Technology Audit Report

Technology Audit Report Prepared for: Northbridge Public Schools Submitted by: CTO to Go Annamaria Schrimpf Jean Tower April 8, 2011

Table of Contents Introduction... 1 Executive Summary... 3 Process... 5 Findings by Area Infrastructure... 10 Staffing... 16 Teaching & Learning... 20 Leadership... 26 Appendix A Survey Questions... 28 Appendix B Data Systems... 39 This Technology Audit Report by Jean Tower & Annamaria Schrimpf is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

Introduction CTO to Go was engaged by the Northbridge Public Schools to conduct an audit of the district technology program. The audit was conducted by Jean Tower and Annamaria Schrimpf of CTO to Go. A technology audit is the process of collecting and evaluating evidence to determine whether a technology system allows organizational goals to be achieved effectively. Our audit will address several components of the technology program, with a focus on answering the two questions below. How do the current systems impact student achievement? How effectively do current systems support staff? In this report, we will describe our findings and will make recommendations to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the technology department, in order to best serve students and staff. This audit includes a survey of all staff, interviews with members of the technology department and selected administrators and staff, and a review of documents. The report is presented in three main sections: an executive summary, a description of the process, and the findings of the study. The findings are divided into the major areas of infrastructure, staffing, teaching and learning, and leadership. Based on our own professional practice along with reputable research about technology in schools, we place a high value on integrating technology into the curriculum and on using technology to address core learning goals that the school district has otherwise identified as important to the mission of the school district. To accomplish this effectively, many essential conditions should be met. The engauge framework, developed by the North Central Regional Educational Laboratory (NCREL) and the METIRI Group, says that six essential conditions have to exist in school districts for truly effective use of technology to take place. The six conditions are in the dimensions of vision, effective practice, equity, leadership, access, and educator proficiency. The Massachusetts state technology plan guidelines are based in part on the School Technology and Readiness (STaR) Chart. This framework lists the essential ingredients as teaching and learning, educator preparation and development, administration and support services, and infrastructure for technology. Our audit framework uses the best of both of these taxonomies. Crosswalk: EnGauge MA STaR Chart Audit effective practice teaching and learning educator proficiency educator preparation and development teaching and learning vision & leadership administration and support services leadership & staffing Access & equity infrastructure for technology infrastructure Page 1 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

For each of the four areas in which we gathered data, we developed the following broad questions that guided our inquiry. Infrastructure Do students and staff have robust and equitable access to reliable and fast technology, anytime and anywhere? Is the access adequate to support teaching and learning? Are there computer labs, mobile labs, classroom computers and laptops for teachers? Is there access to digital tools beyond computers interactive white boards, document cameras, video cameras, and projectors? Staffing Do teachers have access to technology coaches during planning and while teaching? Is there a fully-functional and well-supported technology department that maintains systems and provides coordinated services and curriculum support? Does the technology staff function as a cohesive unit that supports both of the functions of administration and teaching and learning? Teaching and Learning Are teachers modeling technology learning and growth in a Professional Learning Community? Are educators prepared to use technology for teaching and learning? Are educators skilled in creating learning environments to capitalize on the impact that technology has on learning? Is technology fully integrated throughout curriculum, instruction, and assessment, in order to ensure 21 st century outcomes? Leadership Has the district developed a vision that guides the implementation of technology? Is the vision widely known and shared by all and is it regularly evaluated, refocused, and revised? Are all stakeholders committed to the vision? Does the vision drive planning, and are both focused on educational outputs and instructional goals? Do administrators recognize exemplary use of technology in instruction and do they provide constructive feedback to teachers on their technology use? Is there a coordinated funding strategy to meet the goals of the technology plan? In addition to the broad questions above, we looked for alignment and compliance with Massachusetts state technology planning guidelines (Local Technology Plan Guidelines, www.doe.mass.edu/edtech/standards/itstand.pdf) and looked for evidence to help answer the specific questions central to this investigation. How do the current systems impact student achievement? How effectively do current systems support staff? Page 2 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

Executive Summary Annamaria Schrimpf and Jean Tower of CTO to Go conducted a technology audit for the Northbridge Public Schools from February through April of 2011. Throughout the process, we were impressed by the firm commitment of many in the school system to improve academic achievement and the 21 st century skills of students. In fact, one of the stated District Goals of the Northbridge Public Schools is, To seamlessly integrate technology across all classrooms in order to effectively prepare students for the 21st Century. We found many commendable practices and successful implementations of technology, and provide recommendations in infrastructure, staffing, teaching and learning, and leadership to help the district approach their goal of effectively preparing students for the 21 st century. We recommend a computer replacement cycle of five years and improving the student to computer ratio at all levels. The district has improved internet bandwidth and should continue to do so. We suggest a rigorous and comprehensive review of the use of open source software, paying close attention to the total cost of ownership. In addition, one of the most important things that must happen in the area of infrastructure is to develop a plan that is based on the shared vision of educators, parents, and community members. Infrastructure decisions should be clearly aligned to district strategic goals. A critical component of technology in schools is staffing. There must be people who maintain the systems, support users, and guide the vision. We find that the technology department in Northbridge is heavily weighted toward technical support. We recommend that the district reorganizes the technology department in order to provide more balance. Increasing instructional support and providing leadership for the department are critical needs in order to continue to make progress and will bring the district closer to compliance with state standards. In the reorganization process, it will be important to provide cross-training and to share information outside of the department. 1 FTE Technology Director 1 FTE Information Systems Manager 3 FTE Instructional Technology Specialists 3 FTE Technology Systems 1 FTE Secretarial/Administrative Support A Snapshot of Staffing 2002 Versus Today 2002 Today 0 FTE Technology Director 1 FTE Information Systems Manager 1 FTE Instructional Technology Specialist 3 FTE Technology Systems 0 FTE Secretarial/Administrative Support The Massachusetts Teacher Self-Assessment Tool (TSAT) and the National Educational Technology Standards (NETs) for teachers are guiding documents that clearly outline the recommended proficiency levels for teachers. We recommend that the district provide more professional development (PD), co-teaching, coaching, and support opportunities for teachers, because research shows that there is a direct correlation between teacher skills and comfort level and student use of technology in schools. The most efficient way to ensure 21 st century Page 3 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

skills for students is through educators with 21 st century skills. We also suggest that the coordination and facilitation provided by a district-wide Coordinator or Technology Director will help to focus technology projects and initiatives on learning outcomes. The district is committed to providing 21 st century learning environments, but among staff, there is confusion and a lack of clarity about the vision. People outside of the technology department lacked awareness of the Technology Plan. We suggest that the district convene a task force to write a comprehensive, long-term technology plan. The task force should include a school committee members, administrators, teachers, and technology personnel. Further documentation to support these recommendations is found in the sections that follow. In each section, the report also commends the existing achievements in these areas. Page 4 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

Process This audit relies on data gathered through staff surveys, staff interviews, and a review of district documents. The timetable of the audit appears below. Audit benchmarks Responsibility Target dates Develop customized online teacher survey Consultants February 25, 2011 Preview and approve survey Various Staff February 25, 2011 Deploy survey Superintendent/Leadership March 3-7 Conduct onsite interviews Consultants March 10, 2011 Review existing documentation Consultants March 11-April 4 Analyze surveys and interviews Consultants March 11-April 4 Draft final report Consultants March 11-April 4 Submission of final technology audit Consultants April 8, 2011 Present findings to Interviewed Staff Consultants April 15, 2011 Present findings at School Committee Meeting Consultants April 2011 The survey was developed by CTO to Go, and was refined with feedback from several staff members who piloted it. The survey was an online instrument and administered solely online. An email informing staff about the survey and asking them to complete it was sent by the superintendent to all staff, and principals followed up with reminders. From a possible 369 staff members, 227 completed the survey, for a response rate of 61%. Page 5 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

School or Building Staff at Location Staff Respondents Response Percent Northbridge Elementary School 81 46 56.8% Balmer School 79 45 57% Northbridge Middle School 101 54 53.5% Northbridge High School 87 59 67.8% Multiple Buildings 9 9 100% Central Office 12 14 102% Teaching Capacity Staff Respondents Response Percent Classroom Teacher 64 40.0% Math Teacher 6 3.8% Science Teacher 8 5.0% English Teacher 3 1.9% Social Studies Teacher 7 4.4% World Languages Teacher 4 2.5% Health/Phys Ed Teacher 3 1.9% Fine & Performing Arts Teacher 5 3.1% Related Arts Teacher 0 0.0% Library Media Specialist 3 1.9% Special Educator 25 15.6% Teaching/Instructional Assistant 28 17.5% Title I 4 2.5% Survey results are referenced in the relevant sections under findings. Annamaria Schrimpf and Jean Tower of CTO to Go spent a day interviewing staff. The interviews were each about an hour long. Everyone was friendly, helpful, and sharing and the conversations were informative. We talked about the responsiveness of the technology team, how everyone worked together, and heard about schedules, what works well, and what people might like to see improved. It would not be possible to list every question and response here, but below are some representative questions that initiated conversations. Among other things, we asked the technology team members to describe their typical work days, how they coordinated their work, where their primary location was, how they communicated to others about the status of projects, who set priorities for their work, and what kind of reporting they did on a regular basis and to whom. We also asked what they thought they did well (as a team), what the areas of challenge were, and what their frustrations were. We had read the technology reports before coming to the school district, but we also asked clarifying questions about the infrastructure computers and networks. These conversations helped to paint a more complete picture of the technology infrastructure and the work flow of the department. Page 6 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

We asked technology teachers about their typical work day, their schedules, how well the infrastructure met the needs of students and teachers, and many questions about the curriculum. Administrators and others were asked similar questions about their day, how they interacted with technology and members of the technology department and whether their technology needs, as well as the needs of teachers and students, were being met. Everyone was asked what was going well with technology and what would be at the top of their wish list in working toward an ideal solution. We also asked most interviewees to tell us what the vision for technology in the district was and who owned that vision and was the designated leader of it. Page 7 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

On Site Interviews March 10, 2011, interviews were conducted. The staff members listed below each met with one or both of the consultants. Staff Interviewed: Lisa Adams, Executive Assistant to the Superintendent Phil Anderson, Technology Teacher, Northbridge High School Barbara Columbus, Technology Teacher, Northbridge High School Steve DiMare, Network Manager Steve Falconer, Systems Administrator Mike Gauthier, Northbridge High School Principal Lisa Gogolinski, Technology Teacher, Northbridge Middle School Jill Healy, Northbridge Elementary School Principal Gene LaCava, Information Systems Manager Anna Larson, Technology Teacher Balmer and Northbridge Elementary (substitute for Michele Shorten) Steve McKinstry, Technology Support Specialist Mary Ellen Mega, Northbridge Middle School Principal Kristi Meyer, Supervisor of Administrative Services Peter Ritter, K-12 Instructional Technology Specialist Nancy Spitulnik, Assistant Superintendent of Teaching and Learning Cathy Stanton, Director of Pupil Personnel Services Melissa Walker, Business Manager John Zywien, Balmer Principal Documents Reviewed Annual technology plan submitted by Northbridge Public Schools to the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (January 2011) District Three-Year Technology Plan 2010-2013 High School Program of Studies Inventory of data systems in use List of technology staff and their job descriptions FY 11 Budget Northbridge Public Schools web site District Improvement Plan 2010-2013 Page 8 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

Staff Surveys In analyzing the survey results, we looked the raw data, charts derived from the data, and comments that individuals shared in the open-ended responses. Some highlights of the survey responses are: The district goal, Increase of technology to improve and expand teaching and learning, had the highest response frequency as the most important. Slow computers was often indicated as a barrier to effective technology use.* Unreliable connectivity was often indicated as a barrier to effective technology use. There were requests for more Instructional Technology Specialist support time. Teachers are reluctant to assign online homework due to lack of student connectivity at home. Technology proficiency level was higher in the more basic skills, like word processing and email. At the secondary level, more teachers felt more comfortable with the web 2.0 tools. Vertical and horizontal alignment for integration/technology literacy was not evident. The use of technology for data analysis was more widespread at the middle and high school levels. Responses indicated a limited use of Moodle. 39% of respondents indicated that it was easy for them to update a web page. *NOTE: Question 26. Using a scale of 1 to 5, please rate the occurrence of these factors as OBSTACLES OR HINDERANCES to using technology at your school/at work. (1=this is always a factor and 5=this is not a factor) Page 9 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

Findings The Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) provides technology planning guidelines for school districts. The Local Technology Plan Guidelines are based on the on the School Technology and Readiness (STaR) Chart. The DESE states, These guidelines are not mandated but rather recommended benchmarks for districts to meet by the end of the school year 2014-2015. The Department will use these guidelines to gauge the progress of districts' implementation in order to approve their technology plans annually. The guide is an effective framework to use in planning and in measuring progress toward meeting the goals of your plan. It is comprehensive, with suggested standards in several areas: Benchmark 1: Commitment to a Clear Vision and Implementation Strategies Benchmark 2: Technology Integration and Literacy Benchmark 3: Technology Professional Development Benchmark 4: Accessibility of Technology Benchmark 5: Virtual Learning and Communications Benchmark 6: Safety, Security, and Data Retention Our findings will often refer back to some of the specific benchmarks outlined in the state planning document, in particular, assessing whether Northbridge has met, has partially met, or is not meeting the standards. The full document, Local Technology Plan Guidelines, can be found on the DESE web site at: www.doe.mass.edu/edtech/standards/itstand.pdf. Findings: Infrastructure Infrastructure Guiding Questions Do students and staff have robust and equitable access to reliable and fast technology, anytime and anywhere? Is the access adequate to support teaching and learning? Are there computer labs, mobile labs, classroom computers and laptops for teachers? Is there access to digital tools beyond computers interactive white boards, document cameras, video cameras, and projectors? Commendations In the area of infrastructure, there is extensive evidence that the district has a commitment to providing technology to students and staff. This is seen in the number of computers at each school, the ratio of students to computers, the spread of interactive whiteboard technology (SmartBoards) throughout the district, the improvements to bandwidth that have been made, and the initiative to improve wireless connectivity. Page 10 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

The table below shows the number of computers at each school and the ratio of student to computer, based on the data that the district reported to the DESE, using data captured as of June 30, 2010. Location Number Computers Ratio Students to Computers Northbridge High School 263 2.54 to 1 Northbridge Middle School 213 3.77 to 1 Balmer Elementary School 118 5.27 to 1 Northbridge Elementary School 107 5.35 to 1 The table below shows how many computers were purchased in the current year, and in each of the four previous fiscal years. The year the computer was purchased does not necessarily represent the actual age of the computer. The majority of the district computers are refurbished, used computers. Fiscal Year Number of Computers Purchased FY07 39 FY08 145 FY09 99 FY10 208 FY11 202 693 The table below shows the number of SmartBoards and projectors at each building. Please note that each SmartBoard includes a projector, and that the number of projectors (column 3) represents those in addition to the SmartBoard set-ups. Location Number SmartBoards/Projector Number Standalone Projectors Number Classrooms Northbridge High School 18 13 52 Northbridge Middle School 22 7 62 Balmer Elementary School 12 5 33 Northbridge Elementary School 3 4 39 The backbone for the Wide Area Network is fiber, a generally reliable and upgradeable resource. In the table below is a description of the wide area network and Internet connections, as provided to us by the technology staff. Page 11 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

Northbridge Middle School has a direct connection to the Internet. It runs over Charter fiber, provided by MEC at 5 Mbps full duplex. Balmer Elementary and Northbridge Elementary Schools do not have direct connections to the Internet. Their traffic is routed across the wide area network (WAN) and goes to the internet through the NMS connection. Northbridge High School has a direct connection to the Internet. It runs over Charter fiber, provided by MEC at 5 Mbps full duplex. Northbridge Public Schools WAN speeds are minimum 100 MB and maximum 1 GB. The primary connection to the Internet is through one of two connections, as described above. Students and staff have access to storage on file servers which are backed up regularly. The district provides a single login for the network, Moodle, and Drupal. The project to provide more ubiquitous wireless coverage is in process. Data is automatically transferred from ipass to Nutrikids and ConnectEd, a process which avoids data inconsistencies between the systems, and reduces data entry. The district provides access to fully vendor-supported, enterprise quality, software for many services, such as special education software, parent notification system, student information system, email, content filtering, archiving, and spam blocking. The district provides a dependable system of servers, switches, cabling, and routers to provide a robust infrastructure. The district employs remote desktop access, which can facilitate end-user support and maintenance. Recommendations Improve Student to Computer Ratio Benchmark 4-A-1: By 2014-2015, the district has an average ratio of one high-capacity, Internetconnected computer for each student. To reach this benchmark Northbridge needs to commit a regular and reliable funding source to increase the number of computers at each school. Replace Aging Computers Benchmark 4-A-6: The district has established a computer replacement cycle of five years or less. In order to reach this benchmark Northbridge must adopt a computer replacement cycle and commit a regular and reliable funding source to replace aging computers. Page 12 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

Provide Laptop Computers to Professional Staff Members It is our recommendation to assign a laptop to each professional staff member, providing access and ease of use during and after the school day to enable teachers to develop lessons, collaborate with colleagues and other such opportunities that will increase technology proficiency levels. Improve Internal Network Connectivity In specific instances, especially at the High School, it was reported that there are issues with internal network wiring. The technology support team explained the issue to us as being caused by the wiring below the floor being compromised over time by cleaning processes. There has been a solution successfully piloted, and further network cable repair is a project that is currently delayed for funding. Improve Internet Connection Speeds Benchmark 4-B-2: The district provides an external Internet connection to the Internet Service Provider (ISP) of 100 Mbps per 1,000 students/staff. The district has made progress to date, and should continue to improve internet bandwidth. While 100 Mbps may seem like a reach, it would still be a wise choice to increase speeds by some achievable increment annually. The current speed of 5 Mbps is the slowest speed that typical home cable Internet service providers offer. For example, Comcast and RCN both offer Internet connection speeds of 5, 10, or 20 Mbps to their residential customers. As more of the school resources become Internet-based and cloud-based, the speed of the connection to the Internet becomes even more critical to a satisfactory user experience. Develop a Decision Framework for Purchasing Software Benchmark 1-D-2: The budget includes staffing, infrastructure, hardware, software applications, professional development, support, and contracted services. While the district does provide many commercially available software solutions with user support, maintenance, and documentation, it also utilizes many open source software solutions. Examples of these are: Open Office, Koha library software, Moodle integrated e- learning environment, Drupal website software, and Liberum help desk software. Certainly the motivation behind implementing open source software solutions is to be cost-effective, but there are many factors that need to be taken into account when calculating the cost of software solutions. The total cost of ownership (TCO) for open source software needs to take into account the man-hours required to configure, maintain, support, and train users. The decision framework should also include user feedback. For example, any move to implement open-source software should first include a test with a group of users and user feedback should be counted into the equation. In addition, most TCO frameworks include administrative costs, license costs, deployment and configuration, hardware and software updates, training and development, maintenance, technical support, compatibility issues within and outside of the organization, professional development, and the availability of resources not included "in the box." Such resources would be lesson plans and documents found on the Internet and developed by colleagues inside or outside of the district. It is the opinion of the auditors that the school district may have too many open source software solutions for a small technology department to support effectively. In situations like Page 13 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

this, technology support teams often spend a disproportionate amount of time supporting free software. In particular, Open Office was said to be unpopular among staff, and administrators told us about difficulties they have in sharing documents with staff. The situation should be reviewed closely and a decision made that includes the input of all stakeholders. Continue to Improve Wireless Coverage Benchmark 4-B-1: The district provides connectivity to the Internet for all computers in all classrooms in all schools, including wireless connectivity. The current trend in technology is toward more mobile computing. In order to take full advantage of this trend, the school district will have to provide wireless connectivity throughout the buildings. In fact, there is a plan in place to continue the next phase of wireless implementation. Tend to the Repository of Shared Documents One issue that several users brought to our attention is that finding district and school documents can be confusing. Users were not sure whether to look on the web, in First Class, or in Moodle. In addition, there are older and conflicting documents that need to be purged from these shared areas. It is recommended to standardize on one location for these shared documents so that everyone knows how to access them. Disseminate Clearly Articulated Plan for 21 st Century Classrooms Benchmark 4-A-5: The district provides technology-rich classrooms, with access to devices such as digital projectors, electronic whiteboards, and student response systems. Clearly the district is committed to providing 21st century classrooms. This is evidenced by their recent investment in interactive whiteboard technology. However, in speaking with technology staff and administrators, it was evident that not everyone fully understood the initiative. Such understanding is necessary for widespread buy-in and support. The plan to further implement 21st century classrooms should include district staff at all levels and the purpose of the plan along with the plan itself should be communicated extensively. Protect District Data and Systems Every technology system should have a continuity plan should disaster strike. Disaster can be as localized as a flood, fire, or accidental sprinkler system deployment, or as big as an earthquake. In any event, the district should develop a backup and disaster recovery plan to ensure continuity of business and systems. Such a plan should also address the storage of key information. A person or group of people at Central Office has to be the keeper of all system logins and passwords, and should be able to view, at the administrative level, any system that belongs to the school district, including the help desk, the inventory database, the filtering policies, and all cloud-based systems. The superintendent, as the designated keeper of records by regulation, should have these records. Summary The school district is obviously committed to providing a robust and reliable technology infrastructure. However, work remains to be done. Page 14 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

The district needs to review the plan to refresh computers, and to continue to work toward improving the student to computer ratio at all levels. For all schools and districts, it is clear that one pressing infrastructure need is to provide fast and robust networks with the fastest Internet connection that districts can afford. As more software, resources, and storage move to the cloud, Internet bandwidth becomes an even more pressing issue. It is challenging to prioritize the recommendations made in this section. However, based on our knowledge of the district, our top priorities are: Improve student to computer ratio Adopt a computer refresh cycle of five years, restoring a laptop assigned to each teacher Continue to improve the bandwidth of the Internet connection Review the use of open-source software. In addition, one of the most important things that has to happen in planning for infrastructure, is to develop a plan that is based on the shared vision of educators, parents, and community members. The plan should have, at its core, a commitment to improving teaching and learning. Every infrastructure improvement should be directly related to a goal that is centered on teaching and learning or on the productivity and efficiency of the Northbridge Public Schools staff. The absence of a leader for the Technology Department makes it difficult for infrastructure decisions to reflect the needs of students and staff as agreed upon by a wideranging stakeholder group. Instead, such decisions are being made by the technology support team, who naturally, have a technical perspective. While a technical perspective is vital in making such decisions, it must be balanced with an educator s perspective one that understands more genuinely the needs of students and staff, and goals for teaching and learning. Page 15 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

Findings: Staffing Staffing Guiding Questions Do teachers have access to coaches during planning and while teaching? Is there a fullyfunctional and well-supported information technology department that maintains systems and provides coordinated services and curriculum support? Does the technology staff function as a cohesive unit that supports both of the functions of administration and teaching and learning? The state technology plan guidelines describe recommended minimum staffing levels in a variety of roles. There are four benchmarks that address staffing: Benchmark 2-C-1: The district has a district-level technology director/coordinator. Benchmark 2-C-2: The district provides one FTE instructional technology specialist per 60-120 instructional staff to coach and model. Benchmark 4-E-3: The district provides at least one FTE person to support 400 computers. Technical support can be provided by dedicated staff or contracted services. Benchmark 2-C-3: The district has staff specifically dedicated to data management and assessment. Commendations The district provides the technical support of three full-time staff members for the approximately 700 computers in the district, thus providing one FTE per approximately 233 computers. This exceeds the state guidelines. According to the staff surveyed, when they enter tickets in the help-desk, the ticket is most often addressed within a day (see graph below). Page 16 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

Help Desk System Summary, 3/23/10-3/23/11, as reported by the technology support team. 1863 total tickets closed 52,370 minutes to complete those tickets. 146 were account issues 425 Hardware 51 Instructional Technology 132 ipass 101 Moodle 257 Network 94 New Software/Hardware 85 password resets 39 Smart Board related 326 Software Issues 75 Teacher Website 51 Training issue/requests 35 Technology use 2 VoIP 40 Website changes/info This breakdown shows that the technicians address a wide variety of problems. Teachers report that issues entered into the help desk system are often resolved within a day. This is commendable. They report that they cleared 1863 tickets in a year and it took 52,370 minutes to clear the tickets. 52,370 minutes is the equivalent of 109 eight-hour days. The auditors commend such clear record keeping and the ability to report by category. Since not all requests are entered into the Help Desk system, this represents only a portion of the work done. Increasing the use of the Help Desk system would allow for more efficient deployment of staff and more accurate reporting. The district recognizes the importance of Instructional Technology Specialist support, and there is one person (one FTE) in this role. The district has a full-time person (one FTE), Information Systems Manager, whose role is to provide data management and data compliance for state reporting. In addition, Human Resources and the information systems manager work closely together to collaborate on staff data and accounts and are creating a form to streamline process. Benchmark 2-C-3: The district has staff specifically dedicated to data management and assessment. The district has Technology Teachers at each of the schools so that students have opportunities for direct instruction in technology skills. Page 17 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

Recommendations Add Instructional Technology Specialist Benchmark 2-C-2: The district provides one FTE instructional technology specialist per 60-120 instructional staff to coach and model. Northbridge Public Schools currently has only one FTE Instructional Technology Specialist, and thus does not meet this benchmark. It is recommended, based on current staffing levels, to have two to three instructional technology specialists. During interviews, the technology support team agreed that more Instructional Technology Specialist availability would help drive instructional use. Distribute Responsibility for Data Integrity Currently the Information Systems Manager submits data to the DESE, gets the error report, and then directly makes corrections in ipass. We recommend that the error reports are distributed to person/people responsible for data entry to make corrections. This will, over time, improve data integrity and accuracy. Additionally, we suggest that the job now titled, Information Systems Manager, could be reworked slightly to become, Data Compliance Specialist, and this could save the district money. Add a Coordinator/Director Position Benchmark 2-C-1: The district has a district-level technology director/coordinator. Northbridge Public Schools currently has no one unambiguously in a technology leadership role. CoSN (www.cosn.org) and other organizations that study technology leadership say that it is critical to have a leader who has both technical expertise and a solid educational foundation. Technology decisions should be made reflecting a strong understanding of the educational environment. During interviews, the technology support team said that the lack of an administrative leader in the department was a gap they felt should be closed. Provide Cross-Training, Share Information Outside of Technology Department During our conversations with both administrators and technology support team, it was learned that there are many areas of technical knowledge that are the exclusive domain of one support person. The district should require cross-training. Knowledge of a system should not reside with a single person. This will build redundancy of capabilities and knowledge to ensure efficiency, the ability to fill in for one another, and continuity of operations should anyone leave the employ of the schools. Reorganize Structure of Technology Department One of the questions we had in mind during the audit was, Does the technology staff function as a cohesive unit that supports both of the functions of administration and teaching and learning? We find that the department is heavily weighted toward the technical side, creating an imbalance that leaves educators fewer opportunities to work with an instructional coach or colleague to provide professional development. The department lacks direct and comprehensive leadership. In addition, the current structure does not facilitate a strong sense of accountability, collaboration, or communication. The regular reporting mechanisms may not be sufficient to ensure optimum collaboration and efficiency. Page 18 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

Currently, the Assistant Superintendent meets with the Instructional Technology Specialist on a regular basis. The Superintendent meets with the technology support team monthly. There is a liaison from the technology support team who attends the district leadership team meetings. Goal setting meetings are held by the Superintendent with each member of the technology support team at the beginning of the school year. Additionally, the budget dictates some of the goals for the year. On a typical day, given the expertise of the individuals and the technical issues that arise, they may be setting their own priorities. Department effectiveness could be improved with a clear and well-defined vision backed by over-arching priorities, and tighter communication practices. Summary School districts seldom have the luxury of having it all difficult decisions are made all the time (in all of our districts) between competing priorities. It appears that over time, decisions about staffing in technology have leaned a little more toward the technical strand rather than toward user support and professional development. The result for the Northbridge Public Schools technology department is that there is an imbalance in that staffing and there are now unmet needs for instructional technology support and leadership. This is especially true given the recent renewed commitment to 21st century, digital classrooms, and professional development the teachers will need to update their skills and practice. We suggest that the district reorganize the department in order to provide for those unmet needs. There are solutions that the district could use in order to begin to make strides without great costs in year one. For example, the district could hire a second instructional technology specialist whose role is both instructional technology support and department coordination. There could be a longterm goal on the part of the school department that if the person is successful in these roles the job could shift over time towards more coordination and leadership. The highest priorities under staffing are: Provide Technology Department Leadership through Coordinator or Director Role. Add an Instructional Technology Specialist. Reorganize the structure of the Technology Department. Provide cross-training and sharing information outside of the department. Page 19 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

Findings: Teaching & Learning Teaching and Learning Guiding Questions Are teachers modeling technology learning and growth in a Professional Learning Community? Are educators prepared to use technology for teaching and learning? Are educators skilled in creating learning environments to capitalize on the impact that technology has on learning? Is technology fully integrated throughout curriculum, instruction, and assessment, in order to ensure 21 st century outcomes? Commendations All new hires participate in a 90-minute orientation in technology addressing email, ipass and Moodle. There is a district-wide Instructional Technology Specialist who collaborates with teachers to integrate technology into their lessons. The central office staff felt proficient in the use of the software programs they use relative to their functions in the organization. The principals interviewed were supportive of technology integration within their school buildings. The middle school program, under the guidance of the Technology Teacher, covers a wide array of technology topics in Grades 5-8. The technology teacher s outline that was shared during the interview clearly articulates the Massachusetts (DESE) Technology Literacy Standards that are being taught. Students are experiencing a multitude of web 2.0 during these valuable classes. The technology topics and projects the students were doing were very impressive. The instructions and guides for the students are available through the Moodle server. Benchmark 2-B-1: At least 90% of eighth grade students show proficiency in all the Massachusetts Technology Literacy Standards and Expectations for grade eight. Students are required to take two technology electives at the high school as a graduation requirement. This requirement ensures that students graduate the Northbridge School District with some skills and knowledge relating to technology. The district-wide SmartBoard initiative is in support of 21 st century classrooms, and teaching and learning. Recommendations Provide Focused and Meaningful Professional Development Opportunities Benchmark 3-C: Professional development planning includes an assessment of district and teachers' needs. The assessment is based on the competencies listed in the Massachusetts Technology Self-Assessment Tool. Although the majority of the central office staff felt proficient with the use of most of the software programs, they felt that more structured training for the MUNIS program would enable them to use the full functionality of the program. Page 20 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

Currently there are multiple areas that resources are found for the organization which includes folders in First Class, shared folder on network, Moodle server with no consistency, direction or routine purging of documents maintained. It is suggested to use one conduit to share common forms, curriculum guides, and other district/school. We recommend that the district schedule training for administrators including principals to use resources available both in the district and on the web to optimize efficiency and streamline processes. In addition, training should be provided to expand the use of First Class as a collaborative tool throughout the organization. Hire a District-level Technology Director/Coordinator Benchmark 2-C-1: The district has a district-level technology director/coordinator. There is little or no evidence of horizontal or vertical alignment for PK-8 technology classes/curriculum. The technology teachers have little direction or guidance from any administrator. Limited supervision regarding curriculum is provided at the building level, as well. During the interview, it was stated that the technology teachers had met through their own initiative a couple of times but not consistently. In order for the technology teachers to build a cohesive program from Grades PK-12 they must have an opportunity to participate in scheduled meeting times throughout the school year. These programs can impact the development of the students 21 st century skills. It is recommended that the guidance and coordination of programs for Grades PK -12 be done by a district level technology coordinator/director. Coordinate the Purchase and Implementation of Assistive Technology Benchmark 4-A-3: The district maximizes access to the general education curriculum for all students, including students with disabilities, using universal design principles and assistive technology devices. The technology staff and the Special Education department should work closely together to ensure that through technology, access to the curriculum is maximized for all students. Universal Design for Learning (UDL) should be considered when purchasing and implementing technology resources. Review and Enhance Technology Curriculum and Integration It is the recommendation of the auditors to align the curriculum with the state technology literacy standards and with the state frameworks. We recommend reviewing the technology program PK through 12 to ensure vertical and horizontal alignment and integration into all classrooms. Currently, skills taught in the technology courses are not always further developed in the content courses. This impedes the students abilities to develop these skills to a higher level. Without additional staffing (Instructional Technology Specialist) this is unlikely to occur. Share Current Instructional Guides for Staff The instructional guides, websites, and videos located on the Moodle server for students could be a great resource to share with staff. This would enable them to build their proficiency level and also build an awareness of what the students are learning in the technology literacy classes. Page 21 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

Provide Extended Learning Pathways Provide relevant opportunities and certificate programs to effectively educate students for school to work. Increase Teacher Proficiency Level to Support Technology Integration Benchmark 2-A-1: Outside Teaching Time At least 90% of teachers use technology every day, including some of the following areas: research, lesson planning, organization, administrative tasks, communications, and collaboration. Teachers explore evolving technologies and share information about technology uses with their colleagues. The survey results show that teachers concentrate their use in more basic technology areas. The table inserted below shows how often teachers use technology in their classroom for various purposes. For example, more teachers responded that they use technology for looking for information on the internet and for electronic communication (emails & newsletters). Teachers are not always using available technologies to their fullest power, to promote 21 st skills. This indicates a need for more professional development and the support and coaching from an instructional technology specialist to increase proficiency and comfort in using these technologies. This information is filtered to display data only from teachers. Please note that for five of the task areas that we asked about, the most prominent response is never. Benchmark 2-A-2: For Teaching and Learning - At least 90% of teachers use technology appropriately with students every day to improve student learning of the curriculum. Activities include some of the following: research, multimedia, simulations, data analysis, Page 22 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

communications, and collaboration. Teachers integrate evolving technologies that enhance student interest, inquiry, analysis, collaboration, and creativity. Benchmark 2-B-2: 100% of teachers are working to meet the proficiency level in technology, and by the school year 2014-2015, 90% of teachers will have mastered 90% of the skills in the Massachusetts Technology Self-Assessment Tool (TSAT). This information is filtered to display answers only from teachers. The higher responses were under not applicable and never. This is consistent with the proficiency level of the teachers as articulated in the summary. The use of technology that is the highest is the use the internet to look for information. This does not reflect a level of technology integration that would impact student learning. Develop District Technology Professional Development Plan Benchmark 3-A: At the end of five years, at least 90% of district staff will have participated in high-quality, ongoing professional development that includes emerging technology issues, technology skills, universal design, and research-based models of technology integration. Benchmark 3-B: Technology professional development is sustained and ongoing and includes coaching, modeling best practices, district-based mentoring, study groups, and online professional development. Page 23 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

The development of a multiyear professional development plan for teachers will provide teachers and administrators a clear understanding of the district s expectations as it relates to technology. This plan should be developed by a committee comprised of staff and administrators. This committee should be in addition to the technology committee recommended to develop a multiyear technology plan. The focus of this committee will be to design a multiyear professional development plan that will build the proficiency levels of teachers and will be in line with the district goals. A strong recommendation is to capture district/school time which would include early release, professional development days, and other district time to offer professional development. Providing professional development on district time will enable systemic change for the school district. Otherwise, participants selfselect, which most often results in pockets of excellence and limited saturation throughout the district. Of the number of people with SmartBoards the findings showed that the use of the resources in the classroom is spread over a continuum of motivated adopters to reluctant bystanders. One area of concentration would be to focus on SmartBoard training at various levels offered during the district time with the concentration of developing technology integration lessons. Summary The Massachusetts Teacher Self-Assessment Tool (TSAT) and the National Educational Technology Standards (NETs) for teachers are guiding documents that clearly outline the recommended proficiency level for teachers. The district should strive to have all the teachers reach the Proficiency level of the TSAT. At the proficiency level, the teacher has developed an ability to infuse technology in various aspects of the learning process to include curriculum, instruction, and assessment. Currently, within the school district, the survey results clearly show that the majority of the teachers are at Early Technology level with some at the Developing Technology level. Since there are many factors that impact the ability of educators to attain the Proficiency level, the recommendations in this report will outline the steps and resources necessary to guide the teachers in the district to become proficient users of technology for teaching and learning at a level that will impact student learning. Along with the TSAT, the Massachusetts Department of Secondary and Elementary Education provides Technology Benchmarks. Technology plans that address the benchmarks as outlined in that document should help to support a successful implementation for technology use in both the administrative and educational aspects of the school district. Recommendations we suggest should be high priority are: Provide focused professional development to address the district s initiatives, including the SmartBoard. Provide technology leadership through a district-wide Coordinator or Technology Director to ensure a deliberate and cohesive system, with coordination for both integration and technical resources. Develop a multiyear professional development plan for technology integration to support the teachers in multiple modalities with a focus on the district s initiative of 21 st century classrooms with SmartBoards Page 24 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

Consider the purchase of Microsoft Office to support the high school program and district coordination of document sharing. Page 25 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

Findings: Leadership Leadership Guiding Questions Has the district developed a vision that guides the implementation of technology? Is the vision widely known and shared by all and is it regularly evaluated, refocused, and revised? Are all stakeholders committed to the vision? Does the vision drive planning, and are both focused on educational outputs and instructional goals? Do administrators recognize exemplary use of technology in instruction and do they provide constructive feedback to teachers on their technology use? Is there a coordinated funding strategy to meet the goals of the technology plan? Commendations: Absent any explicit technology leadership, the current Superintendent and Assistant Superintendent have, along with their other extensive duties, been coordinating the efforts of this department. The district has developed and posted a Bullying Prevention and Intervention Plan which includes cyberbullying. The district has a website that has extensive information available for both parents and the community. The district has publicly posted the AUP and Internet Policy on the district website. Each year the district requires a signature from a parent for both policies. Recommendations Develop Clear Vision and Implementation Strategies Benchmark 1-A: The district's technology plan contains a clearly stated and reasonable set of goals and implementation strategies that align with the district-wide school improvement plan. The district is committed to achieving its vision by the end of the school year 2014-2015. Benchmark 1-B: The district has a technology team with representatives from a variety of stakeholder groups, including school committee members, administrators, and teachers. The technology team has the full support of the school superintendent to implement the plan. The current Technology Plan was developed by the Technology Department with limited input from any of the school staff, including administrators. The Technology Plan must be developed by key stakeholders including administration, technology coordinator/director, teachers, parents, and community members. This interrelated group will ensure the alignment of the Technology Plan with the District Plan and will build support for ongoing budget and staffing needs. The Technology Plan should be used to support the budget and personnel requests for the school district relative to technology. The plan should clearly outline goals and strategies which will enable the school district to monitor the progress of the school district as it relates to technology to support teaching and learning. Page 26 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

Hire a District-level Technology Director/Coordinator Benchmark 2-C-1: The district has a district-level technology director/coordinator. Currently, the focus for the technology department is almost entirely on the technical aspects of the organization with limited focus on the education components necessary to infuse technology into the curriculum. Although it is necessary to have the technological components in place, a successful technology program requires a balance, with the primary focus on teaching and learning. This crucial position should be held by someone with a strong educational background and an understanding of the technological components to support both the educational and administrative functions of the organization. A successful person in this position would have skills in project management and would be able to make decisions regarding technology software and infrastructure that demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the technical information while at the same time keeping the needs of students and staff in mind. Provide Clear Guidelines Regarding Electronic Communication During the interviews, we heard that there is some uncertainty relative to electronic communication to parents. Are administrators and teachers to use the district website, send emails, or distribute electronic newsletters? Guidelines regarding the expectations for both administrators and staff would be a recommendation. Summary Throughout the interviews, people were unable to state that there was a shared vision and few had any knowledge of the current Technology Plan. The Technology Plan was developed and completed solely by the Technology Department. The lack of input from key stakeholders has impeded the growth of the infusion of technology for teaching and learning throughout the organization. A shared vision and a clearly articulated plan would build a cohesive understanding and guidelines for administrators when purchasing resources, developing school goals, and communicating to parents and the community about the needs for their school buildings. Some of the recommendations for leadership are: Develop a long-range, comprehensive Technology Plan. Create a vision for technology that is shared by all staff and administrators. Hire someone in a leadership role to guide the district technology department. Establish clear guidelines for electronic communication. Page 27 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

Appendix A Survey Questions The survey was administered online. Here are the questions that comprised the staff survey. Page 28 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

Appendix B Data Systems DATA SYSTEMS (If Yes specify) SPED Library Parent Notification System Health Cafeteria Student Information System Financial Staff Information Management System (tracking for DESE Reporting, certification, etc Professional Development Email Professional Dev Tracking Website Security Portal (LMS) Online Course What systems if any are integrated with each other?? Integrated is defined as using a SIF integrator/script to update information on a regular basis. ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTION Attendance Progress/Report Cards Electronic Gradebook MCAS Analysis SPECIFICS esped Koha Connect Ed ipass NutriKids ipass MUNIS ipass ipass, Moodle FirstClass ipass Drupal Moodle Moodle Novell LDAP server connected to Moodle, Drupal. Ipass server updates to NutriKids and ConnectED ipass ipass ipass State Data Warehouse Page 39 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

NETWORK INFORMATION Help Desk/Ticket System (Name of System) (Y/N) Liberum Virtualization Servers? Product used (Y/N) VMware 4.0 Virtualization to desktop (Y/N) no Connectivity between Buildings Fiber Connectivity within Buildings Wireless, Ethernet Inventory Management (Software, Hardware) zcm (Novell) Wireless Infrastructure AeroHive Security on Wireless AeroHive Manager Protocol for network services, etc..(i.e. Active Directory) LDAP Policies in place AUP, ISP VPN Specified Users, Remote access (specific use of this resource) Email. Ipass Antivirus software Avira Spyware software Avira Content Filtering Marshall 8e6 Drupal, GIMP, Windows Movie Maker, OpenOffice, Website development software district Google Picasa, Audacity Drupal, GIMP, Windows Movie Maker, OpenOffice, Website development for teachers Google Picasa, Audacity FC Archive Services, Backup Archiving services/product Exec Anti-spam software/hardware Barracuda Imaging software zcm Backup system and protocols Backup Exec 2010 Disaster recovery plans/protocols/systems In Process of being Updated 13 file/print,web, and email Number of servers and specific tasks server OTHER Heating Systems, Maintenance Systems Security (i.e. security badges) Phone systems Facility Scheduling System Copiers/Scanners Niagara Framework ID Badges, Code Entry into buildings ip Phone Beacon Leased, Scanners HP Page 40 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go

Other Software Resources Discovery Education Streaming ThinkCentral (StoryTown online) Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI) Scholastic Reading Counts (SRC) Pearson SuccessNet Inspiration SMART Notebook OpenOffice Microsoft Office Scratch ML Test Generator ExamView Microsoft Publisher Type To Learn JR WJ3 Writer Reporter Zap Around Town Type To Learn 3 Virtual Business Trudys Time in Place TimeLiner Studio MX (Macromedia) SMART Response Sammy's Science House Rigby PrintShop Millies Math House Mavis Beacon Math Arena KidPix 3 InkScape IceCream Truck EasyBook Cross Country Safari Co-Writer Board Maker ArcView CamStudio Orchard Math West Point Bridge Design Educational Videos StoryTown online reading assessment program independent reading math online concept mapping interactive presentation Office Suite Office Suite programming language test/assessment software test/assessment software publishing software typing program Assessment mapping and direction skills Typing program Instructional Software Instructional Software Instructional Software Creative Suite Student Response Software Instructional Software Instructional Software publishing software Instructional Software Instructional Software Instructional Software bitmap drawing program Vector Graphics Editor Instructional Software book-publishing too Instructional Software word-prediction PCS Software GIS Screen Recording Software Instructional Software Bridge Design Software Page 41 of 39 Technology Audit CTO to Go