US/ND-4: Re: Mandated Plans
Re: Mandated Plans
Cheryl Lemke (clemke@mail.isbe.state.il.us)
Mon, 16 Sep 1996 23:17:14 -0500
And yet another state official commenting on mandated plans...
First an introduction...Cheryl Lemke... I work for the Illinois State
Board of Education in the area of Learning Technologies...
And a story... this year we granted learning technology funds to 36 of
the poorest school districts in the state (a small step toward closing
the information gap). We provided a one-page list of 11 expectations
for the plan and a very progressive, stimulating, commununity-based
planning process in which we supported 6-member team participation from
the 36 schools/communities. The "catch" was... "come through our
process, involve your community, get your plan 'approved' by a jury of
your peers (according to a rubric based on our 11 expections) and the
money is yours.
As you might expect, districts COMPLAINED, but complied... The majority
of superintedents later apologized for the complaints saying... "I had
no idea of the scope, hope and POSSIBILITIES technology could bring my
school and community." In essence they said..."I didn't know what I
didn't know." AND their testimonials a year later reiterate the
importance of the state role in "building their capacity to make wise
local decisions based on those 11 expectations and their surprise as to
what lengths their communities will go to support and invest in a shared
vision."
In summary... that capacity building is extremely important... and the
assurance that schools enjoying these reduced rates will thoughtfully
use such access to improve learning. Otherwise, I am afraid that in the
near future the media will focus on our failure to sustain, grow and
capitalize on telecommunications to the benefit of our learners and our
communities in general. We all know this is not about boxes and
wires...
Maybe the answer is a common-sense, community-based technology plan
which is required but the Hammer isn't the state. Instead, a
peer-review/moderation process is implemented to assure districts of
a nod... while enabling reviewers and reviewees the opportunity to
share, discuss, debate and exchange ideas... Learning all the while...
Bill Cosh wrote:
>
> Jan Bolluyt wrote:
>
> "A mandated plan is necessary to get everyone thinking about the goals
> that this universal service can help us meet."
>
> I just wanted to offer another perspective on mandated plans. I have
> also seen situations where schools have developed community based
> technology committees (10-20 people). Everyone is excited about planning
> for technology, everyone puts a lot of work and effort into developing
> the plan. Only later do they realize that under revenue caps their
> school needs to cut $100,000's from its budget, and has no money for
> technology. There they sit, with all of their hard work, and great
> plans, and no way to implement them.
>
> If technology plans were mandated, I think this type of situation would
> only be increased even more.
>
> Wisconsin is a state that has operated on the "mandate" approach for
> decates. I have a publication that we produce on school law that is over
> a foot high, most of it mandates. Other types of plans have been
> mandated in Wisconsin. For example, every school district in the state
> has a gifted and talented plan. When the Department of Public
> Instruction's auditors show up, the district takes the plan off the
> shelf, dusts it off and proves to the state that the mandate has been
> met. But that doesn't mean a lot has been done to help kids.
>
> There is a better way!!!! Mandating technology plans will not work.
>
> Bill Cosh
> Wisconsin Association of School Boards