settles carrie swot template revised

ESSENTIAL CONDITION ONE: ACCESS TO TECHNOLOGY

SWOT Analysis Template for Technology Planning Needs Assessment What is the current reality in our school? Name: Carrie Settles ITEC 7410, Semester: Summer 2015ESSENTIAL CONDITION ONE: Effective Instructional Uses of Technology Embedded in Standards-Based,Student-Centered Learning

ISTE Definition: Use of information and communication technology (ICT) to facilitate engaging approaches to learning.

Guiding Questions: How is technology being used in our school? How frequently is it being used? By whom? For what purposes? To what extent is student technology use targeted toward student achievement of the Georgia Learning Standards (GPSs, QCCs)? To what extent is student technology use aligned to research-based, best practices that are most likely to support student engagement, deep understanding of content, and transfer of knowledge? Is day-to-day instruction aligned to research-based best practices? (See Creighton Chapters 5, 7)

StrengthsWeaknessesOpportunitiesThreats

Media center has collaborative work space. Space is arranged so students can plug-in and collaborate at the same time.

All teachers have the following software as a part of e-class umbrella: Curriculum & Instruction, Professional Development & evaluation tool, portal & collaboration tool, assessment tool, gradebook tool, student information system, digital content focus groups.

All teachers have access to digital textbooks. All teachers have access to course resources and virtual collaborative workspaces in the e-class software programs and access to a repository of pre-created content for modules in e-class.

BHS ranks high in the teacher and student use of e-class.

BHS continuously sends teachers to technology conferences and provides

Computer labs are used at 66% of their capacity.

There are 9 computer labs. All classrooms have 1 desk top, all teachers have a laptop, all classrooms equipped with a LCD projector.

Many have response systems, mobi tablets, promethean boards, document cameras, and tablets.

Technology use in our school is not tied into instructional theory, rather the primary focus is on the hardware and software that has been provided to us (or that we can use for free)

Our e-class matrix mentions using GCPS, Quality plus teaching standards for digital use, but there is not mention of it in the LSPI or at any stakeholder meetings.

Teachers are not held accountable for using technology that helps students learn at high levels nor are they being acknowledged for when they do!

Teachers not updating the calendar folderWe are encouraged by the district to use our D2L platform, e-class in some capacity. Therefore there is a plethora of training opportunities at the district level and school level to help teacher become more effective with using it. The district says the following about e-class:

E-class, while primarily a communication tool, has places in it (discussion postings, can be grouped by levels, resources can be differentiated) that give rise to higher order thinking and places for students to collaborate and synthesize new information. This tool is also a way to embed widgets from outside websites that align with our content standards.

Principal and tech team just approved Google for Education in our school. All students will have a Gmail for education account; this allows us to unleash the potential of Google Drive for collaboration and best practice technology use within each of our content areas.

Our PLCs meet once a week, this is a great place to collaborate on incorporating the technology standards in their content area.

Our leadership team is already observing teachers three times a semester; it would be easy to include a technology component to their observation.

Our teachers are already documenting 6 hours of continuous improvement; it would be easy to add a NETS/ standards component to it.E-class is a very expensive program to run for an entire district, it leaves little room for more technology software that would also be beneficial.

Not all community members are pleased with GCPS technology budget.

Difficult to get support for new programs teachers want to try, if they cost money.

Teachers who have too much on their plate dont want to learn e-class, and many will resist Google for Education and how they can use the two together to promote high LOTI levels.

Test scores are highly emphasized,

Teachers and administrators are so busy; adding another accountability piece to their observation would possibly get push-back.

Parents dont have ability to log into their childs classes to see the e-class pages; they do have access to school website, but not teacher e-class pages.

Teachers still using teacher-centered lessons with technology integration.

Summary/Gap Analysis: There is an abundant amount of technology use in our school. Our teachers are held accountable to make sure there is a bare minimum on their e-class page, however, they are not held accountable to the technology standards being included at any time in their lesson planning and that technology is being used for higher level thinking skills such as synthesizing and creating.

Data Sources:e-class matrix, BHS e-class use statistical analysis, BHS technology presentation to the GCPS

ESSENTIAL CONDITION TWO: Shared Vision

ISTE Definition: Proactive leadership in developing a shared vision for educational technology among school personnel, students, parents, and the community.

Guiding Questions: Is there an official vision for technology use in the district/school? Is it aligned to research-best practices? Is it aligned to state and national visions? Are teachers, administrators, parents, students, and other community members aware of the vision? To what extent do teachers, administrators, parents, students, and other community members have a vision for how technology can be used to enhance student learning? What do they believe about technology and what types of technology uses we should encourage in the future? Are their visions similar or different? To what extent are their beliefs about these ideal, preferred technology uses in the future aligned to research and best practice? To what extent do educators view technology as critical for improving student achievement of the GPS/QCCs? To preparing tomorrows workforce? For motivating digital-age learners? What strategies have been deployed to date to create a research-based shared vision? What needs to be done to achieve broad-scale adoption of a research-based vision for technology use that is likely to lead to improved student achievement?


The district has a very clear technology Goal aligned to its vision, Goal 5: GCPS will meet the continuing and changing demand for essential information through technological systems and processes that support effective performanceand desired results.

Gwinnett County recognizes the Local School Technology Coordinator (LSTC), Media Specialist and Technology Support Technician (TST) as the foundational members of the "Tech Team." Together, they work closely with school administration to support local and county initiatives.

Our school goals align directly with the district goals

Part of the Local School plan of improvement: Teachers will utilize technology effectively to build lessons, increase student participation during class, and obtain and analyze student data, all with the goal of increased student learning and achievement. In order to assist in this objective, all teachers will complete 6 hours of continuous improvement technology activities over the course of the year. Teachers may attend local or county staff development opportunities, among other routes, in order to meet this goal.

School-Wide eClass Integration: All teachers will utilize eClass as the primary digital resource for all students to enhance classroom instruction and student achievement. Over the course of the year, differentiated professional learning sessions and an eClass focus during faculty, department, and instructional team meetings will allow this resource to be pervasive across all classrooms. Data analysis on access in addition to teacher and student surveys will be used to assess usage and the overall effectiveness of school-wide eClass integration.

School has set technology goals within our LSPI, but not a real plan, nor a real vision for technology.

The schools technology vision is not well communicated with the stakeholders nor is input about our vision sought after.

Community and parents not a part of the technology vision process (they are a part of the goals process)Stakeholders are asked about what they would like to see as far as their needs with using technology.

Our school utilizes surveys so could easily send one out to faculty to allow them to be a part of the shared vision process.

The adopted vision could easily be shared with the community on our website, newsletters, twitter, and Facebook accounts.

Stakeholders receive a lot of surveys so this would likely be one that is ignored unless they see the importance of effective technology integration.

Even though the strategies are research-based, they may still not be on board with implementing a shared vision that is going to use technology to increase student engagement and learning.

Summary/Gap Analysis: Our leadership team and technology team do a great job of creating goals as a part of the LSPI, however, they do not have their own vision for technology. When they do create one, they will need to seek input from the PTA and teachers to receive more buy-in for their vision. Also, they should present the research on why effective technology use is important for student learning.

Data Sources: Local School plan of improvement (LSPI), Gwinnett County Public Schools 3 year technology plan (2012-2015), BHS technology report.

ESSENTIAL CONDITION THREE: Planning for Technology

ISTE Definition: A systematic plan aligned with a shared vision for school effectiveness and student learning through the infusion of ICT and digital learning resources.

Guiding Questions: Is there an adequate plan to guide technology use in your school? (either at the district or school level? Integrated into SIP?) What should be done to strengthen planning?


Excellent district plan to integrate technology in our schools

Our school includes technology integration in our LSPI as a part of our implementation design.

There is also a technology plan that includes staff developments that will help reach some of the goals

The technology plan doesnt include a shared vision

The technology plan doesnt include timelines and budget considerations.

More time is spent with the technology re-cap from previous year than concrete goals for the next year..

School supports the technology goals with technology staff developments, eClass implementation, digital equipment acquisition and support, computer lab scheduling and support, data reporting and analysis, and digital communications.

A lot of time is allocated to eCLASS goals, which is not always focused on constructivist learning strategies. This leaves less time for other technologies to fit into the plan.

Plan for technology use may be seen as a hoop to jump through and not meaningful to the teachers if they do not have a voice in its creation.

Summary/Gap Analysis: There is a specific district plan in place for technology. Our school doesnt really have a plan in place, the technology team would bode well to sit down and create the plan instead of just coming up with common goals for the following school year that assist with the LSPI. A lot of time is spent on re-capping what was done the previous year instead of creating a shared vision and goal setting, along with strategies to achieve those goals. Everyone is so tied up with the eClass roll-out that the time and energy has mostly gone into getting teachers prepared to use it with their classes. That is really the plan and that needs to be addressed.

Data Sources: BHS LSPI

ESSENTIAL CONDITION FOUR: Equitable Access (Specifically address low SES and gender groups)

ISTE Definition: Robust and reliable access to current and emerging technologies and digital resources.

Guiding Questions: To what extent do students, teachers, administrators, and parents have access to computers and digital resources necessary to support engaging, standards-based, student-centered learning? To what extent is technology arrange/distributed to maximize access for engaging, standards-based, student-centered learning? What tools are needed and why? Do students/parents/community need/have beyond school access to support the vision for learning?


Last year we offered whole-faculty differentiated training on how to reach and teach gifted, SPED, and ESOL students. Finding data using technology resources allowed teachers to look up ACCESS scores. The teachers who led this session (I was one of them) also demonstrated how to use digital resources to differentiate by LEXILE levels. We also offered last year ESOL GACE preparation classes, in addition to holding a Brookwood TALC (Teaching Academic Language and Content) class to teach teachers about culturally and linguistically diverse students. From those, we had several science and social studies teachers get ESOL certified, which helps better serve our students. This collaboration occurred in person, but the digital resources were shared on-line.

Our special ed department has staff development geared toward assistive technology and technology tools that help improve their instruction. One example listed in our technology staff development log was training on STORI

Our special ed department has access to all of the computer labs the regular ed staff does, but they also have their very own, as well.

Our new Robotics class will be taught by a female instructor.

Our Science Olympiad team is evenly distributed with males and females.

Our data team has identified students as as-risk with low SES being one of the risk factors.

Breakdown and synthesizing the data to determine the disparities of males versus females in sciences and technology courses hasnt been done yet.

Our Robotics club is primarily male therefore our new robotics class we are offering for the first time is also male dominated.

The Science Olympiad team is broken down into many subjects and the engineering related subjects are usually done by males. The females take the life science events, rocks/fossils, etc.

Most of the time when I share a computer lab with the SPED department, they are using USAtestprep.com, which is a drill and kill tool designed to help them with the state tests.

Our economically disadvantaged population has grown to over 30%.Low SES families may not have access to all of the digital (on-line) resources we have provided to ALL of our students.Community support is significant. The Brookwood School Foundation provided a Grant (to me actually) to take my sheltered ESOL environmental science class to the Gwinnett Environmental & Heritage center where students used current technologies to monitor stream quality and hands-on lessons on quadrant sampling & succession. These students also use the classroom set of Nexus 7 tablets in my classroom (from another grant)

We could essential write grants to the BSF that would give us money to support after school programs that would encourage female participation in science. This is a cluster-wide program and it would be beneficial to start in middle school.

Meet with a science vertical team, so science and technology collaboration begins early, this is a place to begin researching female participation in science and technology.Funding within our school. We are limited to how many teachers we can have and teacher points. Right now our classes are still stuffed to the brim. Ideally, we could hire more teachers so that we could try what the research is saying about girls in ESOL classes being taught without boys in the classroom so that they can break the social stigmas that impede their learning.

If we are not number one on the CCRPI this year, number two still gets some money, then we will lose some of the established interventions that have been helping our at-risk students be more successful.

Mindset that all students have equal opportunity to learn when they leave our building. Also mindset that since some students have a smart phone, automatically assuming that they must have Internet at home.

Summary/Gap Analysis: There is not a lot of focus in our schools in the disparity between males and females in the AP computer science course, robotics, and other engineering courses. Time needs to be set aside to figure out ways to address this. Resources may need to be used to create avenues for females be drawn back into math and science. Teachers need to be trained in supporting our low SES students more effectively. The school needs to find ways to offer extra support to our low SES students and their parents.

Data Sources: BHS Staff development report, BHS data profile

ESSENTIAL CONDITION FIVE: Skilled Personnel

ISTE Definition: Educators and support staff skilled in the use of ICT appropriate for their job responsibilities.

Guiding Questions: To what extent are educators and support staff skilled in the use of technology appropriate for their job responsibilities? What do they currently know and are able to do? What are knowledge and skills do they need to acquire?

(Note: No need to discuss professional learning here. Discuss knowledge and skills. This is your needs assessment for professional learning. The essential conditions focus on personnel, which includes administrators, staff, technology specialists, and teachers. However, in this limited project, you may be wise to focus primarily or even solely on teachers; although you may choose to address the proficiency of other educators/staff IF the need is critical. You must include an assessment of teacher proficiencies.


All faculty and administration has been trained on the use of eCLASS.

All faculty can use their course resources, Microsoft office, and lotus notes for e-mail. Most faculty can use the gradebook tool to communicate with parents.

BHS has School innovators (techsperts, technology leaders, etc.) who do a monthly hands-on demonstration with their grade levels/department/course team of a technology resource they have used for an instructional activity, so they are certainly skilled and helpful to colleagues.

Some teachers can use schoolnet to acquire data from district level tests.

Many teachers have written technology grants.

Many teachers can use the eInstruction software for CPSs

Many teachers can use All in Learning scanners

Many teachers can use the document camera

Many teachers create their own screencasts to put on their e-class homepages.

Many teachers use class blogs and wikis

Many teachers

Many teachers lack confidence to try more engaging technologies with their students.

Most teachers use technology in the classroom, but lack training on technology tools that have real-world applications.

Most technology is used for class structure and outdated word processing. The outdated word processing tools doesnt allow for real-time collaboration. The presentation tools they use are teacher-centered.

The eInstruction response systems and all in learning are for assessments, not critical thinkingDistrict level funding opportunities for innovators leading staff developments

Funding opportunities are provided by the district and cluster so that teachers can get outside training.

eCLASS training module is on the Brookwood Community, easily accessible by all teachers.

Technology innovators are easily trained and disseminate information and training to their colleagues.

New teacher mentoring program helps teachers get acquainted with available software.

20 Continuous improvement hour, 6 in technology, are already mandated.The testing software continuously changes (we went from Elements, which crashed and burned) to schoolnet. This is very new and teachers are not efficient in using schoolnet for data acquisition.

The same few teachers getting the grant opportunities and are being sent to the technology conferences.

Teachers are not utilizing technology appropriately to increase student engagement.

Summary/Gap Analysis:Most teachers have the basic skills for structuring classroom and communicating with staff and parents. However, the vast majority lacks the skills necessary to have truly engaged learners, using technology to differentiate instruction; they dont allow students to create their own learning outcomes. Many teachers only use basic Microsoft word and powerpoint in their day to day instruction, and the occasional testing software.

Data Sources: BHS data profile

ESSENTIAL CONDITION SIX: Ongoing Professional Learning

ISTE Definition: Technology-related professional learning plans and opportunities with dedicated time to practice and share ideas.

Guiding Questions: What professional learning opportunities are available to educators? Are they well-attended? Why or why not? Are the current professional learning opportunities matched to the knowledge and skills educators need to acquire? (see Skilled Personnel) Do professional learning opportunities reflect the national standards for professional learning (NSDC)? Do educators have both formal and informal opportunities to learn? Is technology-related professional learning integrated into all professional learning opportunities or isolated as a separate topic? How must professional learning improve/change in order to achieve the shared vision?


Increasing teacher knowledge and use of instructional technology is a primary goal at BHS. We even offered an instructional technology PLU last year for 10 hours of tech professional development.

21 separate technology-related staff development opportunities were offered last school year, many were ways to incorporate eCLASS into daily instruction,

AP for staff development/technology sends out a survey every year (needs assessment) to the staff. This is one piece of the puzzle in the creation of staff development opportunists for the following school year.Staff development opportunities are offered during the school day.

PLCs can attend the lunch & learns together offering another avenue for collaboration.

The technology sessions were taught as separate topics, with the exception of the ones that aligned with eCLASS.

Follow-up is not a part of the technology lunch-n-learns, with the exception of a few follow-ups for eCLASS.

National standards for professional learning are not addressed. School innovators offer eCLASS C&I course page lunch and learn sessions once every two weeks, focusing on a specific feature or function, or on questions from the faculty. Can be geared more towards collaboration tools and School innovators share a technology tip or lesson-learned in each faculty newsletter, these could be geared towards fostering more critical thinking in our schools. School innovators starting to offer quarterly classroom observation lessons for peer observations.

Documentation of the service hours already in place allow for meaningful reflection on the technology strategy they implemented.

District offers a Digital Learning Conference every summer. The content is then placed on eCLASS in its own community.Teachers only attending the lunch & learns to document their required hours, but not trying any new standards-based tech tools in the classroom.

Teachers too busy to attend professional learning workshops during the summer and after school.

Summary/Gap Analysis: There is already an infrastructure in place for teachers to have staff development incorporated into the school day. Teacher-leaders get the opportunity to lead these sessions, however more training and purposeful sessions to ensure constructivist learning being emphasized.

Data Sources: BHS staff development report

ESSENTIAL CONDITION SEVEN: Technical Support

ISTE Definition: Consistent and reliable assistance for maintaining, renewing, and using ICT and digital resources.

Guiding Questions: To what extent is available equipment operable and reliable for instruction? Is there tech assistance available for technical issues when they arise? How responsive is tech support? Are current down time averages acceptable? Is tech support knowledgeable? What training might they need? In addition to break/fix issues, are support staff available to help with instructional issues when teachers try to use technology in the classroom?


Very skilled and knowledgeable Technology Support Technician.

Online reporting of tech issues, usually resolved quickly.

LSTC, Media Specialists, and Lead Innovator teachers can all provide basic troubleshooting support.

Lead innovators (teachers) also help with eCLASS issues and issues from the program they taught at lunch-n-learns.

There is only one Technology Support Technician for a staff of almost 300.

LCD projector aging, they continue to break leaving teachers without.

Laptops need a re-imaging, again. Batteries not keeping charge.

Repairs can be costly, almost cheaper just to purchase new equipment.

Network unreliable, especially during the China Cyber Attacks!innovator teachers would be willing to get trained on some basic trouble shooting for the county.

GCPS has a strong relationship with IBM, they could train these groups of teachers.

Many trouble-shooting videos are available on the Internet.Teachers are afraid the Internet wont work seriously impeding lessons built around technology use, back-up plans are time consuming.

Many teachers leave desktop computers with repair issues undocumented, so they just stay broken.

Teachers get frustrated when they computer labs are occupied by testing, so stop trying to schedule them.

Summary/Gap Analysis: There could be more training for the lead innovators, they usually volunteer to help out because they have prior knowledge from outside the field, or they are self-taught via Internet. This would help the tech team resolve issues in a more timely manner. The Internet connectivity was a huge problem this past school year, so this needs to be addressed if we want teachers to plan more web-based activities.

Data Sources:

ESSENTIAL CONDITION EIGHT: Curriculum Framework

ISTE Definition: Content standards and related digital curriculum resources.

Guiding Questions: To what extent are educators, students, and parents aware of student technology standards? (QCCs/NET-S) Are technology standards aligned to content standards to help teachers integrate technology skills into day-to-day instruction and not teach technology as a separate subject? To what extent are there digital curriculum resources available to teachers so that they can integrate technology into the GPS/QCCs as appropriate? How is student technology literacy assessed?


All teachers know the technology goals in the LSPI.

Teachers are encouraged to use the eCLASS in accordance with GCPS Quality plus teaching strategies.

All content areas have access to repositories of digital resources to support their instruction.

Educators, students, and parents are not well informed about technology standards in my school.

Student technology literacy is not formally assessed.

Teachers have varying expectations of what students should be able to do for coursework on the computer.

Media Specialists are already willing to work with classes in the media center on how to use the Internet for research, how to use easybib.com, prezi, etc. They would be willing to incorporate an informal survey to the 9th graders on their current technology literacy.

PLCs can view the Technology standards and collaborate on ways they will fit into their content.

Vertical team meetings would be a great place to also collaborate on the incorporation of tech standards into their curriculum.Not every teacher is willing to take time to schedule time with the media specialists as it is.

Teachers are very busy so technology standards will not be addressed.

Teachers in PLCs may have different opinions on how much technology should be in the lessons.

Teachers assume since their 21st century learners are digital natives, they will automatically use technology safely.

Summary/Gap Analysis: The LSPI contains the goals for the school and while technology integration is a part of this, our stakeholders are not aware of the NETS standards. Our school would benefit from an informal audit on our current technology philosophy utilizing the essential conditions rubric. It would also be helpful if with the course information on our on-line repository, they also add content resources that already have the NETS standards included.

Data Sources: BHS LSPI

settles carrie swot template revised

Documents