OPEN Update: Technology Survey Results

by Tom Cook, Director, Oregon Public Education Network

Last fall a technology survey of each school was initiated to determine the extent and level of technology use in schools. Questions focused on telecommunications, networking, support, training, curriculum, computer equipment, and priorities. A big "Thank You" is due to all 714 schools responding.

The information we've gathered will be used for the following purposes:

Provide information to Educational Service Districts (ESDs), the Oregon Department of Education (DOE), and the legislature about the current status and deployment of technology in each school.
- ESDs are developing regional plans for connectivity and teacher and staff development programs to support the current and future needs of all schools.
- DOE is assisting in planning, curriculum development, and training.
- Legislators are asking questions about wiring, connectivity, the role of technology in curriculum, and training for teachers.
Create a database of information on each school that will be the basis of the NetYear97 efforts to match industry and business volunteer efforts with the specific needs of schools. Calls come in daily requesting information about which schools need help and what they need.
Provide evidence in support of funding requests before the legislature. For example, Governor Kitzhaber has included $6 million in his recommended budget to cover the telecommunications costs of getting all Oregon schools connected to the Internet. This proposal, which would not cover in-school technology needs, is now under legislative review.

A copy of the report will be provided to all schools as soon as additional analysis is completed. The database will also be posted on the OPEN Web site for access. The plan is to create a process where updates can occur as schools move forward with implementation of their technology plan.

Which brings us to some of the survey results.

Number of responses: 714 of 1,218 schools responded. We will be doing additional analysis on this segment. It appears that some districts responded with one survey for an entire district which results in a lower number of responses and limits the information about each school. We will attempt to sort this out.

Internet access: Of the 555 schools reporting access to the Internet, 56% have a direct link while 38% are using a dial-up process. Libraries or media centers were the most popular locations for Internet connections.

Classroom connectivity: Initial analysis indicates that a greater number of classrooms have network access than dial-up access; fewer than 15% have a telephone link, while more than 18% have local area network connections.

Technology staffing: Fifty-one percent of schools reported having an Instructional Technology Coordinator. However, only 15% of these are full-time assignments.

Technology plan: The big surprise was the percentage of schools having a technology plan; 72% reported having a plan, with 77% of those having been approved by their local school board. This indicates a significant amount of planning across the state.

Priority needs: The number one priority for schools was funding, followed by staff development, getting connected, planning, curriculum, and community awareness. These findings are not surprising and with the planning that has been done, it's only logical that seeking funding for implementation is the next crucial step.

Technology in curriculum: Language Arts teachers represented the highest percentage of technology use in their curriculum area.

Operating systems: One comparison that is always of interest is the number of Apple computers in use versus the number of PC-Windows machines. This could be the subject of an entire article in itself. One finding is that, while there are more Apple computers being used in schools, very few of them are network compatible, while the Windows-based computers have a high percentage of network compatibility. This item likely will generate additional fuel for the debate on which platform should be purchased for classroom use.

Here are some of the numbers:

Low-End
Apple II/IIe/GS, or 286 PCS	10,513
Mac LCII, or 386 PCS	9,936
High-End
Mac LCIII, or 486 PCs	12,888
Mac Power PC, or Pentium (586) PCs	9,647
Other	652
PowerBooks and other lap-tops	1,341

The full report will break down the numbers for each platform, as reported.

We want the database to be as complete and accurate as possible. Since the cutoff date, another 41 surveys have been received, but these are not included in the report at this time. They will, however, be added to the database for future reporting. When we have completed our preliminary analysis of the survey data and have determined which schools have not provided information, we will allow those schools an opportunity to participate.