1. Modified School Technology Plan Goal and Goal Implementation Melissa A. Fromm Central Michigan University EAD 615

2. The Holly Area Schools District Technology Plan for 2005-2006 has 3 major goals: Technology integration in all areas of the curriculum will improve student attainment of the learner profile.Technology integration in all areas of the curriculum will improve student attainment of the learner profile. Student learning will be enhanced as all members of the learning community use technology as a tool for communication, problem solving, & collaboration.Student learning will be enhanced as all members of the learning community use technology as a tool for communication, problem solving, & collaboration. Teachers will integrate technology into all areas of the curriculum to support and improve student learning.Teachers will integrate technology into all areas of the curriculum to support and improve student learning.

3. Modified Goal: All high school science teachers will implement the use of an interactive whiteboard into every unit to improve student engagement and mastery of the state standards and benchmarks.All high school science teachers will implement the use of an interactive whiteboard into every unit to improve student engagement and mastery of the state standards and benchmarks.

4. What is an interactive whiteboard? According to Glover and Miller (2001), white boards have many positive impacts on learning: Device that interfaces with a computer and LCD projector to allow computer images to be displayed on its surface.Device that interfaces with a computer and LCD projector to allow computer images to be displayed on its surface. Text and images can be manipulated on the whiteboard screen by teachers and students during a lesson.Text and images can be manipulated on the whiteboard screen by teachers and students during a lesson. Lessons can be saved and printed as notes later for students, complete with the manipulations.Lessons can be saved and printed as notes later for students, complete with the manipulations. (Glover and Miller, 2001)

5. History of the Technology First appeared on the market in early 1990s, but cost-prohibited to most schools.First appeared on the market in early 1990s, but cost-prohibited to most schools. By the late 1990s, whiteboards came into use in classrooms.By the late 1990s, whiteboards came into use in classrooms. Today, prices range from $1,600 to $3,000.Today, prices range from $1,600 to $3,000.

6. Why Choose an Interactive Whiteboard? Necessary technology is already in place in most of the science classrooms already at HHS.Necessary technology is already in place in most of the science classrooms already at HHS. Research shows that whiteboards improve student engagement and lead to increased student success for both general ed. and special ed. students.Research shows that whiteboards improve student engagement and lead to increased student success for both general ed. and special ed. students.

7. Meeting the Needs of All Students… HHS has a large special ed. population. The 1997 federal law known as IDEA, requires that these children have access to the curriculum through devices known as assistive technologies.HHS has a large special ed. population. The 1997 federal law known as IDEA, requires that these children have access to the curriculum through devices known as assistive technologies. Whiteboards are considered to be an assistive technology that can help these children to be successful because they add sound and project lessons in large-size type.Whiteboards are considered to be an assistive technology that can help these children to be successful because they add sound and project lessons in large-size type. The interactive nature of this device also reaches students that are apathetic toward learning science.The interactive nature of this device also reaches students that are apathetic toward learning science.

8. Implementation: Not cost-prohibitive if implemented over a 2-3 year period.Not cost-prohibitive if implemented over a 2-3 year period. Provide teachers with plenty of professional development training for interactive whiteboard use to increase their confidence and allow for lesson development and idea sharing.Provide teachers with plenty of professional development training for interactive whiteboard use to increase their confidence and allow for lesson development and idea sharing.

9. The Need For Professional Development: Research states that most manufacturers provide minimal training.Research states that most manufacturers provide minimal training. District must research manufacturer policies and availability prior to purchasing units.District must research manufacturer policies and availability prior to purchasing units.

10. When would professional development training take place? Initial training by manufacturer prior to start of school year during district PD days.Initial training by manufacturer prior to start of school year during district PD days. Subsequent training during PD days for department staff to plan lessons around use of white board.Subsequent training during PD days for department staff to plan lessons around use of white board. Subsequent training on an as needed basis.Subsequent training on an as needed basis. Lesson planning for department members occurs on district collaboration days.Lesson planning for department members occurs on district collaboration days.

11. References Basilicato, A.N. Interactive Whiteboards: Assistive Technology for Every Classroom. Retrieved November 26, 2005, from the Today’s School: Shared Leadership in Education website :http://www.peterli.com/ts/index.shtm. Beeland, W. D. Student Engagement, Visual Learning and Technology: Can Interactive Whiteboards Help? Retrieved November 26, 2005, from the website: http://chiron.valdosta.edu/are/Artmanscrpt/vol1no1/beelan d_am.pdf. Bell, M.A. Why Use an Interactive Whiteboard? A Baker’s Dozen Reasons! The teachers.net Gazette. Retrieved November 26, 2005, from http://teachers.net/gazette/. Glover, D. and Miller, D. 2001. Running with Technology: the pedagogic impact of the large-scale introduction of interactive whiteboards in one secondary school. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 10 (3), pp. 257-276. Levy, P. 2002. Interactive whiteboards in learning in two Sheffield schools: Department of Information Studies, University of Sheffield. Retrieved November 26, 2005 from http://dis.shef.ac.uk/eirg/projects/wboards.htm. Smith, H. 2001. SmartBoard evaluation: final report. Kent NGfL. Retrieved November 26, 2005, from http://www.kented.org.uk/ngfl/whiteboards/report.html. Wishart, J. and Blease, D. (1999). Theories underlying perceived changes in teaching and learning after installing a computer network in a secondary school. British Journal of Educational Technology, 30 (1), 25-42. Retrieved November 26, 2005 from the website http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/links/doi/10.1111/1467- 8535.00088/abs/.

12. References Continued Glover, D. and Miller, D. 2001. Running with Technology: the pedagogic impact of the large-scale introduction of interactive whiteboards in one secondary school. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 10 (3), pp. 257-276. Levy, P. 2002. Interactive whiteboards in learning in two Sheffield schools: Department of Information Studies, University of Sheffield. Retrieved November 26, 2005 from http://dis.shef.ac.uk/eirg/projects/wboards.htm. Smith, H. 2001. SmartBoard evaluation: final report. Kent NGfL. Retrieved November 26, 2005, from http://www.kented.org.uk/ngfl/whiteboards/report.html. Wishart, J. and Blease, D. (1999). Theories underlying perceived changes in teaching and learning after installing a computer network in a secondary school. British Journal of Educational Technology, 30 (1), 25-42. Retrieved November 26, 2005 from the website http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/links/doi/10.1111/1467- 8535.00088/abs/.