Personally, I think the inventory is a bunch of junk anyway. First of all, the peer reviewers don't look at it (hats off to the ones who actually do and can make sense of it). For the most part, they look to see if it's there and that's it. Second, I don't think it's ISBE's or anyone else's business what software we have, what OS we're running, or how many copies/licenses for anything we have. If it were really important, the thing would work properly and it would be current.
From: tech-geeks-boun...@tech-geeks.org [mailto:tech-geeks-boun...@tech-geeks.org] On Behalf Of Bob Schmidt Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 9:05 AM To: 'Tech-Geeks Mailing List' Subject: Re: [tech-geeks] ISBE Tech Inventory Survey I bet that no one would have noticed if you didn't say anything. >>> "Bob Morse" <bmo...@d168.org> 9/21/2010 8:33 AM >>> Be aware!! We used the online portal last year to enter data into the inventory, all was well. When we printed a hard copy of the plan the inventory numbers were completely screwed up!!! What you see on the portal is definitely not what you get when you print the inventory. I made my LTC director aware of it who then informed IIRC and ISBE. IIRC was looking into fixing it (let's hope it's fixed for you guys) and ISBE was going to let the peer reviewers know (do not know if this happened). Bob -----Original Message----- From: tech-geeks-boun...@tech-geeks.org [mailto:tech-geeks-boun...@tech-geeks.org] On Behalf Of Steele, Thomas C Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 3:53 AM To: Tech-Geeks Mailing List Subject: Re: [tech-geeks] ISBE Tech Inventory Survey This is our "lucky" year to write one as well. I have also been told by our LTC that the TIP and DIP plans are being integrated this year. That is GREAT NEWS and something that is long overdue. We have been pushing for such an integration for years! Based on the preliminary information provided us (namely templates), there seem to be some areas of concern that we are going to have to be careful with. The tech inventory is obviously still a sore point and, from what I understand, has not yet been finalized (we will still have to do one, but I don't think the format is complete). I can generate some very comprehensive inventory reports that are more than sufficient for USAC but don't come close to fitting the current ISBE template. I have requested of our LTC that my inventory reports be accepted in lieu of the ISBE template - I have not heard back and I expect the answer will probably be no, but if enough of us bring this up, perhaps we might see *some* change. Granted all I have seen is the templates, but it appears the new plan has meeting/maintaining AYP as the primary focus and everything has to be backed up by data. I don't necessarily have a problem with that, but it makes it much more challenging to work in all the E-ratable services. For example, it is hard to prove, with verifiable data, that cell phones for bus drivers are going to help you meet/maintain AYP. Certainly data and strategies can be incorporated into the plan to allow for this, but it is unlikely a school/district improvement team is going to be looking at these types of things. Considering that the only tech funding left is E-rate, it would really be nice to see ISBE go back to the "Tech Plan Lite" that was used several years ago that simply met the minimum requirements for USAC. The irony of this whole situation is that the integration of TIP and DIP/SIP means that tech planning pretty much has to be done no matter what while at the same time the only tech funding source (USAC/E-rate) is considering a rule change making most services schools receive (Priority 1 services) exempt from the tech plan requirements. -TS -----Original Message----- From: tech-geeks-boun...@tech-geeks.org [mailto:tech-geeks-boun...@tech-geeks.org] On Behalf Of rkas...@valmeyerk12.org Sent: Monday, September 20, 2010 8:50 PM To: Tech-Geeks Mailing List Subject: Re: [tech-geeks] ISBE Tech Inventory Survey I've gotten in trouble too many times for expressing my opinion on the subject, but when you look at some of the requirements, you gotta wonder who we're paying to come up with this stuff and why they can't keep up with the changes but we're expected to. This is exactly what happens when politicians decide to run something they know nothing about because they want to say "look what we did" so they can keep their jobs. The good thing is that the TP is going to be rolled up in the school improvement plan. The bad part is that someone who knows less than the people writing the criteria is going to be writing the plan. The good news for us is that we'll have to do the inventory and that's about it. Quoting Heath Henderson <hmh1...@gmail.com>: > I can't say anything nice about Tech plans. I just don't see how > they are technically a tech plan. I think they need to be termed > Fundamental Organizational Outline of Longitudinal Instruction by > School Honorees. > > I seriously think however FOOLISH the basis is sound. I don't think > it is really in the realm of "tech" though. I think it is more > appropriate for school administrators on the curriculum side to > address the needs and paths the district wants to pursue > educationally and instructionally. Tech only has small hand in what > these plans are designed for but somehow we the tech republic get > the brunt of doing these plans I think sometimes because > Administration might not want to or be confused because it is titled > "Tech Plan." > > -Heath Henderson > > On Sep 20, 2010, at 2:28 PM, JimHays <hay...@sages.us> wrote: > >> Bob said my least favorite two word phrases - "Tech Plan". If >> someone wants to make real and positive political reform the word >> "tech" would never, ever, ever be followed by the word "plan". >> >> >> >> Bob Schmidt wrote: >>> Has anyone seen this template and how horribly outdated it is? >>> The spreadsheet doesn't even include Windows 7, but it still has >>> Windows 95! >>> It asks how many computers I have with a modem below 28.8kbps, and >>> how many have 28.8 or better! >>> Then it asks for Brand Names like Smart Boards or Mimeos. What >>> if I have Promethian? >>> Then they want to know how many Firewalls, Spam Filters, Content >>> Filters and Intrusion Detectors I have in our classrooms and >>> administrative offices. >>> Does anyone still use LCD Panels on overhead projectors? >>> There is no mention of Student Response Systems at all. >>> And it goes on and on and on. >>> Who writes this stuff and how much are we paying them? >>> Sorry, I am very frustrated today dealing with this Tech Plan. >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> | Subscription info at http://www.tech-geeks.org | >> >> | Subscription info at http://www.tech-geeks.org | > | Subscription info at http://www.tech-geeks.org | > | Subscription info at http://www.tech-geeks.org | | Subscription info at http://www.tech-geeks.org | | Subscription info at http://www.tech-geeks.org |
| Subscription info at http://www.tech-geeks.org |
