Digital Directions - Fall 2012 - (Page 23)

7-to-1 ratio of students to devices. The state found its schools have 197,898 devices available for online testing, but only 67,038 met new device standards, which excluded machines using Windows XP, for example, since Microsoft has said it plans to stop supporting the program. Only five districts met the minimum device-readiness requirements, and only two districts met both the device- and network-readiness guidelines for online testing, says Carol Mosley, the K-12 E-rate director and a management consultant for the Louisiana Department of Education. But Mosley says she’s working closely with districts and feels confident that small upgrades and investments will put many more schools in the “ready” category. The state is also being creative about helping districts find refurbished devices to purchase, grouping districts together for buying power, and pushing districts to share technology know-how. The districts “don’t have to depend just on the state. They can rely on each other, too,” Mosley says. “We’re all in this boat together.” ‘Source of Anxiety’ The reality is there’s a vast range of common-core technology readiness among states. Some already do their state assessments online; others still use paper and pencil. And some states have collected significant data on schools’ technology profiles, while others have not. Georgia, for example, already had a statewide technology survey in place and submitted that information through the readiness tool. The state offers districts the ability to administer state assessments online, though many haven’t done so. “Some districts haven’t dipped their toe into online testing, and they are really, really hesitant,” says Melissa Fincher, Georgia’s associate superintendent for assessment and accountability. “There are so many unknowns about the [common core] assessment. We know there’s going to be a deficit, but we don’t yet know where we stand.” In neighboring Tennessee, the assistant commissioner for curriculum and instruction, Emily Barton, predicts that inadequate bandwidth and devices will be two big technology problems for schools. “Overall, this is definitely a source of anxiety for everyone in the country, not just Tennessee,” she says. Since schools still do not know how long the common-core tests will take to administer, it’s hard to determine the number of devices that might be needed. “There are many answers that are not yet firm, so we can’t easily fix on the number of devices we’re going to need,” she says. Some of those uncertainties are causing problems for school districts in South Dakota, says Jim Holbeck, the superintendent of the state’s 3,000-student Harrisburg district, who is also president of the School Administrators of South Dakota and the South Dakota School Superintendents Association. Schools still aren’t sure which devices to buy, but want to make sure students are familiar with using those devices well before they have to take the online common assessments, he says. “Our fear is, are we going to have a test that accurately shows what our kids know, or will the results be unreliable because the kids are taking it in a different format?” he says. In addition, bandwidth is a huge concern for districts, Holbeck says. The state provides a minimum level of bandwidth, he adds, “but if we want more, we have to pay for it,” and school budgets have little extra money. (See related story, Page 19.) In Washington state, Raj Manhas, the superintendent of the 14,000-student North Thurston schools, says districts must turn to the voters for approval on tax levies for technology purchases. Twice in recent years, voters have rejected technology levies for his district. A general fund levy was approved, however, and Manhas is using part of that money to buy new devices for the common core. But he’s concerned about the “technology gap” between districts that serve wealthier communities and districts with lower-income families. While he fully supports the concept of common standards, Manhas says that “sometimes when national policies are made, the corresponding resources are not planned for.” n Education Week Assistant Editor Catherine Gewertz contributed to this article. READINESS QUESTIONS TO ASK 1. What are your digitalconversion planning objectives and how will they support implementing the common core and preparing for the new college- and career-ready assessments? Have you developed a phased plan for improved access that incorporates textbook and open-resources savings? 2. ? Fall 2012_ Digital Directions >> What resources can be reallocated to support deployment? What savings can be secured through adoption of digital resources? 3. Have you supported adoption of blendedlearning models that leverage teacher talent? 4. SOURCE: Digital Learning Now! 23 

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Digital Directions - Fall 2012

Digital Directions - Fall 2012
Contents
Editor's Note
DD Site Visit
Bits & Bytes
Shifting to Adaptive Testing
Tailoring the Tests To Special Needs?
Choosing the Right Device
Bandwidth Demand Rising
Are You Ready?
Where’s the Money?
High-Priority Virtual PD
Online PD Destinations
Virtual Ed. Dives In to the Common Core
Open Education Resources Surge
Security

Digital Directions - Fall 2012

http://dd.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/dd_2013summer
http://dd.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/dd_2013winter
http://dd.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/dd_2012fall
http://dd.edweek.org/nxtbooks/epe/dd_2012springsummer
https://www.nxtbookmedia.com