Site+Visit+Notes

//Please enter the answers to our site questions under each appropriate question (labeling to which site it refers), and put overall observations about what was learned at the end.//


 * Questions for School Districts Implementing a 1 to 1 program **


 * // Background and Demographics //**

**How long have you had your 1 to 1 program in place? Give us an overview of how this began**. ** DAVIESS CTY, KY : 6 Years. It was a top down implementation with the vision coming from the previous Superintendent. He had visited a 1 to 1 conference (or perhaps school) sponsored by Apple and was convinced of it's value and had it implemented within one year. Current Superintendent is just as passionate about it and believes it's just 'meeting the students were they are'. He admits that there are problems with allowing access to 'social networking' sites but believes that they need to find a way to allow it eventually (currently they aren't) and in a perfect world, would even like to see cell phone usage allowed (noted that kids don't check email, only text messages etc). **

**CSG:** 4 Years. Was originally the brain child the Technology Integrator and Associate Head of Schools and was going to be an endowment which specified anonymity. The endownment fell through in the final hour. Teachers received their tablets at the same time as students (May2006) and found out only months before that this was going to happen. The headmistress was very dedicated to this process and had she along with the Board members not made a committment, the program would have been aborted. They faced many disgruntled teachers and parents. The residue of the initial problems are still seen in the senior class. The younger students and their parents are quite supportive. It just goes to show that initial fire storms do subside.

**University Hts:** Started in 2008-2009 school year. 2007-08: All middle school teachers. 2008-09: Monticello MS students, grades 6-8. 2008-09: Roxboro & Wiley MS students in grade 8. 2009-10: All MS, grades 6-8. 2010-11: HS students in grades 9-10. 2011-12: HS students in grades 11-12. 2012-13: Annually replenish in grades 6 & 9.

**Beachwood:** Started 7th and 8th grade in 2003. Tried to start at the HS, but it was met with much resistance -- they weren't ready to implement with the variety of courses and # of grade levels mixed into various courses; they couldn't work it out. MS was most receptive so it is now implemented in 7th and 8th grade; carts at 6th grade (they feel 6th graders can't handle it).

** SUA: ** 12 years for faculty; 4 for studetns. Vision came from the HeadMistress after a site visit.

** DAVIESS CTY, KY : Programme is implemented 100% in the districts two High Schools; 1,400 students in one and 1,700 in another. All teachers have computers. When asked about how many teachers were really 'engaged and onboard' with the programme, answers ranged from 75% (Principal of school we visited) to 100% (teacher group). Superintendent would like to see it implemented beginning in the Middle School. **
 * How many teachers are involved with this program? How many schools are involved?**

**CSG:** All teachers and just the upper school (grades 9-12). No funding currently to move this lower, but would like to.

**University Hts:**

2007-08: All middle school teachers. 2008-09: Monticello MS students, grades 6-8. 2008-09: Roxboro & Wiley MS students in grade 8. 2009-10: All MS, grades 6-8. 2010-11: HS students in grades 9-10. 2011-12: HS students in grades 11-12. 2012-13: Annually replenish in grades 6 & 9. **Beachwood:** 30-45 staff

** Bishiop Hartley: ** Only Junior and Senior teachers. Totals about 64 faculty.

** SUA: ** 55 all at one building

** DAVIESS CTY, KY : ** Two High Schools; 1,400 students in one and 1,700 in another.
 * How many students in your school/district have their own laptop?**

**CSG:** 250 students plus about 100 staff.

** Bishiop Hartley: ** Only Juniors and Seniors. Totals about 500. 98% of their students already have computer access at home.

**Beachwood:** 320 students in grades 7 and 8. Carts in classrooms at 6th grade. HS is allowed to bring their own, but only have a 10% participation.

**University Hts:** 475-500 students at a grade level in MS so approximately 1654 middle school students plus 142 staff.

** SUA: ** 672

* ** If you have not included K-2 in this plan, do you plan to? ** DAVIESS CTY, KY : Currently in the Districts two high schools; Superintendent would like to see it rolled out to Middle School but there are no plans to do so (funding for the High Schools is precarious enough). **
 * What grade levels do you serve with your program?

**CSG:** Upper school only (9-12)

** Bishiop Hartley: ** Only Juniors and Seniors. They don't feel Fresh/Soph can handle it (they use carts at this level). They feel they need grades 9/10 to adjust to HS life (work on things like study habits). Specifically, they list the amount Freshmen and Sophomores have to learn/adjust to for HS, the cost, using it as a carrot for attention and not trusting them to safely transport it between home and school as the reason they only supply tablets to juniors and seniors.

This program is voluntary in the junior year, but they have 100% participation. At the end, 1 or 2 give them back because they are too much distraction. They borrow computers in the classrooms if they don't have it.

** Beachwood: ** 7th and 8th grade only. Carts in 6th grade.

**University Hts:** 6-8 currently. Planning to move to HS. See above for implementation.

** SUA: ** 9-12

** DAVIESS CTY, KY : **
 * If your program is not currently in all grade levels or content areas, do you plan a full implementation in the future? Why or why not?**
 * Currently in the Districts two high schools; Superintendent would like to see it rolled out to Middle School but there are no plans to do so (funding for the High Schools is precarious enough). **

**CSG:** Would like to move it downward, but currently don't have funding identified.

** Bishiop Hartley: ** No. They are content to keep it at grades 11 & 12 for the reasons stated above (maturity, future motivation, trust issues and cost).

** Beachwood: ** They would like to see this move down to the Elementary School level (there is some enthusiasm there for it). Are currently trying to work through moving to HS (tried unsuccessfully to start here).

**University Hts:** Only located at the Middle School. Tried to initially implement at the HS, but the teachers werent' ready for it. Are currently in the planning phase at the HS. Meeting with Dept Heads to start planning for next year.

** DAVIESS CTY, KY : ** Began with Grade 9 and then added one grade per year. Did a major Professional Development for all teachers in the summer prior to the roll out to Grade 9.
 * Did you initially pilot this program? If so, at what grade level or content area and why?**

**CSG:** They rolled this program out one grade level at a time starting with Grade 9.

**University Hts:** Started a full building in 2008-2009 as their pilot (they selected the building that participated with them on site visits); after that decided to just start at 8th grade in the other schools. Are currently in the planning phase with the HS.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** Indirectly -- had a pilot program of one classroom withlaptops and the curriculum was digital. It was called a paperless pilot program where all the students used laptops in one particular english class. This classroom was selected because the teacher was forward-thinking.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** DAVIESS CTY, KY : Instead of doing one large training for all teachers prior to the implementation in Grade 9, they would recommend ONLY training those teachers that were going to have kids with computers the following year. They found that Senior teachers had forgotten everything they learned in the PD from 3 years previously. **
 * Knowing what you know now, would you approach this differently today?**

**CSG:** They would have had teachers more engaged in the initial planning of the process (but had been prohibited by the speciications in the potential endowment). There would also have been more training and involvement of parents initially (they modified that in subsequent years). The head mistress and the tech facilitator we spoke with both emphasized that no amount of preplanning can identify all road blocks. They felt strongly that it important to plan as best as possible, but to be flexible and adjust to challenges as they arise.

**Bishop Hartley:** They left the parents out of training at first. Now they have meetings specifically for parents to let them know what to expect. Did have an issue with the Father taking over the laptop and not giving it to his student to use! Initially just gave it to students first (not teachers) and did no training for students in the summer.

**University Hts:** Unsure.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** No.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** DAVIESS CTY, KY; Bishoph Hartley, CSG, University Hts and SUA: **
 * Did your implementation approach differ between grade levels?**
 * No. **

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** DAVIESS CTY, KY : No. They did provide some power strips to all classrooms for students that may have not charged their laptops. **
 * Did you have to modify your physical plant in any way to accommodate 1:1 (lockers, power, etc.)? (aside from the addition of wireless).**

**CSG:** No, but will soon remodel some to include more electrical outlets in classroom and better lighting for projectors (to dim by projectors)

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** Beachwood: ** New school was built for 1:1. However, they don't have enough outlet space (MAC batteries don't last all day).

**University Hts:** They started 4 years ago with a ground-up rewiring ($600,000-$700,000 per building); then increased their access to the internet to 120M (ours is 250M burstable to 500M).

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA and Bishop Hartley: ** No.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** DAVIESS CTY, KY : They did a pilot project with tablets in one class and both the kids and the teacher much preferred the tablets. There were concerns that the tablets wouldn't stand up to the four years of student use (but they didn't check into it). We suspect it was a cost issue that prevented the further rollout of tablets. They were moving towards netbooks (or versions thereof) to reduce cost and make them easier for the kids to move around. **
 * Did you evaluate laptops vs. tablets? What drove your decision of one over the other?**

**CSG:** It was never an issue when they saw all the tablets could do. Didn't want to limit their students or staff. They found research from UPenn that women don't like barriers -- tablets and working in tablet mode eliminates that. This sentiment was reinforced at CCDS. Rob Baker made the salient point that laptops are a productivity tool, while tablets are a creative tool. Since critical thinking is closely linked to creativity, it makes sense to go with tablets.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** Beachwood: ** No. They purchased Apple laptops -- the district was a MAC district before. Apple had incentives and it was a single source purchase with no competition. HS is PC-based. They are re-evaluating tihs decision since they can by 2.5 PCs for each MACbook.

**University Hts:** They did not. Budget kept them with laptops. The decision to go with MACbooks was made at the Superintendent level (the former Superintendent was a MAC fan). They found the MACs are NOT more sturdy than the Windows machines. It also seems the timeframes for repair are much more elongated. Their laptop is $1200.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** No. The ability to write on the tablet and the flexibility of it made it the only option.

**<span style="font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 10pt;">How many traditional labs or other computers do you still have for student/classroom use? DAVIESS CTY, KY : ** We didn't ask this questions specifically, however, we did see some computers in a couple of classrooms and when we enquired about their specific use, we were told that if a child didn't have a loptop (e.g. forgot to bring it) they could use the PCs.

**CSG:** They have one remaining lab which is one less than what they had. At both CCDS and CSG students used thier tablets as comfortable as most students use books. Having 1 to 1 capabilities cut down on trips to the lab, on time getting carts, and on wasted instructional time logging on to computers.

**University Hts:**

The one middle school we visited had a lab off the library that had approximately 25 desktops. They were not upgraded and were used primarliy for an intervention reading/math program. The library had a writing center that included 10 to 15 desktops.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** Bishop Hartley: ** They still have traditional labs and carts, especially to accommodate Freshman/Sophomore classes.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** 46


 * //<span style="color: green; font-family: 'Cambria','serif';">Parent and Community //** <span style="font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 10pt;">

**How did you educate your School Board/Directors and your community about this program so that it was supported? DAVIESS CTY, KY : This was a topdown implemented programme, driven by the Superintendent. It was implemented very quickly (within a year and a half). The last School Board vote authorizing expenditures was the 1st since the programme started that had 100% of the School Board Members voting yes and the 1st time that the Chair voted yes in the 6 years of the programme. **

**University Hts:**

The planning for the one to one program began during the district's mission/vision (P.A.S.S.A.G.E) process that includes an emphasis on 21st century skills. The district vision process included many stakeholders from the school community.

PASSAGE stands for Prepare All Students for Success in a Global Economy.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** The Tech Dir. gave presentations to the Education Committee and Board of Trustees. They posted information about the program on the web. They held a variety of different information for parents in the evening.

DAVIESS CTY, KY : 1) Cost (they are charged $100 per year per child and have to pay for careless damage on a sliding scale); 2) social networking using the computers (feeling that they children are 'playing' on the computers instead of working and 3) accessing inappropriate sites. **
 * What were common parent concerns?

**CSG:** There was initial concern about the cost for the equipment, especially since they could buy something else more cheaply and they already had technology at home. They eventually detailed the additional software that was loaded on the tablets ($1500 worth) that they are able to use for free as a result. Also, there was a learning curve for parents to understand the benefits of tablets (why tablets). Once they actually saw their students using the tablets tools, the questioning went away.

They lost some parents after the first year when they had to start paying (the school purchased the tablets from capital in the first year when the endowment fell through last minute). However, most will say they love it.

There are always questions by parents about filtering/monitoring at home. The school points parents towards resources, but doesn't recommend anything specific.

MAC people complain -- MAC doesn't convert well (not compatible like they claim). They state simply to those parents that the school does NOT support MACs.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** Bishop Hartley: ** They primarily opted for this program as a way to differentiate themselves from competitor schools. Parents expect it now, and in fact the program is really driven by the parents. Digital Divide now exists with speed of access at home -- working out a deal with Time Warner. They actually have grown enrollment because of this program.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** Beachwood: ** Some parents are concerned about the responsibility of taking it at home (be also responsible for theft/damage/loss). They do allow some students to NOT take it home.

**University Hts:** Some parents opt out of allowing students to take home laptop -- they don't want the responsiblity of have their own tech at home.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** There really weren't many -- mostly questions about what if they couldn't afford it and what would happen if it got lost or stolen.

DAVIESS CTY, KY : There didn't appear to be any. **
 * Do you do anything special to communicate with parents on an on-going basis about this program?

**CSG:** Communicate early and often. Held parent coffees to educate them on various topics (social networking, or had students talk about their experiences). The handbook they developed was extremely helpful and successful. The handbook has three distinct audiences: parents, students, teachers. It is revised yearly so that it stays fresh and responsive to needs as they arise.

**University Hts:** The provide information through web resources and PTA meetings (though not many parents are touched through PTA meetings). Their curriculum/integration specialist talks to parents about basic parenting techniques and teaches responsible use.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** Beachwood: ** They feel parent education is very important. Parents don't realize they have full control over how this is used in their house and that parenting is required -- ok to say not in bedroom, to lose access or that they should be off the computer by x hours. They have a restricted image by parent request.

They provide Laptop Info nights for 7th grade parents. Also run Tech Tidbits at each PTO meeting and include local law enforcement. Currently looking a ways to provide parent tools for filtering.

Conference style training when they receive their laptops : how to change passwords, social networking, invite cable/internet providers to give parental control info; invite parents to talk about home tips (proponents and critics).

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** Gave periodic reports to parents by email. The first year there were quite a few because they had some problems that needed to be addressed (and to keep parents aware of what was going on). These issues were with the file storage policies. As things are running smoothly now, they only do a wrap-up email at the end of the year when they send out links to parents, students and faculty to the annual technology survey.

DAVIESS CTY, KY : Other than communicating the general programme details through standard newsletters, the parents are invited once per year to a seminar but they only get a handful of parents each year. Students 'learn as they go'. **
 * What type of training did you provide for parents and students initially?

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** Beachwood: ** They feel parent education is very important. Parents don't realize they have full control over how this is used in their house and that parenting is required -- ok to say not in bedroom, to lose access or that they should be off the computer by x hours. They have a restricted image by parent request.

They provide Laptop Info nights for 7th grade parents. Also run Tech Tidbits at each PTO meeting and include local law enforcement. Currently looking a ways to provide parent tools for filtering.

Conference style training when they receive their laptops : how to change passwords, social networking, invite cable/internet providers to give parental control info; invite parents to talk about home tips (proponents and critics).

**University Hts:** They provide an evening parent question meeting. They find it difficult to get parents involved. The intro class was less than an hour, it included: Google video on online safety; how to turn on, charge and login; review of AUP and responsibilities of the students, parents and district. They wanted more on Online Safety, so have adopted the i-safe curriculum.

Parents are NOT required to go through a session.

Summer workshop/training session before school starts (recommend there they backup once a week). This is primarily for LD and Freshment. Work for three weeks on studies, and include the tablet training. Summer reading was their context.

Rest of students get tablets mid-June (training 24 students with parents in one hour). Orientation 1/2 day right before school 8-12 includes tablet orientation. Freshment course for one quarter covering NETS standards.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** Bishop Hartley: ** They did not provide any training initially for parents or students. Not even in the summer. Now they have a meeting with parents to set expectations.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** Students came with a parent to pickup the tablet and get an overview of the program during the summer. They now hold these sessions in June so students have access to the tablets for a full month prior to the start of school. They also have a summer workshop that lasts 3 weeks in June for about 60 students. Those students get their tablets first day and learn what they will be doing on them as part of the workshop.

None according to them. They have been doing the program for several years.
 * Have there been any negative __physical__ side effects associated with this program?**
 * DAVIESS CTY, KY and SUA : **


 * University Heights** //:// None were mentioned.



Planning and Implementation //**<span style="font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 10pt;">

**Who was involved in the initial planning for your 1:1 program (Governing Board, Administration, Teachers, Students, Parents, Community, and Vendors)? DAVIESS CTY, KY :** Initially, this project was initiated by the Superintendent who asked his Staff to find a way to make it happen. This was completely supported by their Board. They do charge a $100 fee/year for parents (for each child), and did have an opt-out option which they have revoked this year. Parents have had an issue with the $100 fee.

**CSG:** Admin and some teachers. Had to be very secretive as a result of the endowment stipulations. Wish they had had more involvement of their constituents intially.

**University Hts:** They had a team of teachers and administrators evaluate programs and participate in site visits.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** The Director of Technology and the Technology Committee.

There were some concerns about classroom mgmt, student distractability, deterioration of basic skills with focus on tech. Bigger concerns were about less face-to-face time with students (loss of personal relationships), but the reality of this is that the students still communicated face-to-face and the tablets actually help with communication.

**How do you handle students that keep "forgetting" to bring their laptop/tablet with them to classes - if we are too generous with loaners, it will be easier for them to just constantly "forget"?** ** DAVIESS CTY, KY :** As mentioned earlier, there is a long list of technology/laptop expectations. From the list, I would assume penalties or consequences would evolve if a student did not bring his/her laptop. The loaner system seemed to be working in the school as they had 5% extra in the break/fix room to loan out. I sensed this wasn't a huge issue, since it didn't appear that many classrooms were actually using the laptop on a regular basis.

**CSG:** This doesn't seem to be an issue.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** Bishop Hartley: ** If students forget it, they just do without it. They will borrow a tablet for the day if needed in the classroom.

Principal has a bin in his office for laptops left unattended. If this happens, they lose their take-home privileges.
 * University Hts:**

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** This has only happened once in 4 years. Everything they need is on the tablet, so they do not forget it.

DAVIESS CTY, KY :** In their initial year, they did not provide any financial penalties for damage to their systems and found that students honestly did not take care of their computers. After year one, they have a 4 strike system in place. One intentional issue is levied a small fine (it varies based on what is broken, but is around $25). The third issue is charged at the full price for replacement. The fourth issue has the computer removed, and lockdown of the computer, depending on the violation, could happen at any time in this process.
 * How do you handle discipline regarding the technology (e.g. AUP violations)?

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** Bishop Hartley: ** They don't take it away. First they assign demerits. The last resort is to remove it and it has only happened once (due to student accessing proxy sites). When this happens, they borrow one for some classes that need it. If they unblock things from home, they treat this like a social violation.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** Beachwood: ** Access is a privilege: teams and principal control who gets this.

**University Hts:** The laptop is school property and thus it falls within the guidelines of the code of conduct in cases of vandalism or misuse. The acceptable use of technology policy also indirectly addresses the proper use of the laptop.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** They have an AUP and a Tablet PC agreement. Discipline varies depending on the infraction.

They did not lockdown anything until this year (now they have a filter in place that will lockdown websites at school as well as home -- with parent control for their home access). Web access has been a real hindrance of use in the classroom, especially with the lack of any teacher management tool. Subsequently, some teachers do not even allow the students to use the laptops for even notetaking!
 * What do you lockdown on student computers and what freedom do they have on their computers (e.g. screensavers, wallpaper, installing programs)?**
 * DAVIESS CTY, KY: **

**CSG:** Students are administrators on their tablets. No lockdowns.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** Bishop Hartley: ** Students are NOT given administrative access. Things are locked down. It is an AUP violation if they hack into it.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** Beachwood: ** First year they locked down everything -- students immediately figured out how to hack it. Now everything is wide open (helped ease ease of use). This also eliminated problems with accessing printers and wireless at home. Have now made parents administrators on the laptop and setup accont parameters for students.

No parental controls are currently in place. They have the ability to lockdown the computer so it turns off at 11PM and not back on til 6PM (though they currently do not use that).
 * University Hts:**

They do not allow students to print at school!

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** Students are local admins in order to be able to load software for printers and anything needed for class. Students may choose their own wallpapers, fonts, cursors, etc., but are not allowed to put stickers on the tablets. They must use complete sentences when communicating with teachers and staff. They use Dyknow which allows teachers to control what th estudents have access to during class. Teachers have different philosophies regarding this and it is at their discretion how it is used.


 * // Evaluation/Assessment/Effectiveness //**

<span style="font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 10pt;">**How do you evaluate the program's effectiveness? (Did you create measurable objectives? Do you use a specific tool?)** **DAVIESS CTY, KY:** Measurable objectives were not created. Administration referred to student engagement as a top priority believing this would ultimately lead to student achievement, but measurable goals or objectives to gauge student engagement were not identified. The Principal at Apollo High School indicated that this is a priority for the district's committee, but he did not give a timeline for when the goals were to be created.

**University Hts:** They are not measuring against OAT scores (not looking for score improvement). They evaluate for Higher Order Thinking skills. Using Hanover Research - benchmarks to 21st century competencies to benchmark for success.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** They do an annual online survey of students, parents and faculty at the end of every year. They ask what they are doing well, what should they continue doing and what she they stop doing.

**DAVIESS CTY, KY:** I think the answer would vary depending who we asked. The Spanish teacher at the high school seemed to think the students were more motivated and engaged in learning in the classroom and outside the classroom based on some of the programs she was using (Moodle and Ning). The Assistant Principal frequently mentioned the on-going problems with issues due to the one to one program including inappropriate use of the Internet both during and after school. She claimed the problems focused mainly with the Freshman Class as they didn't seem to understand the responsibility that comes with taking care of the laptop nor the understanding of appropriate uses of the technology. She cited an increase in cyber bullying as well as neglect/vandalism of the machines. The students we talked with during our visit were "lukewarm" about having a notebook/laptop in their possession. They did not seem to think that it was being utilized all that much by the teachers and consequently the technology wasn't necessarily transformative. They were critical of the network security restricting their freedom to explore and hindering their opportunity to visit sites that would benefit them for their classes. I think it is safe to say that our committee could find very few classrooms that were using the technology in a transformative way.
 * What difference(s) have you noted with student behavior and learning since moving to 1:1?**

**CSG:** Students enjoy having online textbooks to clip from the textbook into OneNote. They feel they are much more productive and organized. Teachers send skeleton notes to OneNote and students develop their notes from there. Students love having all 4 years of material in one place that they can look back on.

Virtual experiences have been extremely powerful (working with others in other schools, states, countries). This has provided very personal experiences -- developing better relationships with students and staff (staff supporting students online and at not normal hours). Students want an online presence and they need to help shape what that looks like safely.

Students have benefited -- their tech "savvy" has risen dramatically. The Classroom dynamic has changed: there is more coaching, it is more interactive and there are no "barriers". All their work is always with them, and they love that. They love being able to "snip" from their textbooks to their notes. Students are more acclimated to reading online (no concentration issues). Science noted that since tablets and one note there seems to be a significant improvement in test scores! There is more coaching on how to organize and study.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** Bishop Hartley: ** Most students still use this as laptop (easier to type notes). They use them as tablets in math and science. "Bottom line: the experience is different in the classroom with this technology." "People want to own stuff, and by having their own laptop they take care of it." They see engagement with a wider audience (Reference arab-israeli conflict simulation through UMich) "It changes the dynamic - students can fact check and research. They are engaged." They are putting tools in front of them that help them.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** Beachwood: ** They definitely feel this has impacted their classrooms. More product options-choices are available (multi genre and multi media). They are good at building and posting units in Blackboard. This is helpful to students and parents. Though they still collect final products in paper form, the ability to go paperless is there for future. This has forced teachers to differentiate lesses (not just write papers). They have a variety of presentation formats now (including multimedia and things like google docs). Students are more amendable to watching video clips -- and they are more readily accessible. "Learning is happening 24x7" There is more interaction with the teachers. Students become motivators for teachers. 1:1 access gives them more authentic learning -- they haven't been able to do this at the HS without access. The collaborative nature of this program keeps it running. "This helps us meet the needs of all our kids" -- this was a quote from a teacher.

**University Hts:** They feel this has transformed what they are doing to really engage the students

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** Students comment that they are more organized. The students take pride in having the tablet and being proficient using technology.

**DAVIESS CTY, KY:** According to the Assistant Principal responsible for Freshman and Sophmores, there has been an increase in students violating the technology acceptable use policy (AUP). In the second year of the program, Apollo High School created a list of consequences for student violations. The elearning infractrations included a list of 26 violations ranging from battery charging to downloading playing or storing pornographic music.
 * What negatives have you encountered and how have you addressed them?**

**University Hts:** The principal shared that there have been a few situations where students are using the laptops at home inappropriately and there have been some situations of cyberbully although one could make the case that this could have happened regardless of the laptop program.

**DAVIESS CTY, KY:** I thought the Spanish teacher was using Moodle and Ning in a very productive way. There were many examples where the laptops were used as a re;lacement for having students go to a computer lab, and clearly not tranformative. I think it is fair to say the team was disappointed in the lack of quality that the technology could have provided. on our visit enhanced by the the technology.
 * Do you have any specific examples where you think the one to one program has created a unique and highly effective way to instruct students and promote achievement?**

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** Bishop Hartley: ** They are now connecting to a wider audience. Science has live connections through the state to share data. They have access to videos and simulations -- can go home and recreate a lab. Social Studies - students are really engaged with the understanding the Arab-Israeli conflict and world issues through the ICS SOE program at UMich. If a teacher doesn't use it in the class, students at least are able to record the teacher to refer to later. One English teacher annotated corrections and recorded the comments which were very helpful to students. He even had a library of pre-recorded comments that expedited his grading time, but still personalized the experience for the students. These recorded comments were often more clear to students than a written annotation because they could be more detailed. Teahcers have created podcasts for poetry. To hear Shakespear read properly and them then read it is also helpful. They feel this helps them prepare students to become more independent.

**University Hts:** Some of buy-in stems from their training procedures. The district encourages teachers to teach other teachers. There was some built in opportuntity to share and learn in a mini-class type of situation (after school). Also, some early release time allowed for teachers to shaddress new technologies.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** The transformation in the classroom from lecturing to student-centered learning is one of th emost obvious advantages of the one-to-one program.
 * //<span style="color: green; font-family: 'Cambria','serif';">

Expectations and Professional Development //**

<span style="font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 10pt;"> **How many teachers are expected to implement a one to one environment in their classroom? DAVIESS CTY, KY : No teachers are expected or required to implement the technology in the classrooms. **They are encouraged, but most are hesitant.

**CSG:** All. The administration has an expectation that at least 40% of the assignments be tied to tablet usage. They did admit that there is not a solid way of measuring this, but felt strongly that the expectation did make teachers more aware of using the technology.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** Bishop Hartley: ** No one is "expected" to use the technology, but teachers are encouraged. There are no specific teacher expectations (it is rather broad), though it is expected they will use it as part of their contract.. However, providing notes through their LMS has been a hard transition for their teachers! They do believe there has to be an accompanying change in pedagogy to make appropriate use of devices/tools that were not available before. Some math teachers don't care for the tablets. The least involvement is English. Though their seems to be pockets of excellence everywhere. They still feel the vast majority of their teachers do buy-in to this program.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** Beachwood: ** There are no formal minimum expectations. The general culture/expectation is that it will be used. Kids are motivators to some extent.

All, eventually.
 * University Hts:**

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** All of their teachers have studetns with tablets. A section about effective use of technology has been added to the faculty eval form for all teahcers. Expectations were relaxed during the implementation of the program. Teachers were more likely to implement something that they sw being used by another teacher or in a presentation. All materials are posted in a digital format for students in blackboard in all classes.

DAVIESS CTY, KY : There were no documented or verbal expectations from the administration to teachers or students. The superintendent expressed a desire for increased use, but it did not seem to be filtered down through the chain of command. In addition, there were no documented expectations for students. The student panel seemed unclear if there are any expectations in certain classes either. **
 * Do you have a documented set of expectations for teachers in terms of using one to one in their classroom? Are there certain technology expectations that your students are required to master?

**CSG:** They set the expectation that 40% of their day should be working with technology in some respect. They expect teachers to set one tech goal and have a % of CEUs required.

There are no formal minimum expectations. The general culture/expectation is that it will be used. Kids are motivators to some extent.
 * Beachwood: **

The same teacher evaluation instrument is used for the whole district. Technology is one component in the observation template. They have a tech literacy self-assessment for staff. They use the e-tech conference as an incentive for staff (and to provide extended learning)

They expect teachers to differentiate more.

**University Hts:** They do not have a minimum set of expectations. They "expect students to hold teachers to doing it." They trust the professionals to adapt. They do not expect immediate/complete change of their staff. Expect it will be used in "some" capacity. Teacher are motivated by seeing student engagement.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** Only the section that was added to the evaluation form.

**Bishop Hartley** : There is no expectation for the use. It is a "tool" that teachers and students may use, but it is not mandatory. In addition, there are no checks on which teachers are consistently using the technology.

DAVIESS CTY, KY : Most teachers seemed hesitant to incorporate the technology because of student misuse and a lack of control. They expressed that most staff (about 70%) are on board with using the technology, but not necessarily on a daily basis. Some feel that having 1-to-1 is worthwhile, but only about half the staff. **
 * Do you feel you have 100% "buy in" from your staff or are there still a few reluctant teachers who aren't buying in at this point?

**CSG:** There are always reluctant teachers, but they hold to the "3R's": Retool, Retire or be Removed! They also set the expectation that 40% of their day should be working with technology in some respect.

**University Hts:** They feel they do. "Teachers are now all using the resources."

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** Because the program was rolled out over 4 years, teahcers who were really reluctant moved to teaching students without tablets until they retired or found that there were advantages to students having the tablets. There are still a few teachers who are still teaching like they were taught, but they notice that they are losing the students and are starting to see the tablets as a tool to help engage them.

**Bishop Hartley** : There are still some hold outs who do not feel the technology enhances their teaching, nor student learning. Though despite it all, they feel the vast majority do buy in.

DAVIESS CTY, KY : There was no integrated approach toward teachers. It was mandated from the superintendent and teachers were required to attend initial training. **
 * How did you promote teacher buy-in and acceptance of this?

**CSG:** Professional development and support (They stated that for veteran teachers, change is always hard, but administrators worked with them to head it off). The Integration specialists provide just-in-time support and written support (email tips, for example). There is one IS in the upper school, one in the lower school and one part time person in the Middle. The IS's provide mini lessons before and after school. The teachers can get CEU's for attending.

**University Hts:** They used opportunities to share and learn. Some of these sessions were in a mini-class format after school and other opportunities occured during early release time. Teachers were given the opportunity to share their knowledge with collgues. <span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">**

SUA: ** The teahcers drove the request. They were tired of sharing old equipment on carts. The principal also provided many professional development opportunities for them to learn new technologies. Another thing we did for the first 2 years was use board delegated development funds for the faculty to compensate them for the time they spent converting their materials to a digital format.

DAVIESS CTY, KY : There did not seem to be much staff preparation or training. Most was in the initial roll out, but not much yearly repeat. **
 * How did you prepare your staff for this and address teacher capacity to handle it?

**University Hts:** They started by focusing on 21st century skills and modified their mission/vision with administrators and teacher leaders as part of the Excel Project (3 years prior to the start of this initiative).

**Bishop Hartley** : There was no discussion - it was mandated that this would be occurring. There was minimal staff pd.

DAVIESS CTY, KY : There was minimal staff professional development in the initial implementation. All teachers were required to attend training, but not all grades received laptops initially. Therefore, senior teachers were using technology 3 years after training - without any follow up. ** <span style="font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 10pt;">
 * How much structured built- in professional development opportunities did they have in anticipation of implementing this program?

Time is limited. They offered 150 sessions for teacher with diversified topics last year. Offered tech sessions 1 hour after school (many of these were show and tell by teachers), some 2-4 hour workshops and Atomic learning. It was the individualized assistance (just in time) from their integration specialists that ultimately end complaints.
 * CSG :**

They offered a session at the beginning of the year for teachers to setup in science fair style in the cafeteria (loose tables, NOT in classrooms), where they could go around and see what their peers had been doing with their students with the technology. This was very exciting and worked really well.

They foster the climate of "each one, reach one" -- when you learn something new, take 5 minutes to share it.

Teachers are NOT willing to stay after school. Wednesday AM is helpful and is part of their culture (bulit in department time). PD started with a focus on tools, then went to tech literacy. The collaborative nature of this keeps it running.
 * Beachwood: **

At the beginning they had Apple support to help with the training, but not any more. Sometimes bigger vendors will provide training as well (like smartboard). Teachers share on PD Days. They send teachers to the eTech Conference. The run "After School Snippets" for 1.5 hours -- usually how to use a tool. They provide a stipend to the teaching teacher. Occasionally they use team time.

They have learned that PD really has to be on-demand. Built in with teacher-leaders.

They have a late start every Wednesday AM for 1 hour. Parents can bring students in for OAT assistance or supervised study hall in the theatre (about a third do). Buses run at the regular schedule.

**University Hts:** They have a schedule in their contract for paying after hours instructors and attendees.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** Their teachers had been using laptops and then tablets for almost 7 years before the one-to-one program. They were ready.

<span style="color: #0000ff; font-family: Cambria,serif; font-size: 10pt;">**Bishop Hartley** <span style="font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 10pt;">: There was minimal training at the start of the year and a few afternoon sessions were offered throughout the year. They do a large group introduction now for new teachers. Throughout they year they break into smaller groups for PD (by dept/skill/teaching style).

** DAVIESS CTY, KY : There was no initial training for administrators. **
 * What type of training did you provide for your administrators?**

This is an area that probably needs to be addressed.<span style="font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 10pt;">
 * <span style="color: #0000ff; font-family: Cambria,serif; font-size: 10pt;">University Hts: **

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** Whatever was needed specific to their jobs.

** DAVIESS CTY, KY: There is some professional development now between teachers collaborating, but not much provided by the district. The Principal at Apollo High School mentioned that teachers get 24 hours per year for professional development, but that wasn't all focused on technology. They have organized "Learning Walks" where a group of teachers, once a month, will volunteer to partcipate. Basically, they walk around on scheduled visits to classrooms and then share what they saw. **
 * How much scheduled professional development time do they currently have to learn more ways to successfully implement one to one? How do you train new teachers to your school or district?**

New teachers are given multiple training opportunities prior to school starting (workshops and day long training sessions). These opportunities are also available to all staff to refresh skills. A weekly tech tune up is available for all teachers to practice old skills or learn a new technology. Furthermore, they require one day of teaching training prior to the teacher workdays in August, and have an assigned mentor.
 * CSG: **

They blocked 4-5 afternoons for required trainings (after school on the 5th Tuesdays). Once every other week they provide basic tech-help sessions (like gradebook training). Beginning and end of the year the have a 1-3 day institute, and they also provide training during teacher meetings.

They occasionally provide 1-3 hour workshops, but participation is voluntary.

Teachers are NOT willing to stay after school. Wednesday AM is helpful and is part of their culture (bulit in department time). PD started with a focus on tools, then went to tech literacy. The collaborative nature of this keeps it running.
 * Beachwood: **

At the beginning they had Apple support to help with the training, but not any more. Sometimes bigger vendors will provide training as well (like smartboard). Teachers share on PD Days. They send teachers to the eTech Conference. The run "After School Snippets" for 1.5 hours -- usually how to use a tool. They provide a stipend to the teaching teacher. Occasionally they use team time.

They have learned that PD really has to be on-demand. Built in with teacher-leaders.

They have a late start every Wednesday AM for 1 hour. Parents can bring students in for OAT assistance or supervised study hall in the theatre (about a third do). Buses run at the regular schedule.

**University Hts:** They have surveyed their staff to find their interests/needs, and develop 2 hour classes based on that. They also do a lot with Moodle (like Using forums to aks a good question to bring abuot a good discussion).

Using more social tools like Diigo and Google Docs. They do not do online learning for PD.

Their central support (program specialists) have a longer day and longer contract time. Their support of teachers just-in-time during the day is most critical.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** There are 8 times a year when the faculty can attend a 45 minute session during the school day. Faculty were told they needed to attend at least 6 of these sessions. The Asst. Director of Technology works with new teachers and then they work with other teachers in their department.

DAVIESS CTY, KY: ** They have not had much further training.
 * How have the training opportunities been structured?

Many after school sessions are available (weekly) or during faculty meeting times. They also provided online tools for anytime access -- Atomic Learning and PD360. Atomic learning is available for students and staff, and provides tracking of CEUs. PD 360 is solely for teachers and curriculum (AL is more skills-based) and is trackable as to its usage as well.
 * CSG: **

Afternoon training sessions were required, with 3-4 offerings provided and taught by peers. Developed workshops around the ISTE NETS Standards. Integrate right up front -- not viewed as an add-on. CONTENT is king, tech is the tools. Bring a lesson that they are having difficulties engaging students with and work on it.
 * University Hts:**

They have an hourly rate to pay for after school or weekend (built into the contract). Have offered Ashland credit (15 or 30 hours -- through modules they select). Offer sessions immediately before/after school year and leave July alone.

Looking for MS teachers to support the PD teaching process, not just their integration specialists.

Provide Wednesday lunch periods with food; have early release (about every 6 weeks is dedicated to tech) and some staff meetings. No community push back on early release dates. They don't bus. It only affects students by 25 minutes.

HS has common time --

Tuesdays are early release time 2:30-3:45. First one is organized by school, 3rd is organized by department. MS is organized by team.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** They have evolved over the years. They have transitioned all faculty training sessions to smaller sessions and one-to-one training.

** DAVIESS CTY, KY: Training occurs through other faculty members collaborating. There is no district sponsored professional development in this area. **  **University Hts:** Not sure although Asst. Superintendent indicated that some of the tech training is done through their mentoring program. <span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** They are trained by memebers in their department, usually.
 * What extra training do you do now when new staff joins your faculty?**

<span style="font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 10pt;"> **How do you currently finance this project? DAVIESS CTY, KY: ** They initially postponed capital improvements to fund the first year. In the second year they took out a loan in the hopes a levy would pass for subsequent years. They have since passed two levies to support this.
 * //<span style="color: green; font-family: 'Cambria','serif';">Financing/Acquisition //**

**CSG:** They had an endowment that fell through and paid for this last minute out of their capital budget. Since then parents pay $480 a year or $48 a month for 10 months. Early withdrawals can decide to pay out and keep it.

**Beachwood:** They pay for this through the general fund. Initially they had a two year replacement cycle, but budget restrictions have made that longer. Older equipment is put into carts for other schools (ES or HS). 6th grade equipment lasts a little longer -- they can get 4-5 years out of it.

They require students to purchase an insurance policy for $75 (it has a $25 deductible). They use "Student Insurance Partners).

**University Hts:** No new funding was allocated for this. They reallocated funding (even after 2 major budget reductions affecting admin, specialists and supplies) Pushed back textbook acquisitions ($650-800,000/year) by a year -- which is how they funded the first two cycles. Shaved from other areas of the budget. Their mindset: this is like a bus, you have GOT to have them. Based funding on operating funds so it is always there and always allocated.

Would like to get away from textbooks as soon as possible (develop their own).

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** The parents pay a fee for the tablets. There is an operating budget that supports the infrastructure, software, security, etc.

**DAVIESS CTY, KY:** The use of advertising to off set the costs of the technology has not been explored at this time.
 * Are there any promotional discounts if you allow advertising or use of your "story"?**

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** No.

DAVIES CTY, KY: ** Parents (whose students are not on free/reduced lunch) are expected to pay a $100 technology fee yearly. The district, however, picks up all the rest of the cost. Parents are also expected to pay for intentional damage.
 * Do parents pay any portion for the laptop/tablet or does the district pick up all of the cost? (If parents participate, what % do they contribute)

**CSG:** Parents pay $480/yr or $48/mo. It is handled as a lease from the school, so school owns the licensing for the software and can install it. If parents purchase the computer at the end, they will reimage to remove the software (but the student license for Office can be kept by the student).

Accidental damage insurance (purchased with the machines as part of the cost) covers theft (though they have had no thefts) and homeowners covers loss. Parents have a $100 deductible for insurance ( a purchase arrangement with CDW)

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** Bishop Hartley: ** Tuition is $700 for this per year and they pay a one time tech fee of $110 in their Junior year. They currently do NOT provide accidental damage coverge. Homeowners insurance covers lost/stolen (about a $15 rider). None of this covers consumables (like the pen or battery).

**Beachwood:** They require parents to purchase insurance for $75 ($25 deductible).

**University Hts:** District picks up the entire cost.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** Their parents pay 100% for the tablet.

DAVIESS CTY, KY and CSG, Bishop Hartley, Beachwood, University Hts and SUA: ** No, they never allowed students to bring in their own technology.
 * Did you at any time allow students to provide/bring their own personal laptops? If yes, how did you support the variance of models and software?

DAVIESS CTY, KY: ** They had some of this, but simply stuck to the design of their program.
 * If not, how did you handle any parent complaints in households where students already owned a laptop?

**CSG:** They demonstrated the use of the tablet as a tablet (and implemented its use effectively in classes), as well as detailing what the school provides for the cost of the machine (which includes hardware support and software license).

**University Hts:** Some parents opt out of having their students take home the laptop because they already have a computer at home.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** Bishop Hartley, SUA: ** Parents did not complain.

DAVIESS CTY, KY: ** The school leases the laptop and provides it to all students. There is a $100 technology fee that parents have to pay (although this is reduced or free for free/reduced lunch people).
 * If students/parents participate in the cost for this, is there a scholarship/grant program for students who can't afford it and how is that funded?

**Beachwood:** PTO funds help sponsor or pay in cases where this is necessary.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** Yes, they have financial aid for the tablets. The students use a tablet purchased with special funds and do not get to keep it after 4 years.

DAVIESS CTY, KY: ** There is a high underprivileged rate in this school, but these laptops are provided to all students by the district (aside from the annual technology fee per student, which is reduced/waived for free/reduced lunch classifications).
 * What percentage of your students receives a "scholarship/grant" computer to use?

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** 10%-12%

DAVIESS CTY, KY: ** The school leases the computers. It is a 4 year lease. At the end of the lease they give students the option to purchase the equipment (they charged $200 for it). However, they feel that price was too high, especially given they are paying $100 a year for it with the tech fee.
 * Does the school lease, purchase or sell the computers?

**CSG:** They currently lease their computers and are contemplating how to handle the end of life (senior graduating) process.

**University Hts:** They lease their equipment. Cannot allow students to buy laptops at end of lease because public funds purchased the technology and must be sold at auction.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** Purchase and lease.

DAVIESS CTY, KY: ** They purchase ADP insurance for all student laptops to cover accidental damage (this is pricey, but worth it for the amount of repairs, especially screen repairs). They also purchase COMPUTRACE to track assets that are missing.
 * How do you handle insurance: accidental damage, intentional damage and theft? (is there any personal/home insurance involved?)

**CSG:** Loss is handled by homeowners. Damage and theft are handled through the Laptop Insurance program (provided through CDW). There is a $100 deductible to the parents for this insurance.

**Beachwood:** They require parents to purchase insurance. Insurance issues take 2-4 weeks to process (which is tough on loaners).

**Bishop Hartley:** They do not have accidental damage coverage but are now considering it. Home insurance is used to cover loss or theft.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** They handle the accidental damage issues in-house and charge a deductible or the full amount for intentional damage.

**DAVIESS CTY, KY:** They replace the battery as a "repair" when it holds less than 30 minutes of a charge. They will replace on tablet pen, and then charte the students for any others.
 * What "accessories" do you recommend to be purchased for the laptops/tablets? (i.e. you strongly recommend they purchase a new battery after two years, or include this in the cost of the pc upfront)**

**CSG:** They require a battery and memory upgrade after 2 years, and roll in the cost of one lost stylus. They include a laptop bag as part of the package, and have a metallic faceplate covering the lid of the tablet on which students write their names.

**Bishop Hartley:** They give them 2 batteries so they will last all day (evaluating Fujitsu since it has a modular bay for this; Currently they use HP).

**Beachwood:** Bags have been an issue -- they don't last and they just don't reuse them. SAMs had a laptop case for $10. It has become part of the student fee and it becomes theirs (they own it).

AC adapters/chargers get stolen/lost and are expensive to replace. Now all chargers have a library tag.

**University Hts:**

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** they purchase an external battery and provide a new internal and external battery after two years if needed. They include that cost in the cost of the tablet upfront. They also will add in an extra pen (students have to purchase any beyond the one they provide). Syncing wasn't working for their students, so they provide SD cards for students to handle their own backups, and cna backup to there and the network.

**DAVIESS CTY, KY:** They do not have management software. They do provide textbooks for the students.
 * What software applications do you require for all laptops?** (e.g. DyKnow)

**CSG:** OneNote, Classroom Presenter, Office (they wish they had Dyknow), Audacity

**Bishop Hartley:** Office, OneNote, Audio Recorder, SmartNotebook, Virus protection, TI Calculator, (Photoshop & #D Studio for those in the class); Brain Honey (Their LMS -- Blackboard type software), all textbooks for all classes (students download them).

**Beachwood:** Blackboard, Office, Photoshop, itunees, Garageband, iMovie, eSIS (grades) and Study Island

**University Hts:** <span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** Office, PDF Annotator, DYKnow, OneNote

What do you do with the outgoing equipment (if not owned by students)? Do students have a mid-term (2 year?) upgrade option?** They expect the computers to last 4 years. (Laptops) They handle them as a traditional lease, boxing and returning the laptops to the leasing company. They have not provided a mid-term upgrade.
 * What is your replacement cycle? How long do you expect a laptop or tablet to last?
 * DAVIESS CTY, KY: **

**CSG:** They expect the tablets to last 4 years. They aren't sure how they will handle the returns yet (this is their first year). They require battery to be replaced at year 2 as well as a memory upgrade.

**Bishop Hartley:** 3 years. After 2 years, they are put in carts for Grades 9 and 10.

**Beachwood:** Intially it was 2 years, and then they'd move the laptops to carts for use at ES or HS. Now it is slightly longer. For 6 grade carts it is 4-5 years because they sustain less wear and tear not going home with students.

They roll out the equipment 4 weeks into the year (hand out in a social studies class). They keep all the grades with the same computer. Anything installed must be installed through the tech department.

**University Hts:** They have a 4 year equity lease with warranty. Have a $1 buyout at the end.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** 4 years. They repurpose the out-going equipment. There is no option to upgrade in year 2.

<span style="font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 10pt;">**How do you handle reclaiming equipment from withdrawn students? DAVIESS CTY, KY: ** They are expected to return it before leaving. They have not had much issue with theft.

**CSG:** They work wtih them to return the equipment or purchase it out. They withhold grades and record transfers until fees are paid.

**Bishop Hartley:** Same as handling text books, fees or anything else. They can withhold grades/transcripts/report cards.

**Beachwood:** They turn in the computers the last week of school -- which then totally changes the dynamic of the classroom. In 6th grade, they pickup the computers from their P1 classrooms and return them at the end of the day (they have 5 minutes at the end of the day to return their laptop to the labelled spot in their P1 classroom cart.

**University Hts:** They have a high mobility rate (1/2 in first 6 weeks): 18%. This can be an issue. They handle the movement of equipment through the library.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** The same as we do books, past tuition, etc. Transcripts are held until returned. This has not been a problem.

DAVIESS CTY, KY: ** They have not really monitored savings, though they do feel there is a paper savings.
 * Has the district actually saved some money in some areas over time going to a one to one program? (i.e. paper reduction, textbook costs, etc.)

**CSG:** They have not closely monitored savings. They have not seen a savings in paper printing, but are putting measures in place to start limiting it because there is a lot of wasteful printing.

**University Hts:**

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** Our printing and copying costs have gone down by 25% in the first 2 years!!!

**DAVIESS CTY, KY:** They purchase 5% loaners and handle flux in enrollment through the pool. They find students leaving and entering mid-term to be fairly equal.
 * How do you handle/finance an unexpected influx/enrollment of students? How do you handle mid-term enrollments (how many extra loaners do you keep on hand for this)?**

**CSG:** They carry a 5% loaner and it seems to cover the flux.

**Bishop Hartley:** They carry a 5% loaner pool.

**University Hts:** Their loaner pool covers this.

**Beachwood:** They have a 10% loaner pool (as recommended by apple) but this is never enough - especially since insurance repairs can take 4-6 weeks.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** They seem to have a balance between students withdrawing and students transferring in. Not a problem so far. They do have a cache of spares for each class that is large enough to handle distribution to a few transfer students if needed.

<span style="font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 10pt;"> **What kind of break/fix support do you have? DAVIESS CTY, KY: ** They use IBM service and send out repairs for major items like broken screens (which they have extensively) and system boards. Other smaller items their techs can repair onsite. They have pre-imaged hard drives that they swap when someone comes in with a software problem.
 * //<span style="color: green; font-family: 'Cambria','serif';">Support //**

**CSG:** They use IBM service and send out major repairs. Smaller items they repair onsite themselves. They are a self-maintainer.

**Bishop Hartley:** VERY limited. One woman handles the help desk, all repairs for all grades (not just laptops) and all professional development. They do also have a person that comes in to handle repairs on a very part time basis. Students help in the summer. Media Center also can help.

HP does not have a self-maintainer program. They handle repairs before, during and after school. Evening/weekends aren't an issue, though sometimes faculty calls the tech person on weekends (and they respond). They stock some parts -- and do have a stock of hard drives. If the repair will take a while, they will swap out the HD and give the student a loaner.

**Beachwood:** They have a certified tech who works with them 2hrs/week. They have an aide who handles paperwork (insurance and repairs), takes in equipment and distributes returned equipment.

**University Hts:** They have a 5 week turn around time for repair because much of it has to be sent to Apple authorized repairers. They do have someone come in part time who can do some onsite repairs with some stocked parts.

They have issues at the beginning of the year in rolling out the technology and at the end of the year. They don't allow students to keep the technology over the summer, as they use that time for refreshing equipment. They realize this may be an issue with APEX for credit recovery so may have to extend availability.

Repair company comes once a week for equipment.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** They are on the HP Self-maintainer program. They do all of the repairs themselves in-house. They receive compensation from HP that ranges on the type of repair.

DAVIESS CTY KY: ** They have two full time technicians in the building, and 3-5 students assisting with paperwork, delivery and repairs for all but one period. Additionally, they have 7 other techs (higher level) in-district, that rotate through all their buildings. One spends two days (Mondays and Wednesdays) at this site, helping with repairs.
 * How many technicians do you have supporting how many computers?

**CSG:** They have one full time head of service (who reports to the Tech Director). This person does break fix at the help desk, but also manages the interns they contract through Devry University. They pay $3/hr for the interns and have about 7 of them (part time) manning the help desk and repairs at all time. The downside is that their schedules are based on their student schedules, so the #s are not evenly split throughout they day. Sometimes they have several periods where there are a number of interns, then some times when there is only one.

They provide support from 7:30 AM (school starts at 8AM) until 5PM. Most call they've had for home support is initially connecting to the home network or printer. They expect parents will get assistance on their own for those purposes. The interns are also available to be hired to help at home. Their tech integration specialist also has offered to meet them at starbucks or other places for assistance. They provide documentation on the basics.

**Bishop Hartley:** Not enough -- 1.25 for all 600 mobile machines in 11-12 grade; and laptop carts and labs in the other grades. No evening/weekend support. And the full time person is also the help desk and PD person.

**Beachwood:** They have a certified tech who works with them 2hrs/week. They have an aide who handles paperwork (insurance and repairs), takes in equipment and distributes returned equipment.

**University Hts:** 3 for 3500 laptops! plus 7 other traditional buildings (VERY understaffed) They have 3 FTE total Techs who also handle 7 other buildings. They have a 5 minute fix window before supplyin ghte loaner. 2 of the techs do imaging and minor repairs. One is responsible for pick ups and delivery to the repair center. Media Center is the help desk. They are greatly understaffed and know it.

Next year they hope to bring on a full time, apple certified tech to fix things and to shorten the cycle for repairs.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** 2.5 for 1000 computers.

DAVIESS CTY KY: ** They try to have a student's machine repaired quickly (within twenty minutes), if possible, and quickly provide loaners.
 * Do you have service-level standards/expectations regarding technical/repair support and what are they?

**CSG:** They expect students to sign into schooldude and open a ticket when they bring a repair to the help desk. But expect to turn students around quickly with a quick fix or a loaner. Viruses can be bad. They give troubleshooting 1 hour, then reimage if it is a software issue.

**University Hts & Beachwood:** No. They expect to work on the machine for no more than 5 minutes before they exchange with a loaner.

**Bishop Hartley:** No.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** Not at this time. They are in the process of establishing them.

**DAVIESS CTY KY:** They wanted a 10% loaner pool, but ended up with 5%. Given movement of students in and out of district, that has actually served them well. Students leaving return their laptops and they are placed in the loaner pool. Students arriving mid-term also receive a laptop (by grade level) from the loaner pool.
 * Do you stock parts? If so what percentage?**

**CSG:** They do stock some parts (like hard drives) and have 5% loaners. But they do not have much space for parts or equipment.

**Bishop Hartley:** Yes, especially HDs.

**University Hts & Beachwood:** No.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** Yes. It depends on the part. More hard drives and displays, a few system boards.

<span style="font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 10pt;">**What is your typical battery life and how do you handle mid-day charging? DAVIESS CTY KY: ** They replace batteries when they keep less than a 30 minute charge. They haven't automatically replaced batteries and at 4 years it is rough.

**CSG:** 8 cell battery is not holding up. They definitely need replacements at 2 years. The students are responsible for recharging (and for being sure to charge overnight). It is a good responsibility for them to have. They will charge during lunch and study hall. There are extension cords in class they they can use (with power strips). They use extension cords. Batteries don't last on the laptops.
 * Beachwood:**

**University Hts:** New batteries tend to last all day. Students handle the charging (power cords).

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** Average is variable depending on the class. The new tablets last more than a whole day with non-stop use. Occasionally a student will be able to plug in a class,but that is at the discretion of the teacher. We keep a bank of charged batteries and the students can swap one out if needed.

DAVIESS CTY KY and CSG: ** 5% (they keep 20 laptops per building as loaners)
 * What percentage of your purchase do you use for "loaners"?

**Beachwood:** 10% and still not enough.

**University Hts:** 5% - WAY low. Students check out the loaners from the library and do not take them home.

**Bishop Hartley:** 5%

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** 10%

**DAVIESS CTY KY and CSG:** <span style="font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 10pt;">They ship out warranty service to IBM (all their laptops are Lenovo and they rebid it every 4 years). Turn around time is typically a week. They do stock some parts in-house and repair minor issues. They have spare hard drives that are preimaged.
 * Do you do all service in-house? Do you send machines out for repair and what is the turn-around time?**

**Bishop Hartley:** Combination. They handle what they can in-house, and use HP warranty repair.

**Beachwood:** All insurance claims are shipped out and take 4-6 weeks. Apple repairs also are taken to the local dealer.

**University Hts:** They send out much of their repair to apple certified service.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** yes.

DAVIESS CTY KY: ** They have TIS' (Technology Integration Specialists). This person basically acts like the TFs in our district. This person is the liaison for the teachers for assistance and just-in-time training. There is one per building. They are full time. They create all the professional development and work with other teachers to offer PD.
 * Do you have people in place that can assist teachers integrate technology with the curriculum? If so, how has this been established and do you have a list job responsibilities that you could share? Are they full time or do they do this in conjunction with another duty (like teacher or librarian)?

**CSG:** They have built a culture where teachers are expected to be responsible for their own learning. Subsequently, they provide online, on-demand tools: Atomic Learning and PD 360. They also have 2.5 Integration Specialists -- one for Upper School, one for lower school and one part time for Middle School (they help at all levels, however).

** Bishop Hartley: ** No. The tech handles PD but it is mostly skill-based (like how to use the new gradebook).

**Beachwood:** The building used to have a tech integration specialist. Now just have media specialist and teacher leaders to help with PD/integration/support.

Media Center specialists handle the equipment and any on-site questions for teachers.
 * University Hts:**

They also have 2 program specialists that handle curriculum and integration PD and efforts.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** Yes. Job description has been established. Full time assistant of technology acts as a technology faciltiator for faculty and staff.

DAVIESS CTY KY: ** They really have had little problems with vandalism or theft. They have software in place on the computers (CompuTrace) that will track an asset that has gone missing. They had definite issues with students properly taking care of their computers and not intentionally damaging them initially before they applied a fee for offenses ($25 for first intentional issue, full price for 3rd issue, removal of technology for 4th issue). Freshmen are the most likely to have issues. Juniors/Seniors are protective of their equipment (having learned as Freshman). This $ buy-in involves the parents and helps students understand that this is something to be taken seriously and handled with care.
 * Do you have problems with vandalism or theft? Do you have specific preventative measures in place to help reduce this issue?

**CSG:** This is not an issue for them. They do have issues getting students to return their tablets in the summer for imaging. SO, now they will reimage for free if it is returned in June. They will charge $50 if it is turned in during July, and $100 in August.

**Bishop Hartley:** Hasn't really been an issue. Students take "ownership" of their machines.

**Beachwood:** Since they provide an older/slower mac book for a loaner, this seems to provide some incentive to students to take care of their machines.

**University Hts:** No. There have been 2 thefts. Computrace is installed the track stolen equipment.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** No. Using the sleeve case that fits in the backpack keeps the tablets out of sight.

One of their district techs is paid to provide tech support from after school until 10 PM. This is purely phone support and not home-visits. The most prevalent issue is helping people connect to their home network (wireless).
 * What kind of support is available for students on evenings (after school hours)/weekends?**
 * DAVIESS CTY KY: **

**CSG:** None. They offer support from 7:30AM until 5:30PM Monday - Friday (school days)

** Bishop Hartley, Beachwood and ****University Hts:** None.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** We have an email distribution list called support that goes to everyone in the tech department. If a student emails support, someone usually responds in an hour or so (no one is paid for this, they just do it on their own, voluntarily).

<span style="font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 10pt;"> **What have you learned from this experience? Are there things you would do differently knowing what you know now that would prevent or avoid problems? DAVIESS CTY KY: ** - Don't train teachers until they are going to get the technology. - Train students about the imaging process so they don't lose files (and know they have to re-install customization) - Have web filtering -- and have it with parent controls for home. - Be prepared to handle discipline issues (charge a replacement fee)
 * //<span style="color: green; font-family: 'Cambria','serif';">Advice/Recommendations //**

**CSG:** Involve teachers more up front (even though they started having these discussions 8 years ago). Don't lose heart over small issues. Provide more detail for parents and communicate often. Create a handbook for parents/students and staff (together) providing details and expectations of the program. Strong administration support is key. Teachers who required using OneNote for notes and submitting everything online for the first semester had the best success in modifying student paradigms and got them involved and using the tools most quickly.

**University Hts:**

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** From classroom observations: Tablet allows ease of changing colors (no hassle with physicallychanging pens); ease of markup; handwrite flash cards (powerpoint); easy to clean-up/erase; easy to share (email to eachother); easy to add space and move around or search for things. Easier to catchup on a sick day (logged in from home using Dyknow or Skype and didn't miss a thing).

Students and teachers are much more organized. OneNote really helps them keep things together (not trying to figure out where they put files).

Good for different learners -- color and audio options.

Audio helps them because they record teachers who talk too quickly. They did chat sessions on snow days (todaysmeet.com)

Maximizes class time effectiveness by not having to rewrite/copy.

AUP deterrent -- close tablet and use paper/pen (they HATE that).

Self-maintainer was key (even having the HP rep onsite was a mess)

They have no more paper report cards with everything reported and available online. They use Google docs to sign up for things like classes.

Pressure comes from parent expectations. Set finite expectations for parents/students: storage, reimaging, school data separate from personal data, etc.

Start thinking globally: purchase web cams to practice speeches, conference, skype when sick, practice a language.

In your AUP, include asking permission to record/skype in class.

Go to centralized printing.

Computers in the classroom MUST change the way you teach, or it won't be successful. MUST have students interact in the classroom. Need time for students and teachers to share what they have done. Set AND post requirements.

**CSG:** Visiting CCDS was very helpful
 * What other schools or districts do you think were helpful to your organization in implementing your one to one program?**

** They looked at some schools in Memphis and Knoxville, TN. Private schools. There was really nothing local or public when they were looking to implement.
 * Beachwood:

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** Initially, Moeller High School. Most of the information I accumulated for the development of our program was from reasearch online. I found other 1 to 1 schools across the country through AALF. We are now a model for other schools in Cincinnati who were exploring 1:1 programs.

<span style="color: green; font-family: 'Cambria','serif';">**//Overall Observations/Lessons Learned//** <span style="color: #0000ff; font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 10pt;">** New Tech--Decatur Central High School: ** __Marian's Observations__: This school did not have a great deal to offer us in understanding the best way to implement one-to-one, since their tech implementation was done with desktop computers in each classroom. It is based on the New Tech model, which is basically a project-based curriculum. The strengths of this were: <span style="color: #000000; font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 10pt;">1. Students seemed to know what they were being taught, what they were supposed to produce and how it was to be graded. 2. Students worked well independently or in small groups. 3. Students seemed highly engaged with the learning process.

Though these outcomes are not directly related to one-to-one implementation, they are integral to the transformative nature of one-to-one technology education that we are seeking, and should be considered.

Issues concerning problem-based currriculum: 1. Getting teachers on board. Decatur was a school with failing students; they were highly motivated to try something new. 2. Training teachers. The teacher's role looked drastically different at Decatur New Tech. They spent a week learning the process during the summer and still the first year was most difficult, creating problem-based units and training students to work independently. Adequate time would need to be allotted for professional development, perhaps more with this model than most. 3. Covering required course material through project-based learning. This is particulalry of concern for AP classes (which did NOT use project-based learning at New Tech), but even making sure that basic Ohio Achievement Test standards are covered could be an issue. Having test scores decline for even one year would not be acceptable.

__Arline's Observations:__ This place is definitely mis-named. They have "1:1" by providing a desktop in the classroom for every student (LARGE rooms). However, they really don't use the technology as you would expect in a real 1:1 school. For example, we observed a "technology" class where the students digitally created graphical advertisements. The computers were turned off, though they were sitting in front of them with their print-outs of the art and their paper rubrics. They rated the advertisement then passed it on to the next student to evaluate... seriously. They haven't even begun to consider mobile technology, though the wireless infrastructure is in place so that a transition would be do-able. The focus here is really project-based learning curriculum, which has some real benefits, but becomes impossible to continue with things like AP courses. The students were very enthusiastic about how they were learning. That was fun to see.

__Garth's Observations__: I echo the comments above. This was an interesting visit from the standpoint of seeing different approaches to learning (e.g. group project learning) but really didnt' add to our deliberations regarding 1 to 1 (as kids didnt' have their own laptops). I asked the School Principal if he had been to a tablet school and he hadn't (indeed he looked a little puzzled, like he didn't really know what I was asking). I will say that all the students I spoke to were poised and confident, which given that I believe this was not a high performing school district, does speak to the benefits from their group project experiences. <span style="color: #0000ff; font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 10pt;">

**DAVIESS CTY KY:** __Arline's Observations__ <span style="font-family: 'Cambria','serif'; font-size: 10pt;">: -- This to me was an example of how NOT to implement a 1:1 program:


 * 1) PD is key -- they trained all their teachers in year 1 of the roll out but only Freshman teachers had the technology to implement at that time. They did not provide real PD for their other teachers as they received the technology with their students in subsequent years. As a result, the Freshman teachers have integrated more successfully. The Senior level teachers have struggled.
 * 2) Appropriate Management tools are important -- they have none and have had no lockdown tools until just recently (within the last month). Subsequently, teachers do not even allow students to use the technology to take notes because they can't control what they are doing, and can't even observe what they are doing.
 * 3) Tablets make a difference -- it seems that only having a laptop is really crippling to what students and teachers can really do with the technology. They piloted tablets for teachers and students in math this year and don't ever want to go back. In fact, the teacher's opinion was they could care less about using the laptops, tablets were a different story. Just taking notes and being able to illustrate a concept with a drawing or free form graph makes a difference.
 * 4) There are no expectations or benchmarks set! Is it successful? How do they really know? Teachers are hit-or-miss with their use, but there is no real expectation on them that they use it at all or consistently! If we implemented like this and 6 years out were having these same results, it would be the end of our program!

I walked away thinking that we are doing REALLY well with what we have and would really be able to implement successfully. The potential for us is huge and exciting. We definitely need to do more upfront work with our teachers to prepare for this when the time comes, and communication to our staff, parents and community will be key. <span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">


 * <span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Cambria,serif; font-weight: normal;">__Garth's Observations__ - I wholeheartedly agree with Arline's <span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">salient observations above. I would only add the following **


 * 1) Comprehensive Communications Plan - It's critical that we develop a plan that introduces, educates and updates ALL community stakeholders (Board Members, Parents, Teachers and Students) throughout the entire implementation process and ongoing usage. It's a testament to the Superintendent's 'force of will' (and his predecessor who launched the programme) that this programme was indeed launched and is now sustained. We saw multiple examples of possible 'show stoppers' as various stakeholders were unconvinced and/or disengaged (e.g. teachers who weren't fully embracing and indeed resisting the technology, parents who are fearful of the computers and Board Members who felt it was too expensive etc). We need to proactively identify what issues various stakeholders will have up front (and each group's will most likely be different) and ensure that they addressed and communicated as we proceed.
 * 2) Power of 1 to 1 - Despite the fact that this public school district is 1) not using tablets (which I'm becoming more and more convinced are essential for a successful implementation) and 2) could be using their existing technology MUCH more effectively, we didn't meet one person who didn't see the value in the programme and want it to be maintained.

The more I reflect on this site visit the more I sincerely appreciate that we had the opportunity to visit this district. This school was a true 'trail blazer', especially since it is a Public School with a significant number of lower income students and we can clearly learn from their 'journey' (as they themselves repeatedly said that they wanted us to do). Daviess City are very open about their challenges (past, present and future) but are equally convinced that One to One is critical to the future success of their students.

__Laura's Observations:__ I agree with all that is mentioned above. As a teacher, I see our current infrastructure being 1000x ahead of where Davies County is currently. I think we can handle the roll out of 1-to-1 with better and safer parameters for students, as well as better professional development for teachers. While I do think some teachers will be reluctant, I think they will quickly see the benefits for students, as well as opportunities to enhance their curriculum. I foresee the global thinking and project based education initiatives exploding throughout the high school and our students embracing the changes. Lastly, we witnessed a lot of vandalism at the Davies district, which I do not foresee being as great an issue with our students.

__Josh's Observations:__ The comments above speak to many of the challenges faced at Daviess County. I believe the most beneficial aspect of this visit was a grasp of pitfalls and obstacles that lie in front of us. What continues to come to my mind, and I believe was apparent through this visit, is how imperative the paradigm shift in education is prior to implementation of a 1:1 program. The instructional choices and pedagogy must be the impetus for moving forward. We'd all agree that this technology is "where kids are", but unless our teachers embrace 21st Century Skills the technology will only be as successful as the //students// make it. At Daviess County, the students are making it only moderately useful and the lack of training and buy in by staff members has slowed their effectiveness.

This visit emphasized to me not only the importance of the technical PD required for implementation, but the overall conceptual development of staff that needs to occur.

__Mark's Observations__: While I applaud the bold move the Superintendent made in getting laptops into the hands of the students in a timely and creative way, it was apparent that after five years the momentum had diminished. Teachers using the technology in a transformative way were hard to find. Students were "lukewarm" about the laptops and the building administrators seemed focused on the negative consequences that the technology presented. The visit confirmed that our plan for implementing a one to one program is fluid in that we must ensure that we continue to grow the program as year one and two unfold. It is critical that we get a strong movement from our teachers to change the way they teach and this will require a great deal of on-going professional development.

**COLUMBUS SCHOOL FOR GIRLS:** __Arline's Observations:__ I thought this school had done great things with the technology. Engagement with the students was very high. You could see them taking advantage of the tablet and its tools. They had a great idea using the interns from Devry. Their parent/student handbook was terrific! They also put a lot into professional development which obviously turned a nearly hostile staff into definite supporters. Loved this site. __Garth's Observations__: I would echo Arline's comments. Additionally I'd note that the school is VERY proactive in terms of outlining the benefits of their tablet PCs (and the software and additional services that's provided etc), to attempt to counter the "I can buy a PC for $500 so why is the school's programme SO expensive????" - a key piece of learning for schools wanting to adopt one to one. Also, we're beginning to see a consistent pattern regarding openess and effectiveness. By that I mean, in the schools where the computers are unlocked (e.g. the kids can load their own software and use them for social networking) the kids love their computers and respect them whereas in the schools where the computers are 'locked' (e.g. can't load personal software or use for social networking) the kids are indifferent to their computers and abuse is higher. As Arline said, this was an impressive display of the integration of technology at it's best!! __Laura's Observations:__ I would agree with Garth and Arline. This school was the best display of effective and integrated use by students and staff. Both groups seemed comfortable with the technology and eager to embrace new tools. The students viewed it as an integral part of their education - not as another "thing to lug around in my backpack" as we have seen in other schools. Both the students and the staff stated they would be lost without their tablet and would never go back to the "old way" of teaching/learning.


 * University Hts/Cleveland Hts** :

__Mark's Observations__: The plan articulated to us at the Central Office was well thought out and addressed many of the components that would lead to successfully implementing the program. There was a disconnect, in my opinion, from what we heard at the Central Office and what we actually saw in the school. There was very little observable evidence that the laptops were being used. It seemed, as we discussed the program with the Principal, there was some hesitancy and reluctance on his part about the true instructional value that this program could bring to his teachers and students.

__Arline's Observations:__ It seemed that they had a great structure in place for grounding this program in good pedagogy (21st century skills, NETS competencies, etc.). However, we saw very little evidence of good use as we toured the building. They are also EXTREMELY understaffed with technology support. A turn-around time of 5 weeks is unacceptable for repairs. Furthermore, they do not let students keep the machines over the summer, which diminishes some of their capabilities for credit recovery and summer work (for AP/Honors classes when they get to the HS).

__Mark R's Observations:__ Approached 1-1 not for sake of technology, but for goal of 21st C learning. Initiative based on their research and learning called PASSAGE: Preparing all Students for Success in a Global Economy. PD seems varied and ongoing. Multiple classes offered to teachers with faculty input in terms of content. Sumer Institute offered each summer built upon district and staff needs. Teacher contract includes provision in which trainer/teachers are paid to provide the additional PD and teachers are paid to attend for non-contractual hours. Flexibility in terms of budgeting (ie textbooks) was what allowed this district to move ahead and purchase technology for their students.

__Kerry's Observations__ District seemed to have best intentions, but teachers were not implementing the tools very much. Due to lack of start up PD? support staff? Kids seemed very enthusiastic though. Liked that the district was creative with purchasing laptops as well as structuring incentives for staff to attend and teach PD sessions.

<span style="font-family: Cambria,serif;">** SUA: ** __Arline's Observations__: Through our observations it is obvious that there can still be pockets of good use. We observed one classroom that was absolutely engaging -- used effectively by teachers and students (Latin). Then we observed another class where the teacher still had students go up to the board and transcribe problems, even though he had a working projector, Dyknow, and the students had completed the problems on their tablets -- what a waste of time! In another class we saw students totally off task -- even with us watching. Turns out those students had completed what the teacher was trying to take them through (a tax form) and were doing other work (or email). The teacher was not using her tools to keep students engaged or interacting. In speaking with their team, we heard other great stories of how the technology is being used -- and really relied upon by the students, so this does look to be a good program that we caught a few off classes with. Their tech group seems to have management of their repairs under control and very competent.

__Melissa's Observations:__ I agree with Arline. Having 1:1 will not create effective teachers. Rather a teacher must effectively use the technology in order for it to be transformational. Our teachers have the skill to do so. The Latin class was transformational. The Econ class was not. Ironically enough, the Geometry teacher made a point of telling us how he denies access to internet/texting, yet we observed students messaging each other. In the Latin class, there was no attempt to "lock down" the computers, but the lesson was so engaging that it wasn't necessary to take such precautions. The support office at SUA was quite effective; no students went without computers. As we have discussed I believe that there must be a balanced support program of professional development, tech support, and coaching opportunities in order to sustain this type of effort.

__Mark R's Observations:__ Very impressed with genuine interest/appreciation these young ladies had for the technology their parents had purchased for them. Many said it was central to their school success...esp. re: organization. In-house break fix definitely seems the way to go. Tablet is central to learning so students always need access to a tablet. If one goes down a loaner tablet or hardware swap takes place quickly and efficiently so the student has virtually no down time. Interesting approach to filtering. Sounds very open....allowing even Facebook. They have left blocking to the discretion of the teacher.....who can block what they need to when they need to using DyKnow.

__Josh's Observations:__ I was very happy to see the level of commitment to the program from the top down. While SUA acknowledged their challenges and obstacles, they have remained steadfast in their long term/permanent commitment to the project. There were certainly pockets of excellence with regards to integration and use of the technology. The observed Latin class used technology as if it were air. Observing the class, I would have thought the teacher and students knew no other way to learn. It was so deeply entrenched, removing technology would have created a gaping hole in the instruction and learning. I believe Melissa hit the nail on the head with regard to effective teaching and use. It seems consistent that technology and 1:1 availability will not create effective teachers, nor will it magically transform an average teacher into a great one. What it does appear, is that a 1:1 program will empower a distinguished teacher to become exceptional. With the talent and skills of our teaching staff, it is exciting to dream about we can continue to maximize our students' potential.

**Bishop Hartley** : __Laura's Observations:__ This school was similar to Davies County in that they were terrified of allowing students to really use the laptops. They have all "extra" technology locked down and therefore have faced immense problems with students mistreating the technology (both hacking in the system and destruction of materials). In addition, they only have one tech facilitator who does it all - pd, training, maintenance, etc. Lastly, they refuse to allowing Freshman and Sophomores to be given personal laptops. The 1:1 piece is really only extended to the Juniors and Seniors. This is another case where they, as an admin, have set the expectation that certain students cannot handle the technology, and therefore, those students can't.

__Arline's Observations__: This school was very unimpressive. They clearly weren't benefiting from the tablet feature, and, in fact, their program is at jeopardy as budgets get tight. They are now considering moving to netbooks. They are severely understaffed from a tech support perspective and their PD support is beyond inadequate. No expectations are set for teachers and as a result, walking down the hallways, you have to look to find people using the technology. It is obvious this program was started to attract clientele, so to speak, to the school. They may have pockets of excellence using the technology, but even with that they could do what they are doing with a laptop and not a tablet. And while they firmly believe Freshmen and Sophomores cannot handle the technology as they are learning to handle High School, this is definitely disproved at the majority of the schools we have visited. They are imposing their own limitations on these students.

__Mark R's Observations:__ Teachers appreciate the availability of the computers....allows them to be more creative with students. Allows the students to be more creative as well. Teachers esp. appreciated the flexibility and range of the final projects (choice). Teachers are better able to differentiate for their students (quoted teacher as they feel pressure to differentiate with the avail. of the computers). Some teachers have even allowed students to "test out" of certain content instruction and allowed those students to work on a higher level project thus allowing them to stretch the curriculum. GoogleDocs and EtherPad have allowed them to do some collaborative work with their students (students work together to create a study guide). They host a tech information night for parents to teach more about tech usage, different Web 2.0 tools. Great opportunity to get face to face time with community and show pride in their work. Teachers are paid to present PD outside of the school day. Did not sound as frequent as it once did....ebb and flow between how much staff will attend. Same people relied on to deliver PD....exhausting those people. Love love love the weekly late start as an improvement tool for the school. Students may choose to attend school at the regular time and laptop allows them to stay busy on other work. Didn't sound like a supervision issue. HS has open access on its network and is allowing students to bring in their home devices (netbooks, laptops). Report cards are available online...no longer send home printed copies.
 * Beechwood Middle School **

__Kerry's Observations__- Ditto to what Mark wrote. I really liked the way Beechwood was using the laptops. 21st century skills are being taught. I am still convinced the tablet is the way to go. A teacher projected their word doc about an assignment, students had it up on their screens, but the opportunity to annotate personalized directions on their own "paper" was not there without the tablet. I felt bad for this school. All of their hard work with the middle schoolers is somewhat lost as they enter HS. It would be most beneficial for a 1:1 program to be a vision carried out by all vested.