Minutes+for+Tech+Team

Instructional Technology Meeting 4-16-13 Attendees: G. Sipe, T. Zortman, R. Smith, J. Roberts, M. Runkle, S. Paduhovich, M. Fink

Discussed technology survey being sent home for students to list devices they had access to. This was discussed at our November meeting, but nothing ever started from that discussion.

Discussed wireless security being a success thus far. Bandwidth usage has dropped.

Discussed iPad application vouchers not working. We have $1500 that we are currently unable to use.

Discussed phone system upgrade. Taking place May 23rd. Issues brought up were shop teachers having large rooms and only one phone, headsets, etc.

Discussed Office 365. Terry and James will be attending a session on Office 365. It was brought up that Google Apps has similar capabilities. Still no Google Apps progress made.

Instructional Technology Meeting 3-19-13 Attendees: G. Sipe, T. Zortman, R. Smith, B. Sprankle, M. Runkle, S. Paduhovich, M. Fink

Discussed surveying student body as to what they have available electronically: internet, interactive devices at home, computer, etc.

Discussed Google Apps. Where are we on the Google Apps process?

Instructional Technology Meeting 1-15-13 Attendees: G. Sipe, J. Roberts, T. Zortman, M. Fink, R. Smith, B. Sprankle, M. Runkle

Discussed Google Apps for Education. This is a free resource for the school. We need to consider bandwidth as this is a cloud resource. This may require more bandwidth. We will use the live email accounts. We need to look at what parts of the Google Apps suite we would like in our classrooms.

Discussed iPad Cart update. Two syncing carts have been ordered and should arrive within approximately one week. iPad covers and screen protectors have been ordered as well. The free apps will be put on first, followed by the paid apps that are requested and approved. The cart will not be synced daily. There will be a schedule of once a week or once a month. This schedule has not be determined yet.

Discussed PETE&C conference. A wikispace will be made to place all information and share from the conference. It was recommended that the attendees look at the events ahead of time and try to go to as many as possible and not the same ones. It was recommended that the information obtained from the conference be shared with the school during inservice, faculty meetings, or department meetings. Someone should attend a Google Apps session and an iPad session.

Discussed the virus. It continually is changing and hard for Lightspeed to catch. They believe flash drives are corrupted. As of yesterday afternoon we were five hours virus free. Asking teachers to clean up flash drives.

Discussed integrity of the network. The IU12 provides our internet and they were working to correct the problems yesterday. It should be more reliable and stable by tomorrow.

Discussed a new phone system. It will be installed sometime between now and July 1st. They are looking at the functionality of the phone system because it will be VOIP. It will have conference capability, voice mail to email, and the ability to log in in any room. You will also be able to forward calls to your cell phone. A committee will be formed to work on this.

Instructional Technology Meeting 11-27-12 Attendees: G. Sipe, J. Roberts, T. Zortman, R. Smith, B. Sprankle, M. Runkle, M. Fink

Discussed network security (wireless). We currently have an open network that is being consumed by YouTube videos and music 70% of the time. The technology department plans over the holiday break to implement network security. There will be a staff, student, and guest network. Any devices not owned by the school will need authorized by the technology department. The owner will need to prove it is being used properly for school/work.

Discussed disk space. The S drive has been cleaned up for the remaining 2012-2013 school year. The entire drive needs to be restructured. Permissions will also need to be reassigned.

Discussed BYOD. The administration is currently looking at the policy. Access will need to be granted/authorized onto the network. They are trying to determine how best to implement this policy considering issues like liability and insurance.

Discussed iPad usage. They still are not ready for student use. Currently they are being lent to teachers upon request. The collaboration group requested that a time limit be given to people when testing them. The group also requested that an email be sent to all staff letting them know that using an iPad to test apps with is available upon request. There are still no covers for the iPads. The technology department said they would need a Mac server to sync all of the iPads. This approximate cost is $5000.00. For now, the technology department can only sync a few at a time. The technology department is also having trouble certifying the school ID for the iTunes account.

Discussed a new MMS update. The new upgrade will look different. There is a video that will show the staff how to use the new upgrade. The video is 35 minutes long. The request was sent to administration to show the video during the December 10th 2 hour delay.

A request was made to James Roberts to survey students about the technology they have available at home. This would be a starting point to the BYOD initiative.

Instructional Technology Meeting 10-16-12 Attendees: G. Sipe, M. Runkle, L. Pison, M. Fink, T. Zortman, S. Paduhovich

We discussed iPad apps that had been suggested by various departments. These included:
 * Geo Sketchpad
 * Flashcard app of basic math facts
 * Singapore Math
 * Apps that correspond to our textbooks
 * Quizlet
 * Quick Graph or TI Graphing App
 * P83
 * Chemistry Periodic Table App

This list still needs added to from other departments.

We also discussed that the iPads have still not been implemented. The list of things needing accomplished to get the iPads running include:
 * iTunes account creation
 * cart with a sync station
 * money designated for the apps
 * proposal for the money amount
 * covers/protectors
 * AUP
 * repair fee established/agreement for students to abide by while using iPads signed by parents

Another topic point was that we have approximately 90 laptops sitting that are not being used because no carts have been purchased. No movement has been made toward getting these out for staff use. We need a budget for the replacement process for these in the future as well.

The group feels as though we would like to start the paperwork on Google Apps getting implemented in our school. A motion was made to start the application process. We will be contacting S. Rogers to address this process.

It was brought up that the spam filter in our email has not been working properly as several spam emails came through over the weekend.

Instructional Technology Meeting 9-18-12 Attendees: G. Sipe, M. Runkle, S. Paduhovich, T. Zortman, B. Sprankle, L. Pison, R. Smith, M. Fink

We discussed what we wanted this group to set as goals for the 2012-2013 school year. We also discussed issues in the school with technology and what could we work on in our collaboration meetings. Following are a list of topics we felt need addressed:


 * Updated technology plan
 * Replacement plan for equipment
 * Functionality of MMS and related services
 * S Drive
 * Training on available equipment within the school
 * BYOD
 * Google APP's
 * Apps for iPads
 * Plan for the new technology in our building
 * Trainings provided at appropriate times
 * Training expert lists within the building
 * Training videos to access anytime

It was also decided that an email would be sent to the department heads asking for app suggestions for the iPads.

Instructional Technology Meeting 3-8-2011 Attendees: C. Zortman (virtual attendee), M. Runkle, M. Chapman, D. Merges, N. Brooks, T. Zortman

We discussed how to meet the needs of staff as described by the assessment from SimpleK12 via in-service training or professional development through a summer program. It was decided to submit topics to the Administration for this process. Following are a list of topics addressed through the assessment indicating needs of the staff:

Blogging Power Point Excel Evaluating student work with technology (rubrics/video/web 2.0 tools) Advanced Internet searching Google Products (Reader/Earth/Docs/Translate/Picasa) Remote classroom collaboration (Skype/IM/Polycom) PLN/PLC (professional learning network/professional learning community) development
 * Survey / Assessment result In-service topics**
 * Assessment (areas that < 60% passed) – these are technologies that the staff have not performed at an acceptable level **

Student Response System Online evaluation tools Online survey applications Web 2.0 Rubric tools 4SIGHT/Performance Tracker Keyboarding shortcuts Blogging Web 2.0 Collaboration tools Online teacher resources (Lesson plans/instructional materials) Digital differentiation tools Web site evaluation, cyber safety, acceptable use Digital image editing Digital story telling tools Creating an online presence (Web site, Moodle, Wikis) Moodle Interactive virtual learning tools Using digital audio resources in the classroom File conversion tools Screencast creation Webinars, Video Conferencing, Distance Learning Online voice and video communication tools Online social networking tools for PLN creation Online educational databases Online citation/copyright tools RSS readers Online bookmarking tools (Diigo) Digital Graphic Organizers Word Clouds Critical website evaluation
 * Survey (Areas rated at the beginning level) – these are technologies that our staff have acknowledged that assistance is needed **

Instructional Technology Meeting 1-11-2011 **Attendees:** C. Zortman, M. Runkle, M. Chapman, T. Laucks, T. Jamison, T. Zortman Reviewed the results of the IT staff survey Reviewed and began committee member completion of the Simple K12 teacher online educational technology assessment Begin to think about other IT issues that the committee can begin to address
 * 111 responses
 * Overall average of competence – 2.39 (middle of the scale)
 * Identified NETS-T standards that were at a beginning awareness level (11 Standards)
 * Only 2 Standards were rated as demonstrating active awareness (email utilization and SIS usage)
 * These results will be combined with the assessment results to identify in-service topics and suggest individual participation
 * The survey contains both multiple choice and application based questions
 * Speak to Mr. Rogers about in-service time for staff to complete the assessment
 * The assessment should be given with staff in small groups with IT committee members and IT staff available to answer questions about test format

IT Integration Team Meeting 12/14/2010
 * Attendees**: M. Runkle, M. Chapman, K. Martin, C. Zortman, T. Zortman


 * 1) Discussed 2 possible assessment tools, an online self-evaluation technology survey aligned with NETS standards and an online technology assessment from Simple K12 that is also NETS teacher aligned.
 * 2) Benefits were seen in both tools.
 * 3) Decision was made to use both tools, the survey as a pre-evaluation and later the assessment to provide working knowledge evaluation.
 * 4) We will push the survey out this week and request that all staff complete the evaluation by Winter Break; we’ll follow up with non-completers. The survey should take about 20 minutes to complete.
 * 5) The Simple K12 assessment should be ordered before January, there is a $150 price increase next year.
 * 6) The assessment should be given to all staff during an in-service day. We’d like to see it scheduled early in the morning.
 * 7) Discussion was also had on including technical teachers in technology; they have been assigned to other activities at the last in-service day.

IT Integration Team Meeting 11/9/2010
 * Attendees**: T. Zortman, C. Zortman, M. Chapman, D. Merges
 * 1) Review of YCST IT Wiki, discussed contents of the Wiki
 * 2) Reviewed NETS teacher standards
 * 3) Discussed Educational Technology assessment options that were submitted by Team members.
 * 4) Choose an ET knowledge survey that is maligned to NETS Teacher standards
 * 5) Decided to look at a demo on the Simple IT online teacher assessment tool that will perform an objective evaluation of teacher Educational Technology knowledge to dovetail with the ET survey.
 * 6) Demo scheduled for 11/17 – committee members not able to view the demo will review the tool later.
 * 7) Next meeting – Determine a format/timeline for the survey/assessment tool deployment.
 * 8) Meeting adjourned.

**Team Online Results**

 * SimpleK12 - Educational Technology Teacher Assessment **

$300.00 for 150 users

 * A snapshot of where their teachers’ technology skill strengths and weaknesses are
 * To revamp or fine-tune their tech professional development plans
 * A robust, performance-based assessment that shows what the teachers don’t know

IT Integration Team Meeting 10/12/2010
 * Attendees:** Melissa Chapman, Dave Merges, Carol Zortman, Marge Runkle, Terry Jamison, Terry Zortman, Karen Martin

Terry Zortman handed out information from a previous meeting held over the summer. This information was a collection of items that must be addressed.

Terry Zortman discussed several items on the list of information:
 * More faculty technology in-service is needed
 * Creation of a “Master Resource” guide for technology at York Tech – Terry Zortman told the group that this project has been started but not completed.
 * Have a single hotline for student password resetting, create a document with all student passwords for easy retrieval Item not on list
 * Plan to replace current laptops used by students or at least sustainability of current laptops.

Terry Zortman told the team that we need to have goals. He opened the floor for the team to suggest goals. *Karen Martin is going to ask Kevin Nagle to work with her to see what “online” assessments may be available. * Marge Runkle is to check what assessments are available through Pa.nets and ISTE.org
 * Critical applications were discussed and the training of staff how to use the applications. Team members noted that we were shown how to use certain applications such as Moodle, power point, Gradebook or even E-mail but all staff do not know how to use such applications. (Example: A technical teacher hired from industry)
 * The team members were informed that training during ACT80 Days or in-service days would not probably happen.
 * A technology point of contact was suggested for each academy. This point of contact would be a person who is familiar with technology/application or would know of a person who would be familiar with a certain type of technology/application that could inform others of its use.
 * The team discussed the use of an “assessment” tool that could be used to see what applications the staff was familiar with and not familiar with.
 * The team discussed a way for the staff to “test out of” an application. Should the staff member not test out of an application the staff member would take a remedial course to upgrade their skill level. If the staff member tested out of the application no remediation would be needed.
 * Meeting was adjourned.