Georgetown, Kentucky

Technology Plan:

Scott County Schools

Georgetown, Kentucky

www.scott.kyschools.us

Prepared Date: December 31, 2011

Update to Plan Date: December 31, 2013

Plan Start Date: July 1, 2012

Plan Expiration Date: September 30, 2014

Approved Date: Pending Commonwealth Approval

http://www.scott.kyschools.us/

December 31, 2011 i

Acknowledgments

Technology planning is an important and continuous process in the Scott County Schools. We

strive for excellence of teaching and learning with technology by all stakeholders and supported

by a strong infrastructure. This document is a compilation of needs and goals representative of

the CDIP and CSIP in addition to the individuals identified below.

District Information Technology Services Staff School Technology Coordinators

Sheila Setser, CSE

Timothy Clarkston, Network Support Engineer

Matt Reed, Computer/Electronics Support Engineer

Central Office District Contributors

Patricia Putty, Superintendent

Matthew Thompson, Assistant Superintendent of

Student Learning

Chip Southworth, Secondary Education Curriculum

Director

Randall Cutright, Chief Financial Officer

Mike Luscher, Director of Facilities

Zan Rexroat, Director of Maintenance/Facilities

District Instructional Technology Services Staff

Jeanne Biddle, District Instructional Technology

Coordinator

Nora Oliver, Anne Mason Elementary

Ben Smits, Eastern Elementary

Ann Tallant, Garth Elementary

Mandi Hudson, Northern Elementary

Michael Coston, Southern Elementary

Candice Hutchison, Stamping Grd. Elementary

Carrie Garrett, Western Elementary

Marijean Long, Georgetown Middle

Cindy Sturdivant, Royal Spring Middle

Mary Jo Johnson, Scott County Middle

Jesse Smith, 9th

Grade

Julie Holzhause, Scott County High

School Board Members

Phyllis Young, Board Chair

Rebecca Sams, Board Vice-Chair

December 31, 2011 ii

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments ..........................................................................................................................................................i

Table of Contents.......................................................................................................................................................... ii

Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................................... 3

Planning Process / Methodology ................................................................................................................................... 3

Current Technology and Resources. .......................................................................................................................... ... 6

Curriculum and Instructional Integration Goals ......................................................................................................... . .9

Curriculum and Instructional Integration Goals - Evaluation ...................................................................................... 13

Student Technology Literacy Goals ............................................................................................................................ 14

Student Technology Literacy Goals - Evaluation ........................................................................................... ……16

Staff Training/Professional Development Goals ....................................................................................................... ..17

Staff Training/Professional Development Goals - Evaluation ............................................................................. ..19

Technology Goals ....................................................................................................................................................... .20

Technology Goals - Evaluation ................................................................................................................................ .24

Budget Summary ......................................................................................................................................................... 25

Appendix A - Scott County Public Schools Technology Readiness Survey ............................................................... 27

Appendix B - Scott County Public Schools Comprehensive District Improvement Plan ............................................ 28

December 31, 2011 3

Executive Summary

Executive Summary

The Scott County Technology Plan focuses on goals, vision, needs, priorities, and solutions for excellence in

infrastructure, integration, and implementation of technology for all staff and students. By providing students and

staff with accessible and effective technologies, all stakeholders will have the opportunity to develop job-embedded

skills that enhance learning, increase productivity and prepare for the future.

District Vision: Create a collaborative culture to ensure student learning.

Technology is an essential vehicle for maximizing the capacity of teachers and learners. We envision that

technology will be effectively supported for all students and staff to:

Provide global access to information

Provide access to general curriculum

Meet the instructional needs of all learners

Refine critical thinking skills and foster creativity

Provide a medium for expression and communication

Collect, assess, and use performance information

Improve the effectiveness of administrative tasks

Provide skills and proficiencies necessary for the workforce

Plan of Action:

If Scott County School administrators, staff and community work collaboratively to focus on high quality

instruction, then teaching, learning and student performance will improve for every student, in every classroom,

every day. The schools have knowledgeable staff and external resources – such as parents, community members,

business, higher education and network resources – working together to further the curriculum goals.

Goals:

A reliable technology infrastructure reduces downtime, decreases user frustration and increases productivity. Taken

as a whole, our strategies are designed to create a current, operational environment used by teachers and staff who

are trained to integrate technology into teaching, learning and administration.

Every student will graduate college and career ready.

All students and staff will work in a safe and positive learning environment that focuses on lifelong

learning and self-renewal.

The district will develop and maintain strong and productive partnerships with parents and the community.

The district will provide high quality, timely support services and resources to assure student and staff

success.

Planning Process / Methodology

The district technology plan is a plan for continuous improvement, monitored progress, and an organized focus on

goals for supporting instruction. The plan was developed by members of the Technology Department and District

Office Administration and is a living document – evolving along with the technology and curriculum it supports.

Effectiveness of the plan will be demonstrated by the knowledge of students graduating from Scott County Schools,

as well as increased use and integration of technology by teachers.

December 31, 2011 4

Our goals and objectives were created to be a compliment and support of the overall district goals which ultimately

support the academic and instructional goals of our district.

The Chief Systems Engineer (CSE) working collaboratively with key instructional stakeholders and the District

Superintendent is responsible for reviewing and revising the plan.

In reference to our previous year’s plan:

Goals that were met:

o Goal 1: Increase the level of technology proficiency for all certified staff and students in

compliance with the new refreshed NET*S standards for students, teachers (Standard 6), and

administrators (TSSA / ISLLC) in alignment with the Technology Program of Studies, and state

and national content standards..

o Goal 3: To increase the number of teacher, administrator/staff, and student instructional

computers and/or mobile computing devices by 20% each year with emphasis to reduce current

student to computer ratio to meet or exceed KETS IDEAL Minimum Standard of 3:1. On-going.

o Goal 4: Fund and support learning opportunities for teachers, students, and administrators focused

on technology trends at the local, regional, state, and national levels, new and emerging

technology, policy making, assessment, and integration of technology that supports informed

decision making and greater student achievement and technology proficiency.

o Goal 5: Continue and increase usage of Atomic Learning, a web-based subscription of video

learning tutorials accessible 24/7 for just-in-time learning by staff, students, and parents of

students in Scott County Schools.

o Goal 6: Increase funding to support the purchase of interactive intelligent classroom components

to expand classroom tools for teaching and rigorous learning opportunities.

o Goal 7: Increase participation in the Student Technology Leadership Program (STLP). Provide

increased funding and support for active STLP participation across the district was a challenge

due to budgetary constraints.

o Goal 9: In alignment with eRate / Federal funding requirements, State, and District policies, we

will continue to address the essential need and urgency for awareness and integration of digital

citizenship, internet safety, social media, and social networking responsibilities and consequences

for all staff and students.

o Goal 10: Provide quality software, hardware, and professional development to support continuous

monitoring, data collection, and intervention and credit recovery services to schools and students

within the district aligned to Response to Intervention (RtI).

o Goal 11: Garth Elementary, Georgetown Middle, Southern Elementary - Install wireless access

coverage for the entire campus of the above listed schools. Replace older switching technology to

accommodate VOIP and wireless.

o Goal 12: Our current network infrastructure will be maintained and upgraded as needed to support

innovative communication, teaching, learning, assessment, and administrative needs. Older aging

December 31, 2011 5

equipment will be replaced timely, as needed, to maintain efficiency toward a learning

environment.

o Goal 13: Establish support technicians (School Technology Coordinators) at every building level.

o Goal 14: Research/ Purchase necessary Software updates and licenses to ensure capacity

necessary for technology advancements.

o Goal 15: Continue implementation and support of the district-wide student information system and

utilize the data to determine technology needs and improve communications between parents,

students and staff.

o Goal 16: Provide an increased level of effective communication both within the district and with

the community via the network, email and/or district website.

o Goal 18: Provide and support CCTV systems to monitor every facility. On-going – All schools

except one have CCTV coverage.

o Goal 19: Implement technologies which support a “green” environment.

o Goal 20: Provide sufficient bandwidth, and voice and video capability to support technology

integration into teaching, learning and administration.

Goals that were not met and/or had unanticipated outcomes:

o Goal 2: Employ Technology Integration Specialists (TIS) at the district and building level to

support teachers to create engaging lessons with technology for students to comply with the new

refreshed NETS, the state Technology Program of Studies, state and national core content to

develop awareness of trends in educational technology that support teaching and learning for

preparing students for a successful future in a digital world. The specific goal was not met due to

budgetary constraints, however, the objective of this goal is being addressed using existing staff

and resources.

o Goal 17: Increase the number of computers and other emerging technologies in schools, including

a 5-year replacement cycle for all personal computing devices. The state legislature approved

$50M for IDU funds statewide to begin this process. The number of computers have increased,

however, due to budgetary constraints, we were not able to implement a 5-year replacement for

all devices – this will continue to be an on-going process.

Goals that are no longer relevant:

o Goal 8 Purchase of video conferencing equipment for every school and the central office to

provide administrators, staff, and student’s virtual learning opportunities supported by Internet 2

educational content (MAGPI and CRD) for professional development opportunities supported by

the tenets of the KETS Master Plan. Video conferencing is now performed by utilizing the Internet

and existing technology equipment.

December 31, 2011 6

Current Technology and Resources

Scott County Public Schools technology staff are designated by a technical division – Information Technology

Department and an instructional division - Instructional Technology Department.

The Information Technology Department team consists of 3 district professionals, (1 Chief, 1 Network and 1

Computer Engineer), in direct coordination with each School Technology Coordinator, work diligently to improve

district-wide information technology in areas such as academic computing, administrative computing, enterprise

systems, networking, policy and planning, security, telecommunications and user support.

One full-time District Instructional Technology Coordinator supports instructional technology initiatives within the

district in addition to other job related duties. The Instructional Department provides technology professional

development, grant writing and instructional classroom technology training.

The following are only a few of the achievements made possible by an extremely dedicated technology team that are

working toward a common vision of “creating a collaborative culture to ensure student learning”.

·

o Main Data Technology Center: Installations and maintenance of a Centralized Data Center that

connects to each school via point-to-point fiber; threading to 27 District wiring rooms located

throughout our school facilities. These data rooms contain the necessary equipment to connect

our educational technology devices.

o Computer, Tablet and Projector Devices: Support of 2874 computers, 417 Projectors, 480+

tablet/handheld devices utilized by students, staff and administration.

o Network Switching Devices: 172 network switches provide 7,000 active ports to connect our

district devices. (computers, telephones, printers, projectors, tablets, etc.)

o District File and Application Servers with Storage Area Network (SAN): 27 District Network

Servers that provide access to files, printers, instructional applications, thin-client technology and

security.

o Enterprise Wireless: Academic buildings and many campus common areas were equipped with

full wireless internet coverage, utilizing more than 236 wireless access points across the district

and making our network more accessible to students and staff.

o Internet Filtering Appliance and Radius Security: These devices assist us in filtering content

that may be unsuitable for viewing and assisting in our compliance with CIPA “Children’s

Internet Protection Act”.

o Website Redesign: Our team collaborated with other administrative stake-holders in developing

and designing a more user-friendly website that focused on our parents, students and community

members. One module included the “On-line Classroom” for teacher’s to use in communication

with students – at this time, approximately 351 on-line classrooms are being utilized. Another

important aspect of this design was the implementation of the e-Communications module, which

allows instant notification to those that choose to subscribe – total e-Communications subscribers

now total 2,575. www.scott.kyschools.us

o Technology Helpdesk Ticket System: Our team implemented an electronic Helpdesk Ticket

System at all schools which has enhanced our customer care. Over the course of the past 4 years,

the district team has addressed more than 5703 helpdesk tickets, 1249 in the present

year. Beginning in February, 2010, the School Technology Coordinators started utilizing this

ticket system and have addressed 3715 tickets submitted by their school staff.

o Instructional Applications: Our team collaborates with instructional administrators to implement

and support instructional applications, such as, but not limited to: CIITS, Internet apps,

SuccessMaker, Compass Learning, AimsWeb, InfoCentre, RiverDeep, Renaissance Accelerated

Reader, FLRT (Fluent Language Reader), SRI, etc.

http://www.scott.kyschools.us/

December 31, 2011 7

o Administrative Applications: Our team collaborates with administrators to implement and

support administrative programs, such as, but not limited to, Infinite Campus Student Information

System, Munis Finance System, Horizon Food Service, Video-Insight CCTV Security Software,

Formunis Forms, TimeClock System, ChildCare Manager System, EPES Bookkeeping Software,

Versatran Bus Routing Software, HVAC Controls (Heating and Air), Lighting Controls, Internet

Apps, etc.

o Voice Over Internet Protocol – (VoIP) and Legacy systems: Approximately 880 telephones

(600-VoIP) consist of Nortel/Avaya hardware and a mixture of older legacy hardware. The older

equipment is scheduled for replacement as budgets permit and failures require.

o CCTV (Security) – Video-Insight hardware encoders and software were selected as part of an

initiative to improve our existing security measures to better protect our customers and district

assets. Approximately 600 + cameras are currently installed within the district.

Below are only a few of the initiatives on-going currently or are on tap for the immediate future:

·

Munis Financial System – migration and upgrade to the new financial system, selected by

Kentucky Department of Education.

Citrix/Hyper-V – setup, configuration and testing of a new virtualization system.

Security Systems – replace older failing hardware with newer technology, allowing for better

viewing and monitoring of our facilities.

Media Distribution System –Centralized system upgrade to enhance learning resources for both

students and staff.

Enterprise Remote Control Software – Software to enhance our abilities in assisting our

customers remotely.

Aesop Subfinder Migration – Collaborate with H/R personnel to ensure a successful migration

and implementation of this new software program.

Elementary School (New) – Technology Infrastructure Design and Classroom Audio

Enhancement System Selection.

In short, the major enhancements and future plans featured highlight the improvements made in the functionality,

robustness, and reliability of district-wide information technology and our team’s ability to respond to district

requirements. We look forward to contributing further to this district as it continues to grow in enrollment and

technology expectations.

Our strengths include our technology staff, our administration, students, parents, community, and infrastructure; our

weaknesses include budget resources (available funds) and aging equipment. All fourteen schools employ a school

technology coordinator on either a full or a part-time basis.

In order to provide detailed information as it relates to Scott County Public Schools Technology, attached is our

Technology Readiness Survey (TRS) effective December 1, 2011 (Appendix A).

District student enrollment continues to increase at an approximate rate of 3 -5% annually. With budget cuts and

decrease of federal and state KETS funding, technology purchases fall below the goal for annual replacement of

older and outdated computers.

Within the district, 14 locations are connected to WAN via fiber, 100% of LAN ports are 100MB or above, 100% of

classrooms are connected to the LAN, 100% of workstations are connected to the LAN, and 50% of instructional

devices connect wirelessly to the LAN.

Funding received for the Kentucky Education Network (KEN) continues to provide our bandwidth for a 45 MB

connection. This improvement facilitates greater use of web-based applications, video streaming by teachers and

December 31, 2011 8

students and improved connectivity for enterprise systems (MUNIS, SIS, and CIITS). The network supports fiber

and gigabyte activity available to administrators, teachers, and students. It is the foundation for movement towards

online assessment, and future initiatives from the local and state level.

Should our bandwidth place restrictions upon the district for teaching with technology, the state will revisit the

needs of our district for a possible increase.

Our technical staff receives training and professional leadership skills during regularly scheduled monthly meetings.

In addition, on-line and electronic training materials are provided, as well as, attendance at the annual KySTE

technology conference.

December 31, 2011 9

Curriculum and Instructional Integration Goals

Goal 1

Instructional technology staff will provide support and training necessary for teachers to successfully integrate

technology into instruction.

Action Plan: Projects/Activities

Project/Activity Instructional

Outcome

Indicator Timeline Person(s)

Responsible

Funding

Source

Teachers will

advocate and

provide

opportunities for

student to practice

safe, legal and

responsible use of

information and

technology

Students will

demonstrate

personal

responsibility for

lifelong learning

by the safe, legal

and responsible use

of information and

technology

Teachers and

students

improvement

in technology

usage and

integration

Lesson plans

will show

evidence of

student use

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

District

Instructional

Technology

Coordinator

Library Media

Specialists

(LMS)

Local

Provide examples of

technology use for

grade-specific

standards

Allows teachers

opportunity to

meet technology

standards

Lesson plans,

observation,

student work

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

District

Instructional

Technology

Coordinator

Assistant

Superintendent of

Instruction

Local

Hold media

distribution trainings

on how to encode

and access content,

and how to create

and access school

and district media

libraries

Teachers will have

a better

understanding on

how to use on-

demand video

content to enhance

their instruction

Teachers and

students

improvement

in technology

usage and

integration

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

Library Media

Specialists

(LMS)

School

Technology

Coordinators

(STC)

CSE

District

Teachers and

students will

collaborate, and

publish with peers,

experts or others

employing a variety

of digital

environments and

media

Students and

teachers will

communicate

information and

ideas effectively to

multiple audiences

using a variety of

digital

environments and

media

Lesson plans,

observation,

student work

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

District

Instructional

Technology

Coordinator

Library Media

Specialists

(LMS)

KETS

Local

December 31, 2011 10

When appropriate,

teachers will

integrate interactive

classroom tools into

classroom

instruction

Students will be

more engaged in

learning

Lesson plans,

observation,

student work

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

School

Technology

Coordinators

(STC)

KETS

Local

Continue to support

use of web

applications and

tools that promote

student growth as

next generation

learners

Students will be

more engaged in

learning

Teachers and

students

improvement

in technology

usage and

integration

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

District

Instructional

Technology

Coordinator

Assistant

Superintendent of

Instruction

KETS

Local

Collaborate to

provide instructional

technology

integration support

to teachers; be an

active resource

participant.

Increased

technology

integration in

instruction;

increased staff

proficiency; on

demand assistance

Student

participation

and teacher

and student

evaluation of

effectiveness

of program

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

District

Instructional

Technology

Coordinator

Local


Goal 2

Define professional learning activities for administrators on the use of the CIITS EDS to ensure improved teacher

effectiveness under the new teacher and principal effectiveness system, thereby improving instructional outcomes,

teacher effectiveness and leadership.

Action Plan: Strategies/Activities

Strategy/Activity Instructional

Outcome


Responsible

Funding

Source

Provide trainings

for teacher leaders

across the district to

create district-level

common

assessment items

and a summative,

first semester

assessment

Teachers will

have a better

understanding on

how to access

and utilize

content to

enhance their

instruction

Lesson plans,

observation,

student work

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

District

Instructional

Technology

Coordinator

Assistant

Superintendent of

Student Learning

District

Hold district

professional

development

opportunities and

PD sessions at each

school throughout

the school year to

train teachers in the

continuous use of

CIITS.

Teachers will

have a better

understanding on

how to access

and utilize the

content to

enhance their

instruction

Lesson plans,

observation,

student work

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

District

Instructional

Technology

Coordinator

Assistant

Superintendent of

Student Learning

District

Identify CIITS

leaders at each

school to build their

leadership capacity

in CIITS to serve as

school-level point

of contact.

Teachers will

have a better

understanding on

how to access

and utilize the

content to

enhance their

instruction

Lesson plans,

observation,

student work

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

Assistant

Superintendent of

Student Learning

District


Goal 3

Develop our structure to promote the percentage of students utilizing next generation skills in the classroom.



Outcome


Responsible

Funding

Source

Adoption of a

Bring Your Own

Technologies/Bring

Your Own Devices

(BYOT/BYOD)

system. Students

will utilize

personally owned

technology devices,

for research and

other instructional

activities

Students will

utilize

technology

throughout their

instructional day

as an integrated,

integral part of

instruction

This will

improve the

student to device

ratio and

improve the

ability for more

students to have

access to modern

technologies

Student work,

teacher

observation,

school and

district

observations

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process –

beginning with

pilot program

Teacher

School

Technology

Coordinator

(STC)

Superintendent

Assistant

Superintendent of

Student Learning

CSE

District

Instructional

Technology

Coordinator

Student

Families

Devices will

be available

for students to

utilize who do

not own

devices

Funding for

additional

devices will

come from

school,

district, state,

or federal

funding


Curriculum and Instructional Integration Goals – Evaluation

Monitoring and evaluation of the technology plan is continuous as we seek improvement, address changes and needs

- planned and unplanned at the building, district, state, and federal level.

Increased proficiencies and class-room integration by teachers will ultimately lead to increased technology

proficiency among students.

District and school level monitoring, conducted on a regular cycle, are used to evaluate the success of these

collaborative learning experiences.

Schools utilize ILPs to assist students in career planning

School technology committees meet throughout the year to review technology plans for completion and/or revision

of the planned activities, necessary budget adjustments, creation of new activities, and review of current and future

goals for supporting the district vision and brought to the SBDM council for approval.

Surveys will be developed for indicating interest and needs for professional development opportunities addressing

how to use current, new, and emerging technologies, quality of the professional development, and if extension of the

concept/topic is required for proficiency.

Information from surveys will be shared with schools for creation of their own professional development

opportunities as well as for district wide professional development.

Annual technology proficiency/standards assessment of all students, teachers, and administrators will take place via

online assessment tools and surveys.

Data from the web-based applications will be reviewed to determine usage by schools and to identify areas of

greatest interest for development of systemic growth through incentives and presentation opportunities to share best

practices and engagement of students through integration of these resources.

A survey will be sent to teachers at the end of each school year to assess their use of CIITS in the following three

areas, whereas, all teachers will be asked to complete the survey.

1. Lesson Planning,

2. Assessment Creation

3. Using the Data Module


Student Technology Literacy Goals

Goal 1

All students will receive both direct and indirect instruction in technology skills as outlined in the district curriculum

standards. All 8th and 12th grade students will take part in a pre-assessment, receive group and individualized

technology instruction, and take a post-test to assess technology literacy.



Outcome


Responsible

Funding

Source

District

Technology

Assessment

Improvement in

technology

literacy based on

their pre-test and

post-test scores

Scores for

both teachers

and students

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

Twice yearly

District Instructional

Technology

Coordinator

Local

Teachers utilizing

the computer labs

for classroom

instruction

Enhance

technology skills

and learning

based strategies

Lesson Plans 7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

Teachers/Principals Local

Goal 2

Increasing our percentage of students utilizing next generation learning skills in the classroom.



Outcome


Responsible

Funding

Source

Personally owned

devices (laptops,

tablets, etc)

Develop next

generation

learning skills

and increase

interactive

learning

Lesson plans,

observation,

usage data

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

Principals

Assistant

Superintendent of

Student Learning

District

Instructional

Technology

Coordinator

Superintendent

CSE

School

Technology

Coordinators

(STC)

KETS

Local

Web-based

Develop next

Lesson plans,

7/1/2012-

District

Local


Applications

(Skype)

generation

learning skills

and interactive

learning

observation,

usage data

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

Instructional

Technology

Coordinator

Teachers

Classroom

assessment

equipment (CPS)

Develop next

generation

learning skills

and interactive

learning

Lesson plans,

observation,

usage data

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

District

Instructional

Technology

Coordinator

Teachers

KETS

Local


Student Technology Literacy Goals – Evaluation

8th and 12th grade students are assessed on technology skills and terminology at the beginning of each school year

to establish a baseline, and again at the end of the year to measure their progress.

Students are provided direct technology instruction at elementary, middle and secondary grade levels. Within the

school curriculum students are taught basic skills such as keyboarding, word processing, spreadsheet applications,

multimedia development, as well as focusing on careers. Classes are taught with constant assessment of

comprehension throughout.

Library Media Specialists and School Technology Coordinators work with staff and students to implement

technology effectively and efficiently into all areas of instruction. One of the areas evaluated for certified staff is

technology. Continuous observations by district and school staff, also measure technology usage of staff and

students.


Staff Training/Professional Development Goals

Goal 1

Provide adequate technology resources to support students, staff, and community to provide for learning.



Outcome


Responsible

Funding

Source

STC provide staff

trainings on current

technologies as

needed

Improving

teacher

technology

integration

skills

Increased

technology use

in classrooms

through

observation.

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

School

Technology

Coordinator

(STC)

Principal

Teacher

Local

Individual

training sessions

as needed

Improving

teacher

technology

integration skills

Increased

technology use

in classrooms

through

observation.

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

School

Technology

Coordinator

(STC)

Chief Systems

Engineer (CSE)

District

Instructional

Technology

Coordinator

Local

District

Instructional

Technology

Coordinator

provide summer

PD’s for staff

training

Improving

teacher

technology

integration skills

Increased

technology use

in classrooms

through

observation.

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

District

Instructional

Technology

Coordinator

Local

District

Instructional

Technology

Coordinator

provide online

PD’s throughout

the school year

Improving

teacher

technology

integration skills

Increased

technology use

in classrooms

through

observation.

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

District

Instructional

Technology

Coordinator

Local

CIITS leaders at

each school to

serve as school-

level point of

contact and provide

training throughout

the school year.

Teachers will

have a better

understanding on

how to access

and utilize the

content to

enhance their

instruction

Lesson plans,

observation,

student work

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

Teachers

Assistant

Superintendent of

Student Learning

Local


Goal 2

Update and maintain the district and school web sites to include relevant information to the school community,

including parents/guardians and community citizens



Outcome


Responsible

Funding

Source

Provide on-

going training(s)

as needed, so

that individual

schools enhance

and maintain

their content

management site

Providing better

communication

locally and

globally for

community, staff

and student use.

Updated web

sites with

relevant,

current

information

Use of analytics

to show the

number of

visits to school

and district

content pages

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

Principal

School

Technology

Coordinator

(STC)

Library Media

Specialists (LMS)

District

Administrators

Information

Technology Staff

Local


Staff Training/Professional Development Goals – Evaluation

All certified staff are assessed on technology skills and terminology at the beginning of each school year to establish

a baseline, and again at the end of the year to measure their progress.

School Technology Coordinators provide as-needed school wide trainings on current and new innovations in

technology.

PD sessions are also offered each summer. Topics are a combination of school requests and new innovations.

The Information Technology Team attend weekly and monthly meetings where celebrations are shared, issues are

addressed and new information is discussed. Professional leadership and training areas are identified and provided

as needed. One of the areas evaluated for certified staff is technology. Continuous observations also measure technology usage

of staff and students.

A survey will be sent to teachers at the end of each school year to assess their use of CIITS in the following three

areas, whereas, all teachers will be asked to complete the survey.

1. Lesson Planning,

2. Assessment Creation

3. Using the Data Module


Technology Goals

Goal 1

Increase student access to technology throughout the curriculum.



Outcome


Responsible

Funding

Source

Develop a

structured process

to enable students

to utilize

personally owned

devices, in

collaboration with

district owned

devices, to move

towards a one-to-

one environment

Technology

integration into

the curriculum

to enhance

student

interaction for

learning.

Classrooms

should have

multiple school

owned devices

available to be

utilized with

student owned

devices.

Availability

should be

evident in all

content areas

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process –

beginning

with a

designated

“Pilot”

program

Principal

School

Technology

Coordinator

(STC)

Central Office

Administrators

Site-Based

Decision Making

(SBDM)

Local

State

Federal

Goal 2

Train staff on technology integration throughout the curriculum.



Outcome


Responsible

Funding

Source

District

Instructional

Technology

Coordinator will

train teachers on

how to properly

integrate

technology across

the curriculum

Staff will

properly

integrate

technology

throughout

instruction

Observation

should show an

increase in usage

and effectiveness

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

Classroom

teachers,

Administration

Local

Goal 3

Provide and improve upon the wireless infrastructure for all instructional facilities.



Outcome


Responsible

Funding

Source

Adequate wireless

coverage will be

provided for all

schools in order to

increase technology

access for students

Wireless

infrastructure will

be maintained to

provide adequate

access for student

access

Student

technology

access should

be evident

throughout the

curriculum.

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

Information

Technology

Department

School

Technology

KETS

Local


District and

school

observation

should confirm

the increase in

availability

Coordinators

(STC)

Chief Systems

Engineer (CSE)

Goal 4

Our current network infrastructure will be maintained and upgraded as needed to support innovative communication,

teaching, learning, assessment, and administrative needs. Older aging equipment will be replaced timely, as needed,

to maintain efficiency toward a learning environment.



Outcome


Responsible

Funding

Source

Implement

LAN/WAN

enhancements to

ensure

capacity necessary

for

technology

advancements.

Lease and/or

construct

1GB fiber

infrastructure

to connect new sites

with current wide-

area network.

Operate and

maintain an

efficient and secure

network

environment

that meets industry

standards

Improve and

maintain

network

efficiency to

provide flexible

and reliable

access for

students and

staff.

The services

detailed here

support

teaching and

learning, deliver

quick access to

student data,

and increase

student

engagement.

These elements

are critical as

administrators

and teachers

make decisions

that impact

instructional

practice,

curriculum

quality,

administration

and the school

environment.

100%

Availabili

ty

Chief System

Engineer (CSE)

General Funds


Goal 5

Maintain School Technology Coordinators at every building facility.



Outcome


Responsible

Funding

Source

Collaborate with

district

and building

administration to

ensure adequate

staffing to meet

technology and

school support needs.

Maintain and

support

software and

hardware

to promote and

enhance

instruction for

students and staff.

Adequate

technology

support

personnel is

available at the

school level to

assist with the

integration and

support of

technology.

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

Chief Systems

Engineer (CSE),

Superintendent,

Human

Resources,

Principals,

School

Technology

Coordinators

KETS

Local

Goal 6

Provide an increased level of effective communication both within the district and with the community via the

network, email and/or district website.



Outcome


Responsible

Funding

Source

Provide and offer

training and support

for the content

management system

that provides teacher

classroom, school and

district web pages.

Web pages are a

means

to inform

students,

parents, and

community

members of

information

relevant to school

business.

The use of

analytics to

show

frequency of

site content

visits.

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

Chief Systems

Engineer (CSE),

Superintendent,

District

Administrators,

Human

Resources,

Principals,

School

Technology

Coordinators

General

Funds

KETS

Goal 7

Provide sufficient bandwidth, and voice and video capability to support technology integration into teaching,

learning and administration.



Outcome


Responsible

Funding

Source

Make sure bandwidth

is used effectively and

efficiently.

Maintain adequate

data flow.

Make sure staff and

students have

Analyze

bandwidth use

and make

decisions

based on data.

Increase leased

bandwidth when

A reliable

network

reduces

downtime,

decreases user

frustration and

increases

productivity.

7/1/2012-

6/30/2014

On-going

Process

Chief Systems

Engineer,

Network Support

Engineer

General

Funds

KETS

USF Funding,

if

applicable


sufficient

telecommunication

capability.

Boost the speed,

flexibility and

interactive dimension

of district

communications.

necessary.

Update telecom

system

as needed.

Update and

maintain CCTV

and CATV

systems as

needed.

An

infrastructure

that allows the

learning

process to

continue with

minimal

interruptions.


Technology Goals – Evaluation

Monitoring and evaluation of the technology plan is continuous as we seek improvement, address changes and needs

- planned and unplanned at the building, district, state, and federal level.

The technology-related strategies presented in our plan are designed to support the district’s vision for an up-to-date,

technology-rich educational environment by providing each classroom with the tools necessary to enhance the

classroom in order to prepare students for next generation learning environment.

An annual inventory of hardware provides an accurate account of the age and number of workstations in the district.

In addition, this data is used to plan and budget for adjustments of current and future instructional and management

needs by students, teachers, and administrators.

Monitoring bandwidth traffic within the district and from the district to the state to ensures that fiber and gigabyte

activity is available to all students and staff.

We realize the importance of building and maintaining a robust and stable technology infrastructure to reach these

goals. A reliable network reduces downtime, decreases user frustration and increases productivity. Taken as a whole,

our strategies are designed to create a current, operational network infrastructure used by

teachers and staff who are trained to integrate technology into teaching, learning and administration.

High availability, trouble-free connectivity, dependable equipment and high-speed operation are vital as teachers

and students work online.

District and school observations will provide feedback as to the progress of the implementation of technology goals,

and also assist in identifying deficiencies.

Staff and student technology assessments will provide feedback on progress in individual growth.


Budget Summary

School Year: 2012 – 2013

Annual Budget Summary

1) List the professional development and technologies to be acquired during each year of the agency’s plan.

2) List all funding sources for recurring services, anticipated purchases, and professional development.

3) Include the total of all technology resources to support the district’s technology initiatives.

4) Note: At least 25% of the funds allocated to an LEA through the Title IID ED Tech Program (Competitive

and Non-Competitive), must be allocated for professional development activities.

5) This information will be helpful in completing Item 25D on the E-Rate Form 471. \

6) The budget to support the District Information Technology is derived from general funds and KETS.

Staffing allocations are provided by local general funds.

Acquired Technologies and Professional

Development

Ed Tech Competitive

Title IID

Ed Tech Formula Title IID

E-Rate NCLB/other than Title

IID KETS

Other (Specify)

Professional Development

to promote best practices,

integration of new

technologies and learning

opportunities

*Cost Estimate:

$55,000.00

X

General Funds

Increase student access to

technology throughout the

curriculum

*Cost Estimate:

$200,000.00

X

X

General Funds

Provide and improve upon

the wireless infrastructure

for all instructional

facilities

*Cost Estimate:

$50,000.00

X

X

General Funds

Local

Infrastructure Support ,

including hardware and

software (ie.. Munis,

Infinite Campus, Library,

Instructional Programs)

*Cost Estimate:

$217,000.00

X

General Funds

TOTAL $522,000.00

*Estimated amount based upon funding from KDE and available General Funds.


Budget Summary

School Year: 2013 – 2014

Annual Budget Summary

1) List the professional development and technologies to be acquired during each year of the agency’s plan.

2) List all funding sources for recurring services, anticipated purchases, and professional development.

3) Include the total of all technology resources to support the district’s technology initiatives.

4) Note: At least 25% of the funds allocated to an LEA through the Title IID ED Tech Program (Competitive

and Non-Competitive), must be allocated for professional development activities.

5) This information will be helpful in completing Item 25D on the E-Rate Form 471. \

6) The budget to support the District Information Technology is derived from general funds and KETS.

Staffing allocations are provided by KETS and local general funds.

Acquired Technologies and Professional

Development

Ed Tech Competitive

Title IID

Ed Tech Formula Title IID

E-Rate NCLB/other than Title

IID KETS

Other (Specify)

Professional Development

to promote best practices,

integration of new

technologies and learning

opportunities

*Cost Estimate:

$55,000.00

X

General Funds

Increase student access to

technology throughout the

curriculum

*Cost Estimate:

$200,000.00

X

X

General Funds

Provide and improve upon

the wireless infrastructure

for all instructional

facilities

*Cost Estimate:

$50,000.00

X

X

General Funds

Local

Infrastructure Support ,

including hardware and

software (ie.. Munis,

Infinite Campus, Library,

Instructional Programs)

*Cost Estimate:

$217,000.00

X

General Funds

TOTAL $522,000.00

*Estimated amount based upon funding from KDE and available General Funds.


APPENDIX A

SCOTT COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS

TECHNOLOGY READINESS SURVEY

December 1, 2011

Survey District(s) > Survey Sections >> Logged in as: [SSETSER1] | Logout

Site Compatibility

KY Agencies | KY Services

Technology Readiness Survey

This survey has been signed off. If you need to make corrections, please contact your KETS Engineer.

Scott County: 2011 - 2012

SUMMARY Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 Section 8 Section 9 Section 10

The information collected will be used by local school districts, local Boards of Education, Legislators and the Kentucky Board of Education to determine the needs for (1) implementing the KETS Master Plan for Technology

initiative, (2) technology funding, (3) on-line applications and (4) on-line testing.

Completion Date: December 1, 2012

REGION: 5

DISTRICT: Scott County

ADA: 7,388

NUMBER OF CLASSROOMS: 537

NUMBER OF CLASSROOM TEACHERS: 543

Copyright © 2012 Kentucky Department of Education Privacy | Disclaimer | Contact Us | Help

Page 1 of 1Technology Readiness Survey

4/26/2012https://applications.education.ky.gov/TRS/SurveySections.aspx






SUMMARY SECTION 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 Section 8 Section 9 Section 10

Section Completed

Section 1: Student Instructional Devices/Desktop Virtualization/Home Access

Instructional Devices (Desktops/Laptops/Tablets/Netbooks) - Elementary Schools Total Percentage

Number of student Instructional Devices located in standard classrooms 352 43%

Number of student Instructional Devices located in fixed or mobile labs 475 57%

Number of student Instructional Devices that are carried and stay with student 0 0%

Elementary Student Instructional Devices - TOTAL 827 100%

Instructional Devices (Desktops/Laptops/Tablets/Netbooks) - Secondary Schools (Middle, HS, Alt)

Total Percentage

Number of student Instructional Devices in locations that have 3 or less student Instructional Devices 91 9%

Number of student Instructional Devices in locations that have 4 or more student Instructional Devices 939 91%

Number of student Instructional Devices that are carried and stay with student 0 0%

Secondary Student Instructional Devices - TOTAL 1030 100%

Grand TOTAL 1857

Desktop Virtualization - Elementary Schools

How many hardware based desktop virtualization cards (i.e N-Computing, Fiddlehead, MiniFrame) have you deployed in your district? 58

How many additional student instructional access terminals did this create in your district? 57

Desktop Virtualization - Secondary Schools (Middle, HS, Alt)

How many hardware based desktop virtualization cards (i.e N-Computing, Fiddlehead, MiniFrame) have you deployed in your district? 69

How many additional student instructional access terminals did this create in your district? 66

Home Access for Students

1. Percentage of students that have a computer at home? 85 %

1.a) Percentage of these computers that are less than 5 years old? 75 %

2. Percentage of students that have Internet access at home? 83 %

3. Percentage of students for each type of Internet connectivity? 100%



Site Compatibility

3.a) Dial Up 4 %

3.b) Cable Modem 30 %

3.c) DSL (usually provided by telephone company) 44 %

3.d) Satellite Dish 8 %

3.e) Other 14 %

Home Access for Teachers

1. Percentage of teachers that have a computer at home? 95 %

1.a) Percentage of these computers that are less than 5 years old? 73 %

2. Percentage of teachers that have Internet access at home? 95 %

3. Percentage of teachers for each type of Internet connectivity? 100%

3.a) Dial Up 1 %

3.b) Cable Modem 43 %

3.c) DSL (usually provided by telephone company) 43 %

3.d) Satellite Dish 6 %

3.e) Other 7 %

This section is finished










SUMMARY Section 1 SECTION 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 Section 8 Section 9 Section 10

Section Completed

Section 2: Age, Mobility and Availability of School** Minimum Standard for PC Platform PC and Macintosh platform

Elementary Schools Total Percentage

Total number of student Instructional Devices 827

Number of student Instructional Devices that meet or exceed minimum standards 498 60%

Number of student Instructional Devices that are laptops 330 40%

Number of student Instructional Devices that are tablet PCs 0 0%

Total number of classroom teacher Instructional Devices 315

Number of classroom teacher Instructional Devices that meet or exceed minimum standards 276 88%

Number of classroom teacher Instructional Devices that are Laptops 206 65%

Number of teacher Instructional Devices that are tablet PCs 1 0%

Total number of administrator/other Instructional Devices 101

Number of administrator/other Instructional Devices that meet or exceed minimum standards 74 73%

Number of administrator/other Instructional Devices that are Laptops 28 28%

Number of administrator Instructional Devices that are tablet PCs 5 5%

Secondary Schools (Middle, HS, Alternative)

Total number of student Instructional Devices 1030

Number of student Instructional Devices that meet or exceed minimum standards 826 80%

Number of student Instructional Devices that are Laptops 285 28%

Number of student Instructional Devices that are tablet PCs 1 0%

Total number of classroom teacher Instructional Devices 372

Number of classroom teacher Instructional Devices that meet or exceed minimum standards 346 93%

Number of classroom teacher Instructional Devices that are Laptops 196 53%

Number of teacher Instructional Devices that are tablet PCs 0 0%

Total number of administrator/other Instructional Devices 139



Site Compatibility



Number of administrator/other Instructional Devices that are tablet PCs 4 3%

District Office

Total Number of Administrator/Other Instructional Devices 90



Number of adminstrator/other Instructional Devices that are tablet PCs 0 0%

Of the Total 2874, how many Instructional Devices (desktop/Laptops/tablet PC) were purchased/acquired new, from all funding sources, for FY11? 211

How many Instructional Devices (desktop/Laptops/tablet PC) were surplused during FY11? 232

How many total Instructional Devices (mini computing devices) within the district were purchased/acquired new, from all funding sources for FY11? 380

1) Total Number of Instructional Devices Within the School District Total Percentage Ratio to 1

1a) Student Instructional Devices 1857 65% 3.98

1b) Classroom Teacher Instructional Devices 687 24% 0.79

1c) Administrators and other personnel Instructional Devices 330 11%

TOTAL 2874 100%

2) Total Number of Instructional Devices Within the School District that Meet or Exceed Minimum Standards Total Percentage

1a) Student Instructional Devices 1324 71%

1b) Classroom Teacher Instructional Devices 622 91%


TOTAL 2231

3) Total Number of Instructional Devices Within the School District that are Laptops Total Percentage




TOTAL 1146

4) Total Number of Instructional Devices Within the School District that are Tablets Total Percentage




TOTAL 11







Site Compatibility





SUMMARY Section 1 Section 2 SECTION 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 Section 8 Section 9 Section 10

Section Completed

Section 3: Instructional Device Software Instructional Administrative

Instructional Device Operating System Information Student Teacher Administrator/Other

1. How many total Instructional Devices use the following OS? 1857 687 330

Pre-Windows XP 31 4 11

Windows XP 1226 493 216

Vista 119 18 32

Windows 7 402 157 60

Mac OS 9 (and earlier) 34 0 1

Mac OS 10 45 15 10

Other:Instructional Devices that have an OS that's neither Windows or Mac (e.g. Linux) 0 0 0

TOTAL 1857 687 330

What percentage of all Instructional Devices does the district plan on upgrading to Windows 7 in the next 12 months? 10

Instructional Device Productivity Software Information Student Teacher Administrator/Other

2. How many Total Instructional Devices use the following Productivity Software?

Office 2003 or Earlier 958 344 102

Office 2007 450 184 108

Office 2010 322 130 91

Office 2004 for Mac or Earlier 1 0 1

Office 2008 for Mac 0 3 6

Open Office or Other 24 12 1

TOTAL 1755 673 309

3. Has the district began utilizing web-based productivity tools (i.e Office on-line, Google Docs, etc) Yes

3.a If you answered "Yes", what level of adoption have you achieved? Minimum (1%- 5%)






Site Compatibility





SUMMARY Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 SECTION 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 Section 8 Section 9 Section 10

Section Completed

Section 4: Other Computing Devices

Next Generation Instructional Devices District Owned

Personally Owned

1. Number of tablets (devices larger than a mobile phone or personal digital assistant, integrated into a flat touch screen and primarily operated by touching the screen) using the following operating systems

Apple's iOS (iPad etc) 205 25

Google's Android OS (Samsung Galaxy, Motorola Xoom etc) 0 1

Other (Blackberry Playbook etc) 0 10

2. Number of E-Readers (Kindle, etc) 0 25

3. Number of Handheld Wireless devices (Ipod touch, MP3, etc) 328 350

4. Number of Smartphones (Windows Mobile, iPhone, Palm Centro, Palm Pre, Blackberry, etc) - Devices which provide wireless email, texting, internet access and other on-line services. 0 375

TOTAL 533 786

Personally Owned Computing Devices (Laptops/Tablets/Mobile Devices)

1. Has the district permitted personally owned devices to be brought to school by students? Yes

2. Has the district permitted personally owned devices to be brought to school by teachers? Yes

3. Has the district permitted personally owned devices to be brought to school by administrators? Yes











SUMMARY Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 SECTION 5 Section 6 Section 7 Section 8 Section 9 Section 10

Section Completed

Section 5: Technology Leadership

Service, Support and Training Resources

Total number of days CIO/DTC position is employed during the FY11 school year 260

1. Estimate the percentage of time the CIO/DTC spends performing the following tasks:

1.a) Justifying, obtaining, managing funding for existing technology services or new projects (e.g., e-rate discounts, NCLB technology funds, KETS EDTECH funds, other local, state or federal funds) 10 %

1.b) Planning, research, preparation, engineering, procurement and installation of new technology enabled projects or major enhancements to existing instructional or administrative systems 10 %

1.c) Integration and training of technology tools into instructional and administrative business processes 15 %

1.d) Operations and maintenance of existing instructional and technology services to schools and district office 25 %

1.e) Technology related written communications, meetings, customer satisfaction/complaint investigations, public relations, providing data requests, personnel issues, security, and vendor management 35 %

1.f) Other CIO/DTC Responsibilities 5 %

1.g) Other Responsibilities outside of CIO responsibilities (e.g., Facilities Director, Teacher, Supt) 0 %

TOTAL (Section 5 : 1.a - 1.g must Equal 100%) 100%

2. Number of schools with a STC? 14

3. Are they paid a stipend? If yes, how much on average? $ 0

4. Number of FTE in-house district/school technicians that focus on daily operations and maintenance? 2

5. Number of FTE outsourced district/school technicians that focus on daily operations and maintenance? 0

6. Number of FTE district/school Technology Integration Specialists (Technology/Curriculum Resource Teachers)? 1

7. Number of FTE students that assist with technology leadership, services, support and training? 0

8. Number of schools with active STLP? 13

9. Are STLP Leaders paid a stipend? If yes, how much on average? $ 0

Student, Instructional, and Leadership Technology Skills

Students

1. Has the district implemented technology skills for students as defined in the Program of Studies? Yes

2. Are these student technology skills evaluated? Yes

3. At what grade level do your students start formally learning and acquiring keyboarding skills? 3rd

Instructional and Leadership Staff



Site Compatibility

1. Has the district defined and implemented technology skills and knowledge assessments as part of the district evaluation plan for teachers? Yes

2. Has the district defined and implemented technology skills and knowledge assessments as part of the district evaluation plan for school leaders (central office and school level leadership)? Yes

Digital Citizenship

Please indicate which of the following nine elements of Digital Citizenship have been adopted as part of the district’s technology culture through either curriculum or an Acceptable Use Policy for students and staff?

Digital Access Digital Literacy/Education Digital Rights and Responsibilities

Digital Commerce Digital Etiquette Digital Health and Wellness/Safety

Digital Communication Digital Law Digital Security/Self Protection







Site Compatibility





SUMMARY Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 SECTION 6 Section 7 Section 8 Section 9 Section 10

Section Completed

Section 6: Network Connectivity

School Wide Area Network (WAN) Connection to District Hub Site # Schools Percentage

1. Number of schools connected to WAN via the following connection speeds (please use advertised download speed coming into building, not actual speed in classroom or work area)

At or greater than 200kbps and less than 1.5mbps 0 0%

At or greater than 1.5 mbps and less than 3 mbps 0 0%

At or greater than 3 mbps and less than 10 mbps 0 0%




Greater than 100 mbps 14 0%

2. Number of schools connected to WAN via wireless 0 0%

TOTAL 14 100

Local Area Network Capacity within the Schools

1. What percentage of LAN ports are switched to 1GB or above? 65%

2. What percentage of your classrooms are connected to the local area network? 100%

3. What percentage of your Instructional Devices are connected to the local area network? 99%

4. What percentage of your Instructional Devices use wireless to connect to the school LAN? 50%

5. Number of schools with wireless coverage throughout the school 11

6. Number of schools with existing 1 to 1 instructional device initiatives 0

7. Number of schools with planned 1 to 1 instructional device initiatives over the next 12 months 0






Site Compatibility





SUMMARY Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 SECTION 7 Section 8 Section 9 Section 10

Section Completed

Section 7: Ease of Access to Telephonic Services.

1. Number of schools that have implemented a Traditional Phone system? 4

2. Number of schools that have implemented a Voice over IP (VoIP) system? 10

3. Number of schools that anticipate to replace/upgrade phone system in the next two years? 2

a) Upgrade/replace to traditional phone system 0

b) Upgrade/replace to Voice over IP (VoIP) system 2







Site Compatibility





SUMMARY Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 SECTION 8 Section 9 Section 10

Section Completed

Section 8: Intelligent Classrooms 1. Number of electronic image projection devices available to classrooms? (mounted or mobile) 413

a) Number of mounted? 320

b) Number of mobile? 93

2. Number of Plasma/LCD wall-mounted units in classrooms? 1

3. Number of interactive white-boards (mounted or mobile) in classrooms? 200

a) Number of mounted? 125

b) Number of mobile? 75

4. Number of individual responder systems (using clicker type devices)? 55

5. Number of wireless interactive slates/pads? 21

6. Number of Document Cameras? 141







Site Compatibility





SUMMARY Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 Section 8 SECTION 9 Section 10

Section Completed

Section 9: Video Conferencing/Web 2.0 Collaboration/On-line Assessment

Video Conferencing

1. How many Classroom-type systems (Tandberg, Polycom, etc) does your district own? 2

2. On average, how often are these systems used? Less than once a month

3. What other video-based communications does your district use?

a) Desktop-based (WebEx, Adobe Connect, Elluminate, Tandberg MOVI? Yes

b) Web-based (iChat, SKYPE, etc) Yes

c) One-way video broadcast (webcast, podcast, etc)? Yes

Web 2.0 Tools

Which best describes your district's use of Web 2.0 Tools (i.e. collaboration tools, social networking tools, etc) for instructional/educational purposes by teachers and district staff Encouraged and supported

Which best describes your district's use of Web 2.0 Tools (i.e. collaboration tools, social networking tools, etc) for instructional/educational purposes by students Encouraged and supported

Does your district have a Board Policy on the use of Web 2.0 Tools? Yes

On-line Assessment

Do your students use instructional devices (desktops, laptops, netbooks, etc) for formative testing purposes? Yes

Please indicate which of the following online formative assessment packages you use in your district (you may choose more than one)

G-MADE (Group Mathematics Assessment and Diagnostic Evaluation)

COMPASS (Computer Adaptive Placement Assessment and Support System)

GRADE (Group Reading Assessment and Diagnostic Evaluation) EXPLORE

MAP (Measures of Academic Progress) PLAN

PAS (Predictive Assessment Series from ThinkLink/Discovery Education) Study Island

Other Success Maker







Site Compatibility





SUMMARY Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 Section 8 Section 9 SECTION 10

Section Completed

Section 10: Federal Reporting

Technology Literacy

Number of 8th graders (school year 2010-2011) that are technology literate as referenced in the Program of Studies? 561

a) via Assessment 0

b) via Observation 23

c) via Assessment and Observation 538

Number of 8th graders (school year 2010-2011) that are not technology literate as referenced in the Program of Studies? 78

Number of 12th graders (school year 2010-2011) that are technology literate as referenced in the Program of Studies? 328

a) via Assesment 0

b) via Observation 240

c) via Assesment and Observation 88

Number of 12th graders (school year 2010-2011) that are not technology literate as referenced in the Program of Studies? 138

Number of teachers that are proficient in Standard 6? 533

Number of teachers that are not proficient in Standard 6? 10

Number of Library/Media Specialists that are proficient in Standard 6? 12

Number of Library/Media Specialists that are not proficient in Standard 6? 0

Number of Administrators that are proficient as per the Technology Standards for School Administrators (TSSA) 33

Number of Administrators that are not proficient as per the Technology Standards for School Administrators (TSSA) 0







APPENDIX B

SCOTT COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS

COMPREHENSIVE DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT PLAN

(CDIP)

Plan Approval

by the Scott County Board of Education

Approved 1/24/12 by the Scott County Board of Education

Page 1 of 9

Comprehensive District Improvement Plan District: Scott County Public Schools Year: 2011-2012

SMART Goal Worksheet: District Goal(s): We will improve as next-generation learners in achievement, gap, growth, college/career readiness, and graduation rate. District SMART Goal

Strategies and Action Steps

Responsibility (Be specific)

Timeline

Evidence of Effectiveness (short term and long term)

Our Reality: According to 2011 KCCT scores:

76.04% of all students are scoring P/D in reading

70.16% of all students are scoring P/D in math

According to 2011 ACT scores:

15% of all 11th

graders are meeting all 4 ACT benchmark scores

According to 2011 AP scores:

There were 353 qualifying AP scores in high school.

According to 2011 KCCT scores large achievement gaps exist between the following subpopulations:

White and African Americans in Reading – 18.5% P/D

White and African Americans in Math – 21.47% P/D

Non-disability and Disability in Reading – 38.75% P/D

Non-disability and Disability in Math – 37.87% P/D

According to 2010-2011 district data:

The graduation rate was

1. Continue to facilitate

groups of teachers and Building Administrators working towards a district-wide set of pacing guides and highly rigorous common assessments.

2. The district will use the

additional 2 contract days for teachers across the district to collaborate together discussing results on common assessments and instructional strategies

1. Superintendent, Directors

of Instruction, Building Administrators

2. Superintendent, School Board, Directors of Instruction, Building Administrators

1. Begin: 8/11

Continuous

2. Continue: 8/11 Continuous

List both short term and long term evidences: 1. Short Term

a. Groups/Teams of teachers/Building Administrators use time and resources to collaborate on pacing guide and common assessments.

b. The level of rigor of common assessments continues to increase.

c. The district pacing guide is continually in the process refinement to meet the needs of students.

2. Short Term a. There are two days

built into the calendar to allow district-wide collaboration.

b. The agenda for those days include


Page 2 of 9

88.76%

The # of dropouts in 2010-2011 was 41.

The College and Career Readiness % in 2010-2011 was 44%.

Our Goal(s): We will increase the % of all

students scoring P/D by at least 10%.

We will increase the % of 11th

graders meeting all 4 ACT benchmark scores by 3%.

We will increase the number of qualifying scores on AP tests by 40.

We will increase the % of students in the state identified sub populations scoring P/D by greater than 10%.

Increase the Graduation Rate to at least 91%

Increase the College and Career Readiness % to 68% by the end of the 2012-2013 school year.

We will implement a way to monitor every student’s progress towards at least one year’s worth of growth.

that may help their students achieve at high levels.

3. The district will continue to foster a Professional Learning Community (PLC) by focusing all instruction and instructional resources towards answering the 4 following questions: o What is it we want

students to learn? o How will we know when

they learn it? o What will we do when

they do not learn it? o What will we do when

they do learn it?

3. Superintendent, Central

Office Directors, Building Administrators


opportunities for collaboration between teachers and teams across the district.

3. Short Term a. An additional vertical

teams consisting of grades 4-7 is created and meets with each other to answer the 4 questions.

b. Vertical teams (K-5, 6-9, 10-12) meet to focus on collaborative efforts to answer the 4 questions.

c. Instructional resources are provided and focused on answering the 4 questions.

d. Teachers will use quality formative assessment effectively and design learning opportunities that allow students to participate in empowering activities in which they understand that learning is a process and mistakes are a natural part of that learning.


Page 3 of 9

4. We will continue to encourage more students to begin AP classes and achieve qualifying scores.

5. The district will celebrate student and teacher success at each monthly school board meeting in addition to an annual Proficient/Distinguished student celebration in order to foster a climate of success.

4. Superintendent, Directors of Instruction, Building Administrators

5. Superintendent, Directors of Instruction, Building Administrators, School Board, Teachers



4. Short Term a. Vertical alignment for

4th grade and above occurs.

b. Enrollment in Advanced Placement courses increases.

c. The number of students taking Advanced Placement tests increases.

d. The number of qualifying scores on Advanced Placement tests increases.

e. The number of teachers attending “Laying the Foundation” increases.

5. Short Term a. School Board

Meetings have an agenda item designed to celebrate student and teacher success (“Spotlight”)

b. Student and teacher celebrations will be communicated to parents and community on a regular basis through multiple avenues.

c. An annual celebration for students scoring Proficient and


Page 4 of 9

6. All schools will utilize a

Response to Intervention (RtI) model in which students will be provided with tiered interventions based on their level of need as monitored through AIMSweb and other school-level assessments.

7. Schools will create a process by which students in need of additional support will be “Named and Claimed” so as to monitor and ensure their progress towards Proficiency.

8. The district will monitor district-level and school-level achievement gaps.

6. Directors of Instruction, Building Administrators, Teachers, District RtI Coordinator

7. Directors of Instruction, Building Administrators, Teachers, District RtI Coordinator

8. Superintendent, School

Board, Central Office Directors, Building Administrators, teachers,

6. Continuous

7. Continuous


Distinguished on the KCCT is planned and occurs.

6. Short Term: a. Schools are using

multiple assessments including AIMSweb to determine student need.

b. Instructional resources will be provided and focused on implementation of RtI.

c. School schedules will evidence formation of tiered intervention groups

7. Short Term

a. A process will be evident for each school where staff monitor and support students performing below level.

8. Short Term:

a. % of students in state-identified sub populations at each


Page 5 of 9

SBDM Councils school will increase.

Long Term:

a. See Goals Column


Page 6 of 9


SMART Goal Worksheet: District Goal(s): We will improve as next-generation professionals. District SMART Goal



Timeline


1

Our Reality: In 2012-2013 all districts in Kentucky will pilot the implementation of new teacher and administrator evaluation rubrics. It is important for us, as a district, to begin creating structures to make this implementation successful.

Our Goal(s): We will fully implement

new state curriculum standards.

We will facilitate effective and engaging instruction to diverse learners in a diverse learning environment.

Assist building level administrators in verifying new state curriculum standards are being implemented.

Assist building level administrators in guiding teachers and staff in effective instruction to a diverse learning population.

1. The district will provide training for administrators and teachers focused on Classroom Assessment for Student Learning (CASL) which will provide a focus on the following components:

o Clear purpose for assessment

o Clear targets for student learning

o Sound design of assessments

o Communication to all stakeholders

o Increased student engagement and ownership of their own learning and progress

2. The district will provide training for administrators and teachers regarding what RTI is and the most effective RTI strategies.

1. Directors of Instruction, Principals, Teachers

2. Directors of Instruction, Principals, Teachers

1. Continue: 8/11

Continuous


List both short term and long term evidences: 1. Short Term:

a. Teachers will post student friendly targets in their classrooms.

b. Assessments will match the target type of the targets.

c. Student engagement will increase.

d. Students will monitor their own progress.

2. Short Term:

a. Conversations with teachers will indicate they understand RTI.

b. Teachers will implement effective RTI strategies.


Page 7 of 9

3. The district will provide training for

administrators and teachers on Characteristics of Highly Effective Teaching and Learning (CHETL) which will provide a focus on the following areas:

o Rigor and Engagement o Relevance o Content Knowledge o Climate o Assessment

3. Directors of

Instruction, Principals, Teachers

3. Continue: 8/11

Continuous

3. Short Term:

a. Teachers and administrators will be knowledgeable of CHETL.

b. Teachers will effectively implement the characteristics of HETL.

c. Administrators will be able to guide teachers in implementing CHETL.

Long Term: See Goals Column


Page 8 of 9


SMART Goal Worksheet: District Goal(s): We will improve as next-generation support systems. District SMART Goal



Timeline


1

Our Reality: New Program Reviews for writing, arts and humanities, and practical living and career studies are being implemented during the 2011-2012 school year. It is important to ensure appropriate structures exist in the district to collaborate on effective implementation of these program reviews.

Our Goal(s): All schools will effectively

implement program reviews in writing, arts and humanities, and practical living and career studies.

All schools will have at least 50% participation in the TELL survey.

1. The district will review school implementation and evaluation of program reviews prior to submission to the state.

2. The district will provide opportunities for the program review teams at each school to collaborate across the district as a way to facilitate understanding and knowledge of the program reviews.

3. The district will encourage teachers to complete the TELL survey in the Spring.

1. Directors of Instruction,

Principals, School-level Program Review Teams.

2. Directors of Instruction, Principals, School-level Program Review Teams.

3. Superintendent, Directors of Instruction, Principals

1. April/May 2012

2. February/March/April/May 2012

3. Spring 2012

List both short term and long term evidences: 1. Short Term:

a. The district provides timelines and due dates to the schools for district review of program reviews.

2. Short Term:

a. Meetings are scheduled for program review teams to meet together across the district.

3. Short Term:

a. Communication occurs to teachers encouraging them to complete the TELL survey.

Long Term: See Goals Column


Page 9 of 9

Georgetown, Kentucky

Documents

Transcript of Georgetown, Kentucky