8/14/2019 description: tags: 003-red

1/9

8/14/2019 description: tags: 003-red

2/9

8/14/2019 description: tags: 003-red

3/9

8/14/2019 description: tags: 003-red

4/9

8/14/2019 description: tags: 003-red

5/9

8/14/2019 description: tags: 003-red

6/9

PAGE A-14 TECHNOLOGY LITERACY CHALLENGE PROGRAMS: TECHNOLOGY LITERACY CHALLENGE FUND,

TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION CHALLENGE GRANTS, AND NATIONAL ACTIVITIES

OBJECTIVE 4: HELP IMPROVE STUDENTS INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY LITERACY SKILLS IN ALL STATES.

Indicator 4.1 Standards for students in educational technology: The number of states that have standards for student proficiency in the use of technology will

increase.

Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data QualityYear Actual Performance Performance Targets

1998: 381999: No data available 42

Year Actual Performance Performance Targets

2000: 45

2001: 46

Status: No 1999 data, but progress toward target

is likely.

Explanation: In 1997-98, 38 states hadstandards or graduation requirements pertainingto technology. A large portion of states alreadyhave technology standards in place for theirstudents. As states increasingly devote resourcesto educational technology, they also increasinglyfocus on measuring the impact of educationaltechnology. Setting standards is a precursor to

that measurement of student proficiency.

Source: Education Week, Technology Counts,

1998; TLCF Profiles for future updates.Frequency: Planned.

Next Update: Fall 2000 for 1999-2000 schoolyear.

Validation Procedure: Education Week Datasupplied by Education Week. No formalverification procedure applied. TLCF Profiledata will be provided by SRI International.

Limitations of Data and PlannedImprovements: Education Week provides nodetail on the rigor or comprehensiveness ofstandards.

Indicator 4.2 Student proficiency in technology: In states that assess student proficiency in technology, the percentage of students that are proficient will

increase.

Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data QualityYear Actual Performance Performance Targets

1999: No data available No data available

2000: Baseline to be established2001: Increase over baseline

Status: Unable to judge.

Explanation: Data on this indicator has not yetbeen collected; however, collection of relevantdata is planned through the TLCF Profilesproject.

Development of a test of student computer skillsis being planned for future studies andevaluations.

Source: TLCF Profiles.Frequency: Planned.

Next Update: Planned.

Validation Procedure: Data to be supplied bySRI International. No formal verificationprocedure applied.

Limitations of Data and Planned

Improvements: Limitations of data will bedefined as data is collected.

8/14/2019 description: tags: 003-red

7/9

8/14/2019 description: tags: 003-red

8/9

8/14/2019 description: tags: 003-red

9/9