.



Page 64

• the level of discounts that accrue to the school (and ensuring that discount levels are related to free & reduced lunch rates) • proper steps of procedure in securing bids/contracts and maintaining contact with vendors • expenditures of prior funds, ensuring that funds were applied for acceptable use • what precipitated the receipt of E-Rate discount payments (Technology Plan?—Local administrative mandate? School board reaction to SEA demand/requirement?) • channels of funding School personnel would be well advised to have collected data that show how the receipt of E-Rate discounts translate into actual improvements in technology-related enhancements to the district. If there is one thing that will help a district’s audit results, it is to get a “pat on the back” regarding their participation in the E-Rate program!

Result of a Level I audit: So, you’re having this technology audit, but what do you get from it? What can you expect? Will all this effort have been worth it in the end? What have you learned that can bring benefit? Can you justify its cost? Yes, any kind of audit is invasive at some point. Yes, it takes a great deal of time—time that you don’t always feel that you have to spare. Yes, all the meetings, document collection ventures, and heated discussions have taken their toll. But, the advantages are so much greater than the disadvantages. Let’s see how. Technology Audit Survivor’s Guide


Page 63

as well as various SEA requirements, other Federal program requirements, and a diversity of general, comprehensive legal matters. E-Rate The E-Rate program11, while extremely beneficial to school districts, has become one of the most contentious programs in existence. For that reason, a thorough internal audit, followed by an authentic external audit, is of inestimable positive value. All U.S. schools are subject to a formal, directed audit by the Federal Communications Commission, the Schools and Libraries Division (SLD), or others as specified by the Federal government oversight agencies. It behooves wise district leaders to take the initiative to conduct their own audit, and then seek assistance from outside experts to help ensure that the district is above reproach. This is a sterling way to help guarantee that E-Rate discounts will continue flowing to district coffers. Auditors in a Level I audit may ask to see reports and other evidence related to: who may have access to our medical records, etc. While HIPPA requirements may not have yet “trickled down” to impact schools’ handling of student health information, I believe it is prudent for local teams to stop and consider what actions they might take, especially as a part of their technology plans. While there is not necessarily any reason to panic about this, yet another Federal requirement, we all know from history that all it takes is one lawsuit, then everybody will be scrambling to find ways to comply. So, my reason for including HIPPA in this list is more an informational piece than a strict element of the compliance shopping list. 11

The Education Rate (E-Rate) program, or more formally the Universal Service Support Program for Schools and Libraries, was established by the U.S. Congress as part of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The E-Rate is administered by the FCC and provides discounts of from 20% to 90% to public and private non-profit K-12 schools and libraries for telecommunication services, Internet access, and internal connections. The size of the discount is based on a school's or library's location in an urban or rural area and on the level of poverty determined by the percentage of students eligible for the National School Lunch Program.



Page 62

In addition to some of the ordinary, expected realms where compliance is of concern, the district will do well to enumerate areas where local compliance is desirable. Then, a self audit (internal) may help to reveal compliance gaps or successes that, otherwise, would have gone unnoticed and unrecorded. Some of the programs in which compliance may be audited are: • Title IX (Prohibition against discrimination based upon gender) • ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) • IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) • NCLB (No Child Left Behind) • E-Rate (Education Rate) • Remedial education programs • Special education programs • Minorities education programs • Adult education programs • Environmental quality • User safety (through the Safe and Drug Free Schools programs) • Tech Prep programs7 • CIPA (Children’s Internet Protection Act)8 • FERPA (Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act)9 • HIPPA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act)10 7

Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act of 1998, Title II, Sec. 207; 20 U.S.C. 2301 et seq. 8

PL 106-554, Title VXII. http://www.ala.org/cipa

For more information, go to

9

20 U.S.C. § 1232g; 34 CFR Part 99. For more information, go to http://www.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/fpco/ferpa/index.html 10

HIPPA regulations have impacted all our lives recently, as we have had to sign a new form when we go to the doctor’s office, stating precisely



Page 61

technology-aided learning authentic for students; and if the policies have served the district well or have been invasive by their interpretation and application. Technology policies, like all others, should be designed to serve constituents well. If the technology audit dealt with nothing else but technology policy matters, the audit would be well worth all the effort. NCTP encourages all school leaders to enhance their familiarity with technology policy implementation in order that technologies used in the school can serve its people and not become a burden requiring inordinate quantities of valuable time just to “fight fires.”6

Compliance State Education Agencies (SEAs) can provide an updated listing of Federal/State regulation areas where compliance is necessary. The audit team, working with district leaders, can agree upon those areas where compliance will be assessed. In a Level I audit, the auditors will not “drill down” into compliance. Rather, they will perform a cursory observation to determine if the school is recording attempts to comply.

6

For more information on and assistance with technology policies, contact the National Center for Technology Planning (NCTP). NCTP has created and delivered multiple national and international level workshops/seminars on the topic of technology policy. The most successful of these is a handson workshop titled, Technology Policy: Keeping Your School—and You—Out of Trouble! NCTP has established a web site where you can find links to technology policy examples, as well as articles and guidelines to help educators. Find all this at http://www.backflip.com/members/lsanderson



Page 60

crashes, are there current backups (and readily available)? Are there offsite backups, if needed? In the case of a disaster, are there means of communicating among/between campuses and central office without the current phone system being operational? Does the current insurance policy meet the needs of a school in case of a disaster? Do you have policies for appropriate access? For example, if you receive a report of inappropriate email being sent by an employee, what is the policy for accessing private email accounts? Is email backed up? If so, are open records possibilities kept in mind and the implications of that?5 Is your process for enforcement spelled out clearly? How often are your technology policies reviewed? What procedure do you have in place for updating policies? What mechanism do you have in place to garner employees’ input into policy development, enforcement, modification, and review? Auditors, both internal and external, will be extremely interested in reviewing technology policies of a district. The matter of initial interest will be whether there are specific policies for technology. Then, at the next level, auditors will be intrigued to determine how and to what extent these policies are functioning within the district: if they are communicated clearly to education personnel, students, and the community; if they have any relationship to contents of the technology plan; if they are kept up to date; if they have relevance to the way the school uses technology to make

5

Thanks to Raylene Renfrow, Marquez, TX for some of these ideas regarding disaster plans and access.



Page 59

coordination between instructional excellence (and even student achievement) and administrative functionality with technology. Technology policies Do you have policies that are specific to technology? If so, were the policies initiated at the instructor, principal, superintendent, or school board level? Do you have all your technology policies gathered in one single location? Where are they kept? Are they maintained in a central database, notebook, or some similar collection device? Are all the technology policies well thought out? How are your policies distributed? Are they available online? If so, how hard are they to locate when a person searches for them online? Are they accessible via the World Wide Web, on the commodity Internet, or in a closed fashion (such as a Virtual Private Network (VPN))? Are all technology policies for the district level, or do you have some that exist at the building level? Are they mostly administrative in nature, or do some apply to classroom instruction, as well? Do you have a clear delineation between policy and procedure? Is this delineation written in such a way that teachers and staff can understand the difference clearly? Are there disaster plans? Are data backup procedures documented and in practice? For example, if the network goes down, can the cafeteria still serve/check out? Can the nurse still find medical information? If a server



Page 58

Critical point: The discussion that follows speaks mainly to the position of technology coordinator. It is critical to understand at this juncture that the profile of a technology coordinator/director in many school districts has changed significantly during the past 10-15 years. In many schools, two individuals have been hired in what had, traditionally, been a single position. Often, one person in a coordinator-level position will deal strictly with the technical aspects of technology. A different person will be hired to handle the instructional needs. Many years ago, when microcomputers first came into schools, one person performed both of these functions. With the advent of networks and so many other complex technological innovations, the curriculum person just cannot keep up with the rapidly changing world of information technology. Little by little, a hodge-podge of titles, job descriptions, and expectations has permeated this field. Nonetheless, we still look to some individual in a school district who has been given the authority and who has the prowess to provide leadership for the instructional technology function. The main focus of this section is the technology coordinator and his/her support staff colleagues. Certifications held by any of the following positioned employees should be catalogued and reported to audit teams or auditors when asked: • building-level technology coordinator • district-level technology coordinator • curriculum- or subject-area specific coordinator It is a point of victory when a district can celebrate the certification of its personnel. Administrators are considered stronger leaders when support personnel obtain advanced levels of preparation that enable them to serve the classroom instructional function more effectively. A natural extension of this is that administrative functions will occur more smoothly, as well, because the highly-trained and certified support team will ensure a tight



Page 57

Interviewers, then, should seek teachers who are good and effective teachers, but their having tech skills is a bonus to the school. If your school adopts this philosophy and it is reflected in your personnel assessment/evaluation materials, you should win big points with your auditors. Certification of teachers. The importance of teachers’ certification cannot be underestimated. Thus, in preparation for an audit, the school team should gather data to address the following questions: • How many teachers have earned some kind of certification or endorsement related to technology? • What is/are the level(s) of certification that teachers have received? • What is the relevance of certifications received to instructional responsibilities of those certified? • What is the recency of certifications received? (With the rapidity of changes in the world of technology, it may be questionable if a certification is ten or more years old.) • How many teachers are currently in process to receive advanced certification in technology areas? • Are there any incentives by the district to reward teachers for gaining additional certifications?

Certification of support staff. Classroom teachers are not the only ones who need to be striving for advanced certifications. Those who work in support of instruction face such a multitude and variety of challenges that they can be successful only to the extent they stay abreast of the rapid changes brought into their world. Technology Audit Survivor’s Guide


Page 56

Now, as a caution, I remind you that technological prowess on the part of a teacher—or a prospective teacher seeking to be hired by the school—is admirable, but it is not the “main thing.” Those of you who have been through the hiring process many times have discovered that some teachers just know how to teach. They are eager to learn. They have nearboundless energy. They exude enthusiasm. It stands to reason, then, that if such people are great teachers, yet they seem to have limited skills or understanding related to technology, this will be just one more challenge to them. They accept challenges, so they enter the learning phase with great anticipation. On the other hand, if a potential employee shows up for an interview and can demonstrate significant technology skills, this is cause for excitement. Well, maybe. If the person can make a computer “walk and talk,” but is unable to teach or seems wary of learning new things, you should be disheartened…and maybe look elsewhere. Rae Niles, Director of Curriculum and Technology in the Sedgwick, Kansas Public School District, feels that hiring practices must focus upon teachers’ natural instructional capability. At my school we would rather

hire a strong teacher with weak technology skills than a great tech teacher with weak teaching skills. We feel you can train them to use technology, but if they don't know the content or understand kids, there is not much we can do.



Page 55

performance. If you are unable to show any correlation whatever, this still is a valuable clue that will guide you in preparing data of this sort for the following technology audit. In the interim, regardless of what your report shows about student performance with technologies, you will deliver a far stronger program of instruction just because you are monitoring student performance on objective assessments. Personnel assessment/evaluation In addition to the contents of a district’s personnel plan, auditors may seek evidence related to the way that district handles ongoing assessment and evaluation of faculty, staff, and administrators.

For example, are

technologies used in any way to assess and evaluate faculty—their performance, compensation, certification, the way they use technologies to support and enhance their teaching, etc.? Evidence in this area helps to demonstrate to what extent the school seeks and rewards technology prowess among its employees. This is another one of those aspects that separates the schools dedicated to advancement from those that “muddle along.” Auditors will seek information on the school’s hiring practices. How energetic is the school in seeking new employees who know how to use technologies effectively in fulfillment of their duties? Does the school apply technologies in profiling potential employees, using the computer, for example, to compare and contrast the pool of applicants? As with everything related to a technology audit, the key element here is that there is evidence to support a school’s claims.



Page 54

• How has the district used its funds to provide a unified communications system that covers the district and enhances productivity and efficiency for all employees and operations (ex: to overcome such scenarios as each school having to phone in lunch orders for the day to some central locations rather than having a centralized, automated system for collecting and processing these kinds of pertinent, but time-consuming, data)? It has been said that if you want to know what a person’s priorities are, examine his/her checkbook. Such is the case with technology funding in a district, as well. This goes beyond simply the amount of money budgeted. It includes the way in which dollars are allocated and spent, the way in which they leverage their finances to acquire more money, and the discipline they exercise as they make purchasing decisions–to ensure that the purchases they are making are the kinds that will have lasting value and are not simply “fad purchases.” Student performance Students are at the core of any worthwhile educational enterprise. Hence, a valuable indicator to inform the audit process is a reference to student achievement. Your school should compile information that demonstrates the extent to which student learning has been impacted by various technologies and technology-enhanced instructional practices. Even if your inclusion of student data reveals only baseline information or shows progress from year to year, these data will be quite valuable. Tracking student achievement while examining technology programs is worthwhile, especially if you are able to demonstrate that when the program is well executed, students fared better in objective measures of Technology Audit Survivor’s Guide


Page 53

may be for construction projects, faculty incentives, professional development, or software and other peripherals to support instruction. Funding and budgeting are not the same thing. They are related, however. Funding is a function of the budget. Decisions begin with budgeting, but are demonstrated by the commitment evidenced in funding. Part of this philosophy relates to a district’s policies, as well. So, the auditors may want to ask for policy statements that support either the budgeting/funding plan or the evidence from practice, or both. In addition, some questions that local audit teams should ponder, in preparing materials for auditors are: • For how long has the district included technology in its budget? • Has the district’s inclusion of technology in its budget served a leadership/visionary function, trailed practices used elsewhere that are supported through research, or become stagnant over time? • How much input do principals or teachers truly have into budgeting/funding matters for the district? Are their opinions sought when the budget is built? Are they counseled when expenditures are made? Is a mechanism in place to ensure this over time? • How do grant dollars impact the technology plan and/or district funding for technology? • How are technology funds spent for professional development (training)? • In what way has the school spent money to provide and support student management systems (also called student information systems)? Who was involved in making key decisions about types, costs, and vendors for these systems?



Page 52

• lighting • sound/acoustical • electrical • condition of physical spaces • safety • security • heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) • floor coverings • entry and exit passageways • network wiring (ensuring compliance with electrical codes, plenum4 considerations, etc.) Finally, particular attention should be paid to regulations pertaining to special population students. Federal, and perhaps State, programs such as IDEA and ADA dictate specific considerations that must be a part of a school’s facilities plan. Correlation of technology plan with funding/budgeting The technology plan may prescribe that the technology budget will expand by a certain percent each year during the cycle of the plan. From there, auditors can look at the district financial papers and determine: 1) if there is an entry for technology as a line item in the district budget; and 2) if the financial practices of the district have aligned with the technology plan statement and the budget. Auditors may want to study the history of funding for technology, as well. It is important to note that this is not just for purchase of computers; it 4

http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/P/plenum_cable.html



Page 51

gladly. Schools that have problems with an audit either will not have this evidence to show or else the evidence they attempt to present will be weak and disconnected with plans. Facilities overview/inspection If the district has multiple internal audit teams, one potentially excellent strategy would be for teams to engage in “site swapping,” that is, going to a site other than the one where they work or teach. Then, they would be able to inspect the school with a fresh eye. Each team, armed with the facilities plan/report prepared by personnel at a different building in the district, would pay a visit to the other school just to verify that the report is right on target. One of the principal things to be monitored is the level of readiness at each site to accept various technologies seamlessly into everyday use. This may include such things as: conditions of walls that are being considered for network wiring penetration (with wireless access as an alternative); electrical circuit capacity, to handle all the technologies that are to be used (including those technologies that are brought in by students and/or visitors to the school); and status of connectivity to portable units. A potential result of this cursory examination by local district personnel is that a catalog of actions can be built that will advise the district maintenance department regarding priorities for their attention. As status reports at each facility are prepared, the personnel who are building the reports should be reminded to compare/contrast the actual conditions of facilities with minimum standards and guidelines:



Page 50

planning for the future. Too, this plan should include evidences of how the school has supplemented their own local money with external funds targeted for technology. Some examples include: grants (Federal, State, and private) to the school; grants to specific teachers or teams of teachers; grants awarded to a different organization, but in which the school played a role or was a partner; E-Rate discounts (to demonstrate how and the extent to which these discounts will offset the need to use local dollars for technology enhancement, and further, to illuminate how E-Rate funding has a direct impact upon the kinds of expansive planning in which the school can engage); and bond monies earmarked for technologies. Many other examples exist, but my point here is to emphasize how the financial plan will demonstrate the positive, sensible approach a school takes to ensuring that technology-related activities can be supported financially. Correlation of document(s) with practice All the plans in the world won’t help a district make advancement if they are disjointed and unrelated. So, auditors will pour through existing documents, such as the technology plan, to determine where evidence exists to support what the district says it will do. An example of this might be: the technology plan states that studentcreated technology projects associated with curriculum plans will be encouraged. Evidence of this might be a printed program from the student film festival that is conducted annually. Schools that excel on their technology audit will not only have these evidences of putting plans into practice, but will celebrate these victories



Page 49

Finally, auditors will want to examine the school’s personnel plan in order to discover how the school plans to handle: • recruiting; • hiring; • promotion; • retention; and • release of personnel, especially as technology is a part of this process. Does the school apply technology during the process of screening applicants for open positions? Does the district expect that new hires will have technology skills or interest? Does the district have a plan–a strategy for taking advantage of the technology-related expertise among faculty? Does the school have a process in place for tracking employees’ progress (CEUs, professional development completion, articles written, etc.) in obtaining and exercising their technological skills? Auditors will want to study the personnel plan to determine how it correlates with the district’s technology plan. Strong districts will be able to demonstrate a tight integration between the two.



Document inventory: Financial Plan

Every school should have a financial plan, just like every person and family should, if they intend (emphasis on “actioned intent”) to succeed in this aspect of their lives. This plan, though, is much more than just a budget. For purposes of this technology audit, we would like to see evidence that a school community has included financial considerations as a part of their



Page 48

levels, as well as years of experience (and in what position, such as classroom teaching, subject matter coordination, coach, administrator, librarian, etc.); an aggregated list of certification levels held by faculty; and extracurricular or co-curricular leadership responsibilities (ex: debate team coach, newspaper or yearbook advisor). For purposes of this technology audit, it would be quite helpful to have a listing of all personnel who have earned some kind of certification that deals with technology, coupled with an indication of the area in which they apply this certification.

Examples include: computer education

certification, technology coordinator certification, A+ certification, Cisco Networking Academy certification, or any other types of certifications or endorsements that would be added to their regular teaching certificate. In particular, a list of positions specific to administrative and instructional technology with a personnel tree3 and certifications (attained or desired for the position) would benefit both you and the external auditors by showing, graphically, how your organizational chart and technology integration are aligned. Having these data will assist auditors in gaining an overall picture of how effectively the school is using personnel for instruction, support, and administration. In addition to a simple database, a beneficial tool would be an organizational chart that shows relationships among faculty and staff, particularly in the realm of technology integration. 3

Special thanks to Ms. Raylene Renfrow, Marquez, TX (retired as Executive Director of Technology for the Grapevine-Colleyville Independent School District) for this phrase.



Page 47

• Do any of your teachers use a computer as a part of their teaching? If so, give examples. • Do you ever see your teachers actually using their computer, either during or outside class? Explain. • Do teachers require you to use computers during class or to prepare assignments? Explain. • Are you ever assigned homework that requires you to use a computer in order to complete it? Give examples. • Do your teachers allow you to use technology in an innovative way as a part of your learning? Give examples. • If you are allowed to use technologies for completing classwork or assignments, are the majority of activities a type of long-term project or are you mainly performing work in your seat that is related to only one lesson? Give examples, especially if work is project-based. [Note: With these questions, you are trying to determine the quality of technology-assisted work students are performing.] • Do any teachers make computer use a regular part of their teaching? Explain. [Note that this question is very similar to one you asked earlier. Ask it anyway. You might be surprised what you learn.] Professional development is an indispensable part of curriculum development and delivery. You might compile examples or evidence to show how professional development that targets technology is used in the curriculum plan.



Document inventory: Personnel Plan

The collection of documents that deal with personnel may include: a listing of all faculty and administrators, showing certification areas and



Page 46

the future. Special purpose facilities (Fine Arts Complex, Athletic Field House, etc.) should be indicated. Your document collection in this area should be not only the obvious usual items (such as floor plans), but also a written plan for facilities. If you don’t have a separate facilities planning document, be sure to provide pointers to where the necessary information is located.



Document inventory: Curriculum Plan

A careful examination of your district’s total curricular offerings may give you clues as to how much emphasis you place upon instructional technologies. This won’t be sufficient, though. In recent years, a growing emphasis has been placed upon integrating technologies into all—or almost all—courses as a natural event. Thus, an effective strategy may be for you to ask teachers throughout the school to identify specific ways in which technology applications appear in their individual curricula. It is entirely possible that this process of scrutinizing your courses will lend new light to the way in which your district has the curriculum plan organized. Ask students! What a novel idea. To gain a realistic picture of the myriad ways technology is used in teaching, ask students a series of questions, such as:



Page 45

• the makeup of the planning committee (to discover the scope of involvement in developing the plan) • whether the essential, focused goals of the district are highlighted clearly and explicitly • an authentic evaluation plan • evidence that the plan correlates technologies with budgeting/funding, curriculum, and hiring practices • evidence that the plan has administrative approval, the proof of which includes signatures from the superintendent, board members, and principals, as appropriate



Document inventory: Facilities Plan

Auditors will look to see if the district has a comprehensive, meaningful plan for the use of physical facilities. This plan may include such things as a physical plant layout map; an enumeration of buildings, complete with square footage statistics; a map showing the geographic locations of all buildings; and recent statistics showing the economic impact of heating/cooling and other utilities, as well as budget figures to substantiate that the district is doing its share in building, developing, and maintaining facilities. Auditors may examine the facilities schematics to discern locations where technologies are deployed, especially such necessary items as wiring closets, server farms, hub/switch/router locations, Point of Demarcation (PoD) for network access, etc. The information provided to auditors may tell them the age of each facility, date(s) of renovation(s), and even plans for



Page 44

Document inventory • What sorts of documents must you have compiled in order to demonstrate the breadth and depth of your technology integration efforts? • Where should these documents be kept? • Who should be responsible for maintaining the database of documents? • Should the document "library" be maintained in hard copy or will electronic holdings be acceptable? • For how long should documents be maintained and catalogued? • Are the documents sufficiently important that backup copies should be kept at an alternate site? • How should the documents be indexed?—is there some accepted scheme for indexing, or is this something that is left up to each individual school district?

These and other similar questions face school district personnel. No fear or trepidation is necessary, though, because a Level I audit requires "surface level" documentation. The key point in a Level I audit is to demonstrate that the school has its act together and is making reasonable progress toward achieving future-oriented goals. The aggregation of documents is merely one piece in the metaphorical puzzle.



Document inventory: Technology Plan

One of the main documents a school district should have ready for review by auditors is the technology plan. Ideally, this plan will be available for viewing online, as well as in hard copy. Auditors will likely check several elements to assess the practicability of the plan: • when the plan was written, originally • whether the plan being used is an original plan or an update of an earlier plan



Page 43

• Dr. Speights coordinates the writing of a plan for improvement, addressing issues illuminated in the technology audit report. This plan is submitted to the school board and to the external auditors. • When auditors have received, reviewed, and approved the improvement plan, they write a letter to Dr. Speights, the school board, and any superordinate agency (such as the State Department of Public Instruction) to indicate that the audit was conducted and any revelations that came forth. This scenario represents the most basic form of technology audit. In actual practice, some of the elements can be “tweaked” to suit the best interests of the affected school district. Some activities in this example may occur in a sequenced manner. Many

could happen simultaneously. Stellar project management will dictate the better way. 6.1 Level I 6.1.1

Components

A Level I technology can best lead to success or positive improvement if we gain an understanding of the Level I framework—what it includes, as well as “who needs to do what” in preparing for this formal audit. Numerous components of a Level I technology audit exist. The following are presented as a baseline set of considerations. You may want to add a listing of your own that would include things I have not thought of.



Page 42

External audit phase • An auditor (individual or team) is selected. The working contract (including salary) is agreed upon, in final form. • Dr. Speights (and the team, if deemed necessary) meets with the external auditors. • The local team shares with auditors all documents gathered, as well as the internal audit report. • Together, the auditors, the local audit team, and Dr. Speights work to establish a strategy that will drive this formal audit. • All parties agree upon a schedule/timeframe for the audit. • All parties discuss some possible outcome objectives. • Auditors schedule date(s) for on-site visit(s). • Auditors meet with focus groups and other constituencies, as needed. • Auditors study all documents provided. • Auditors schedule an on-site visit and make their observations. • Auditors prepare, then release to Dr. Speights and the team, their written report. • Auditors meet face-to-face with Dr. Speights and the team to deliver an oral report on the audit. • Auditors deliver to the school board both a written report and a visual presentation to support their findings and recommendations. • Auditors volunteer to give their presentation to an open meeting of the community. This is at the discretion of the local school board and administration.



Page 41

Internal audit phase • Local audit team leaders are chosen (perhaps by Dr. Speights). He may appoint an individual to serve as overall coordinator, as well. The key here is to get the best leadership in place and functioning quickly. • Audit teams are formed. • Necessary documents needed to support the audit are gathered (ex: technology plan, facilities plan, personnel reports, etc.). • Meetings are held at each school to explain this process to teachers. The purpose is to ensure that all teachers know what to expect as their peers begin gathering data from a multitude of locations. • Dr. Speights meets with the PTA/PTO (Parents Teachers Association) to explain the process, to seek community support and patience, and to forecast some findings. This serves to get the community “on board.” • Teams work school-by-school within the district. At the same time, another team works on the district as a whole. • Individual team reports are written, and then combined into a district-wide document. • Dr. Speights shares the internal audit report with the school board. • The school board approves the internal technology audit. • Dr. Speights authorizes publication of the report.



Page 40

what information the district needs to compile; what role(s) each person must play; what beneficial results the district can expect from the audit; the scope of the audit; and the estimated cost. Dr. Speights and the technology planning team have full expectation that all the things they learn from this initial audit will lead them into a modality of improvement and, further, into a state of readiness for their next audit. The team understands that the first audit will examine basic level items.

Subsequent audits will be either a regular,

periodic repeat of the first audit (to document a sustained pattern of implementation) or else a Level II audit that is more thorough and takes more time. As the team contemplates the forthcoming activity, they are filled with a mixture of consternation and excitement. Consternation because they fear the unknown. Excitement because they have “caught” Dr. Speights’ positivism—and the fact that this district thrives on challenges that make them stretch to become better. {Now, to step through this process more rapidly, I will use bullets to identify each step/phase of the audit activity.}



Page 39

Smallwood has a new shopping mall that was completed 4 years ago and that has brought a boost to the local economy. Only 35 minutes to the East of Smallwood is a state university, so higher education opportunities are readily available to students who emerge from the local school district. Many employees at the university have established residence in Smallwood due to its charm and strong community spirit. The student population in Smallwood School District is 3850, grades K-12. Fifty-seven percent (57%) of teachers hold a masters degree or higher. Eight percent (8%) of classroom teachers have earned doctorates. Twenty-two percent (22%) of employees report that they hold a special certification in some aspect of technology. The district developed a new technology plan in 2001. The intention is to update this plan annually and to have each new plan cover a 3-year span. The plan has not been updated since it was released. Dr. Martin Speights, Superintendent, declared that, prior to initiating the revision phase for the plan, it would be appropriate to have some external entity come into the district and conduct a thorough audit of technology use. Dr. Speights is quick to confess that he doesn’t know for sure what this entire audit would cover or measure, but he has the strong sense that this action would be good for the district. The next step for the district is to meet with the auditors to determine the essential components of a meaningful audit:



Page 38

tiered audits, the school will take significant, positive steps toward improvement. Improvement, after all, is the central purpose of any audit.

6.1

Level I It has been said that "A trip of a thousand miles begins with a single step." Certainly, this holds truth where the audit of technology implementation is involved. Perhaps the best way to introduce the notion of a Level I audit is to set up a scenario of a school district and follow the actions of this district into and through a technology audit.

Smallwood School District

Initial Audit Process

Smallwood School District represents approximately 28,000 residents living in a community that has a strong industrial and agricultural history. Many of the town's residents work in the local factories.

A growing number of residents have

established their own small businesses, including home-based businesses, over the past 15 years. Smallwood demonstrates a strong heritage in the farming and agricultural products areas; however, the number of family farms has dwindled significantly over the same 15-year period. More people are transitioning their farmlands into commercial developments, such as industrial parks or residential subdivisions, especially as families who lived within the city for generations have moved out to the fringe areas and built homes in these blossoming subdivisions.



Page 37

6.0

Levels of audit An audit, by its very nature, tends to be quite complex. At least, we have a tendency to view it that way.

With an authentic, comprehensive

technology audit, though, it is not only possible, but also recommended, that we separate the audit into at least two levels. The first level is designed to be basic in nature. The higher level audit seeks to "ferret out" deeper meaning from the findings during: • evaluation of supporting documentation; • interviews with school personnel (including students and parents); and • the on-site audit visit. In an effort to help education institutions and their leaders grasp a firm understanding of the technology audit—and the accompanying manifold benefits that accrue therefrom—the National Center for Technology Planning (NCTP) has created a multi-tier level approach to the audit process. A school2 that engages in a local technology audit is expected to begin with a basic audit (Level I—to be explained later) the first year. Subsequently, when the school has "sharpened its focus" as a result of initial audit findings, it would advance into a more thorough, more extensive technology audit (Level II). Throughout the process of these 2

The term “school” is used here to encompass not only the physical plant of a facility, but also the employed personnel and students. We want our discussion of school to be as inclusive as possible—and one that makes sense at a local setting.



Page 36



•


•


•




Page 35

In some instances, schools have either sought or accepted external audits conducted by agencies such as regional or state education agencies, or their representatives. When this occurs, it renders the audit practically useless. Why? The objectivity inherent in a supervisory entity is flawed, because often their decisions impact so many elements of a school’s function, such as financing, policy, credentialing, accreditation, transportation, and a host of other areas. So, a careful word of advice: if you desire your school to have a worthwhile audit, seek a consultant or team that is unrelated to your school, rather than succumbing to an audit performed by any superordinate entity. Credibility is something that schools strive for many years and with unending effort to build. It can be destroyed, though, in an extremely short time. You cannot afford that!



Page 34

specifically who his/her team leader is will enhance the quality of your overall effort immensely.

5.2 External Audit When an auditor or auditing team is brought in from outside the school, all the rules for an internal audit apply. Local teams function to gather data, information, and reports. Internal preparations occur at a brisk pace, and then the external auditors come into the picture. The following considerations apply specifically when an external audit is called for: • conducted by an outside individual, agency, or group • conforms to some defensible, agreed-upon criteria for examination • produces reports that illuminate areas of strength, weakness, and improvement • average costs range from $5,000 (minimal audit) to $50,000 (more extensive audit) • duration: on-site visit may take from 3-5 days for a school with average size (1500-5000) enrollment (provided that preliminary documentation is in order) • ensures credibility in your audit As you can see, the predominant advantage to an external audit is that the results of your audit truly have an element of credibility that a school simply cannot provide by auditing itself. Moreover, if the external agency has no direct relationship with the school, the chances improve that credibility will be airtight.



Page 33

and/or profiling. This, in itself, is an excellent demonstration of technoprowess. While you will probably create your own format for data, information, and reports that you post online, NCTP suggests that you check with external auditors, if possible and practicable, to determine if the auditor has a preferred format. This is not an absolute essential. It is merely a suggestion that might allow you to show auditors how agile you are at modifying or customizing online reporting formatting. Although you are working on an internal audit, it always gives your school a boost to make adequate preparations for the time when your external audit kicks in. Ask yourself, "What would a highly effective school be able to show us?"—then organize your teams, facilities, equipment, and reports so you can show them in order to achieve “top billing” in others’ minds. Also, it is a good idea to ask how this information would be organized and presented (appear) to others. Your answer to this will be of inestimable positive value. Your efforts will likely show organizational skills that set you apart from the masses. Activities associated with conducting an internal audit are so important that you should designate directly responsible individuals (DRIs) early in the process of setting up. Multiple reasons exist for doing this. First, it is crucially important that some person actually is in charge of each component in the audit process.

This links to responsibility and

accountability. Second, team members who are laboring on various components of the internal audit really need to know that there is a person with whom they coordinate their efforts. Just the fact that one knows



Page 32

The internal audit should, in the best of all possible worlds, be an ongoing event. This is, perhaps, a key responsibility of the technology planning team, as they should be most adept at building and maintaining a system for managing the perpetual internal audit. Examples of items that the planning/audit team may compile are: • learning objectives that incorporate, or at least mention, technology • reports that demonstrate technology impact within the district (your local team might enumerate what reports would be necessary and/or helpful in supporting this premise, such as personnel reports that indicate both levels of certification as well as salary and funding support for these individuals) • evidence of technology-related successes, including answers (and evidence) to these questions: a) Were students involved? How? How many? For how long? What did they do? a) Were teachers and administrators involved? If so, how? How many? For how long? Who were they? What did they do? a) Any parents involved? ... a) Any community members, business partners, etc., involved? … • student achievement data (this may represent only baseline data from year to year; however, these will be crucial to tracking the extent to which technology-impacted instruction and environment are congruent with student achievement in a variety of subject areas and activities) • reports indicating major technology upgrades/changes during the past year that impact the technology planning/audit environment/landscape • an internal study of how, and to what extent, the technology plan is aligned with curriculum & instructional practices In preparation for the on-site visit, some materials/documents may be posted online for auditors—or, at least, some kind of data aggregation Technology Audit Survivor’s Guide


Page 31

Usually, the chief auditor is a consultant hired by the district to manage the audit review. S/he may have a team of auditors to assist, but a single individual should always be in charge.

5.1 Internal Audit Organization is a key element for accurate reflection and sustainable improvement. Hence, the internal audit represents a perfect opportunity for the school to collect, then organize, all documents that contribute to painting an accurate picture of the school’s progress in using technologies for instructional and administrative purposes. Whether we like what we see during self-examination, it is healthy for a school to take a good, long, thorough look at itself periodically. Since the purpose of an audit is

improvement, nothing but good can come from this exercise as long as all those involved agree to turn over every stone imaginable so the organization can determine areas of strength, as well as weaknesses or shortcomings. One strategy that has been quite valuable to some schools is to engage in a

quasi-internal audit. Here, school leaders seek assistance from parents, students, or community members who will come into the schools, take a look for themselves, then report their findings honestly. Often, we who are in the schools every day simply don’t recognize some areas where we can excite improvement. In addition, we might overlook the profound significance of some specific activity or feature that is contributing greatly to success in a particular area.



Page 30

5.0

Types of audit

Two basic types of audits exist: internal and external. In this case, “type” correlates to the school’s frame of reference.

Caution: Some people may feel uncomfortable with the word “internal” in this context. Perhaps a reason for this results from our notions about internal auditing that occurs in many corporate, banking, government, and military organizations. In such examples as these, however, the usual scenario is this: an individual who works for the organization is on staff full-time in the position of Internal Auditor and this individual (although it could be a team) spends 100% of his/her time auditing functions of that organization. The individual, usually, has a background and training in accounting—and often is a CPA (Certified Public Accountant). Such is not the case with schools, though. For purposes of this document, our internal auditors are, indeed, employees of the school, but the local audit team could include community members who hold special expertise in an area that would benefit the team in accomplishing its goal. We do not have a full-time school employee who conducts this technology audit on a year-round basis. We use our own, often overworked, personnel resources. In this book, I could have chosen to use either “self audit” or “local audit” in place of “internal audit.” I preferred, though, to hold fast to the word “internal” because I believe it is more specific and more pertinent to what our goal is in this audit—to look internally and see where our successes, shortcomings, and opportunities for improvement lie.

An internal audit is conducted totally by personnel who are employees of the district, quite similar to a self-study that precedes a school accreditation visit. The external audit is conducted by a person or group who is not a school employee, has no direct relation to the school, and can operate in a completely unbiased fashion.



Page 29



•


•


•




Page 28

Perhaps one of the best tools to aid a school in this process is the

Technology Audit Accountability Matrix (Figure 9.1 on page 119—described and discussed in more detail in Chapter 9 of this document) created by the National Center for Technology Planning. This is a very simplistic tool that aggregates essential information and data in a single place to facilitate not only the formal audit process, but also the ongoing informal auditing. Timelines and action strategies are shown right in the matrix, but can be extracted so that school personnel can put them directly into practice.

For example, the matrix shows key

objectives/goals, target dates, and directly responsible individuals (DRI). In the course of working a technology plan throughout the year, the planning committee can pull out each objective/goal, examine the target date, and get a report from the DRI on how much progress is being made toward accomplishing the goal. Armed with the information shown in the technology plan and other supporting documents, the technology audit can move forward to a wider scope. We have, though, begun the process by using the most meaningful exhibits of what is important to the school.



Page 27

4.0

What do you audit first?

The natural place to begin an authentic technology audit is with the school’s technology plan. Doing so simultaneously checks the validity of the technology plan—to determine if it was written simply to satisfy some external requirement or whether it really and actually serves as a guide for district policy and action. The second item in the audit sequence is a collection of documents that guide the school’s performance. These include: curriculum frameworks (scope, sequence, and articulation charts, for example); position statements (ex: district vision and mission statements, statements of value; core belief statements); personnel profiles (teacher rosters, reports of certification levels and types attained by teachers and administrators); and school site technology plans (to ensure that the district plan is integral to it, in the event that the technology audit being conducted is occurring at the district, rather than the individual site, level). The purpose for examining this collection at this point is to determine clearly and unequivocally the extent to which the technology plan is aligned with theory, policy, and practice in the district. If alignment is obvious at this stage, the audit can continue. If it is not, then the outcome of the audit will be undesirable to the district. Thus, it behooves the district to examine these data closely and ensure that it can show a clear connection between theory and practice.



Page 26



•


•


•




Page 25

launch a technology audit. An external trigger might be activated for a plethora of reasons. Perhaps the school has performed exceptionally well and the external agency wants to determine the causes for this success so the pattern can be replicated in other schools. Of course, there is always the possibility that some shortcoming (either real or suspected) exists. In some locations, schools are audited merely on a rotating basis, so no reason for the trigger exists other than the fact that it was the school’s “turn” in the audit cycle. The third type of trigger, the Just Cause trigger, occurs without respect to some of the demographic, political, financial, or other reasons that are used for internal or external triggers. When a just cause trigger is “pulled,” an indication is present that the school either has performed in questionable fashion or else is simply a single element in a much larger systemic picture. For example, if all US schools were audited on a regular basis, regardless of their performance, this would constitute a just cause trigger. Often, too, a just cause trigger is activated when a school realizes that it needs an audit. The audit would not be an informal audit but a formal audit, complete with external evaluators and all the trappings that go along with it. Triggers can be activated in combination with one another. For example, decision makers internal to a school may initiate a just cause audit. Or, it may have been suggested by some external entity.



Page 24

Rather, we welcome them. For most of us, these audits are a natural, expected part of our lives. We don’t even think negatively about them at all. We have long realized that these audits are necessary for us to improve or sustain the performance levels we have reached. With respect to technology audits, when a school learns proper strategies for self-auditing, we refer to that as an “informal audit.” Yes, it may be conducted with a formal air within the district. In the view of external agencies that seek measures of accountability, though, this ongoing informal audit does not meet the rigorous test of uniformity. That is, an informal technology audit in School District A does not necessarily equate to the audit in District B. For equity to be achieved in a defensible technology audit, an external reviewer is required. The first of the three types of audit triggers is the Internal Trigger. As you might imagine, this occurs when some local district authority states that “we need an audit.” It could, however, also be triggered by planning efforts, especially long-term planning. At the point when this trigger becomes activated, someone who has been given administrative authority in the district begins establishing the framework for audited data, audit teams, workflow, and reports, as well as the necessary feedback loops into the school improvement process. The essence of this trigger type is that the impetus originates within the affected school district. The External Trigger is the second way in which an audit is initiated. In this case, some outside agency (often, a State Education Agency or a Federal programs office) would “choose” the district or school in which to



Page 23

3.0

What triggers an audit? The natural response we have when an audit announcement is initiated is “I must have done something wrong! What on earth could it be? Oh me, what will I do?” Well, now that we have gotten that fact of reality out of the way, let’s examine a proper way to react—the new way we are going to react from here on out. We should always be auditing ourselves. Perhaps this sounds like an empty platitude. Yet, if we will discipline ourselves to adopt this truth, we will surely find that an audit no longer bothers us. Quite to the contrary, we welcome an audit. Why? Because we are ready—always! Analogies to help us understand and internalize this concept are plentiful. Since our early days in school, we have taken tests. To obtain a driver’s license, we undergo various types of examinations. These are merely audits of our situations or conditions. The test we took in school was one that simply provided an audit of our readiness, understanding, or application of concepts deemed important by our instructors. Driver’s license exams are just audits of our physical prowess necessary to handle a vehicle, along with an audit of our understanding of the rules of the road. Even when we go to visit our doctor, we receive several kinds of audits: temperature audit; blood pressure audit; weight audit; and numerous other forms of audits s/he desires to perform on us. Are these audits performed for the benefit of the driver’s license examiner or the doctor? No! They are conducted to help us. Thus, we do not dread them.



Page 22



•


•


•




Page 21

One result of all this activity was that the E-Rate program became a topic of controversy among members of Congress. Some wanted to halt the program. Others wanted to modify the way in which it was managed. When all was said and done, it was the schools of America—serving the children of America—that suffered. This is just one example of an excellent idea that went sour when some people became involved and inserted their selfish motives into the process. If such can occur in the E-Rate program, just imagine how easy it would be for a thoughtless person at the local level to act in such a way that there is no chance for accountability. A technology audit is not intended to harm. Rather, it is intended to protect those who “do right” from those who find joy in doing wrong. Whenever there exists a suspicion of wrongdoing, we would all agree that an audit is necessary. However, since an audit is a good thing (we do agree with this, don’t we?) for our schools, we don’t wait for something or someone else external to our school to call for an audit. No! We take the initiative and trigger an ongoing audit ourselves! Good for us!



Page 20

tumbling and, at the same time, public confidence in those companies was eroding at lightning-fast speed. The landscape for organizations to be held accountable was developing and maturing at a rapid pace. To compound this, schools were under scrutiny as public institutions that functioned at the will of American taxpayers; thus, a climate of clear accountability was becoming a “normal” expectation. Lest we educators become too smug about the corruption in the corporate world and, somehow, think that we are immune to the intentional infractions that incur the wrath of the public, we should pause and reflect upon what has occurred in the world of E-Rate affairs. At the time of this writing (October 2004), the Federal Communications Commission is withholding a significant quantity of E-Rate funds available to school districts in the U.S. Why? During the past few years, evidence has surfaced that some schools, after receiving their E-Rate discounts, had demonstrated profound irresponsibility. In some cases, it was reported that school officials had diverted funds; in others, that equipment had been purchased and stored in warehouses without being opened and put to use. Various other examples of waste, fraud, and abuse came to the attention of lawmakers in Washington.

As a result,

investigations ensued. Some convictions were handed down. Some companies and individuals who were engaged in fraudulent activities were exposed so that other schools would not become involved with them.



Page 19

public service. Mrs. Kristi Brown, Vice-President of Chamber & Community Development for the Greater Starkville Development Partnership in Starkville, MS (home of Mississippi State University) works closely with a variety of institutions and organizations that incorporate technology solutions into their functions. She offers the following perception of technology audits for non-school environments: Maintaining a global face and momentum is important to all communities—no matter the size, demographics, or growth potential. Technology auditing is crucial for organizations such as chambers of commerce, economic development agencies, and non-profits. A piece-bypiece approach is not acceptable to function effectively at the maximum speed our members and audiences require and expect from us. Technology implementation and auditing should be as second nature as turning on the lights in our offices.

Beginning in the year 2000, we witnessed a heightened emphasis upon the concept of accountability. While the rumblings for accountability in education were gaining amplitude, our society found itself bombarded by reported wrongdoings in some of America’s seemingly most stable and profitable corporations. The names “Enron,” “WorldCom,” “Tyco,” and “Martha Stewart” became regular fare for our conversations. We were not, however, heaping praise upon these once-stable firms. To the contrary, we began losing faith in large corporations because it seemed so easy for a few officers to “cook the books” or engage in other non-scrupulous activities. A public outcry for accountability resulted. We wondered how on earth such a few, powerful people could tarnish the reputations of an organization so quickly—and with such apparent disdain for ethics. We wanted answers—and we wanted them right now! Stock prices were



Page 18

You may be like I am—believing that an audit is always good for

somebody else! But, for me?? No way ! I know I am doing fine, that I am fulfilling my obligations, that I give nobody any reason to doubt the value of what I do. Yet, these are merely feelings, opinions. If I face the truth, I will realize that these feelings have little to no basis in defensible truth, at least as others would see the truth. So, I go along my merry way, telling others that I am doing a respectable job, all the time hoping that nobody calls my hand regarding my proclamation. What is one to do, then? An effective audit yields evidence of accountability. Our society places great emphasis and value upon accountability.

The presence of

accountability puts us at ease with the organization or person being audited. Absence of accountability causes us profound consternation. Somehow, we are not so eager to trust an individual or company that fails the accountability test.

And, how do we measure accountability?

Through an audit! (You knew I would say that, didn’t you?) As I have pointed out previously, the focus of this book is upon technology audit within educational organizations—K-12 schools, community colleges, and universities, for the most part. Also, the U.S. schools are central to most of the principles and examples used herein. It is a fact, though, that technology auditing, as an important concept, is appropriate for schools around the world. Too, it is applicable to other sectors of our society, such as corporate/business, government, military, agriculture, and



Page 17

technologies we have bought for them?” and “When our schools purchase technology tools, are they doing so in an informal, random fashion or are they following a well thought out plan?” are legitimate questions that we, as custodians of the education trust, should be prepared to answer swiftly, accurately, and gladly. Well, if we are to position ourselves to address these and other equally important questions, what mechanism can we use to aid us in this effort? Technology audits, then, became quite important as a means of formalizing evaluation strategies. They are important to the professional educators, to the community, and to the students who are customers of the educational system. With a sound strategy for auditing in mind, we become much more comfortable knowing that now we can demonstrate our accountability more easily. Accountability One word that is closely associated with audit is “accountability.” As a society, we desire accountability. After all, we expect those individuals charged with responsibility for handling public funds to be accountable for the wise, efficient use of resources with which they have been trusted. As we participate in various organizations, we hold a “normal” expectation that the “books” will be audited on a regular basis. Part of our “ordinary” expectation for this audit is that a person or persons external to the organization will conduct it. Somehow, the external nature of an audit lends a degree of credibility and authenticity that cannot be achieved readily if the audit were conducted from within.



Page 16

superior agencies; and, more importantly, 2) demonstrate clearly their own autonomy, showing how the plan is relevant to their needs. Currently, we see a phenomenon almost parallel to the helter-skelter method of technology planning back in the early 1990s. A few schools in the U.S. have engaged in technology audits; however, there is absolutely

no rhyme or reason to these audits, particularly as you might compare the audit in one school district to the audit in another. Several groups of consultants have offered technology auditing services, along with a bare handful of technology vendors. They might even propose their own “twist” to the audit process. It doesn’t take us observers very long to realize that technology auditing, as a growing national activity, needs to have some of the “shaping” performed in a fashion similar to the way technology planning was shaped during the late 1990s and into the 21st Century. NCTP was the predominant player in helping to get technology planning organized so that it could become a truly meaningful enterprise beginning back in the 1990s. Similarly, NCTP is forging ahead again to help shape technology auditing philosophies, policies, practices, and eventually enabling legislation both in the United States, as well as in other countries of the world. Questions such as “How well is our technology dollar being spent?” “What is our ROI (Return On Investment) regarding instructional technologies?” “Where is the evidence to show that students really are learning with the



Page 15

instruction and learning. So, for schools to participate in multiple Federal programs (Goals 2000, etc.) and to receive E-Rate discounts, a specific prerequisite to receiving funds was inserted into the legislation. This prerequisite that swept the entire country was in the form of a written, locally developed, school board-approved technology plan. Most often, the distribution of Federal and/or State funds for technology integration was frozen until the district’s technology plan was submitted to a designated superior agency. The concept of a technology plan is no longer a vague or hypothetical notion, at least not in theory. One potential flaw, though, in the governments’ exercises to get schools to plan well was that very little uniformity in technology plan content across the nation was suggested. Thus, if you were to read six technology plans from six different schools, you likely would find six totally different formats for these plans. I am not suggesting a “cookie cutter” approach to planning. Not at all! Those who know me well know that I am vehemently opposed to this sterile notion. On the other hand, though, one major effort by the National Center for Technology Planning has been to provide schools with intellectual frameworks that would guide their planning efforts so that, as you would read these diverse plans, you would recognize a uniformity in the way the plans laid out the philosophies, policies, and practices of the schools. NCTP has offered numerous aids that schools could use that would allow them to: 1) meet the guidelines imposed by the



Page 14

many hours of practice in the batting cage); a visit to the dentist (how have you been doing with brushing and flossing your teeth?); an opportunity to introduce one friend to another (can you remember the names of both friends, their occupations, and other pertinent facts that you have been told many times?); and that dreaded trip to the bathroom scales right after a big holiday season. See? We all are participants in audits. We fear some. We just understand that some are part of normal life. Regardless, those audits in which we see opportunities for improvement are the ones where we realize, even at a subconscious, academic level, that the outcome of the audit will enhance our lives. Legislative Mandates Most school districts in the United States now have written technology plans. Just a few years ago, most of them did not. Why? Nobody required schools to have written plans. The tables turned, though, in the mid-1990s, when the U.S. Congress passed an important piece of legislation that, among other things, required the establishment of a national technology plan in the U.S. Department of Education. Shortly thereafter, the E-Rate program came into being. Meanwhile, Congress passed other laws that were designed to strengthen schools’ use of technology. Within a short period of time, members of Congress became curious about the extent to which the release of these federal dollars was impacting



Page 13

2.0

Who Wants An Audit, Anyway?

AUDIT !!! The mere mention of this word evokes great fear in the minds of those who hear it. Maybe it makes you break out in a sweat. Perhaps it makes you shake with fear. Or, it could be that you merely attempt to ignore completely the notion of an audit. Regardless of people’s reactions, an audit is often unavoidable—in one aspect or another. Actually, rather than dreading the audit, we should contemplate exactly what an audit is. Yes, it may cause us to prepare for it in a way that is a detour from our ordinary routine. Yet, an authentic audit has the potential to yield numerous benefits—benefits that, if applied appropriately to our situation, will bring about improvement. I contend, therefore, that we should crave an audit! A good audit may be like good medicine: it doesn’t necessarily taste good going down, but it’s necessary to make us well. Have you ever been audited? Sure, you have! As a part of our personal lives, we experience multiple examples of an audit: the piano recital; the baseball game (show me the results of your



Page 12



•


•


•




Page 11

collaboratively, in a true team fashion, in order to accomplish the positive goals that are possible as a result of surviving a technology audit—and improving significantly in the process! It is my purpose, by preparing this Survivor’s Guide, that each of you who uses it will discover renewed success and a fresh commitment to accountability. Further, I dream that many of you will develop new and creative ways of demonstrating excellence—and that you will share your creations with our colleagues. For all those who have asked, I will be releasing a subsequent technology audit guide that is developed and targeted, specifically, for other communities that support local educational efforts:

medical;

business/corporate; military; agricultural; governmental (city, regional, federal, international); and public service (libraries, etc.). My sincere hope is that I will receive sufficient feedback from many of you so that future revisions/versions of this guide will have an even more beneficial impact. Now, let’s get this audit started!!



Page 10

This Survivor’s Guide reveals the key principles associated with a comprehensive1 technology audit. It is designed to be a significant aid to individuals and organizations facing the oft-overwhelming task of documenting the extent of their accountability (AKA “success”), including via the medium of a technology audit. Additionally, the reader is provided a clear understanding of the importance of an audit, the extent of people’s involvement in the audit, the benefits of a technology audit, the roles and responsibilities of those involved, and how all this leads to meaningful improvement of educational organizations—the real reason for the audit process. Technology audits—at least those proposed by the National Center for Technology Planning (NCTP)—are of two basic types and at least two levels. Audit types are: internal and external. Audit levels are classified as Level I and Level II. There are instances, however, when a third level—Level III—is appropriate. This Survivor’s Guide explains types and levels, accompanied by examples designed to facilitate the reader’s understanding. Target audiences for the Survivor’s Guide include: school boards; superintendents; principals; technology coordinators/directors; and classroom teachers. I feel that is incumbent upon all these parties to work 1

A comprehensive audit covers the gamut of issues in which technology impacts daily operations of an institution. Many technology audits being conducted currently in schools cover only a limited scope of considerations, usually those considerations proposed by the auditors, themselves. Thus, the schools wind up paying a premium price for external consultants to conduct a cursory study that yields only marginally beneficial information. The comprehensive audit proposed by NCTP has two elements: rudimentary components that are relatively uniform across schools; and specially tailored components crafted to address matters pertinent to the particular school being audited.



Page 9

award—an easily recognizable denotation that they had achieved in the top 1% of schools in the nation? Isn’t it exciting to just think about all the positive energy that would be unleashed upon our schools? Kathy Shirley, Technology and Media Services Coordinator for the Escondido Union Elementary School District in Escondido (near San Diego), California emphasizes the importance of a good attitude regarding technology audits. In spite of the difficulties that might come with navigating an audit experience, maintaining a positive attitude may be the key to success, especially as local educators work arduously in locating, assembling, interpreting, and reporting the variety of information necessary for showing how well the school is providing for the learning needs of students. Ms. Shirley encourages us to consider this positive attitude as a “real plus”—a major benefit that accrues from the audit experience. For those who are not familiar with the way an audit works, perhaps the process with which educators can most readily associate is the periodic accreditation process.

In a similar fashion, there is work to be

accomplished before, during, and after an onsite visit.



Page 8

Finally, our audit will examine carefully the learning outcomes that emerge as the school’s efforts on student achievement are supported by the technology assets owned or used by the school. When we couch the audit in this fashion, we are “killing several birds with one stone.” Whether the results of the technology audit please us or not, we will achieve growth by adhering to this kind of model.

Why would an audit (of any kind) be feared?

Why would it be

undesirable? Is an audit a “zero-sums” game? If so, who stands to win and who stands to lose? Conversely, is it possible to consider an audit (conducted effectively) as a natural win-win situation? Without question, most people in our society would immediately classify an audit as a negative, time-consuming, irritating exercise imposed upon us by some external agency that does not at all have our best interests at heart. The main place we see this philosophy is with an oft-dreaded Internal Revenue Service (IRS) audit of our private, home accounts. Rather than “finding fault” via an audit, the desired purpose is to strive for excellence. Schools that do well in an audit are ones that are stretching to attain a “Seal of Approval” that denotes their excellence in key areas addressed through the audit. Just imagine—what if every technology-using school were so intensely focused on excellence that they strived for a Malcolm Baldridge-type



Page 7

teachers don’t even think about their being there. They just “work” to support the objectives emanating from the technology plan. Now, the technology audit can examine not only the interactions among these elements, but also the cascade of outcomes that result from effective interactions. Perhaps another graphic would show this more clearly.

Audit

Audit

Technology Plan

Student Achievement Obj

ROI

Technology Assets

Desired Outcomes

Obj = objectives from tech plan

Audit

ROI = Return on Investment

Audit

Figure 1.2 System Outcomes Audit Model

An ideal scenario is that we have a well-crafted technology plan, yielding excellent objectives that the school community will strive to accomplish, followed by attention to the return on investment we can expect. We will target the impact of the investments in terms of student achievement and the technological “trappings” required to give positive results in learning.



Page 6

is the only “return” that really matters. For the sake of simplicity (and a broadened understanding, by the way), though, let’s look at just two elements: student achievement and technology assets. Let me explain a bit about how I see those two elements in this particular model.

Student

achievement can be thought of in terms of learning

outcomes—the results harvested from a meaningful instructional path. Let’s remember, now, that we are talking about much more than standardized tests. We include Problem-Based Learning (PBL), higherorder thinking, creative arts development, and a host of other ways students express their learning achievements. These outcomes can be measured in qualitative, as well as quantitative, terms. Regardless, careful attention to the assessment and measurement techniques will yield extremely beneficial data to aid in the decisions that are made by using these results. This is the “learning profit” part of the equation.

Technology assets can be thought of as the “techno-stuff.” I realize that this is not a uniform condition extending across all situations. For the discussion of this model, though, we will categorize “techno-stuff” as investments in various technologies: hardware, software, infrastructure, facilities, support, etc. All these are certainly necessary for optimum student achievement and we recognize that the technology assets are required for optimum administrative and other uses in the school. At this point, however, we shall focus upon student learning outcomes. Further, these technology assets may serve their best function when they work so well that they become almost transparent—that is, the students and



Page 5

Audit

Audit

Technology Plan

Student Achievement Obj

ROI

Technology Assets

Audit

Audit

Figure 1.1 Technology Plan/Audit Interaction Model

This model shows the importance of return on investment (ROI) in terms of both the “learning profit” (student achievement) and the “techno-stuff profit” (technology assets) if we desired to focus on only those two elements emerging from the technology plan. Notice that the technology plan sets up the objectives that feed into, or target, achievement and the technology assets that support the achievement environment. The technology audit activity, then, examines these interactions. A case can be made for the fact that student achievement is only one of several measures of the success of a technology plan. Return on

investment is essential, but some might propose that student achievement



Page 4

school is armed with the things you need to know in order to assure the highest caliber, success-oriented, implementation-sure technology plan imaginable! How exciting! Dr. Terrie Gray, a highly respected consultant, author, speaker, and teacher in Paradise, CA, gave me some excellent insight as I was preparing this manuscript. I always cherish Terrie’s words. They provide a perpetual stimulus for me to think at a much higher plane. Dr. Gray understands quite well the keen importance of an authentic technology plan and its role in a school’s success. She knows that student learning extends far beyond the ordinary standardized tests that are used so often as a sole measure of student achievement: she pushes for us in this profession to seek strategies that expand our understanding about ways that students can grow into more productive citizens as a result of the carefully planned instructional activities that frame students’ experiences. When questioned about the role of a technology audit in the overall learning landscape within a school, Dr. Gray offered these incisive thoughts: With the current emphasis on accountability, making the case to support not only audits, but educational technology generally, needs to be done in terms that are recognized as valid. In other words, we need to craft and implement a technology plan built on a foundation of objectives that target student achievement as well as return on investment. Then the audit can test whether or not the desired ends have been achieved.

So, in pondering those stellar words from Dr. Gray, I built the following diagram in an effort to show, visually, what I interpreted her saying:



Page 3

time) our real reasons for using technologies in the learning and administration enterprises. I feel a certain comfort in knowing that we, as an “academy of professionals” are embarking—through this book and the activities that result—upon a journey leading everyone to a higher plane of performance and results. An audit is merely a “checkup.” All of us go to our family doctor to receive a “physical audit.” We take our cars to a mechanic in order to obtain a mechanical audit. Some of us even hire a golf pro to give us an audit on our golf swing or putt. So, from these few simple examples, we can see that audits are not bad things. As a matter of fact we use them in a quite natural way to help us improve in various areas of our lives. Audits, then, can, by their design, become quite helpful in enhancing the various lifestyles we hold so dear. Such is the case, as well, with an audit of our technology-related conditions. As we gather more and more techno-devices around us, we recognize the need to ensure that they are all accounted for, are working properly, and are being employed for proper purposes—purposes that advance the cause for our organizations. A technology audit, then, exists at its very core as an activity that focuses our full attention upon

improvement—real, sustainable improvement. As a matter of fact, an audit can be a very positive beginning to effective planning for technology. Knowing clearly where one is is critical to knowing where to go next, where the “holes” in the system or processes are, and where your successes are. With information from the audit, your



Page 2

1.0

Introduction • • • • • •

Audit is a good thing. Real leaders WANT an audit! Audit reveals primarily areas of strength. Audit is feared only by those who have something to hide. Audit promotes growth. Audit demonstrates accountability.

The principles listed above are true! At first glance, though, many of us might not believe those statements. Further, without devoting sufficient thought to the matter, we might even be strong verbal opponents of the concept. A technology audit has more positive aspects, potentially, than negative—it’s all in how we look at the matter. One natural human reaction to a question such as “What is an audit?” is to enumerate the things that an audit is NOT. Perhaps our societal concept of a tax audit overshadows and unnecessarily skews our understanding of what an audit really is and can be. My dear friend, Dr. Mark Benno (Educational Development Executive with Apple Computer), who is known by many of his friends as Learning

Evangelist , made the following comment when asked to describe a technology audit: …after learning about technology integration and planning [with] you…I know one thing is true. It is not about the technology. It is about people and what you do to build people. And ultimately, it is about putting in far more than you expect to get out and then realize that you got out far more than you put in.

I just love that! Mark emphasizes people and personal benefits. So, an audit allows us the opportunity to re-assess (or, maybe, assess for the first



Page 1

Suddenly, the doors at the rear of the auditorium opened. It was a very bright, sunny day outside in Scottsdale, so I couldn’t see anything but the form of a person coming through the door. I could see absolutely no facial features or anything else about that person—it was just a regular silhouette. Even that fact, though, didn’t tip me off. I knew people would often slip into the rear of the room after a presentation had begun. This was different, though. That person just kept walking, getting closer and closer to the front of the room. He passed row after row of people attending. He was going to come all the way to the front of the room! Suddenly, my focus turned to him, because I came to realize that he was just coming right on up there with me. So, I shifted my focus and fixed my gaze upon him. Here was a wonderful friend, walking up to me, carrying a glass of water! It was Chip! He had “cashed in” some of his frequent flyer miles and had flown from Las Vegas down to Scottsdale just to show his support! What a dear friend! Of course, he and I then told that story of the glass of water to the entire crowd assembled…and it’s funny: I don’t remember one single thing about my presentation that day. I do remember, though, the impact his coming had upon the whole crowd of school board members. The stories of Bruce “Chip” Daley could go on and on for hours. His friends were legion. His impact was immeasurable. Yet, he never sought any kind of fame, attention, or recognition. He almost shunned it. He was much more comfortable seeing others in the spotlight. But, when you got to know Chip better, you would find out that he had some of the most famous people in the world for friends. But, he kept those friendships private because he didn’t want to destroy the special nature of their acquaintance. What a testimony! So, Chip told me many times that I should write a book. He knew I had a unique capacity to help others, and he told me that “thousands are waiting, Larry, for your words of encouragement and enlightenment.” Chip always told me I had special gifts and “a way with people,” so I should give to the people I love so much by creating something that will help them. The single most compelling advice he left with me as encouragement to write this book to you, my friends, was: “If you want God to bless your work, you have to do something for Him to bless!” So, now you know why I just had to write this book. As I have worked many hours late at night and often into the “wee hours” of the morning, I have felt Chip’s presence with me, prodding me and advising me to help those school leaders whom I love and appreciate so much. So, this book is an offering of love from Chip and me…to you!



Page xvii

Several times, when I would be somewhere with him at a meeting, he would sense that somebody needed a “lift,” so he would get a glass of water and offer it to them. It’s simply amazing how that would calm the person almost immediately. I had told Chip that I would be in Scottsdale and would be speaking to the school board members from across the United States. At one time, he had taught elementary school in Kingman, AZ (and many of you reading this know some of his hilarious stories about those days when he “taught first” -- his way of expressing “first grade”), so was excited that I would get to see a state that he loved so much. So, the time came for me to begin my presentation to the group. Just as I began, a person from the crowd passed me a note. Here is a picture of that note (which I still carry in my personal journal):

As you might imagine, I was stunned! You see, I was already in front of the crowd, had just begun my speech, so I had their attention, then this note was handed to me. I had seen Chip’s handwriting often, so I knew immediately that it was his note. But, how on earth had he gotten that note to me? How did he know to have it given to me right at this moment? Yes, I knew he cared very much and he was aware that I was speaking, but he didn’t know the exact time. My mind was whirling! Suddenly, I remembered that an employee of the Clark County, NV School District was attending that meeting. He hadn’t handed me the note, though. I looked over at him so I could figure out if he had been the one who had hand-carried that note to me from Chip, as a means of encouragement. That’s just what it had to be! He was smiling, but he shook his head to say, “No. It was not I.” Mercy! I was so bumfuzzled!



Page xvi

I did not know that Chip had come up behind me, forming what would have become a line, had there been other people to come along and use the computers. Mind you, there were plenty of vacant computers, but he just walked up behind me and stood there, waiting for me to finish my tasks. Well, I didn’t see him, so I just went merrily about my business, not getting in any hurry whatever. Chip shifted his weight from one leg to the other, and gave the impression that he was becoming quite impatient with me. He didn’t know that Kathy was the lady standing over to one side, watching me; however, he made a guess that it had to be her. She really began giving me a hard time about getting off that computer, because “people are waiting!” Several minutes went by, then almost in disgust, I turned around to tell that person behind me that there were plenty of perfectly good computers he could use. When I saw who it was, he just yelled with laughter and we embraced! Kathy couldn’t figure it out until she heard me say the word, “Chip!” We have laughed many, many times about that evening…and the many hours of fun we had together in Boston. Then, each year, when NECC time would roll around, Kathy would travel with me to the conference for one single purpose: to see Chip! We grew to be such extremely close friends. I have a special memory of NECC in Chicago. Chip had grown up in Chicago, so he knew it like the back of his hand. He had spent his early years in a monastery there and had many stories to tell of those days. Some were funny; some were so heartwarming that it would turn you into a puddle of tears. On the Sunday prior to the conference opening, I had to conduct a full-day workshop. So, Chip asked Kathy if she would spend Sunday afternoon with him. She was thrilled to do so, especially when he told her that they were going to attend church at the monastery where he had spent so much of his boyhood. They did go to the church and its school, then toured many of the private spots that Chip had not shared with anybody else. My words cannot express how much I appreciate that special gift he gave me by sharing such private moments with Kathy. He wasn’t kin to us by ordinary measures, but I surely considered him to be a close brother because of the intense love he shared so unselfishly with us. Then, there was the capstone experience! I had been invited to speak for the National School Boards Association in Scottsdale, AZ. Chip had such a keen ability to discern people’s special needs, their innermost feelings, and their trepidations in new experiences. He knew that he could find a way to ease their anxiety at particular times, as well. Once he told me a story about this unique way of showing someone that you really care, that you know they are in need, that there is a salve that can be found to place upon their wounded soul. “All it takes,” Chip would say, “is a glass of water.”



Page xv

Dedication In memory of

Bruce “Chip” Daley Administrative Assistant for Technology Clark County Schools, Las Vegas, NV

Chip Daley was a special friend of mine. He was a dear and true friend to thousands of others, as well. Anybody who had ever been around this man claimed, “Chip and I are best friends.” What a legacy! Chip died on May 15, 2003, after a long battle with multiple medical problems. Only those closest to Chip knew anything at all about his condition; even fewer realized the actual severity of those problems. He just was not the kind to complain; rather, he was one who offered solace to others who were experiencing difficulty. He was the very first person to offer help to me as I was getting NCTP cranked up. In those days (1992), hardly anybody was saving their technology plans as electronic documents to be uploaded/downloaded via the Internet. Our methods of sharing, too, were quite archaic by today’s measure. As I collected paper-based technology plans and wanted to transform them into a file that could be shared electronically, I realized that it was taking far too long to scan each page of each technology plan, then go back and edit those OCR-scanned files so that I could make them available via anonymous FTP (now, that really dates us, doesn’t it? Even in those days, we didn’t have Gopher being used in a widespread fashion, let alone the convenience of modern, current methodologies). So, I put out a plea for help on one of the online discussion groups. All I wanted was somebody who would take the scanned files, edit them, then upload the files back to us so we could distribute them online. Chip was the first person to step forward and make that commitment. He converted many technology plan files that helped thousands of schools get their early start in preparing healthy plans. Chip and I conversed often. We became fast friends. Over the years, he endeared himself to my family, as well. It is that part of his friendship that I appreciate most. He was such a witty person. Many of you were able to be around Chip as he told the story of how he first met my wife, Kathy. He loved to tell that tale, laughing raucously throughout the telling. We were at NECC (National Educational Computing Conference) ’94 in Boston. A few computers had been set up so people could check their email. It was in the evening, so few attendees were there. I logged on and began checking my mail. Kathy waited patiently off to one side. A big sign had been erected that reminded users to limit their online time to 10 minutes, maximum. Technology Audit Survivor’s Guide


Page xiv

Dr. Mark Benno, Development Executive and Learning Evangelist, Apple Computer, Inc., Tampa, FL Ms. Maria Benson, Director of Work-Based Learning/Cooperative Education, Itawamba Community College, Tupelo, MS Mrs. Kathy Biernat, Computer Teacher, St. Charles Borromeo School, Milwaukee, WI Mrs. Rebecca Bock, Editor/Proofreader, Research & Curriculum Unit, Mississippi State University, Starkville, MS Mr. Michael Borruso, Editor, Brownstone Publishers, New York, NY Ms. Kristi Brown, Vice-President for Chamber & Community Development, Greater Starkville Development Partnership, Starkville, MS Ms. Chris Carey, Instructional Technology Resource Teacher, Orange County Public Schools, Apopka, FL Dr. Gary Carnow, Director, Technology and Information Services, Alhambra Unified School District, Alhambra, CA Dr. Gordon Dahlby, Director of Curriculum and Technology, West Des Moines School District, West Des Moines, IA Dr. Dave Edyburn, Professor of Education, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI Mrs. Jane Frank, Skyler Associates, Inc. & ATA Technology Academy, Tecumseh, MI Dr. Terrie Gray, Consultant, Paradise, CA Mr. Jay Harding, Systems Administrator for Technology Integration, Nashua School District, Nashua, NH Mr. Robert Hudson, Director of Federal Projects & Technology, Hawthorn CCSD #73, Vernon Hills, IL Mrs. Patsy Lanclos, Knowledge Architect, Houston, TX Mr. Joseph Moreau, Dean of Academic Information Services, Miracosta College, Oceanside, CA Dr. Mabel Murphree, Regional Development Specialist, Itawamba Community College, Tupelo, MS Ms. Rae Niles, Director of Curriculum & Technology, Sedgwick Public Schools, USD 439, Sedgwick, KS Ms. Julene Reed, Director of Technology, St. George’s Independent Schools, Collierville, TN Ms. Raylene Renfrow, Software Designer/Owner, Software Solutions Pro & Former Executive Director of Technology Services for Grapevine-Colleyville (TX) ISD, Marquez, TX Ms. Kathy Shirley, Technology & Media Services Coordinator, Escondido Elementary Union School District, Escondido, CA KS Mr. Gordon Shupe, Network Administrator, Educational Technologist, Stone Middle School & Florida Institute of Technology, Indialantic, FL Ms. Julie Trell, Curriculum Imagineer, Technology Inspirer, & Volunteer. Salesforce.com/Foundation. San Francisco, CA Ms. Kristen Vassos, Technology-Using Teacher, Mount Laurel Township School, Mount Laurel, NJ Dr. James Yao, Professor, Montclair State University, Montclair, NJ Finally, to all of you who have contributed to NCTP in the past, attended workshops or keynotes or sessions I have been privileged to lead, or worked alongside me in helping schools around the world, I offer my deepest thanks. Each of you has made a significant contribution that was powerful in itself, but when it’s combined with efforts of all the others, it’s mind-boggling.



Page xiii

Acknowledgments Where would any worthwhile achievement be without the aid of close friends? Nowhere! This effort has truly been a labor of deep love, but I could not have accomplished the completion of this book (at least in its current first version phase) without having gained the phenomenal insight of so many mentors and advisors. To the following individuals and organizations, I offer my heartiest thanks and pledge to put your assistance to work in making this the most beneficial book it possibly can be: First and foremost, I acknowledge the constant support of my family. My wife, Kathy, is the ever-stalwart encourager when I attempt to do anything to help others. But, when I try to use my talents to help friends in the field of instructional technology, she becomes even more aggressive an encourager. She pushes me, prods me, corrects me, helps me to see things afresh, but always does so in a way that boosts me to higher levels of achievement. I am so thankful that my childhood sweetheart continues to be my very best friend and my wife! My son, Chad, has listened to my rants and ravings for many years, always steering me back onto the track that is closest to my core beliefs. When I’ve had hair-brained ideas, he was ever ready to remind me to ponder everything in reflection of what I say I believe in. He is an amazing musician, graphic artist, designer, and visual imagineer. I thank Chad for creating some of the wonderful artwork and design elements that have appeared on NCTP materials in the past. And, I hope that if he ever reads these words, he will feel guilty because he hasn’t done more…and he’ll get busy right then creating new stuff for me to share with you!!  A special thanks goes to my older brother, David. David and I were extremely close as friends during the years we grew up on our small family farm in Starkville, Mississippi. We were practically inseparable: for that fact, alone, I am eternally thankful. Then, for about twenty years, we didn’t see or hear from each other. One day, though, in early 2001, I received a phone call from David. From that moment on, our relationship grew steadily back to the point where it had left off those many years previously. He was harnessed by several problems in his life, yet he dealt with them with profound mastery. His wife of 25 years, Bobbie, died at the end of March 2003 after a multi-year tough fight against ovarian cancer. David was an amazing caregiver to Bobbie during those horrible days of losing her hair, strength, and health. What a testimony of love he was to many other people! Then, in mid-December of this year (2004), he became ill with the flu. I talked with him almost every day and he was describing how severe this case of flu was upon him, but since he lived alone now, he didn’t go to the doctor. Instead, he relied on over-thecounter medications to combat the flu. Unexpectedly, he passed away in his bed on December 17—the very day he and I had agreed that this book would be finished. David would give me strong words of encouragement each time we talked by phone and would discuss the book and its impact upon the people I love around the world. He kept telling me, “Larry, you just must finish that book and get it out to people who need it!” So, we had an agreement that I would work almost around the clock, with a sheer determination that Friday, December 17 would be the day of completion. Somehow, I think David, even though he was very ill, hung in there until I finished this work of love for you. My prayer is that you will find a special blessing from the words in this book and you will sense the inspiration David provided to the project. Reviewers: Goodness! Where would I be now without the help of my magnificent team of reviewers? Collectively, they have devoted hundreds of hours to making this the best book possible on this subject. They have questioned, suggested, modified, and amplified my materials so the true meaning would come through for the site-based practitioner. This group has served gladly as a wonderful editorial board, keeping my shoulder to the wheel and my finger on the pulse of what is really happening in America’s schools. Because of them, the Survivor’s Guide has a user-centric focus—and that, in my opinion, gives this book great credibility: the element necessary to ensure that it is truly useful! Technology Audit Survivor’s Guide


Page xii

A great deal of discussion in this book focuses upon the “stuff” of technology—the computers, wires, switches, devices, etc. This is a necessary discussion, for we cannot achieve optimum success in student achievement and academic excellence without these supporting mechanisms. It is crucial that I make the point, though, that all this techno-stuff exists for the purpose of supporting learning. Why else would the school exist? The techno-stuff is actually unimportant when compared to people. For me, technology is a “people thing.” So, while we are auditing the “stuff” of technology in many ways, we are doing so with the central focus upon achievement (and not just the very limited achievement results that we get from sterile standardized tests) in multiple realms. In addition to student achievement, we are quite interested in improving other aspects of the school culture: – intra-district communications – professional personnel – community involvement – partnerships – resource development As a preface to the book that follows, though, I would be grossly remiss if I did not point out the reality of my philosophy—that the “who,” “why,” “when,” and “how” of instructional technology is far more important than the “what.” At the same time, I realize fully that the “what” is a necessary ingredient in the success I achieve as I use modern technologies to extend my learning capacities. I need the boxes, wires, and switches to enable me to engage my problem-solving skills, to dig deeply into a research initiative, and, yes, even to write a book about technology use! My sincere hope is that you find this book rewarding. I hope you find it a bit challenging at times, as well. And, maybe even a bit disturbing (or provocative, at least). Of ultimate importance, though, is that you find it useful. I do not claim that this book has all the answers. I don’t even claim that it is the ultimate, complete guide. However, I do feel that it will provide you the very best resource for a meaningful, comprehensive technology audit available in the marketplace today. I encourage you to read this book, mark it up with your comments, share it with others, and then plan to attend one of the TAME (Technology Audits Made Easy) seminars conducted by NCTP so you can learn more and obtain the confidence that will help assure a successful technology audit. As you have ideas related to technology auditing, as a philosophy or concept, or ideas about how to improve the process of tech audits, please let me know. I welcome your emails to: [email protected] Be sure to visit the NCTP web site (www.nctp.com) for materials to help you, as well. Best wishes to you all! Technology Audit Survivor’s Guide


Page xi

Foreword I have had the privilege of becoming acquainted with many of you who are working diligently in school districts to make sense of all the activities associated with demonstrating accountability for your technology-related decisions. Some of you have expressed excitement about the many opportunities that lie before you: others of you have expressed disdain for what you consider an imposition upon your decision-making territory. It is this latter group who I hope to help most with this book. My hope is that, as we move through this manual, you will imagine that you are sitting around a table with a group of your peers and that you have invited me to join you. Imagine that you have brought your technology plan with you. You realize that I have had significant experience working with schools and many other types of organizations on their technology plans, attempting to ensure pragmatic infusion of technologies into their regimens. Of course, I recognize clearly that you are right there on the metaphorical firing line and you know best what your school and its students need. So, during this time together, you have asked me to “walk you through” a process that will help to ensure current and long-term success in showing others the extent to which you are accountable for the resources that have been placed in your trust. Let’s imagine that I am sitting there with you and your friends at your table. I am serving as your personal “coach,” as we step methodically through this technology audit process, because we all realize that the benefits of this make it worth all our efforts! My first question to you might be, “Tell me, in priority order, the main things your technology plan states that you will do over the life of your current planning document.” Clue: If you can’t tell me as soon as I finish the question, I contend that either you don’t really know, or not everyone agrees and has “bought in” to your plan, or your ideas are sprinkled throughout your planning document in a vague and disconnected way. Is there a remedy for this? Sure! Would it be helpful to you and your colleagues to have these concepts identified clearly and shown specifically? Absolutely! Thus, we have this book to guide us as we move through the process together—as a team.



Page x

List of Figures Figure 1.1 Technology Plan/Audit Interaction Model ....................................... 4 Figure 1.2 Systems Outcome Audit Model......................................................... 6 Figure 6.1 Technology Audit Checklist.............................................................68 Figure 6.2 Schedule for External Audit............................................................. 71 Figure 6.3 Direct Impact Model ....................................................................... 77 Figure 6.4 Indirect Impact Model ....................................................................78 Figure 8.1 Level I Audit Components .............................................................. 113 Figure 8.2 Level II Audit Components ............................................................114 Figure 9.1 Technology Audit Accountability Matrix ....................................... 119 Figure 9.2 Personnel Report Form ................................................................. 124 Figure 9.3 Data Collection Checksheet .......................................................... 140 Figure 9.4 Local Team Document Inventory Form....................................... 143 Figure 9.5 Technology Plan Alignment Form ................................................144 Figure 9.6 Interview Synthesis Form .............................................................. 146 Figure 9.7 Sign-off Sheet ................................................................................. 148 Figure 9.8 Technology Department Inventory Summary............................... 160 Figure 11.1 External Auditor Screening Matrix ................................................193 Figure 13.1 Letter of Audit Verification............................................................ 214 Figure 14.1 Benefit Inventory Form................................................................. 223



Page ix

13.0

Results/Reports................................................................................................ 201 Results categories from auditors......................................................... 203 Reports filed by auditors ...................................................................... 213 First reports, then action...................................................................... 215

14.0

Benefits of a technology audit............................................................................218

15.0

Bibliography/Resources ................................................................................... 225 Frequently Asked Questions............................................................... 226 Reference List ..................................................................................... 228 Links.................................................................................................... 229

16.0

Appendices ....................................................................................................... 230 Appendix A— Audit Levels Comparisons .......................................... 231 Appendix B— Personnel Report Form .............................................. 232 Appendix C— Technology Audit Checklist ........................................233 Appendix D—Local Team Document Inventory Form .................... 236 Appendix E— Technology Plan Alignment Form ............................. 237 Appendix F— Interview Synthesis Form ........................................... 238 Appendix G—Sign-off Sheet .............................................................. 239 Appendix H—Technology Department Inventory Summary........... 240 Appendix I— External Auditor Screening Matrix ............................ 241 Appendix J— Letter of Audit Verification.........................................242 Appendix K— Benefit Inventory......................................................... 243 Appendix L— Technology Audit Accountability Matrix.................. 244



Page viii

Physical Plant Layout .................................................................................. 130 Infrastructure Plan ....................................................................................... 130 Organizational Chart ....................................................................................133 Community Profile....................................................................................... 134 Examples of Success Using Technology.....................................................135 Charting the Data Collected....................................................................... 139

Tools ................................................................................................141 Forms ............................................................................................................ 141 Software ........................................................................................................149

Data collection process ........................................................................ 152 10.0

Roles/Responsibilities ...................................................................................... 162 Superintendent.....................................................................................163 Principal .............................................................................................. 167 Technology Coordinator .................................................................... 170 Classroom teacher(s)............................................................................172 Parents/Community............................................................................. 173 Students ............................................................................................... 173 School board member(s) ..................................................................... 174 Support staff......................................................................................... 175 Auditors............................................................................................... 176 Summary ..............................................................................................177

11.0

Choosing an auditor ......................................................................................... 179 Auditor team ....................................................................................... 180 Lead auditor .................................................................................... 181 Auditor assistant .............................................................................. 181 Data manager ..................................................................................182 Others ..............................................................................................182 Questions/Considerations for choosing auditors ................................183

12.0

What does an auditor do? ..................................................................................195 Expectations.........................................................................................195 What does an auditor not do? ............................................................. 197 How does an auditor prepare for the audit? ....................................... 198 Summary ............................................................................................. 199



Page vii

Correlation of technology plan with funding/budgeting............................. 51 Student performance...................................................................................... 53 Personnel assessment/evaluation ................................................................. 54 Technology policies........................................................................................58 Compliance....................................................................................................60 E-Rate ............................................................................................................ 62 Result of a Level I audit.................................................................................63

Frequency.........................................................................................................66 Contents/schedule...........................................................................................67 Level of preparation......................................................................................... 72 Relative cost ..................................................................................................... 73 Length of on-site visit ......................................................................................74 Letters of assurance/commitment..................................................................74

Level II.................................................................................................. 75 All elements of Level I, plus… ....................................................................... 75 Completely comprehensive.............................................................................76 Direct Impact .................................................................................................77 Indirect Impact.............................................................................................. 78

More extensive and expensive than Level I...................................................79 Components......................................................................................................81 Infrastructure..................................................................................................81 Facilities ..........................................................................................................85 Money-Funds ................................................................................................ 87 Health & Safety Issues ................................................................................. 89 Security ...........................................................................................................91 Correlation: Software & Hardware ............................................................ 92 Community Involvement (Partnership) .......................................................93 Integration of Essential Elements................................................................94

7.0

Phases of an audit ...............................................................................................98 Phase One: Getting Ready (Pre-Audit)................................................98 Phase Two: On-Site Visit....................................................................101 Phase Three: Results & Follow-Up (Post-Audit)...............................105 Summary ............................................................................................. 106

8.0

Scope of an audit............................................................................................... 109

9.0

Data Collection & Analysis............................................................................... 116 Data collected by/for auditors ......................................................... 116 Technology Plan ...........................................................................................117 Teacher Roster............................................................................................. 122 Student Achievement Synopsis/Profile .......................................................125 Budget .......................................................................................................... 126 Professional Development Plan & Calendar ............................................. 127 Equipment Inventory................................................................................... 128



Page vi

Technology Audit Survivor’s Guide TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword ..........................................................................................................................x Acknowledgments ..........................................................................................................xii Dedication ..................................................................................................................... xiv 1.0

Introduction.......................................................................................................... 1

2.0

Who wants an audit, anyway?..............................................................................12 Legislative Mandates .............................................................................13 Accountability ....................................................................................... 16

3.0

What triggers an audit? ...................................................................................... 22

4.0

What do you audit first?......................................................................................26

5.0

Types of audit .....................................................................................................29 Internal Audit........................................................................................30 External Audit....................................................................................... 33

6.0

Levels of audit..................................................................................................... 36 Level I ................................................................................................... 37 Components.....................................................................................................42 Document Inventory..................................................................................... 43 Technology Plan...................................................................................... 43 Facilities Plan...........................................................................................44 Curriculum Plan ...................................................................................... 45 Personnel Plan .........................................................................................46 Financial Plan ..........................................................................................48 Correlation of document(s) with practice....................................................49 Facilities overview/inspection ...................................................................... 50



Page v

A valuable resource! — Dr. Dave Edyburn Professor University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee • Milwaukee, WI

The Survivor’s Guide is both enlightening and challenging. This book shows the powerful ways to embrace the audit process and enlist the support of the entire learning community in preparation for it. This book is a very “readable” work; I can recommend it to my colleagues who are engaged in technology planning at the present time. — Bob Hudson Director of Federal Projects and Technology & Apple Distinguished Educator Hawthorne CCSD #73 • Vernon Hills, IL

I appreciate your writing style—it’s conversational, your personality shines through, and the content is easily read and digested—just a nice “flow.” — Kathy Shirley Technology and Media Services Coordinator & Apple Distinguished Educator Escondido Union School District • Escondido, CA

This book is easy to read. It conveys your warm speaking style and offers a great deal of practical information. I believe someone could use it as their guide to how to conduct an audit. — Dr. Terrie Gray Consultant & Professional Improvement Architect Paradise, CA

A technology audit can be a threatening and stressful experience. Dr. Anderson’s “Survivor’s Guide” recognizes the important roles that every member of the greater school community plays in assuring that the audit is, instead, a successful and empowering experience. Dr. Anderson’s positive spirit throughout this book encourages participants to celebrate the opportunity to improve the audit process. It inspires participants to work together and strategize to do what is needed to ensure a successful audit with an outcome that will best enhance learning. — Julene Reed Director of Technology & Apple Distinguished Educator St. George’s Independent Schools • Collierville, TN



Page iv

Praise for

Technology Audit Survivor’s Guide Great compilation of information. I find the information you give us to be great insight on what’s ahead. Very well done! — Jay Harding Systems Administrator: Technology Integration & Staff Development Nashua School District • Nashua, NH

I think you have a winner, Larry! I like the easy style and personable approach of your writing. For those of us who know you, we can hear your voice as it is read. I appreciate the common-sense approach to the writing and the way you explain the importance of conducting a technology audit. Educators know they can’t do business the way they have over the past several years. Accountability is something we all need to embrace as a way to improve what we are doing currently! — Rae Niles Director of Curriculum and Technology & Apple Distinguished Educator Sedgwick Public Schools, USD 439 • Sedgwick, KS

I am so glad I took the time to read your manuscript! I found it to be extremely practical—with tips and ideas I can start to use today. I especially appreciated the overall tone of the book. I felt like I was sitting in your living room. The book is easy to read and should be easy to implement. Thanks for this valuable information in a clear and concise format! — Kathy Biernat Computer Teacher St. Charles Borromeo School • Milwaukee, WI

Very needed topic. Thanks for doing this, Larry! — Raylene Renfrow Former Executive Director of Technology Services (Retired) Grapevine-Colleyville Independent School District • Marquez, TX

I found this book to be well-organized, informational, and thought provoking. The audit procedure is presented in an easy-to-follow, step-by-step manner that is up-beat and positive in nature. If the book is read in the manner it is offered, it will provide the reader with a well-defined road map that will assist with gathering and evaluating valuable information. I am truly awed at your ability to think to the future! — Kris Vassos Teacher & Apple Distinguished Educator Mount Laurel Township School • Mount Laurel, NJ



Page iii

Copyright © 2004 – National Center for Technology Planning – All Rights Reserved ISBN 0-9764901-0-2 No part of this document may be copied, transferred, altered, extracted, or transmitted by any method without the expressed written consent of Dr. Larry S. Anderson, Founder/CEO, National Center for Technology Planning P. O. Box 2393, Tupelo, MS 38803 • [email protected] • www.nctp.com • 662.844.9630 Note: If copies are approved and made, this document must be duplicated in its entirety with no abridgement. Failure to do so constitutes violation of copyright.

Neither the National Center for Technology Planning nor Dr. Larry S. Anderson make any warranty either expressed or implied, including, but not limited to, any implied warranties of usability or fitness for a particular purpose regarding these materials, and makes such materials available solely on an "as-is" basis. In no event shall the National Center for Technology Planning (NCTP) nor Dr. Larry S. Anderson be liable to anyone for special, collateral, incidental, or consequential damages in connection with or arising out of purchase or use of these materials. The sole and exclusive liability of NCTP and/or Dr. Larry S. Anderson, regardless of the form or action, shall not exceed the purchase price of the materials described herein. This manual describes the functionality and use of technology audit principles at the time of publication. The techniques and principles described herein are subject to change without notice. Every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of this document. NCTP regrets any errors and omissions that may occur and would appreciate being informed of any errors found. NCTP will correct any such errors and omissions in a subsequent version, as feasible. Neither NCTP nor Dr. Larry S. Anderson assume any responsibility for any errors or omissions in this document or their consequences, and reserves the right to make improvements and changes to this document without notice. All brand or product names are trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective companies or organizations.



Page ii

Technology Audit Survivor’s Guide Version 1.0 Release Date: December 2004

Prepared and Distributed by:

National Center for Technology Planning Dr. Larry S. Anderson, Founder/CEO P. O. Box 2393 • Tupelo, MS 38803 662.844.9630 (Home Office) • 662.321.0677 (Cell) Email: [email protected] • http://www.nctp.com

Back Cover

Back Cover

Suggest Documents

Cover & Back

Back Cover Image - Naxos

Back Cover Image - Naxos

From the back cover

Cover and back - Crisil

Back Cover Image - Naxos

Back Cover Image - Naxos

Front Back Cover 64_Layout 1

WP 132 cover & back - CiteSeerX

Back Me Up Cover Plan

Back Cover - Deitel & Associates, Inc.

Back Cover - How to Get Arrested

RR 126 Cover & back - India Environment Portal

Cover & back of SLWC Volume 2 - Core

Back Me Up Cover Plan [PDF]

Back Cover - Six Tires No Plan

C-Class Brochure Cover & Back

WP 140 cover & back - AgEcon Search

Audi A4_Brochure Front & Back Cover

C-Class Brochure Cover & Back

Mobile resale market back cover - RGB - accan

front/back cover APRIL - Scottish Natural Heritage

RR 142 Cover & back - IWMI - cgiar

Cover & back of SLWC Volume 2 - IWMI