Technology Resource Allocation 

Underlying all aspects of technology use in our schools, there must be a strong infrastructure of hardware, software, connectivity, and human support.  Those resources must be allocated in such a way as to maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of the functions that technology provides.  It’s critical to not only provide the materials that schools need, but to also provide the people to support schools in their use of technology.  Results of the Infrastructure allocation part of the DTA are shown in the chart below. 

Figure 8. Infrastructure Allocation 

Fayette County is fully networked.  Computers are in every classroom and they are connected to the local and wide area networks, and ultimately to the Internet.  Classrooms also have telephones, televisions, and an assortment of other technological resources.  Schools are beginning to use technology resources to offer instruction that students would not have access to otherwise.  For example, a few schools employ distance learning, via the Kentucky Telelinking Network, the Kentucky Virtual High School, or standard video conferencing modalities.  However, our schools are far from reaching the real potential of those resources.  It’s important to continue promoting those resources within our schools. 

Even though our schools have essentially reached the KETS goal of one computer for every six students, access to some of those computers may be limited.  One reason is that some of the computers are reaching the point of obsolescence and need to be replaced.  Another reason is that a significant number of computers are placed in labs and not enough of them in classrooms.  Ideally, students need access to computers in both environments.  Computer labs are important for activities in which all students require access to computers at the same time.  Classroom computers are vital because they place the resources directly in students’ main places of learning and facilitate a more direct link between daily instruction and technology.  Despite the importance of both, the scale is still tipped toward computer labs in our district.  Schools have begun moving more computers into classrooms, so there has been improvement, but progress still needs to be made.  One positive finding for 01/02 is that schools have more “wireless laptop labs.”  Those are portable computers that can be moved from room to room on a cart.  They have connectivity to the Internet via wireless network cards, so they have the same functionality as regular desktop classroom computers. 

The Board of Education has taken a positive approach in terms of allocation of human resources.  The Board has realized that technology cannot be used effectively if there are not enough highly qualified human resources to support schools.  A prime example of this is the addition of Board-funded LAN technicians for each high school.  Those positions have made a tremendous difference in the our high schools by ensuring that computers, networks, software, and all the rest of the infrastructure are in good working order.  That action had been recommended in the district’s two-year consolidated plan. 

In terms of human resources, the consolidated plan also recommended phasing in LAN technicians in middle schools, thus freeing other existing district-wide technicians to devote all of their time to elementary schools.  It is anticipated that the addition of middle school technicians would provide the same positive impact that the high school technicians did.  However, no action has been taken on that consolidated plan recommendation yet.  Middle School LAN technicians remain a high priority, as demonstrated by the draft school consolidated plans.  67% of middle schools rated technical support as a need, versus only 40% of high schools. 

Another recommendation in the district’s consolidated plan is the phasing in of full-time on-site TRTs in all schools with more than 500 students and half-time TRTs in schools with fewer than 500 students.  The Board has begun the process of phasing in those positions and the data show them to be effective in promoting student achievement.  For example, data in this report indicate that schools that are improving the most on CATS scores are more than twice as likely to have a full-time TRT who works with classroom teachers on integrating technology into their instruction.  It is hoped that the phase-in process will continue.  Some schools have responded by creating a full-time TRT position out of their own staffing allocations.  However, that places a significant burden on those schools because it takes away a classroom teacher position.  They feel the TRT position is vital enough to their school to justify the loss of a classroom teacher, but they also have expressed a desire for the Board to fund those positions.  The table below shows how many schools’ draft consolidated plans included TRTs.