Technology Implementation Partnership (TIP) Kickoff Session

September 25, 2007

Agenda• Welcome from CITEd team – Tracy• Overview of TIP Initiative – Chuck• Presentation from TIP project sites – TIP Sites• Snapshot of TIP

Differentiating instruction – HeidiLooking at Student Work – Judy

• Discussion of the EdTech Locator – David• Evaluation of TIP Initiative – Allison• Overview of Scaling-Up – Tracy• Next steps – Tracy

Who We Are

• The Center for Implementing Technology in Education (CITEd), is funded by the U.S. Department Education’s Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP).

• CITEd is a collaborative project run by the American Institutes for Research (AIR) with the Education Development Center (EDC) and CAST.

• CITEd supports leadership at state and local education agencies to integrate instructional technology for all students to achieve high educational standards.

• See full staff list with contact information on final slide.

TIP Professional Learning Community

AIRTracy Gray, PD & PI

Nancy Safer, PIMary Thorngren, DeputyAllison Gandhi, Evaluator

Susan Skipper, CoordinatorHeidi Silver-Pacuilla

BethanyM. Federico

R. Spino

ThomasvilleM. FriesenJ. Jordan

T. McBrideJ. Scott

Wolsey-WessingtonC. McGillvreyJ. Cutshaw

EDCJudy Zorfass, PD

Alise Brann

CASTDavid Rose, PI

Chuck Hitchcock, PDBoo Murray

Jenna Wasson

NorthamptonB. DichterL. Carrier

B. Dombusch

Minnesota Virtual Academy

M. Dyar

TIP Sites Overview

Why the TIP Initiative?

• To increase the use and understanding of differentiating instruction through innovative technologies.

• To support a professional learning community across the districts and within the five districts.

• To identify and share lessons learned on effective ways to engage teachers, administrators, IT and PD coordinators to use differentiating instruction across the curriculum to meet the learning needs of all students, particularly those with special needs.

• To scale up TIP across grades, curriculum areas, and schools throughout the districts. Share lessons learned with SEAs and LEAs.

Technical Assistance to TIP Sites

• Provide TA through:conference calls onsite meetings web-based supportwebinars“just in time” support and resources shared strategies and tools through online

learning community across sites• Share best practices, successes, and challenges in

program implementation and scaling-up.

• TIP Site Introductions Focus of TIP at your siteGeneral demographics of your siteGoals for the TIP effort over the next two years

• Building a Professional Learning CommunityWhat is one thing your district can contribute to the

TIP professional learning community?  What is one thing your district would like to learn

from the TIP professional learning community? 

Bethany School DistrictBethany, CT

• 557 students

• 51 teachers (FTE)

• Free lunch = 3.2%

• Special ed = 11%

• Limited English = 0%

Focus • Writing• Grades 5 and 6

Goals• Increased use of hardware and software within writing

process for students.• Increased access to general education curriculum and

classroom for students with disabilities.

Minnesota Virtual Academy

Houston, MN

• 479 MNVA students

• 17 MNVA teachers

• Free lunch = 6%

• Special ed = 8%

• Limited English = 0%

Focus• Grades 4-8• Mathematics• Work sample analysis

Goals• Teachers have increased comfort with the scope

and sequence of mastery of math.• Teachers have increased repertoire of strategies

and resources for teaching math.• Improved progress monitoring and reporting.

Northampton School DistrictNorthampton, MA

• 2,940 students

• 232 teachers

• Free lunch = 26.3%

• Special ed = 21%

• Limited English = 2.3%

Focus• Literacy across the curriculum.

Goals• Students independently make use of software.• Teachers incorporate software into their lessons.

Thomasville City Schools

Thomasville, GA

• 2,889 students

• 204 teachers

• Free lunch = 72%

• Special ed = 13%

• Limited English = <1 %

Focus• Mathematics• Middle school

Goals• Teachers identify student learning needs and use

evidence (i.e., student work) they have collected in their portfolios to appropriately select and revise differentiating instruction strategies

Wolsey-Wessington School District

Wolsey, SD

• 217 students

• 25 teachers

• Free lunch = 37%

• Special ed = 17%

• Limited English = 0 %

Focus• Science• Cohort of teachers K-12

Goals• Increase differentiated instruction with technology.• Increase student engagement and use of technology

with learning.

Key Focus of TIP Initiative Differentiating Instruction through Technology:

• Planning and delivery of classroom instruction that considers the varied levels of readiness, learning needs, and interests of each student.

• Using a range of technology tools to engage learners at varying levels of readiness in multiple ways.

• Offering students options for demonstrating their understanding and mastery of the classroom material.

Differentiating Instruction through Technology (continued)• Embraces student differences

Provides assistive and accessible tools, encourages students to create customized tools.

Uses assessment data to guide instruction.Uses progress monitoring and diagnostic tools.

• Uses choice to engage and motivateProvides the tools and encourages students to be creative.

• Offers flexible groupingsMixes whole class orientations with small group and peer

tasks and considers groupings outside of the classroom.

Looking at Student Work (LASW)An approach for professional development:

• Provides teachers with meaningful ways to link technology to the curriculum.

• Supports ongoing, collaborative team process.• Examines diverse student work. • Provides a protocol and process for the teacher team. • Engages the teacher team in a cycle of discussion,

action, and reflection.

Ongoing, Collaborative Team Process• Teams include

general education teachersspecial educators curriculum specialiststechnology specialistsELL, Title 1, etc.

• Team members assume roles: facilitator, recorder, timekeeper, and presenting teacher.

• The team meets regularly before, during, or after school, taking advantage of faculty

meetings, planning periods, grade-level meetings, etc.usually for 45-60 minutesonce every 2-3 weeks or monthly

• Presenting teacher brings the work of three students with diverse abilities and needs, e.g.,

High performing studentTypical studentAt-risk studentStruggling student

with a disabilityELL student

Uses Students’ Work

Plan Strategies

Examine Student

Work

Reflect on Strategies

Tried

Implement Plans with Students

Creates a Cycle

CITEd EdTech Locator SUMMARY CHART

  Teachers and Related Service Providers Administrators Technology Coordinators Professional Development Coordinators

Early Tech Implementation

Technology use by teachers and students is limited with little linkage to instructional strategies or student needs. Technology is mainly used as a productivity tool. The use of technology is substantially different for general and special educators.

The technology plan is nominal: there is no timely technical support, and core curricula are developed with minimal consideration of students with special needs. Assistive technologies are purchased and administered separately. The school/district does not require that websites and software adhere to accessibility guidelines.

Universal design and access issues are considered only for students with IEPs. Connectivity and e-learning environments are limited, providing a student-to-computer ratio of 10-1 and limited access to assistive technology tools.

Technology training is limited to use and access, with little focus on instruction. Training for general educators and special educators is separate, with universal design principles limited to special educators.

Developing / Advanced  Tech Implementation

Technology use supplements instruction, specifically for remediation, review, and practice for special education students. Technology is sometimes used to manage administrative tasks or special education paperwork; e-mail and e-newsletters are used to convey information to parents.

The technology plan is aligned with the state plan and developed with input from multiple stakeholders. Assistive technologies and other accommodations are considered. General cost-of-ownership principles are followed and same-day tech support is provided. The school/district requires that websites and software adhere to basic accessibility guidelines.

Universal design and access issues are considered for a limited number of computers, or areas with high computer use. Internet connectivity is available in most or all classrooms, with basic resources available for sharing servers. Significant wireless connectivity is available.

Training relates technology use to content area instruction. There is awareness of universal design principles among special educators and some general educators.

Target Tech Implementation

Technology is used for differentiating instruction, is integrated into curricular and assessment materials, and follows principles of universal design, accommodating the diverse needs of all learners. Multiple forms of technology are used to manage IEP and administrative tasks. Technology is used as a communication tool between teachers and parents.

The technology plan focuses on integrating technology to support differentiating instruction, and the needs of students with disabilities are included in all curricular and technology decisions and purchases. The school/district requires and ensures that websites and software adhere to best practice accessibility guidelines.

Universal design and access issues are considered and implemented throughout the school/district. Purchase priorities support differentiating instruction. Direct Internet connectivity is available in all rooms in all schools, with easy access to wireless connectivity.

Training models the use of technology as a seamless and expected component of any instruction, with heavy focus on universal design and differentiating instruction strategies to ensure access to the general education curriculum for all students.

Adapted from Massachusetts and Texas STaR Chart Initiatives

Evaluation of TIP InitiativeKey evaluation questions

What changes are evident in TIP sites related to differentiating instruction with technology tools?  What was the role of TIP in supporting this change?

What conditions (e.g. professional development, leadership, communities of practice) facilitated changes at the TIP site? What was the role of TIP in facilitating change? 

What barriers did the TIP site face? What was the role of TIP in reducing barriers?

What were the steps taken to scale-up technology implementation?  What was the role of TIP in scaling-up technology implementation?

Evaluation (continued)• Instruments

Teacher Survey Interview with key site contactsOther feedback sources

• Key benchmarks/timelineTeacher surveys: October 2007, May 2008, May 2009Site contact interviews: April 2008, April 2009

Logistics: Baseline Teacher SurveyLaunch date: Monday October 1 Closing Date; Friday October 12 Online survey via www.surveymonkey.com Needed from TIP sites by Thursday,

September 27: • Names and emails for all teachers who will be

responding to the survey • Approval of, or edits to, the text for the email

invitation

Key Components of Scaling-up • Success with TIP that leads to expansion, e.g., more

classrooms, more grades, different content areas, more school(s), and/or more district(s).

• TIP needs staying power – Is TIP still used 2 to 3 years later? Is there fidelity to the Initiative?

• Ownership transfers to teachers and administrators – Do teachers feel they ‘own’ the program? Are they comfortable making changes if needed?

• TIP needs to change classroom culture – do teachers make it a part of their daily practice?

Next Steps CITEd Upcoming Events• Webinars

September 2007-May 2008 – CITEd webinar series (www.cited.org)

Oct 9th – Looking at Student Work facilitator training Nov 29th & Dec 4th – Differentiating Instruction through

Technology webinar Winter 2008 – Scaling-up event (dates to be determined)

• Other TIP activities Oct 1-12 - Online teacher survey October 5 – Online tours of CITEd website EdTech locator and

other resources Watch for online courses on Differentiating Instruction through

Technology, Evaluation, and Scaling-up

Questions? Feedback?

Email sskipper@air.org or your

TIP coordinator

Key TIP Contacts

• CITEd Alise Brann, TIP Assistant-Bethany Site (

abrann@edc.org) Allison Gandhi, TIP Evaluator (agandhi@air.org) Tracy Gray, CITEd Director and PI (tgray@air.org

) Chuck Hitchcock, TIP Coordinator-Northampton

Site (chitchcock@cast.org) Boo Murray, TIP Coordinator-Thomasville Site (

bmurray@cast.org) David Rose, Principal Investigator (

drose@cast.org) Heidi Silver-Pacuilla, TIP Coordinator-MNVA

Site (hsilver-pacuilla@air.org) Nancy Safer, CITEd PI (nsafer@air.org) Susan Skipper, TIP Coordinator-Wolsey Site (

sskipper@air.org) Tyler Tepfer, TIP Program Assistant (

ttepfer@air.org) Mary Thorngren, CITEd Deputy Director, (

mthorngren@air.org) Jenna Wasson, TIP Assistant-Thomasville Site (

jwasson@cast.org) Judith Zorfass, TIP Coordinator-Bethany Site (

jzorfass@edc.org)

• Bethany Timothy F. Connellan, Superintendent (

tconnellan@bethany-ed.org) Rob Spino, Housemaster Pre-K – 2 (

rspino@bethany-ed.org) Maureen Galla, Curriculum Coordinator (

mgalla@bethany-ed.org) Mary Federico, Housemaster 3-6 (

mfederico@bethany-ed.org) Karen Proto, Special Education Services (

kproto@bethany-ed.org)

• Northampton Beth Dichter, Technology Inclusion Specialist (

bdichter@northampton-k12.us) Linda Carrier, Director of Teaching and Learning (

lcarrier@northampton.k12.ma.us) Bill Dornbusch, Director of Technology (

bdornbusch@northampton-k12.us) Craig Jurgensen, Director of Pupil Services

(cjrgensen@northampton.k12.ma.us) Diane Kolodziey, Special Ed Director's Assistant

(dkolodziey@nps.northampton.ma.us) Donna Sroka, School Technology Director

(srokad@svahs.net)

Key TIP Contacts Continued• MNVA

Mark Dyar, Special Education Coordinator for Online Programs (mark.dyar@houston.k12.mn.us)

Angela Specketer, Principal (angela.specketer@mnva.k12.mn.us)

Joslyn Runyan, Lead Teacher (joslyn.runyan@mnva.k12.mn.us)

Robyn Christopher, Lead Teacher (robyn.christopher@mnva.k12.mn.us)

Krin Berg, Curriculum Director (krin.berg@houston.k12.mn.us)

Karen Swanson, Special Education Teacher (karen.swanson@mnva.k12.mn.us)

Amy Halverson, School Psychologist (amy.halverson@houston.k12.mn.us)

Jon Baietto, Assistant Principal (jon.baietto@mnva.k12.mn.us)

Rana Bell, Teacher (rana.bell@mnva.12.mn.us) Patty Herman, Teacher (

patty.herman@mnva.k12.mn.us) Tara Thompson, Technology Coordinator (

tara.thompson@mnva.k12.mn.us) Georgia Rehbein, Special Education Teacher (

Georgia.rehbein@mnva.k12.mn.us)

• Thomasville Mary A. Friesen, Special Education Director (

tfriesm@rose.net) Jennifer Jordan, Assistant Principal (

jordanj@mail.tcitys.org) Tina McBride, Lead Teacher (

mcbridet@mail.tcitys.org) Jackie Scott, Math Coach, (scottj@mail.tcitys.org)

• Wolsey-Wessington Caroline McGilvrey, Technology

Teacher/Coordinator (caroline.jensen@k12.sd.us) Carol Rowen, Elem/MS Principal (

carol.rowen@k12.sd.us) Darcie Langbehn, Speech & Special Education

Teacher (darcie.langbehn@k12.sd.us) James Cutshaw, HS Principal & Superintendent (

james.cutshaw@k12.sd.us) Sandi Ransom, Teacher (

sandi.ransom@k12.sd.us) Gordon Hooks, Teacher (

gordon.hooks@k12.sd.us) Linda Snell, Teacher (linda.snell@k12.sd.us) John McEnelly, Teacher (

john.mcenelly@k12.sd.us)