National Education Technology Plan - Baker School District

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Jim Schnitz, IBM, Holladay, UT Dan Schultz, Michigan Virtual University, Lansing, MI Linda Sharp, AlphaSmart, Inc, Greenwood Village, CO Elliot Soloway, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI Ron Thorpe, Thirteen/WNET, New York, NY Bruce Wilcox, Harcourt Incorporated, Orlando, FL Denaya Wininger, Frontier Public School, Red Rock, OK Andy Zucker, Education Development Center (EDC), Newton, MA Data-Driven Decision-Making, Accountability, and School Transformation Having good data to guide decisions in schools and for instruction is critical to ensuring that all the nation’s children achieve. New technological solutions have the potential to generate actionable data about school performance—in many cases for the first time. 58 Fred Balfour, Align to Achieve, Inc., Watertown, MA Dean Bergman, Nebraska Department of Education, Lincoln, NE John Boling, SAS Institute, Cary, NC David Coleman, The Grow Network, New York, NY Alvin Crawford, SchoolNet, Inc., New York, NY David DeSchryver, SchoolNet, Inc., Washington, DC Charlie Garten, Poway Unified School District, Poway, CA Joe Kitchens, Western Heights Public Schools, Oklahoma City, OK Keith Krueger, Consortium for School Networking (CoSN), Washington, DC Jacqueline Lain, Standard & Poor’s, New York, NY Eliot Levinson, BLE Group, Washington, DC Elaine Liftin, Council for Education Change, Davie, FL Jane Lockett, IBM Business Consulting Services, Orlando, FL Bob Longo, PowerSchool, Folsom, CA Maribeth Luftglass, Fairfax County Public Schools, Annandale, VA Dale Mann, Interactive, Inc., New York, NY Dean Millot, National Charter School Alliance, St. Paul, MN Cathy Mincberg, Houston Independent School District, Houston, TX Allan Olson, Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA), Portland, OR Mike Patterson, Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA), Portland, OR Mark Schneiderman, Software and Information Industry Association (SIIA), Washington, DC Peter Sibley, Edmin.com, San Diego, CA
Joe Simpson, Council of Chief State Schools Officers (CCSSO), Washington, DC Irene Spero, Consortium for School Networking (CoSN), Washington, DC Matt Stein, Eduventures, Inc., Boston, MA Samuel Stringfield, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD Bill Tudor, Scantron Corporation, Irvine, CA Hugh Walkup, U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC Jeff Wayman, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD Budgeting and Funding Models for 21 st Century Education Systems Federal funds have disproportionately supported the purchasing of technology in schools, but innovative states and districts have rebuilt their budgets from the ground up to reflect the new opportunities afforded by technology. These sites are well-positioned for the future and are much better insulated from short-term funding fluctuations. Kathleen Brantley, Market Data Retrieval, Shelton, CT David Byer, Apple Computer, Inc., Washington, DC John Clement, American Institutes for Research, Washington, DC Sara Fitzgerald, Funds For Learning, LLC, Arlington, VA Anne Flynn, National School Boards Association, Alexandria, VA Jeanne Hayes, Quality Education Data, Inc., Denver, CO Steve Honegger, American Institutes for Research, Washington, DC Keith Krueger, Consortium for School Networking (CoSN), Washington, DC Mark Maine, Pomona Unified School District, Pomona, CA John Musso, District of Columbia Public Schools, Washington, DC Bill Rust, Gartner, Inc., Catonsville, Maryland Mark Schneiderman, Software and Information Industry Association (SIIA), Washington, DC William R. Thomas, Southern Regional Education Board, Atlanta, GA Brenda Williams, West Virginia Department of Education, Charleston, WV 59
Page 1 and 2:
Toward A New Golden Age In American
Page 3 and 4:
Toward A New Golden Age In American
Page 5 and 6:
The Impact of No Child Left Behind
Page 7 and 8:
Teachers and students are transform
Page 9 and 10: There has been explosive growth in
Page 11 and 12: A Nation on the Move Twenty-one yea
Page 13 and 14: Today’s students, of almost any a
Page 15 and 16: No Child Left Behind created new st
Page 17 and 18: Twenty years of national data show
Page 19 and 20: • 49 percent say they may be inte
Page 21 and 22: These are clearly exciting times fo
Page 23 and 24: like that. We should not have to ca
Page 25 and 26: Success Stories from Schools That A
Page 27 and 28: o language learners to compare achi
Page 29 and 30: Founded in 1997, the state-funded i
Page 31 and 32: makes this effort extraordinary is
Page 33 and 34: New Mexico Two years ago in New Mex
Page 35 and 36: • A number of other states and ot
Page 37 and 38: courses by mail. But through today
Page 39 and 40: The Impact of No Child Left Behind
Page 41 and 42: A National Education Technology Pla
Page 43 and 44: effective use of technology to enha
Page 45 and 46: • Encourage that broadband is ava
Page 47 and 48: Conclusions • There is no dispute
Page 49 and 50: Appendices A. Joint Federal Activit
Page 51 and 52: to strengthen this portfolio, and s
Page 53 and 54: APPENDIX B How This Plan Was Develo
Page 55 and 56: Kendall Starkweather, International
Page 57 and 58: Tom Clark, TA Consulting, Springfie
Page 59: Garret Sern, EDUCAUSE, Washington,
Page 63 and 64: APPENDIX C Acknowledgements We want
Page 65 and 66: APPENDIX D Endnotes 1 National Comm
Page 67 and 68: 17 Ibid. See http://www.nces.ed.gov
Page 69 and 70: 43 Ibid. 44 Ibid. 45 See State Educ
Page 72: 70 U.S. Department of Education Off
show all

National Education Technology Plan - Baker School District

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?