Policies for ensuring student safety and appropriate use of computers are in place.
Policies are enforced for ensuring student safety and appropriate use of computers are in place.
Policies for ensuring student safety and appropriate use of computers in accord with the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA), while still enabling teachers and students access to a wide range of information and communication resources (AUP, plans for parent, teacher, student information, filtering, virus/spyware protection)
159
If you have any questions or need further information about these instruments, please contact Dr. Jeni Corn, Director of Evaluation of the Friday Institute, jeni_corn@ncsu.edu.
Table 25: The Friday Institute 1:1 Implementation Rubric 6: Professional Development
Professional Development
Early (Starting) Technology
Developing Technology Advanced (Prepared) Technology Target Computing
PD1
Professional Development Experiences
Teachers participate in professional development on basic technology literacy skills and district information systems.
Teachers have participated in professional development on integrating technology into content area activities for students as well as to streamline productivity and management tasks.
Teachers have participated in professional development on technology integration into the curriculum through the creation of new lessons and activities that promote higher order thinking skills and collaboration with experts, peers, and parents.
Teachers collaborate with other professionals in developing new learning environments to empower students to think critically to solve real- world problems and communicate with experts across business, industry and higher education.
PD2
Models of Professional Development
Teachers participate in large group professional development sessions to acquire basic technology skills.
Teachers participate in large group professional development sessions focusing on increasing teacher productivity and building capacity to integrate technology effectively into content areas with follow-up that facilitates implementation.
Teachers participate in on-going professional development, including training, observation/assessment, study groups, and mentoring.
Teachers participate in multiple professional development opportunities that support anytime, anywhere learning available through delivery systems including individually guided activities, inquiry/action research, and involvement in a development/improvement process.
PD3
Educator Capability
Educators are aware of the certification for technology applications.
Most educators meet two (2) to three (3) technology application standards.
Most educators meet four (4) to five (5) of the technology application standards.
Most educators meet all six (6) of the technology application standards.
160
Professional Development
Early (Starting) Technology
Developing Technology Advanced (Prepared) Technology Target Computing
PD4
Participation in Technology-Driven Professional Development
Teachers participate in less than nine (9) hours of technology professional development per year.
Teachers participate in nine (9) to eighteen (18) hours of technology professional development per year.
Teachers participate in nineteen (19) to twenty-nine (29) hours of technology professional development per year.
Teachers participate in thirty (30) or more hours of technology professional development per year.
PD5
Levels of Understanding
Teachers understand technology basics and how to use teacher productivity tools.
Teachers adapt technology knowledge and skills for content area instruction.
Teachers use technology as a tool in and across content areas to enhance higher order thinking skills.
Teachers create new, interactive, collaborative, and customized learning environments.
PD6
Student Training
Training on school technology policies and software is not provided to students.
Training on school technology policies and software is being planned for students.
Training on school technology policies and software is provided to students once a year.
Training on school technology policies and software is provided to students multiple times a year.
161
Appendix C: Evaluation Resources The evaluation resources in this appendix can help you find more information on a topic. Note that many of these resources address multiple evaluation subjects, so the inclusion of a resource under one topic should not at all imply that it does not also pertain to other areas. There are many good evaluation texts, so you will undoubtedly find additional resources. This list is not exhaustive by any means. However, these resources will get you started if you are interested in a more in-depth look on a subject of interest.
Evaluation Approaches Alkin, M. (2004). Evaluation roots: Tracing theorists’ views and influences. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
Fetterman, D., and Wandersman, A. (2005). Empowerment evaluation principles in practice. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Patton, M. (2008). Utilization focused evaluation. (4th ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Paul, J. (2005). Introduction to the philosophies of research and criticism of the education and the social sciences. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Preskill, H., and Jones, N. (2009). A practical guide for engaging stakeholders in developing evaluation questions. Princeton, NJ: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
Rossi, P., Lipsey, M., and Freeman, H. (2004). Evaluation: A systematic approach. (7th ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Shadish, William R. Jr., Cook, Thomas D., and Leviton, Laura C. (1991). Foundations of program evaluation: Theories of practice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Stake, R. (2004). Standards-based and responsive evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Stufflebeam, D. (2001). Evaluation models: New directions in evaluation, No. 89. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
162
Program Theory and Logic Modeling Frechtling, J. (2007). Logic modeling methods in program evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.
Knowlton, L., and Phillips, C. (2009). The logic model guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Weiss, C. (1998). Evaluation. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Research and Evaluation Design, Including Reliability and Validity Haertel, G., and Means, B. (2003). Evaluating educational technology: Effective research designs
for improving learning. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Lauer, P. (2006). An education research primer: How to understand, evaluate, and use it. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Means, B., and Haertel, G. (2004). Using technology evaluation to enhance student learning. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Mosteller, F., and Boruch, R. (2002). Evidence matters: Randomized trials in education research. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Shadish, W., Cook, T., and Campbell, D. (2001). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.
Shavelson, R., and Towne, L. (2002). Scientific research in education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Stake, R. (2010). Qualitative research: Studying how things work. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Trochim, W., and Donnelly, J. (2006). The research methods knowledge base (3rd ed.). Cincinnati, OH: Atomic Doc Publishing.
What Works Clearinghouse. (2011). Procedures and standards handbook (version 2.1). Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/references/idocviewer/doc.aspx?docid=19&tocid=1.
Wholey, J., Hatry, H., and Newcomer, K. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of practical program evaluation (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
163
Threats to Validity Campbell, D., & Stanley, J. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research.
Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Co.
Budgeting Time and Money Bamberger, M., Rugh, J., and Mabry, L. (2011). RealWorld evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Posavac, E., and Carey, R. (2003). Program evaluation methods and case studies. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
W. K. Kellogg Foundation. (2004). Evaluation handbook. Battle Creek, MI: W. K. Kellogg Foundation.
Ethical Issues APA. (1982). Ethical principles in the conduct of research with human participants. Washington,
DC: American Psychological Association.
National Center for Education Statistics. SLDS Technical Brief (NCES 2011-601), Basic concepts and definitions for privacy and confidentiality in student education records. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2011/2011601.pdf.
National Center for Education Statistics. SLDS Technical Brief (NCES 2011-602), Data stewardship: Managing personally identifiable information in electronic student education records. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2011/2011602.pdf.
U.S. Department of Education. (2007). Mobilizing for evidence-based character education. Washington, D.C.: Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/programs/charactered/mobilizing.pdf.
U.S. Department of Education. Privacy technical assistance center. Retrieved from http://ptac.ed.gov/.
