Tech Plan Critique II

[Ted Smith <tedsmith@capital.net>]

DECATUR CITY SCHOOLS TECHNOLOGY PLAN
Critiqued January 19, 1998

(http://www.ptc.dcs.edu/information/plan.html)

DEMOGRAPHICS
	None formally stated, but by reading the document the reader learns
that this is a city school district of Decatur, Alabama, and the plan
encompasses elementary, middle and high school grades.

COMMENDATIONS
	The brief (seven page) document is vision driven, but at the same time
pragmatic.  Cost and benefits are focused upon.  It describes a multi
phased implementation approach with small incremental stages and is laid
out by building level in three phases.  The plan also uses best research
findings to support its rationale for adoption and implementation. 
Likewise, appropriate information was sought through consultation and
visitation to exemplary demonstration sites.  Despite other shortcomings
of the plan, it is apparent that excellent data drove their decision
making.  It is very upfront in pointing out that user training is
equivalent in cost to the price of technology hardware (40%) and they
have factored this cost into their planning.

UNEXPECTED FINDINGS
	The author (I wonder if this document was truly the product of a
committee) is ‘visionary’ through his/her understanding and
implementation approach to the essence of technology being at the heart
of educational reform - the redefinition of how students learn and how
teachers and schools can provide instruction through the appropriate use
of technology.

MISSING FINDINGS
	Once again, I would have preferred to have seen a more focused
strategic plan - dates, mileposts, etc.  While this document supplied
information about overall implementation sequence and equipment, greater
detail is warranted as to professional development approaches.  There
was an absence of specifics regarding curriculum and technology
integration, hardware and user support structures, plan evaluation and
revision, and concerns about the community.
	Phase I implementation was fairly well articulated, but not so phases
II and III.  Either the author ran out of steam or, more likely, the
author is unable to supply greater depth for want of feedback about the
implementation of phase I.

RECOMMENDATION
	This is a fine high level plan which addresses some very important
considerations regarding technology in education.  It needs to extend
its breadth to include the glaring oversights mentioned above.  I would
like to see an accompanying lower level strategic plan for phase I
implementation where many of the missing details were worked out.

RATING
	6.5