Dani Davis

Article review 4

Febuaury 14, 2004

Citation

AR4: D. Damon, (2001). Public School Budgeting: Changing Practice to Support Technology. http://www.bellsouthfoundation.org/pubs/budget/budget1-5.htm.

Summary

It is no secret that even when school systems would like to provide technology training, they often lack the funding for professional development in the area of technology. We are also painfully aware that many schools often set aside funding to purchase new hardware and software for the classroom, while altogether neglecting to allocate funds for staff development. Damon tackles these tough problems, by suggesting steps that schools may implement in order to secure funds for staff training.

First, Damon points out that on average, “public school budgets in the United States devote one half percent of their resources to teacher professional development.” Damon sees this lack of funding as a direct result of districts viewing training and support is supplement to integrating technology into the educational setting, rather than in integral part of the process itself. The author acknowledges the fact that there are schools that recognize the important role of staff training in the process of developing a technology driven learning environment. For these schools, “the area of technology is infused into all of their on-going training programs, both regular and mandated.” For technology to be embraced in this manner nationwide, all districts must acknowledge the importance of training and find ways to budget for it.

To successfully restructure their budget plans, so that they accommodate for the technology training needs, school systems must undergo a few “systematic changes” are inevitable including, but not limited to:

Ÿ “Re-examining the available funding for technology,

Ÿ “The method used for allocating resources, and what the resources provide is essential.

Ÿ Having access to hardware and software is certainly critical, but not in isolation.

Ÿ Teachers and administrators will need continuing education support, including:

1. time to understand how technology can facilitate student learning,

2. what the implications are for how teachers use technology in their teaching,

3. new curricula that reflect the capabilities of technology in the school environment,

4. new assessment methodologies to measure student learning more effectively,

5. Systems to manage student data so educators can be accountable for the investments made in technology.”

So, how do schools make sure that they have budget enough money for adequate staff development in the area of technology? Damon has some ideas:

§ Outside agencies with more funding sources should share in the responsibility of “sharing educational programs with schools.” By looking at plans that have worked for other agencies, school officials are better able to design technology plans, which operate successfully in the educational arena. Saving school districts money on developing mediocre technology plans.

§ “Similarly, the technology industry should take a proactive stance on providing technical assistance to public education institutions as they determine the role technology can play in improving their system productivity.” Why try to rediscover what has already been proven successful? The technology industry can collaborate with school district to share practices that have been known to work in other schools. This thereby eliminates the need to spend money on practices that may not be a success.

§ School personal should also focus on “creating public awareness and acceptance of their planning in order to insure they can be accountable for their planning and budgeting.” This may also increase the public’s willingness to donate money to the school’s technology fund.

§ There is also great “benefit to both institutions in curriculum and program development and teacher training.” The school district can enjoy broad community support, because of the affiliation with a local university, and teachers will be more likely to participate in training because credit is earned through the university partnership. This will also affect teacher’s “salary schedule credit for their investment in their continuing education.”

§ School should only implement a technology plan that has been successfully piloted within the classroom. This enables school district to budget for resources that are needed, as well as ensure that money is being spent on a program that officials have seen work for themselves.

Implications of Staff Development by Author

According to Damon, “The key to changing practice in planning and budgeting is to develop goals, benchmarks of success, and evaluation plans as part of the process, whether the subject is technology or another program area.” We must have goals related to student learning in regards to the technology. What do we want the students to be able to do with this technology? How can the students best use the technology as a tool throughout the curriculum? Once these questions are answered, schools can begin to write a plan to address their individual benchmarks and standards of the district. Likewise, once the benchmarks and standards have been addressed in the technology plan, administrators, can design training opportunities which will assist teachers in acquiring the skill necessary to tech the students the skill necessary to reach the benchmarks. After, these items have been implemented; the results of the plan needed to be evaluated yearly and steps need to be taken to remedy problems as they occur.

My Reaction

Schools are making an error when they sink the entire allotted technology budget into hardware and software, while totally neglecting the need for staff development training. Having technology in the classroom is great, but if no one is able to use it what purpose is it serving? We need to purchase less software and provide more training, so that the technology we already have is being utilized to the fullest extent possible.

Outside funding sources are a wonderful idea. However, obtaining funding from some of these sources can be very time consuming. Last summer, I spent a month writing a grant to purchase assistive technology for my classroom. The grant was denied and therefore, my time was wasted.

I like the idea of collaborating with a local university to provide training. This partnership, which offers credit, may be just the incentive that the technology leery may need to pursue technology training. They may even overcome their fears and embrace a technology rich learning environment.

I agree with the author that piloting any plan before implementing it is a wise idea. How do schools know if technology is going to meet their needs unless they try it first? In the end, Piloting the technology could prevent schools from spending a lot of funding on hardware and software that may look good, but in the end does not address their needs.