District/School Administration PK-16 Program Support
Educational Technology

1998 EdTech Update Report

Q & A

Questions from the February, 1999 issue of School Business Affairs, the professional journal of the Association of School Business Officials International. Answers provided by Greg Nadeau, Chief Technology Officer, and Connie Louie, Project Director, Instructional Technology.

1. Given the rapid change in technology is "technology planning" possible, or is "technology planning" wishful thinking at best or a wasted effort?

GREG: The rapid change in technology makes planning even more essential. The difference is that planning must be a dynamic, rather than static, activity. There is not much of a point in developing a long-term "plan" that sits on the shelf. Technology implementation requires a formalized process of ongoing documentation and communication to keep people aligned.

As the Department's Chief Technology Officer, I maintain a comprehensive document that outlines our implementation plans for over $15 million in annual technology projects and over $20 million in annual grants. I update this document in virtually every meeting I have with my staff and provide it regularly to the Commissioner.

CONNIE: Since technology is ever-changing, more time and resources are needed to plan and implement technology in schools. Areas for planning include:

• Needs Assessment
• Network Planning and Design
• Hardware Acquisition
• Software Preview and Evaluation
• Procurement Assistance
• Professional Development
• Administrative Use
• Instructional and Curriculum Use

Technology planning is never done; it should be ongoing with constant revision to meet the changes in technologies and resources.

2. From your perspective, what are the biggest challenges schools face when planning for instructional or administrative technology?

GREG: Inadequate staffing. What most people don't understand is that technology is more about human resources than it is about hardware and software. This problem is exacerbated when technology is funded as a one-time capital item rather than as part of the operational budget. As a general rule, spending on "warm-ware" (i.e. staff and contracted services) should be three times greater than on hardware and software.

To make matters worse, schools will probably never be able to afford adequate staffing. While corporations have entire IT departments, many schools must frequently survive with only a single part-time professional. The current level of IT staffing is hopelessly inadequate.

The only solution, I am convinced, is to use students as a resource and train them to assist in network administration and user-support. We are starting a pilot program with Malden High School called Youth Tech Entrepreneurs to develop student-centered technology support. Some of these students will join us at the Department to help support our IT environment. Ultimately, if this proves to be successful, every district in the state can benefit from a similar program.

CONNIE: Schools face a variety of challenges. One challenge is staying current with rapid changes in technology; there are always new skills to learn. Another challenge is overcoming fear of technology; some teachers are tentative in their adoption of technology and they may feel less comfortable with technology than many of their students. The maintainance of technology poses another challenge; schools often lack sufficient personnel to adequately maintain and administer their networks. Another challenge is the true integration of technology with the educational process; the conversation of how, when and where technology can authentically make a difference has not really advanced.

3. How you do ensure that today's "top-of-the-line" computer hardware is not obsolete in 6 months?

GREG: Desktop personal computers last four years, laptops less. Schools need to plan on replacing 25% of their computers every year if they want their equipment to stay current.

The explosive use of the Internet has accelerated the replacement cycle for technology. It is increasingly important for users and organizations to upgrade hardware and software to stay current with changes in communication standards and more powerful applications.

CONNIE: With the rapid change of technology there is no guarantee that today"s "top-of-the-line" computer hardware is not obsolete in six months. However, not ALL tasks need "top-of-the-line" computers. Schools need to plan and budget for the frequent replacement of some equipment and the maintenance of other systems.

4. Wiring schools and connecting to the Internet has been a top priority for educators in the past few years. When you look into your technology crystal ball, what are the big priorities you see in two years and in five years, and how will schools change as a result?

GREG: This year we are focusing on professional development. Last year it was networking. The year before it was comprehensive planning.

As I said earlier, staffing is the last of the major infrastructure pieces that schools are struggling to put into place. That will take another couple of years for the early innovators and longer for the rest.

Once a school reaches a sustainable level of ongoing support for hardware, networking, training, and staffing, things are really going to start happening in our schools. Teachers will begin exploring the full potential of information technology tools and provide students with powerful new learning opportunities.

In five years, this early stage of instructional technology will be widespread. Teachers will download lesson plans and assessment items linked to state performance standards for the majority of their curriculum material. Students in classrooms and at home will download assignments and submit their materials on-line to teachers and other people who will assess their work against the state standards. Everything that can be, will be, measured, quantified, and stored in the student's electronic portfolio. In effect, every student, not just SPED students, will have an Individualized Education Plan.

CONNIE: As I stated earlier in the answer to question number two—training and professional development, maintenance and upkeep of the technology, and integration of technology into the education system are the priorities for the next 5 years.

If the world became a perfect place and schools' priorities were met, we would see teachers and students using the technology more prudently. Technology will never replace human interactions, but technology can facilitate interaction.

5. In your opinion what are the key components and objectives of a good short and long-range technology plan?

GREG: Start with vision. How will the school look five years from now and one year from now? How will the technology be used? If there is no vision, bring in someone new to the planning process.

Once the vision is established, work backwards to mark the major milestones with increased specificity as the date approaches. Then focus on short-term deliverables that fit into the milestones. Make sure the deliverables are very concrete so there is no misunderstanding the expectations.

Finally, share the plan with as many stakeholders as possible and revise it constantly to keep it up to date. Use the plan as a communication document for people directly and indirectly involved.

CONNIE: Setting up short-range and long-range goals is a good way of developing a plan. Then plan the short-range activities and long-range activities with a timeline to see that the objectives and goals will be met. The important thing is not to be afraid to revise the steps as you implement and evaluate the activities.

6. How can vendors help schools plan for technology changes, particularly with respect to controlling costs?

GREG: By not charging outrageous overhead on goods and services! We have created a Chapter 30B-approved vendor pool called Educational Technology Integration Services (ETIS) to ensure that vendors fully disclose actual costs of delivering services and justify the overhead they charge. Through this process, we have seen vendor overhead cut in half.

CONNIE: Vendors can help schools by listening to the needs of the schools and being sincere. Of course, vendors need to make some profit and schools will provide them with that if they meet their needs. Take, for example, a situation in which a school is setting up a network system and is not sure how many routers to put in—:the vendor has the obligation to help the school to figure it out without overcharging or over-recommending. In the long run, if there is lasting trust between the schools and the vendors, better products and better service will be provided.

7.How have your views about administrative or instructional technology use in schools changed in the last two years?

GREG: In the last two years, the World Wide Web has become the only game in town. Now everything that we do is based on the web browser. All applications that we are building for administrative and instructional use will utilize the web.

The Department's Information Management System has shown that we can drastically reduce the collection and reporting cycle of the typical survey or report. We have begun building a web-based application to register every student into a statewide database to track MCAS results across time. This will replace the current summary surveys on students and will be the main source of data for school and district evaluations.

For teachers, we are building an on-line database of lesson plans indexed by the learning standards of the curriculum frameworks. Once again, we are using the power of the web to provide universal access to information.

CONNIE: With networking and the explosion of the Internet, there is no turning back to the traditional way of doing things in schools. The barriers for using technology in schools are starting to be recognized. Technology is still being used in traditional ways. There needs to be a fundamental change in the educational structure so that we can use technology to its fullest. For example, it will be great if the MCAS can be administered electronically, on-demand, at certain periods during the year. This may alleviate many schools' scheduling problems.

8. Please share your own technology goals for the next two years.

GREG: In addition to completing the Department"s Information Management System and continuing to grow MassEd.Net, ETIS, Youth Tech Entrepreneurs, Lighthouse Technology Sites, and other successful programs, we will be launching a new project called "Mass Community Network" which will be an order of magnitude bigger than anything that we have done before.

Over the next two years we will be build a super high-speed network that will connect all 3000 schools, libraries, and other public offices to each other and the Internet for a fraction of the market cost. Over the next 20 years, this network could save the Commonwealth as much as $1 billion. We will use these savings to leverage the development of a host of new on-line services for schools that will put Massachusetts at the forefront of the nation.

CONNIE: Massachusetts has just received a five year, $10 million technology professional development grant from the Technology Innovation Challenge Grant Program under the U.S. Department of Education. The goal of Project MEET, Massachusetts Empowering Educators with Technology, is to work with other state initiatives to bring 85% of Massachusetts teachers professional development opportunities and help 50% of the teachers to integrate technology into their classrooms. I am the Project Director of this project and I will work with all the partners to fulfill this goal.

9. Where would you go to find out about future trends in technology for schools?

GREG: First, I would talk to my wife, a 7th grade humanities teacher at Watertown Middle School. Although I have never taught, the daily conversations that she and I have about the impact of technology on schools gives me a basic context of what is possible in schools.

Second, I would go to my staff. In order to implement all of the Departments new technology initiatives, we have pulled together a top-notch group of people who understand the breadth and depth of technology-related issues.

Third, I would go to the field. Connie Louie and I run a monthly ET Advisory meeting that is open to everyone. Through that meeting and other conversations I have with educators, I have access to some of the best educational technology thinkers in the nation.

CONNIE: I go to the following resources:

• The research centers in Massachusetts (MIT Media Lab, Harvard Graduate School of Education, TERC, EDC, the Regional Lab, etc.) and other centers across the country
• My colleagues in other states - many of them share their experiences with me
• The educators in Massachusetts. Because I am administering all the technology grants of the state, I have the opportunity to meet a lot of very innovative teachers who are making a difference in the classroom using technology. These educators are the trendsetters for other teachers. The Lighthouse Site Program is a good example of how teachers learn from each other
• Finally, I visit different education web sites

Greg Nadeau has served as the Chief Technology Officer of the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education for two years. Prior to that, he directed the Department's strategic planning and Education Reform implementation efforts for three years.

Connie Louie has been with the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education for fifteen years working with schools to implement technology in the classroom. She received her Masters degree in Media Specialist/Technology Instruction at Boston College. She was a classroom teacher in Hong Kong and in America. She is a mother of three grown children. She and her husband, an internist, live in Newton, Massachusetts.

Previous | Next
Table of Contents