Valoración de los impactos ambientales a Impactos a ser valorados

7a. Describe the process for evaluating the plan's overall progress and impact on teaching and learning.

The Common Core State Standards, adopted by California for full implementation beginning in the 2014-15 school year, have technology embedded throughout them, beginning even in Kindergarten. The CCSS in ELA prepare students for college and career readiness through efficient and purposeful use of technology in a variety of contexts. In Mathematics, various technologies serve as tools that allow students to demonstrate, model, correct, and propose solutions. TUSD's Technology Plan is designed to provide the appropriate technological resources and skills to help teachers teach the standards, and help students learn them as they move toward college and career readiness. Monitoring the effectiveness of the plan and making adjustments as necessary will be a necessary step in ensuring student and teacher success. TUSD will use multiple evaluative measures to ensure the plan's effectiveness. Most important of these will be measures of student success related to the Common Core Standards and other state-adopted standards:

• Results of the Smarter Balanced Assessments for all 3rd-8th and 11th grade students, as well as any other state-adopted cumulative assessments.

• TUSD benchmark assessments for all grade levels. • Student progress on IEP goals.

• Department and Grade-level local formative and summative assessments.

In addition, information from the following sources will provide data for the plan's effectiveness: • Pre- and Post- school year technology surveys for staff

• Minutes and feedback from committee and advisory group meetings • Feedback from technology trainings and professional development

Review of this data and the Technology Plan's effectiveness related to it will follow the district's standard data review protocols. Student assessment data is generated by the Office of

Assessment and Accountability, under the direction of the Assistant Superintendent of Educational Services. Data is initially reviewed at the local (site or department) level, in

PLC/SLT teams, committee meetings (e.g., Technology Committee, Common Core Committee, etc.), and advisory groups (e.g., school site councils, Budget Advisory Committee, etc.).

Feedback from these groups is then shared with site and department administration, who in turn analyze and review the feedback along with the relevant data and information from the Tech Plan. Concerns, recommendations, and additional information from these groups then goes to District Office level personnel and groups for review and consideration. These groups include, but are not limited to, the Educational Services Team, Fiscal Services, and Large Cabinet. Changes to the Tech Plan that are able to be done at this level will then be enacted by the Director of Technology and Data Systems. More significant changes would require approval

reviewed appropriate data. The Director of Technology and Data Systems will report progress to the Board of Trustees each quarter, with a final annual review for the Board annually in the spring.

7b. Schedule for evaluating the effect of plan implementation.

Year One (2014-2015)

June

•Technology Department Cabinet- Inventory and Device Audit Review August

•Staff pre-survey

•Educational Services reviews SBAC Field Test local data (no scores, but student and teacher feedback from the test)

September

•District Technology Committee Meeting- review of staff pre-survey and inventory/device review

•Technology Plan Year 1 presentation to Principals’ PLC and Large Cabinet October

•Board presentation- technology update

•Educational Services- Local Benchmark Review November

•Educational Services- Local Benchmark Review December

•District Technology Committee Meeting- Tech plan curricular progress review •Board presentation- technology update

January

•Board presentation- technology update March

•Educational Services- Local Benchmark Review April

•Staff Post-Survey

•District Technology Committee Meeting- review survey data •Educational Services reviews survey data

May

•Board presentation- Technology Plan review and Year 2 proposed changes •Educational Services- Local Benchmark Review/District Placement Test Review Year Two (2015-2016)

June

•Technology Department Cabinet- Inventory and Device Audit Review August

•Staff pre-survey

•Educational Services reviews SBAC data September

•District Technology Committee Meeting- review of staff pre-survey and inventory/device review

•Technology Plan Year 2 presentation to Principals’ PLC and Large Cabinet October

•Board presentation- technology update

•Educational Services- Local Benchmark Review November

•Educational Services- Local Benchmark Review December

January

•Educational Services- Educational Technology review and Local Benchmark review February

•Board presentation- technology update March

•Educational Services- Local Benchmark Review April

•Staff Post-Survey

•District Technology Committee Meeting- review survey data •Educational Services reviews survey data

•Technology Plan Writing Committee has initial meeting to review overall plan data from previous year and current year

May

•Technology Plan Writing Committee meeting

•Board presentation- Technology Plan review and Year 3 proposed changes •Educational Services- Local Benchmark Review/District Placement Test review Year Three (2016-2017)

June

•Technology Department Cabinet- Inventory and Device Audit Review August

•Staff pre-survey

•Educational Services reviews SBAC data •Technology Plan Writing Committee meeting September

•District Technology Committee Meeting- review of staff pre-survey and inventory/device review

October

•Board presentation- technology update

•Technology Plan Writing Committee meeting •Educational Services- Local Benchmark Review November

•Technology Plan Writing Committee meeting

•Draft of Technology Plan submitted for regional approval •Educational Services- Local Benchmark Review

December

•Board presentation- technology update

•District Technology Committee Meeting- Tech Plan Draft review/Tech plan curricular progress review

January

•Educational Services- Educational Technology review/Tech Plan Draft review/Local Benchmark review

February

•Board presentation- technology update March

•Educational Services- Local Benchmark Review April

•Staff Post-Survey

•District Technology Committee Meeting- review survey data/Tech Plan Draft review •Educational Services reviews survey data/Tech Plan Draft review

May

•Board presentation- Technology Plan review and approval of new Tech Plan •Educational Services- Local Benchmark Review/District Placement Test review

7c. Describe the process and frequency of communicating evaluation results to tech plan stakeholders.

The communication of the evaluation results of the various parts of the TUSD Technology Plan will be shared with stakeholders routinely and in a variety of manners. As outlined in section 7B, communication with the TUSD Board of Trustees takes place throughout the school year, with three general updates and an annual final report on the progress of the plan with any

recommended changes for the next year. There is an annual review with the Principals’ PLC and Large Cabinet (agenda items for these meetings are reviewed by the Superintendent and his small cabinet prior).

TUSD’s focus on the PLC process will ensure frequent communication and collaboration at the district and site level. Agenda items for various site and district PLC and SLT meetings will include plan progress reviews with opportunities to provide feedback.

The TUSD Technology and Data Systems Department will include periodic plan updates on it’s department website. Major successes will be included on the district website and communicated with various media outlets, such as the Turlock Journal and the Modesto Bee.

The Technology and Data Systems Department will encourage sites to include tech plan progress information on parent advisory meeting agendas (ELAC, SSC) and ask for feedback from the meetings to be included in meeting minutes for review.