April 2005 — Special Reports
Print this article | Email this articleClick here to receive your FREE subscription to T.H.E. Journal
Administrative Technology: NEW RULES, NEW TOOLS
The model presented below includes several assumptions:
- The school semester is 90 days or 18 weeks; there are two semesters per school year. A school day is based on six contact hours.
- The time required to record grades and daily attendance is the same regardless of method.
- Time-savings occurs largely at the end of the semester when final grades are calculated. (Additional time-savings would occur if homework/tests were scored electronically — i.e., with a bubble sheet and a scanning device — and then those scores were automatically entered into the electronic gradebook.)
- If grades are tallied and reported more than once per semester, additional time-savings would be realized.
- “Communication” assumes that a teacher spends 45 minutes per week discussing grades and achievement progress with students; at the secondary level, this assumes about 1.5 minutes per class daily. It also assumes that a teacher spends about an hour a week calling parents to discuss issues related to student achievement; this assumes about 10 minutes daily.
Prototype of a Framework for Assessing the Impact of Administrative Software in the Classroom.
Motivating Change
After a decade of adopting computing and networking technologies, schools are entering a new frontier of technology use. With the establishment of an installed base of hardware and attendant software programs, attention is now shifting toward maximizing technology’s instructional, administrative and classroom management potential. At least one aspect of this potential focuses on improving the productivity of teachers through the use of technology that organizes and manages the administrative tasks in the classroom. Given the demands of federal legislation such as NCLB, the emergence of this focus is particularly fortuitous.
Early research regarding administrative technologies in the classroom indicates support and enthusiasm from both teachers and administrators. However, the impact of these technologies is dependent upon the shared values and beliefs among school personnel about the importance and potential of technology. And when schools use technology to build organization capital, they maximize its potential.
References
La Porte, M. 2001. Technology and teacher productivity. Online: www.4teachers.org/testimony/laporte/index.shtml.
Johnson, D. 2004. “Classroom Tech: Informate, not Automate.” Education Week 1 September.
Lohr, S. 2004. “Technology and Worker Efficiency.” The New York Times 2 February.
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). 2000. Stats in Brief: Teacher Use of Computers and the Internet in Public Schools. Washington D.C.: U.S. D'E. Online: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2000/2000090.pdf.
Education Week. 2003. “Technology Counts 2003: Pencils Down: Technology’s Answer to testing.” 8 May. Online: http://counts.edweek.org/sreports/tc03/.
Quality Education Data (QED). 2004. “Educational Technology Trends: Back to Business.” For a summary of the report’s findings. A report from QED’s 10th Annual Technology Purchasing Forecast, 2004-2005, which were presented at QED/Heller’s EdNET conference in September 2004 and at NSBA’s T+L2 Conference in October 2004. Online: www.scholastic.com/administrator/technology/business.htm.
Tetreault, D. 2002. An Evaluation of the Excelsior Pinnacle System Electronic Gradebook (Gradebook2) in Miami-Dade County Public Schools. Columbia, S.C.
Cite this Site
copy text (above) for proper citation
