| A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | This is a generic technology integration rubric designed to evaluate a whole integration. Use the Evaluation drop-downs to select your evaluation; the appropriate box will colour based on your selection. Add additional evaluation comments as you see fit to inform how the element needs to be improved. | |||||||
2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | Evaluation | Overall Evaluation | ||
3 | Financial and Leadership support | Budget/Governor support | Funding is secured for a three year rollout with training included. A contingency for damages and unexpected necessities | Funding is secured for a three year rollout with training included | Funding is secured for a one year pilot | Funding is secured for a small/short pilot | 3 | |
4 | Administration support | The lead Administrator/Head of School is heading the project and is already modelling the use of the technology | One of the lead Administrators is heading the project and is already modelling the use of the technology | One of the lead Administrators are heading the project | None of the lead Administrators are heading the project | 1 | ||
5 | Learning Technologists | There is a team of 2 or 3 individuals with responsibility for performing this role, along with multiple faculty personel with release time to coach within departments. | There is a small team of 2 or 3 individuals with responsibility for performing this role | There is one person with responsibility for performing this role | There is one person performing an unpaid role | 2 | ||
6 | Policy | As for 3. The school has fully embraced the power of the collaboration and networking to the point that it provides communication channels with parents through Twitter/Facebook or other Social Networking platforms. | A Learning Technology policy that outlines appropriate use by teachers and students, and provides guidelines for professional, collaborative, social networking skills. The policy has a strong vision and outlines goals for the use and future of technology in the school. The value of technology to the school is evident and necessary, embedding itself in all functions of the school. | A Learning Technology policy that begins to outline appropriate use by teachers and students, and begins to provide guidance on social networking and netiquette for all. | A Learning Technology policy is in its infancy or does not exist | 1 | ||
7 | Plan | The school has a yearly and 3 to 5 year plan for technology intgration at all levels of the school. Renewal of devices, training, additional software pruchases, tech support, hardware and software support, infrastructure renewal/enhancement, backup, are all considered. | The school has a 3 to 5 year plan for technology intgration at all levels of the school. Training, tech support, hardware and software support, infrastructure renewal/enhancement all considered. | The school has a yearly plan that covers hardware, software and training but lacks full infrastructure development | The school has an ad-hoc, reactionary approach to technology acquisition and integration | 3 | ||
8 | Financial and Leadership support overall evaluation and comments | 2 | ||||||
9 | ||||||||
10 | Technical Support | Personnel | There is a Systems Administrator/Technology Director with a team of tech support staff with devisions of skill to cover all the schools systems. Tech support staff are confident and prepared to team-teach/coach staff. | The is a team of tech support staff with devisions of skill to cover all the schools systems | There is one individual who deals with all issues | There is no personnel specifically employed | 1 | |
11 | Hardware/ Software | The tech team are capable of fixing devices inhouse and are skilled with all systems and platforms. Hardware is provided by a vendor and support is part of the contract. All devices and hardware are insured against accidental breakage and theft (Police report required). Software is all fully licensed with support available. | The tech team are capable of fixing devices inhouse and are skilled with all systems and platforms. Hardware has been bought and is owned by the school and is insured. Most software is licensed with support available. | The tech team are capable of fixing devices inhouse and are skilled with all systems and platforms. Hardware has been bought and is owned by the school but is not insured. Some software is licensed with support available. | Hardware has been bought and is owned by the school but is not insured. Software is not licensed and does not have support available. | 1 | ||
12 | Technical Support overall evaluation and comments | 1 | ||||||
13 | ||||||||
14 | Communication | Parents | As for 3. A full Concerns Based Adoption Model questionnaire is provided to these stakeholders and they are involved at all stages of the integration until the evaluation of the outcomes is performed. | Are involved from the beginning of the project and their input is sought as to the path forward | Are told what will be happening | Not communcated with | - | |
15 | Teachers | As for 3. A full Concerns Based Adoption Model questionnaire is provided to these stakeholders and they are involved at all stages of the integration until the evaluation of the outcomes is performed. | Are involved from the beginning of the project and their input is sought as to the path forward | Are told what will be happening | Not communcated with | - | ||
16 | Students | As for 3. A full Concerns Based Adoption Model questionnaire is provided to these stakeholders and they are involved at all stages of the integration until the evaluation of the outcomes is performed. | Are involved from the beginning of the project and their input is sought as to the path forward | Are told what will be happening | Not communcated with | - | ||
17 | Communication overall evaluation and comments | |||||||
18 | ||||||||
19 | Integration plan | Technical | A multiple phase plan is designed with the Core IT team testing in Phase one and the Innovators involved later as part of the Diffusion of Innovations plan. All bugs are identified and removed in the first phase. The tech team liaise and work beside the teachers throughout the integration; they are proactive and effective. | A multiple phase plan is designed with the Core IT team testing in Phase one and the Innovators involved later. | Technology is released to staff without testing | No plan | - | |
20 | Teachers | A plan based on Roger's Diffusion of Innovations is developed. Innovators and Early Adopters are identified and involved in the planning of the trial. A review of the trial findings leads to changes in the 2nd and 3rd phases of the trial or may cause the integration to be abandoned. Administrators fully trust the Innovators and Early Adopters. Training is provided during multiple whole days along with weekly support and extension sessions. Innovators develop templates for less tech-savvy staff to use. | Innovators are identified and given the technology to trial. After this trial all staff are giving the technology with some training. Advice from the trial may not be regarded by the Administration as to the suitability of the technology for the whole school. | The technology is purchased and placed in the classrooms. Training is ad-hoc and the teachers are expected to give up their own time to learn the tech. | The technology is purchased and placed in the classrooms | - | ||
21 | Students | Students are involved at all levels of the diffusion and act as triallers along side the teachers. Their opinions matter and decisions change due to their input. | Students are involved at all levels of the diffusion and act as triallers along side the teachers. Their opinions don't really matter and decisions won't change due to their input. | A class of students are used to test the integration with. There feedback is callected and used to find bugs in the system. | Not involved | - | ||
22 | Integration plan overall evaluation and comments | |||||||
23 | ||||||||
24 | Professional Development/ Training | Teachers/Staff/ Administrators | Teachers are given access to the technology 6 to 12 months in advance of the need to use it. They are provided with resources to use and emulate. They are given multiple whole days of INSET training depending on the size of the integration involved. They are provided with release time to develop resources and collaborate. They are given incentives to use the technology. Training companies are retained to deliver bespoke sessions. | Teachers are given access to the technology 1 to 3 months ahead of the students. They are offered training after school or during their lunchbreaks. Some incentive is offered in that paid PD opportunities may be provided to those who commit. | Teachers are given access to the technology at the same time as the students. They are offered training after school or during their lunchbreaks. | Teachers are expected to learn the technology by themselves without support of any kind. | - | |
25 | Students | Students are given more than one lesson with an IT teacher to learn the new technology and support sessions at lunch and after school are available. All teachers are competent users and model the use of the technologies at all times; teachers support students in all classes. Training videos are available through the VLE. | Students are given one lesson with an IT teacher to learn the new technology and support session at lunch and after school are available. | Students are given one lesson with an IT teacher to learn the new technology | Students are not given training | - | ||
26 | Parents | Parents are invited to a morning training session to learn how to use and support their children's use of the tech. Further twilight sessions each half term are in place for parents to attend and improve their skills. Training videos are available through the VLE. | Parents are invited to a morning training session to learn how to use and support their children's use of the tech. | Parents are sent links to relevant information and training resources online | Parents are not given training | - | ||
27 | Professional Development/Training overall evaluation and comments | |||||||
28 | ||||||||
29 | Timeline | Project | A timeline for integration exists that informs all phases of integration relating to testing, release, responsibilities and project evaluation | A timeline for integration exists that informs all phases of integration relating to testing and release | A timeline for integration exists but only informs major dates of release | No timeline | - | |
30 | Professional Development | A timeline for PD exists that informs main professional development days and regularly weekly sessions linked with initiatives. All training events throguhout the year in the local area and nationally are included and offered | A timeline for PD exists that informs main professional development days and regularly weekly sessions linked with initiatives | A timeline for PD exists but only informs main INSET days | No timeline | - | ||
31 | Timeline overall evaluation and comments | |||||||
32 | ||||||||
33 | Overall Evaluation | 1.5 | ||||||
34 | ||||||||