Clarifying Questions:
- How did choice of device become political?
- How can this be undone?
- MLTI Responsibilities or handbook
- Where did SEED go?
- How to leverage various learning avenues?
- Tie to other state initiatives.
- Can MLTI/LTT assist with device agnostic professional development?
- How do we define equity?
- How will DOE parcel or address device management to school structure?
- Where is money coming from?
- MLTI versus EPS money?
- What is eligible for grant funds?
- Grants are only available
- Will SOM assume WIFI support in the future?
- Or will this become a local cost?
- What aspect of current MLTI will be non-negotiable?
- What will “bridge year” look like?
Values:
- Equity: Same for all students
- Early Professional Learning: SEED [spreading educator to educator development]
- Driven by teachers
- Projects in units everyone can adopt
- Teaching and learning focus
- Teaching and learning focus (not about device)
- Promotes voice and choice for all students
- Teach enhances T+L?
- need belief from teachers
- DOE open to meeting with groups such as METDA or AG team
- Equality: no grants, let’s coordinate the money into one vehicle. Aev is important
- One solution for all
- Singular WIFI: solution (maybe some different options) some flexibility
- No more individual grades, complete solution for one building
- Learning resources:
- PD marriage between curriculum, content, technology
- Infrastructure, support, and leave devices off the table
- K-12 capacity for K-12
- Facilitate larger services with all contents (data, engine, ess…?)
- Sustainability:
- CT and pricing yield to maintain funding
- Keep it under misc
- Most powerful way to move money
- Rebranding of MLTI. Can the DOE pull this off?
- Leadership buy-in
- New leaders to attend and participate in MLTI DO
- Doesn’t require physical presence
- Partnership with groups to get leaders into training
- New leaders to attend and participate in MLTI DO
- Economic Development
- Create a reason and capacity for students to….
- Commitment to the program
- Device choice
- Technology support for VAMF
- Network infrastructure
- Support from MSLN
- Flexibility of PL ind teacher to larger groups depending on needs – responsive to your needs
- Access for all students and staff to technology
- Devices, WIFI, software, etc at a level playing field
- Access to PL opportunities: MARTYL (and buddies) summer conference, dig learning lab for all
- Access to JAMF//management systems to maintain devices and to a repair depot especially for schools without resources for this
- PL at schools for staff versus traveling to PL apps
- Level playing field for all
- Statewide meeting opportunities
- Web based platforms
- Commitment to the program
- Device choice
- Tech support from VAMF
- Network infrastructure
- Support from MSLN
- Flexibility of PL individual teacher to larger groups depending on needs – response to your needs
- Strong network of people who want the MLTI program to be successful
- PD: utilizes Maine teachers relevant to many/any topic
- Beginning focus on technology in class rather than other options. Teachers used it for many things
- For leadership/principles and super intendants, vendors, and DOE team makers
- Support Starr
- Devices into schools in volume
- Coordinated CT
- Logistical project team between state and vendors
- Pricing
- Value in MLTI community with common challenges
- Uniform devices across the state lower and higher end
- Guarantee for teachers to have “teaon”? available
- One solution removes barriers and can focus on learning one device
- State stands between school and vendors
- Balances between both, helps maintain ed. focus and learning
- Guiding principles regardless of vendor, helps drive conversation based on education
- Partnership between sale vendor
- MLTI aspirational
- Improvements in att. Rates
- Drives areas of focus within the project
- Always a sense of looking forward and being on the cutting edge
- Trust
- Trust with the DOE (MLTI team)
- Clear execution of vision between the whole team (vendors, districts, DOE)
- Constant communication
- Visibility and [Lack of] school visits (DOE)
- Entire team, PD, vendor, education
- Regional meetings to instruct
- Admin (superintendent, principle)
- Teachers, tech leaders and parents. (?)
- DOE
- Expectation of local leaderships involvement
- How do we communicate?
- Web communication around buying laptops, program us more than buying
- Choosing out words and town
- Tone of voice. What is MLTI?
- Partnership with vendors on communications
- MLTI as a brand
- Evaluation
- Need for this data
- Bright bytes aren’t the be all end all
- Strong network of people who want the MLTI program to be successful
- Commitment to bringing technology and connectivity for all students in Maine
- Current efforts of reach out/ transparency / from Maine DOE to get feedback
- Broadband and WIFI connectivity
- Digital citizenship / 21st century skills / effectivity of 4cs
- Access to 1-1 devices
- PC to support for student success / teacher success technology integration to improve student outcomes
- Device choice
- Not just about the device
- Equity – needs in different districts vary and we should be responsive / flexible to those - one size does not fit all
- Focus on fairness
- PL addressing individualized needs of teachers / districts – with content and structure
- More offerings
- Classroom practice focused / best practice
- Current / up-to-date
- Teacher-led
- Collaboration between teacher and tech director
- Teachers connect across school districts
- Connections virtually
- Funding
- Equality and access for 7 and 8 grade and begins the conversation for other grades
- Enable classroom / teachers to stay current
- Wireless support
- Offers students and teachers opportunities to expand their classroom beyond the walls of Maine
- Technology integration with content areas
- Support for teacher growth with device growth and innovation
- Shifting mindset
- Choice in device
- Whole package that comes with device make it so 1-1 was manageable in a district
- Everyone having the same device, everyone learned one device / system
- Bring able to buy out devices at end of 4 years allowed districts to use them for other grade levels
- Regular updating of devices
- Access to Apple distinguished educators (?)
- WIFI in schools
- Having devices focus the conversation about digital citizenship
- Access to 1-1 devices for 7 and 8th grade
- Platform agnostic PL
- Technology in learning was useful
- Buying power of the State
- Equity of high equal quality (everyone gets same quality) devices and services
- One device allows for uniformity
- Classroom-based, specific, targeted, (on demand) PL
- 1-800 for Apple – Direct line, on-demand
- Participation is achievable by every district
- Technical support and training for tech people regardless of location
- Management and solution
- Local repair depot – time saving / quicker turnaround time
- Opportunities for input that is valued
- Partnership with vendor is a benefit for buying power as well as program oversight and quality
- Network Maine
- Student equity/access with tools and WIFI
- Couldn’t do otherwise (655s -K-8)
- Second à WIFI/network Maine
- Flexibility to purchase used devices
- Being able to extend past 4 years, pass it down
- Professional Development with colleagues: experts (MARTEL, teacher leaders, Apple, ACTEM, PLN)
- With Teachers tech leaders and curricular labs
- Conformity = continuity
- Sharing ideas/practices
- Planned release time to work with T’s or T’s and T’s
- Ability to network
- Common set of tools
- Money for Subs
- Central leadership – supported innovation leadership
- Student Conference
- Peer work à passion/shared learning
- Leading the way à seeing potential
- MLTI summer institute
- Professional Development/networking
- Fall/spring regional meetings
- Collaboration time/problem solving
- New Devices/refresh of a new cycle à sustainability
- Sense that Maine was leading the nation
- Ego boost/reason to be proud
- Radical change with purpose
- Impacting kinds à opening new opportunities
- Tech access is expecting
- Students can process info in their best modality
- Equity of access for students everywhere
- MARTEL and Professional Development Conferences Statewide/regionally
- Access to this for all regions of the state (summertime most valuable)
- Robust networking/wireless-incredibly helpful
- Core of Technology – MLTI set the stage so schools have had a framework to work with
- Helps in budget convo’s with admin/leadership regarding tech in schools
- Improving tech and learning/teaching in schools and more effective
- Infrastructure people/network/immediate feedback/
- Relationship with Apple: Day-long bootcamp where they come in and teach students
- Device and accessibility/skill building
- Apple involves students and student tech conference
- Real world jobs
- Access to Maine Virtual Library
- Networking
- State commonalities
- Professional Development
- Conferences MLTI teacher/leaders (the middle years)
- Networking/sharing regionally frequent - teacher involved/open
- Engage admin team
- Bulk purchasing power/supports solutions
- Consistent process cross-districts
- Quality infrastructure WIFI MS
- MSLN
- Speed, cost
- Lil opportunity (ME leads)
- Apple updates/best practices
- Privacy plus
- No need to “reinvent the wheel”
- Consistent staff (ME specific)
- MDM solution implementation (current)
- Accountability at local level
- Bright bytes
- Student conferences
Suggestions:
- Network/device/management all grades to existing school infrastructure.
- Guidance/Parameters for minimum implementation/planning to provide equity and lead students to where they need to be
- Offer teachers understanding of….?
- Stay mindful of serving big districts and small districts and small districts
- Prepackaged options
- Grant options for bigger tech departments
- Accountability on schools and on part of DOE
- Bring back Bright Bytes-style data capturing
- Helps Sea overview
- Look at SEED model and PD for teachers (ex. Ed camp of school)
- Ex. Design Thinking
- Grow relationships with other educators
- Teacher Lead/ money for incentive
- Digital Citizenship component
- Experts at School buildings
- Money to cover pieces and/or aspects of teacher learning
- Tie this initiative to other DOE initiatives
- Way to promote great thins happening at school, celebrate success
- Spend more time teaching cert. courses (spec. [about] teach in Maine)
- Back to sustainability model?
- SAMR Model – evaluate MLTA against this à Still appropriate?
- ISTE Standards as a model (evaluate student outcomes)
- OURCOME versus output driven? What are our goals?
- Change state graduation components for technology with standards around digital world
- Get students in on the discussion
- Rebrand MLTI
- Domain
- Key principles
- What is the brand? (revisit this)
- State tech plan – revisit and maybe build off that. Its still relevant today.
- Understanding why
- More about the classroom
- Not about device, “ride the back”
- MLTI in conjunction with computer science content
- Computer science curriculum is evolving, keep an eye on it
- Student success at college level – prepare them
- Be prepared for student life in a project-based environment DOE
- MLTI at DOE
- Tied to other programs and departments
- Digital citizenship
- Learning how to be good digital citizens
- Digital literacy
- Leadership and groups
- Involving everyone at every level
- Superintendent association
- Principle association
- Special education
- Science boards
- Curriculum director
- Invite everyone
- MLTI connected to other groups outside of schools
- Creating partnerships with lost of groups
- Across state and connecting it to the communities
- Solving problems collaboratively
- People forget about economic development
- Creating an innovative workforce
- Tie teachers together across the state
- Vision of learning with technology to support it
- Device agnostic support
- More access to broadband outside of school and library
- More PR for program to build more buy-in
- Develop incentives for companies in Maine who support program for students- through employment?
- Private partnerships for internships, etc for students
- More opportunities for sharing between schools
- Using student growth measures
- More public/private funding
- Demonstrate return on investment to outside stakeholders
- Collect data around acquisition of essential skills for employment
- Guidance from state around alignment of technology and MLRs
- Guidance around how to interpret technology to meet MLRs in other content areas
- Commitment from state around supporting Digital citizenship with PL, resources, etc.
- Expand program beyond 7 and 8 grades à PK-12
- Spend less on devices and more on ensuring equity
- Program evaluation periodically
- Seek out feedback regularly/ yearly and follow up
- More and frequent communication from DOE to field
- Identify most valuable solution with equity
- Devices
- Infrastructure
- Professional development training for IT staff
- Identify level playing field who provides what
- Flexibility in deployment and support and choices
- Ex: Network and WIFI structure
- Support students as they move from 12th grade
- Ex: device buyout for seniors
- Rolling deployment
- Ensure exploration of ALL platforms available
- Continue professional development in house / external for both students and staff
- Continue some form of a student conference
- Evaluation system to ensure full potential of devices / solution is being leveraged
- Maintaining the forward movement in technology
- Collective buy-in from multiple stakeholders
- METDH
- ACTEM
- Maine DPE (?)
- MPA
- MSSA…etc
- Require participation of administration or make a part of other meetings
- More PL conferences / more offerings / more frequency
- More coordination (plan together) à PL should be technology and literacy, not necessarily separate.
- Bring together tech leads to share and collaborate
- Use local tech experts do research early in policy decision around WIFI expansion
- Personal WIFI to students without WIFI at home
- Build capacity at Maine DOE
- Work to make program more sustainable economically
- More stakeholders involved in RFP process – unity and scoring
- A division board – needs to be representative of Maine
- Should be pk-12
- Earlier work on digital citizenship requirement
- Provide support / guidance for digital citizenship
- More regionalized PL offers (including MLTI conference)
- More funding
- More options for MOM solutions
- Opt-out option
- Continue conversations / brainstorming about what MLTI could / should look like
- Options for districts who don’t have capacity
- Packages (wireless in a box)
- Mentoring between district TDs
- Funding flexibility to hire tech coach
- Using title II and III funding for tech coaching
- Use Erate to support curriculum
- Communication and timelines well in advance
- All PL on occan (?)
- Stretch device age beyond 4 years
- Use buying power to help all
- Collect data annual teacher perception of technology integration
- Measure data around MLTI 6.R
- DOE content specialist integrity reach in PL (?)
- Training for new administrators to establish Buy in
- List of qualitative stories about students with tech (?)
- More local access and control of WIFI for those who want it
- WIFI should be K-12 solution needed at all levels
- Leverage buying power of the State for WIFI
- Evaluating WIFI place in program – how best to serve schools
- Should have option for those who want/need WIFI but not required for all
- More open process/transparency in phases
- Make decisions as quickly as possible – stick to timeline
- 7-12 (include) staff and students
- Revisit/update if need be vision and mission
- Single solution statewide
- United/grade level solutions
- Platform agnostic PL
- PL linked to content areas
- PL more conceptual and less application specific
- PL provided by Maine Teachers
- PL aligned to district priorities/state priorities
- Grant program to select devices (choice) within set parameters to have baseline/expectations
- 4-year grant $800-4000 and includes Professional Development
- Got a State contract to help small schools get price break
- Find a way to leverage buying power and noted concern about losing choice
- Tech director/infrastructure training/support/Professional Development
- Certification or credentials
- More technical instruction
- Update days = fall days
- Bring back “deep dive”
- Funding for continued support if you “go alone” as opposed to funding for the “entire package”
- Professional Development (required) for admin/accountability for tech plans
- Admin
- Teachers
- Parents
- “And this how….”
- Integrating/not silos
- “what are the look fors?”
- Have teachers contribute to research about tech use
- Opt in document include “change management”
- Better model to gauge effectiveness
- Teacher leaders effective when paid for the effort
- Identify specific gaps and fill them
- Incentivize schools by making/likins to educator effectiveness (IE: what level of use is reflected in classrooms?)
- Consider stipend position @ admin level
- Instead of a tech plan, create a technology use portfolio and submit various forms
- Hold MLTI teachers conference as well as student conference (free) to instill value and skill in teacher [need a critical mass]
- Identify ideal device to student ratio to support budget decisions in communities program needs jolt-of energy
- One more digital learning specialist may not be enough to support entire state.
- If language in rule changes to most affordable (IE: MA) then value of most effective tools may be lost
- Parent/community education: is there a difference between real-life citizenship and digital citizenship?
- Disconnect between home and school still exists (no access at home means device is a brick)
- Access is not universal
- We are providing access; are we providing equity?
- Equity also involves teachers using the devices effectively-how do boost floor to elevate ceiling?
- How people learn is changing more rapidly than how people teach. Even in H.E.
- ISTE
- Adopt of adapt as part of MLR for students, staff, and administrators
- Students are ready to advance sooner
- Approach standards as progression to support continuous growth
- Differentiate between computer science and technology use
- Consider providing specific curricular guidance about computer science coursework.
- MTLI: discuss role of cellphones in a student’s life and how to use this effectively
- Leverage ACTEM or other organizations as an organization for Professional Development and other relationships
- Leverage vendors to provide Professional Development
- Leverage social model better to demonstrate what schools are doing effectively
- Use social media to network more
- Model collaboration as a professional practice
- Everyday actions need to be shared
- Cookie cutter approach no longer works one size fits all 0 more options instead
- Menu of limited choices (network/devices/ to allow for choices that fit a school district
- More input from community on what apps WILL COME WITH PROGRAM
- K-12 wireless support address at home WIFI as a state
- Add Professional Learning/MARTLE for each building at schools
- More elementary aspects with technology for all elementary schools
- Mandating = equity for all (requiring training for admin/teachers/tech staff)
- More direct campaigning for existence/funding of this program show why it is/how it is working
- Sharing stories of success
- Badges for Apple district Educator: come with physical proof
- More education and involvement with leadership
- Show them HOW to implement tech
- Offer incentive IE: More to front of line for participation
- Restart of program will bring out vision and curiosity for staff to learn MUST have principal as part of the conversation
- Remote/virtual meetings/face to face video conference focus on leadership more than educators bring out passion and excitement
- Standard operating procedures for networks and WIFI and infrastructure and standard $ support for these as well for schools who need it
- Provide best practice solutions around safe apps for kids and guidelines … more conversations around what is appropriate offer this publicly
- Provide Professional Development…
- Engaging, in small bits, teacher promoted/led
- How to incorporate dig into classroom
- Resources for teacher leaders
- Timely
- Micro-credentialing
- Teacher-created instructional videos
- Keep updated
- Continual
- Regionalized and incentivized
- Vendor – single to provide complete solution, economies of scale for costs and supports
- Uncouple WIFI from complete solution/ (MS can’t see inside network) products
- Digital citizenship and staff buy-in
- (needs Admin push)
- Lack of support for teacher to implement dig citizenship without add-on of time
Concerns:
- Damage coverage, sustainability and waste
- No digital citizenship component
- Outdated policies and procedures (take home example)
- How would it impact testing without devices?
- Mixture of implementations (equality) throughout state/dictates success
- Leadership/future to collaborate
- Apple devices create expectations and financial burden on families
- Difficult to open classrooms to change
- Not unique to tech
- Does not want to be tied to a specific network, financial choices
- PD doesn’t match current teaching practices through LTT
- PD is not device specific
- Leadership open to more/new models
- 7th and 8th grade get expensive devices but none at the high school level ***
- Standards-based teaching makes it difficult for teaching PD for teachers/needs leadership?
- Does it need to be 7the and 8th grade only
- MLTI train leadership?
- Communication:
- Web
- Hard to find
- Search is not there
- Broken links
- Missing research on PD
- Too much policy and procedures
- From DOE
- Legislature only knows what we tell them.
- Give more info
- Laptop program: MLTI should be more, not just devices.
- Can we go back to one device?
- Feeling of MLTI at DOE “flies under radar”
- PD:
- Lack of PD, last audience, pushing the envelope, not everyone at the level.
- Should be different, at many levels
- Worst in time away from schools
- Communication of PD and what’s available
- Lack of teacher leaders with a brand of PD
- Leadership:
- At all levels, now is tern focused, should be everyone
- Leaders at local level delegating to teon director and not be involved themselves
- “Tech meetings about device” (why leadership doesn’t go to mailing offices)
- State Coor CT RFF process
- Personel to manage the whole process ready and able to execute solution
- More than just the department in the room to review
- School Size
- Smaller schools -TD wear many hats, must work for all schools.
- Grades
- Not just 7/8 – too limited
- Lack of content play in MLTI
- No baseline for content data
- No keeping up with changing landscape of ed tech, stop focusing on device
- Web
- How is the program adapting to changes in technology – how can we build in ways to ensure updating and changing with technology. Containment improvement.
- Access to broadband at home for students
- Buy-in from stakeholders
- Sustainability
- How we measure success of this program
- What data should we be collecting?
- Not enough focus on digital citizenship for both students and adults
- Need more focus on how we use technology not best devices
- Not enough work at State level to keep students in Maine for life – should be technology base employment / connections
- What teachers need for support / students need for learning will change
- Planning is too static
- Vulnerability to changing administration
- Network Maine is not being fully utilized
- Non MLTI goods style goods style when taking state exam
- Economics who is responsible for funding?
- Utilization of devices to their full potential
- Increase / value
- How to incorporate in classrooms
- Rural areas – disparity of services / support at schools
- What’s next after 12th grade for our students\
- Supporting future needs going forward
- Disparity/ divide throughout Maine
- Accountability of how devices are leveraged/used
- Buyout prices at end of MLTI contracts
- Most schools want them at end at a reasonable price
- Communication to schools for pre-planning
- Lack of transparency
- IE: Communication
- Schools would like more local control with networks
- How is the program adapting to changes in technology – how can we build in ways to ensure updating and changing with technology continuum implement
- Not enough focus on learning; too much on technology use
- What teachers need for support / students need for learning will change
- Planning is too static
- Vulnerable to changing administration
- Network Maine is not being fully utilized
- Timelines for planning à doesn’t line up with local districts
- Moved from learning initiative to a technology initiative
- Lack of buy-in for program as a learning initiative
- Not everyone needs the same device or training
- Access to internet at home
- Restricted by offerings – WIFI, device, ect. Either you buy in or you are on your own
- Lack of transparency / sharing of information sooner
- Too device-focused à needs to be more student focused
- Conference in spring and at Orono
- Vision for future is not clear – data
- Recognizing that student have been born into technology
- Unknown / uncertainty
- Timing: not enough time for districts to plan and adjust
- Teacher hard to access to PL – hard to get out of class / building
- PL not individualized enough
- Not enough choice for districts to choose WIFI and device that suits them best
- Not everyone has tech departments
- WIFI infrastructure needs to be updated but not sure what’s happening with the state
- Lack of public understand of what the program is and is not\
- Funding
- Fracturing of solutions – giving more choice in solutions is taking away from quality of solution
- Choice takes away from buying power
- Lack of opportunity for input
- Timeline – not knowing what will happen in the future make decisions making difficult
- WIFI – not knowing level of support from state
- PL is not getting utilized
- No WIFI access at home – equity
- Lack of local access/visibility into the wireless networks.
- Impacts students.
- Differing levels (locally) of tech ability with expectation to maintain consistent level
- Not recognizing expertise
- Lack of credentialing to prove expertise to access
- With flexibility not, requirement
- Need the Professional Development/ability to gain training (suggestion)
- Outdated equipment needs the money to support WIFI, state options/contract
- Lack of timely communication about changes
- Lack of follow-up/accountability
- Lack of people at DOE to centralize support/leadership
- Lack of info about/sharing of vision/long term plan
- MLTI has lost its identity
- Who to talk to?
- Where does it live?
- Fractured programs/support leaves local schools self-reliant
- Not aligned with MLTI guiding principles
- Equity – see above concerns/who defines equity?
- MLRs – tech is separate from content areas
- What is integration?
- How are you measuring success?
- Sustainability
- Hard to get a good laptop for $600
- Small school struggled to get price break for quantity
- Money doesn’t support Professional Development/maintenance
- Lack of thoughtful research
- Do we have time to catch up?
- Dedicated Professional Development
- Staff may be unwilling to be lifelong learner
- Resistant to new technologies
- Struggle to use decides to maximum capacity and function
- Principals need to be leaders, model effective use
- Buy-in
- No common standards for technology or computer standards so there are no common benchmarks
- Standards for effective use of technology should be embedded in content standards
- Tie GP for MLR to technology ß solution
- Not enough access for Ed Techs to report, plan, assist students
- Student teacher access eliminated but critical to support continuous entry
- Then and now perceptions of MLTI
- MLTI teacher/leader needed “sell” to staff
- New teachers see MLTI as device provider and admin
- Professional Development for preservice
- Professional Development for new to ME teachers
- Lack of skill/training to classroom management of lil
- Repair costs
- Lack of protective structure on device
- Keeping student data private
- WIFI only for MS creates equity
- Issues (MS only with MLTI created equity issues)
- One size fit all doesn’t fit all grades
- What happens after 2020? 2021? (how soon will we know?)
- Multiyear budget decisions need to be made with limited info
- State assessment online without K-12 equipment/infrastructure accessibility
- Lack of home internet/statewide broadband
- Screen time
- Digital citizenship and staff buy-in (needs admin push)
- Lack of support for teachers to implement digital citizenship without add-on of time
- Repair costs at and after buyout and parts/devices
- Cookie-cutter approach-instead offer
- MARTLE did not continue through it was incredibly helpful
- Elem level is left out/missing everything such as training/network/devices
- Restrictions on some student devices because teachers and administration aren’t proficient and don’t understand tech
- Program taken for granted by ALL (teachers, admin, parents, students)
- So much could be lost/Entitlement
- Loss of years’ worth of resources, lessons, and info stored which staff have built over time
- Awareness of what is available to schools for resources/Professional Development
- Old style testing doesn’t match current teaching methods