Technology Plan Evaluation

Stephanie McCoy
Tiana Tibbs
Qiana Worlds
FRIT 8132

Introduction
Bibb County school district is located in the middle Georgia area in the city of Macon.
The total student population is about 25,276 students with a total of about 1,639
classrooms. There are many students who are considered economically disadvantaged
and among those, they are mostly African-American and/or receive special education
services.

The Bibb County Technology Plan was adopted on July 1, 2008 which appears to be a
common date among technology plans. It extends through June of 2011 making it a 3
year plan. This makes sense based on the fact that technology changes so much from
year to year.

We used the Technology Planning Analysis Rubric that was created by Dr. Paul Allen
from the University of Texas to evaluate Bibb County’s Technology Plan.

Components Score Explanation of Score

Executive Summary
Identifies Contributors
and Stakeholder
Groups
3 Overall, the plan addresses the
requirements for executive summary. The
vision, mission, and goals and objectives
are easy to find at the beginning of the
plan. In reading those sections, readers
can effortlessly obtain the major themes
that the county is aiming to address. The
background, findings, issues, conclusions,
and recommendations are described in
greater detail. These additional details are
essential because they provide the
substance on which the plan is built.
2 A membership list of stakeholder groups is
included in the plan, and there are brief
descriptions of how technology is used to
address the needs of the stakeholders.
While the descriptions indicate technology
use by each of the groups, it is vague and
seems to omit many obvious details. More
 thorough descriptions would enhance the
plan and give readers a more realistic view
of technology’s impact on the school
district.
Vision Statement 1 The county’s vision for technology use as
included in the plan is rather lengthy;
however, it lacks much information
regarding instructional outcomes. There
are descriptions of how “classrooms will be
noisy with students…researching together,”
but little is said about how the use of
technology will impact academic
achievement. Most of the plan’s vision for
technology use describes specifics about
what technology will be used for (i.e.,
retaining teachers and communicating with
parents) rather than how it will impact
student learning.
Mission Statement 2 The technology mission statement indicates
that technology will “enhance teaching and
learning process” and bridge educational
gaps. It does not, however, indicate how
these things will be accomplished.
Because there is no mention of any group
in the mission statement, it is unclear
whether the mission is for the benefit of
students, teachers, parents, or all of the
above.
Goals 3 The goals listed in the technology plan met
the highest criteria given in the rubric.
Most of the goals answered the questions:
Who? What? According to which
instrument? Fewer goals answered the
questions: By when and by how much?
Nevertheless, the goals were all
comprehensive and realistic.
Objectives 3 Like the goals, the objectives met the
highest criteria in the rubric. The
relationship between the goals and
objectives is clear. Several strategies are
listed for each objective that explains the
plan for how goals will be achieved. The
evaluation method and timeline for
achievement is also included. The
 objectives in this technology plan are far
more detailed than the goals and include
much of the information that was included
in the goals section of the rubric.
Needs Assessment 2 The needs assessment (gap analysis)
focused primarily on getting the
appropriate technology in the classrooms
to make sure student learning is achieved
through the use of technology. The plan
calls for the county to get the 21st century
technology in all 23 elementary schools
since they are all in the middle and high
schools. They also want to make sure the
teachers have the appropriate training so
they can maximize instruction using this
technology to reach the kinesthetic
learners and students with disabilities.
All computers, even the ones that are five
years or older that are still considered
modern units, have been installed with
Windows 2000 or XP. It briefly mentions
how teachers requests software specific to
their subject and benchmark assessment
application but does not go into detail on
how they plan to get this and by when.
General Issues 2 The issues listed on the rubric are
addressed in the technology plan however
they do not go into detail and are not
measurable.
Conclusions and 1 There was not a complete list that
Recommendations identifies the needs and challenges to
improve the education of Bibb County
overall with recommended projects and
steps to accomplish the vision.
Acceptable Use Policy 3 The Acceptable Use Policy is clearly stated
with guidelines, definitions of relative
terms, and policies. There is also a
parental consent form for internet usage at
the school. Also listed are violations if a
rule is broken. The Acceptable Use Policy
is very well written. A strong acceptable
use policy is integral to the success of the
 use of technology in the classroom.
Technology and 1 The technology and learning statement is
Learning Statement absent.
Technology Standards, 2 This plan gives clear and concise details
Requirements, and about the standards that will be used in
Models for Technology regards to technology for this school
and Learning district. There did not seem to be a lot, if
any, detailed information about current
models for technology and learning once
the standards are set and in place. Mostly
this plan gives some detailed information
about the name and type of software that
will be used. However, there seems to be
little or no information in the plan that
details the type of hardware that will be
used other than the words “modern
desktop, tablets/laptops.”
Staff Development 2 This plan gives a general overview of how
teachers will be trained using 21st century
technology and software. The professional
development courses are offered to
teachers in the county but preference is
given to second year teachers in the TAPP
program. I think more could be added to
the professional development portion by
giving more detail about some incentives
and resources for teachers taking part in
this professional development.
Technical Support 3 Technical support is clearly addressed in
this plan with support being given to
faculty and staff members and parents.
Wireless access has also been included to
be provided for all schools in the district.
Schools will also have access to 2nd
internet connection. Computers will also
be updated with current Windows Office
and Vista. According to plan, technological
support has effectively been put place that
clearly outlines and details how and when
the technology will be in place and who will
be responsible for ensuring that faculty,
staff, and students have what they need to
be contenders with other 21st Cenutry
students worldwide.
Projects, Budgets, and
Timelines
Clarity of Writing
2 Although there was not a specific area
designated for projects, budgets, and time-
lines in the plan, funding and time lines
were included in this plan with specifics as
to who would be the responsible party. It
did not go into detail about how the funds
would be distributed once the money was
released. This plan just gives a list of
where the money will come from and how
much will be given.
3 The writing for this plan was clear and
concise. There were very few, if any,
typos or misspellings. The format and the
table of contents helped to make the plan
very readable and useful when looking for
information within the document. The use
of headings and charts were also helpful in
making the plan easily readable.

Overall, this technology plan was average. While it included many of the requirements
as stated in the rubric, it was lacking in many other areas. In many areas, the plan was
almost too vague for anyone to grasp the district’s purpose for using technology. It
was hard to determine if technology use in the district was more for the benefit of the
students or the teachers. While a good technology program can improve teacher
retention, this plan failed to place the desired emphasis on the importance of learning
outcomes when stating its vision and mission. There were also sections of the plan that
did not seem realistic when describing the current state of the district. Perhaps this is
due to a hurried effort to compile a technology plan, but anyone who reads this
technology plan is relying on its accuracy.

Deficiencies such as these seem odd, especially since technology rubrics like Dr. Allen’s
are readily available resources that could help any school district create an impeccable
technology plan. The Bibb County technology plan is adequate; however, with more
clarity, specificity, and vision, the plan could have been greatly improved.