University of Minnesota Minnesota State Colleges and Universities Minnesota Office of Technology Minnesota Virtual University Minnesota Department of Education

11/24/03

University of MinnesotaUniversity of Minnesota Minnesota State Minnesota State Colleges and Colleges and UniversitiesUniversities

Minnesota Office of Minnesota Office of TechnologyTechnology

Minnesota Virtual Minnesota Virtual UniversityUniversity

Minnesota Department Minnesota Department of Educationof Education

The Minnesota Digital The Minnesota Digital Learning Plan: A Progress Learning Plan: A Progress

ReportReport

11/24/03 2

What is the Minnesota

Digital Learning Plan? The Minnesota Digital Learning Plan is a collaborative effort to review the current status of Minnesota technology-enhanced education and to outline a direction that will best leverage resources and improve learning to serve the citizens of the state.

The plan is sponsored by iSEEK Solutions and the Higher Education Advisory Council (HEAC) and is being led by

• Minnesota Virtual University• University of Minnesota• Minnesota State Colleges and Universities• Minnesota Office of Technology• Minnesota Department of Education

11/24/03 3

Conditions of Change

The Emergence of the Digital Age

End State

Current State

In 1992, Peter Drucker predicted that in the next 50 years, “schools and universities will change more drastically than they have since they assumed their present form 300 years ago when they organized themselves around the printed book.”1

Ten years into that predicted upheaval, the Minnesota Digital Learning Plan will take a collective “snapshot” of where we sit and where we have to go in the next five years.

2003

1American Council on Education Center for Policy Analysis, Barriers to Distance Education

2008

11/24/03 4

The Drivers of Change

New literacy & job skill requirements in the workforce

Limited dollars at the state and institutional levels

Changing, “Digital Age” customer expectations

High total cost of ownership of proprietary systems

National, international, & private competition

Trends toward data-driven decision making & increased accountability

Changing student demographics

& profiles & the rise of the non-traditional student

Increased security risks & requirements

Every Minnesota educational institution is facing similar drivers to adopt and adapt.

External Internal

11/24/03 5

It’s not just Minnesota

• Learner access to the Internet supports interactive communication and provides access to powerful learning opportunities beyond the boundaries of schools and classrooms

The National Association of State Boards of Education (NASBE), describes the factors driving inevitable change across the nation1:

• Interactive communication technologies support the findings and practical applications of recent brain research into how people learn.

• There is so much to learn – textbooks and curriculum frameworks cannot hope to adequately cover all the knowledge necessary for life today.

• The home is becoming a learning place – powerful learning opportunities are available to children in the home.

• The kids get it! Students come to school recognizing that they have more powerful learning opportunities available out of school than they have in school.

• America’s economy requires work to involve learning – businesses are not competitive unless their workers are knowledge workers who continuously improve their knowledge, skills and productivity.

1Any Time, Any Place, Any Path, Any Pace: National Association of State Boards of Education e_Learning Policy Report, 2001

11/24/03 6

Minnesota’s Technology Environment

At the end of 2001, 63.5% of Minnesota’s population had access to the Internet, second only to Alaska, at 68.8%.1

91.7% of Minnesota’s manufacturer establishments had Internet access, number one in the nation. 1

Technet ranks Minnesota 16th in its 2003 State Broadband Index, an assessment of state policies impacting deployment and demand.2

1A Benchmark Study of State Telecommunications Networks, appendix: The Progressive Policy’s2002 State New Economy Rankings, http://www.colorado.gov/dpa/doit/mnt/customerservice/StateNetworksBenchmarkStudy1-img.pdf

2 TechNet, 2003 State Broadband Index http://www.technet.org/resources/State_Broadband_Index.pdf

11/24/03 7

Workforce requirements

1Building Talent for Minnesota’s New Economy, a statewide leadership project, 2002

“The debate is long over. We are now in the Age of Talent, where the success of our state, regions and communities is increasingly tied to the development of our intellectual resources and decreasingly connected to geography and natural resources. Many Minnesotans question our ability [to adapt] to the Age of Talent and believe we are falling well behind that of other leading US regions and countries around the globe.”1

“Our research indicates that the advanced manufacturing, information technology and life science sectors [in Minnesota] include close to 2,500 technology-intensive companies with more than 5 employees. This includes some 1,300 firms in advanced manufacturing industries, 850 in information technology and 300 in life sciences…While it is clear that Minnesota’s technology economy has performed very well during the past decade and has a strong establishment, it is less clear where we go from here – do we stay in the top 10, move up, or move down?”2

2Our Competitive Nature: Minnesota’s Technology Economy, Minnesota Technology, Inc., 2002

“We are in the midst of an information revolution. Large disruptions in the work cycle require constant retraining as traditional job skills are outstripped by market-driven skills. Education is no longer a formal period that ends at age 25. It is clearly true today that individuals will need to be educated throughout their lives.”3

3Access to Success, Report of the Citizens Advisory Commission, Minnesota State Colleges and Universities, 2002

11/24/03 8

Skills for the 21st Century Many studies predict a new skill set will be necessary for jobs in

the 21st Century. Among the top skills needed in Minnesota:

• Verbal skills – reading comprehension, writing, listening• Reasoning – thinking critically, organizing information, using logic• Math• Technical design – designing and troubleshooting equipment, programming• Human service – understanding others’ reactions and looking for ways to

help others• Management – managing time, finances, materials and employees

Minnesota Department of Economic Security, Research and Statistics Office, March 2000, “Skills For the 21st Century”

11/24/03 9

Workforce Requirements

A 2003 summit on ICT literacy recognized the importance of education technology in providing students with the five basic skills necessary to achieve literacy in a knowledge society: The ability to access information in the digital era; Knowledge of how to manage information effectively; The ability to interpret and integrate the results of research; The ability to evaluate the quality of these results; and the ability to create new information by adapting, applying, designing, inventing, or authoring information.2

2Digital Transformation: A Framework for ICT Literacy, 2002, http://www.eschoolnews.com/news/showStoryalert.cfm?ArticleID=4211

In its report to the National Governor’s Association, The Commission on Technology and Adult Learning “foresees a future in which e-learning allows learning to become a continuous process of inquiry and improvement that keeps pace with the speed of change in business and society. With e-learning, the learner has convenient, just-in-time access to needed knowledge and information, with small content objects assembled and delivered according to the learner's specific needs.”1

1A Vision of e-Learning for America’s Workforce, final report of the Commission on Technology and Adult Learning, 2001

11/24/03 10

Multiple Literacy Skill Sets In the 20th Century, “literacy” meant knowing how to read.

In the 21st Century, both learners and educators will need to master multiple literacy skills:1

• Text-based, or alphabetic literacy (the ability to learn to read; the ability to locate, cycle, and interpret information such as charts, graphs, maps and other visual displays; the ability to interpret and apply information for a specific purpose (statistical representations and other non-traditional formats)

• Representational literacy (the ability understand how meaning is created by analyzing information)

• Tool literacy (The ability to use technology and computers to learn )

1Rafferty, C. D. (1999). Literacy in the information age. Educational Leadership, 57, 22-25, http://www.ncrel.literacy.smartlibrary.info/NewInterface/segment.cfm?segment=2380

11/24/03 11

The Nine Information Literacy Standards for Student Learning

The American Association of School Librarians outlines 9 information literacy standards for the 21st Century learner1:

• Accessing information efficiently and effectively• Evaluating information critically and completely• Using information accurately and creatively• Pursuing information related to personal interests• Appreciating literature and other creative expressions of information • Striving for excellence in information seeking and knowledge generation• Recognizing the importance of information to a democratic society• Practicing ethical behavior in regard to information and information technology• Participating effectively in groups to pursue and generate information

1Information Power: Building Partnerships for Learning, American Association of School Librarians, 1998, http://www.ala.org/aaslTemplate.cfm?Section=Information_Power&Template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=19937

11/24/03 12

Technology Standards According to Technology Counts 2003*, Minnesota is one of only 8

states in the country whose state standards for students do NOT include technology or technology literacy.

*Technology Counts 2003 report, Education Week, http://www.edweek.org/sreports/tc03/

11/24/03 13

Student Enrollment Trends in Higher Education*

• The current education infrastructure cannot accommodate the growing college-aged population and enrollments, making more distance education programs necessary.

• Students are shopping for courses that meet their schedules and circumstances.

• Higher-education learner profiles, including online, information-age, and adult learners, are changing.

• The percentage of adult, female, and minority learners is increasing.

• Retention rates concern administrators and faculty members.

* Thirty-two Trends Affecting Distance Education: An Informed Foundation for Strategic Planning, Scott Howell, Peter Williams, Nathan Lindsay. http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/fall63/howell63.html

11/24/03 14

The Rise of the Non-Traditional Student

“Three quarters of all [US] undergraduates are non-traditional”• Delayed enrollment• Attend part-time• Work full-time• Are financially independent• Have dependents• Are single parents• Lack high school diploma

NCES, 2002, cited in “The New Student,” Diana G. Oblinger, Ph.D.

11/24/03 15

Minnesota Higher Education Students by Full and Part-time Enrollment (fall 2001)

66% of all undergraduates attended full-time. 13% were older than 25 years

34% of undergraduates attended part-time. 55% were older than 25 years, with 29% over age 351

32% of MnSCU students are “college experience learners”. The rest are corporate learners (19.4%), professional enhancement and life fulfillment learners (18.3%), degree completion adult learners (19.2%) remediation and test prep learners (7.4%), and pre-college (K-12) learners (3.5%).2

1HESO: www.mheso.state.mn.us/insight.crm?file=mnUndergrads

2Minnesota Online: e-Learning Strategies, Minnesota State Colleges and Universities, 2002

11/24/03 16

Changing Student Demographics

“Minnesota faces demographic changes that require a new definition or access to post-secondary education. The Twin Cities metropolitan area had one of the fastest-growing immigrant populations in the United States during the past decade…In addition, many of the state’s rural communities are experiencing substantial growth in their minority populations…Some are traditional students ages 18 to 24, while others are going back at an older age to continue their education. These students are all motivated to improve themselves, and in doing so, will make Minnesota a better place to live and work.”1

1Access to Success, Report of the Citizens Advisory Commission, Minnesota State Colleges and Universities, 2002

11/24/03 17

Minnesota High School Graduates, 2003 - 2013

Minnesota high school graduates are projected to• Peak statewide at 63,300 in 2004• Level off statewide from 2004 to 2009• Begin decreasing statewide in 2010, with fewer than 58,900 projected

for 2013• Grow in the Twin Cities by 7.4%• Grow in St. Cloud by 5%• Decrease in all other regions of the state

HESO: www.mheso.state.mn.us/insight.crm?file=pipeline

11/24/03 18

Learners of the 21st Century• Sixty-five percent of US children now use the Internet, representing a 59% growth rate from 2000.• Preschool children are one of the fastest growing groups to be online with 35 percent in 2002 compared with 6

percent in 2000. • Eighty-seven percent of Caucasian and 98 percent of high income families own computers, whereas the rate of

computer ownership among African - American families is 71 percent and among low income families it is 65 percent.

• Online children between 6 and 17 reported using the Internet 5.9 hours per week in 2002 compared with 3.1 hours per week in 2000.

• The older the child, the more time spent online. For example, teenagers claim they spend an average of 8.4 hours per week online, 9-12 year olds report 4.4 hours, and 6-8 year olds report 2.7 hours per week. One in five children log onto the Internet at home every day for educational purposes.

• Children's use of the Internet is diverse: exploration (surfing and searching); communication (instant messaging, emailing, chat rooms); entertainment (games, downloading and exchanging music, pictures, videos); education

• Sixty-four percent of teenagers report education as part of their weekly online experiences. • Teenagers are online more than they watch television, for example, 3.5 versus 3.1 hours per day. • Eighty-one percent of parents believe the Internet is valuable to their children's learning.

Grunwald Associates (2003). Connected to the future: A report on children’s Internet use from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. http://cpb.org/ed/resources/connected

11/24/03 19

Learners of the 21st Century “… Internet-savvy students are coming to school with different

expectations, different skills, and access to different resources.…Students are frustrated and increasingly dissatisfied by the digital disconnect they are experiencing at school…many believe they may have to raise their

voices to force schools to change to accommodate them better.”1

1Douglas Levin and Sousan Arafeh, American Institutes for Research, Pew Internet & American Life Project, “The Digital Disconnect, The Widening Gap Between Internet Savvy Students and their Schools,” http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/pdfs/PIP_Schools_Internet_Report.pdf

11/24/03 20

The Customer’s Expectations

“All Minnesota students’ access to technology for their work (learning) should mirror their parents’ access in the workplace.”

-- Digital Learning Plan Working Group

recommendation, July, 2003

11/24/03 21

From the Learner’s View Students want better coordination of their out-of-school educational use of the Internet with

classroom activities.

Students urge schools to increase significantly the quality of access to the Internet in schools.

Students believe that professional development and technical assistance for teachers are crucial for effective integration of the Internet into curricula.

Students maintain that schools should place priority on developing programs to teach keyboarding, computer, and Internet literacy skills.

Students urge that there should be continued effort to ensure that high-quality online information to complete school assignments be freely available, easily accessible, and age-appropriate–without undue limitation on students’ freedoms.

Students insist that policy makers take the “digital divide” seriously and that they begin to understand the more subtle inequities among teenagers that manifest themselves in differences in the quality of student Internet access and use.

Douglas Levin and Sousan Arafeh, American Institutes for Research, Pew Internet & American Life Project, “The Digital Disconnect, The Widening Gap Between Internet Savvy Students and their Schools,” http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/pdfs/PIP_Schools_Internet_Report.pdf

11/24/03 22

The Customer Speaks “…In the final analysis, schools would do well to heed the Latin writer

Seneca’s words, which ring as true today as when they were written nearly 2,000 years ago: ‘The fates guide those who go willingly; those who do not, they drag.’”

Douglas Levin and Sousan Arafeh, American Institutes for Research, Pew Internet & American Life Project, “The Digital Disconnect, The Widening Gap Between Internet Savvy Students and their Schools,” http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/pdfs/PIP_Schools_Internet_Report.pdf

11/24/03 23

Faculty Trends in Higher Education*

• Traditional faculty roles are shifting or “unbundling”.

• The need for faculty development, support, and training is growing.

• Faculty tenure is being challenged, allowing for more non-traditional faculty roles in distance education.

• Some faculty members are resisting technological course delivery.

• Instructors of distance courses can feel isolated.

• Faculty members demand reduced workload and increased compensation for distance courses.


11/24/03 24

Educators of the 21st Century “… the single biggest problem facing education today is that our

‘Digital Immigrant’ instructors, who speak an outdated language (that of the pre-digital age), are struggling to teach a population that speaks an entirely new language.1”

Technology Counts 20032 reports that only 39% of Minnesota’s novice teachers felt well or very well-prepared to use computers for instruction in their first year (2000). The same report indicates that 63% of Minnesota educators participated in technology professional development in 2000.

1Marc Prensky, “Digital Natives Digital Immigrants,” On the Horizon, (NCB University Press, Vol. 9 No. 5, October 2001)http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf2”Technology Counts,” Education Week, http://www.edweek.org/sreports/tc03/state_data.cfm?slug=35mn_data.h22

11/24/03 25

Technology Trends in Higher Education*

• Technological devices are becoming more versatile and ubiquitous.

• There is a huge growth in Internet usage.

• Technological fluency is becoming a graduation requirement.


11/24/03 26

Minnesota’s School Environment In 2002, Minnesota’s average, overall number of students per instructional

computer in was 3.2, however the average number of students per computer in the classroom was 11.3.1

The national ratio of students per Internet-connected computer improved from almost 20 students per computer in 1998 to 5.6 students per computer in 2002. Minnesota’s 2002 ratio statewide was 5.1, with high poverty schools at 4.6 and high minority schools at 5.7. However, the number of students per Internet-connected computer in the classroom was 13.2.1

Between 1996 and 2000, the bandwidth use by K-12 schools in Minnesota rose 400%2

The average copyright date of books in Minnesota school library media centers is 1985, the birth date of this year’s senior class3.

School media centers have an average of 24 networked computers and access to test databases, indexes, & ebooks through the Electronic Library of Minnesota3.

1”Technology Counts,” Education Week, http://www.edweek.org/sreports/tc03/state_data.cfm?slug=35mn_data.h222Minnesota Interactive Television Network (MITN)3”School Library Media Program Census,” Minnesota School Library Media Programs, 2003

11/24/03 27

Academic Trends in Higher Education*• Knowledge and information is growing exponentially

• The institutional landscape is changing: traditional campuses are declining, for-profit institutions are growing, and public and private institutions are merging.

• There is a shift in organizational structure toward decentralization.

• Instruction is becoming more learner-centered, non-linear, and self-directed.

• There is a growing emphasis on academic accountability.

• Academic emphasis is shifting from course-completion to competency.

• Education is becoming more seamless between high school, college, and further studies.

• Outsourcing and partnerships are increasing.

• Some advocate standardizing content in learning objects.* Thirty-two Trends Affecting Distance Education: An Informed Foundation for Strategic Planning, Scott Howell, Peter Williams, Nathan Lindsay. http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/fall63/howell63.html

11/24/03 28

Putting Technology to Work

“Both the private and public sectors have been largely overhauled in the last 20 years through the introduction of new technologies that affect communication, record-keeping, financial transactions, information flow, and knowledge management. While schools have been “wired” and technology purchased, the use of technology to assist in support of central curriculum or centralized instructional resources remains spotty and non-systematic.”1

1The California Virtual School Report: A National Survey of Virtual Education Practice commissioned by University of California College Preparatory Initiatve, 2002

11/24/03 29

Competition

“For the first time in US history, the business community sees higher education as an investment opportunity. Increasingly viewed as poorly run, low in productivity, high in cost, and still not effectively using technology, the traditional higher education community is seen by the for-profit sector as the next health care industry” another business ripe for takeover, remaking and profits.”1

1Barriers to Distance Education, American Council on Education Center for Policy Analysis, Educause, 2002

11/24/03 30

Distance Learning Trends in Higher Education*

• More courses, degrees and universities are becoming available through distance-education programs.

• The Internet is becoming dominant among other distance-education media.

• The distinction between distance and local education is disappearing.

• The need for effective course management systems and Web services is growing.

•There is an increasing need for learning and teaching strategies that exploit the capabilities of technology.


11/24/03 31

Minnesota Rural Schools

Rural schools in Minnesota are not performing as well on national achievement tests as their urban and suburban counterparts, only one of three states in the country to show this statistical disparity in 2003. Factors cited: high poverty demographics, difficulty attracting good teachers to rural areas, fewer curriculum options. According to the same study, rural students are less likely to apply for college. 1

Dedicated funding available in previous years to equalize Minnesota’s widely disparate telecommunications access costs for K-12 rural schools and libraries was eliminated in 2002 and has not been reinstated. Some affected districts are cutting bandwidth, discontinuing ITV courses. Others are cutting in other areas to make up the difference.

1“How Well Are American Students Learning?” Brown Center on Education Policy, Brookings Institution, http://www.brookings.edu/gs/brown/bc_report/2003/2003report.pdf

11/24/03 32

Economic Trends in Higher Education*

• There are fewer resources for education and education initiatives, such as distance education.

• Funding challenges are the top IT concerns for many.

• Lifelong learning is becoming a competitive necessity.


11/24/03 33

School Spending on Technology In spite of the economic slow-down, K-12 schools are projected to spend $5.8 billion nationally on school technology, level with years past. Purchases are being driven by

• NCLB data requirements (90% have student information systems they plan to upgrade)

• Instructional courseware (72% plan to purchase)• New wireless technologies (75% already own or plan to purchase)1

1QED Education Data Report, September, 2003 http://www.qeddata.com

The total dollar value of all e-learning products and services was estimated at $7 billion for 2000, and is expected to rise to $40.2 billion by 2005. Content is now overshadowing technology expenditures by 5:1. 2

2The State of E-Learning in the States National Governor’s Association, 2001

11/24/03 34

How Does Minnesota Reconcile These Opposing Realities?

• “There are fewer resources for education and education initiatives, such as distance education.”


? ? ? ? ?• “Lifelong learning is becoming a competitive necessity.”

11/24/03 35

Understand the ways in which new learning goals and new technologies have impacted the business of educating our citizenry

Align to shared goals and leverage resources for digital learning, academic services, and infrastructure development

Create interoperability standards that enable seamless services and transferable course material

Develop and implement an integrated plan to inform future technology investments and state policy

Build the state’s capacity in 21st Century skills and competencies

Collaborating to Improve Education and to Leverage Resources

The goal and the purpose of the Digital Learning Plan is to establish a statewide vision and benchmark that will allow Minnesota’s learning institutions to

Ensure

Access

Minimize

Costs

Improve

Learning

Create

Standards

It is an effort initiated by the state’s institutions to create a collaborative vision that will lead the way to collaborative planning and projects.

11/24/03 36

What Do We Have to Gain?With planning and collaboration, change can bring about improvements to education and economies to the institutions that deliver it.

Equitable access to greater learning opportunities

Increased data for teacher, student, and parent decision-making

More flexible learning options for students of all ages, all geographic locations, and all life situations

Research-based education techniques and best practices

Shared costs for new technology development

More efficient & faster access to resources

Volume purchasing for commonly used applications & infrastructure

Interoperable systems

Increased, standard security

Learning Technology Operations“Shareable” and timely data for accountability, decision-making & management

Increased and faster services for students

Ensure

Access

Minimize

Costs

Improve

Learning

Create

Standards

11/24/03 37

Key opportunities we have now to encourage innovative change

Budget cuts are driving state leadership’s attention to innovative, collaborative investments that pool resources and reinvent government

Governor’s plan to redesign formula funding for E-12 schools is a time to plan long-term funding for e-learning and infrastructure

Arrival of Internet2 is a change agent for learning & delivery

Existing Minnesota collaborative efforts & committees can provide organizational structure and can offer examples of best practice

National collaborative initiatives offer models & opportunities

Budget cuts are driving educational institutions to think outside the box

11/24/03 38

What building blocks will get us there?

(our “knee jerk” answer)

11/24/03 39

Money may not be the most vital ingredient

11/24/03 40

For change to be strategic, there must be leadership

“Technology is not a solution in isolation, but rather a key component that helps make it possible for schools to address core educational challenges.

However, the uncomfortable reality is that education leaders are not currently driving the policy agenda. Rapidly moving trends are outpacing the ability of policy makers to keep up. In the absence of firm policy guidance, the nation is rushing pell-mell toward an ad-hoc system of education that exacerbates existing disparities and cannot assure a high standard of education across new modes of instruction. By allowing this policy vacuum to continue, education leaders are failing to meet their obligation to assure that all students are provided a quality education.

State education policy makers should seize the opportunity to take the lead and move decisively to assure that e-learning spreads rapidly and equitably, is used well, and strengthens the public education system.”1

1Any Time, Any Place, Any Path, Any Pace: National Association of State Boards of Education e_Learning Policy Report, 2001

11/24/03 41

Leadership For the 21st CenturyThe 2003 Learning for the 21st Century report cites nine steps for building

momentum towards a 21st century educational system:

• Embrace a powerful vision of public education that includes 21st century skills

• Align leadership, management and resources with educational goals• Assess where schools are now• Develop priorities for 21st century skills• Develop a professional development plan for 21st century skills• Make sure students have equitable access to a 21st Century education• Begin developing assessments to measure student progress in 21st

Century skills• Plan collectively and strategically for the future

Learning for the 21st Century, Partnership for 21st Century Skills, July, 2003 http://www.21stcenturyskills.org

11/24/03 42

The Plan to Plan

The purpose of the Minnesota Digital Learning Plan is to describe a set of learning goals and vision -- the drivers of technology architecture on a state and local level.

From these learning goals, the Digital Learning Plan can then draw a map of the technical environment necessary to meet the state’s educational goals and strategy, beginning with the existing technical resources already at work.

The results can create a framework for future collaborative and individual institutional efforts that will foster a continuous and accessible statewide learning environment for citizens of all ages and circumstances.

“Embrace a powerful vision of public education that includes 21st century skills.”1

1Learning for the 21st Century, Partnership for 21st Century Skills, July, 2003 http://www.21stcenturyskills.org

11/24/03 43

Outcomes

MN Digital Learning Plan Shared Vision/Five-Year Targets/Collaborative Strategies/Trends Analysis

The benchmarks established by the Digital Learning Plan will set the stage for further planning efforts at the state, institutional and local levels.

U of M

Technology-enhanced Learning Council (TEL) Strategic Long-Range Plan

Minnesota State Colleges &

Universities

2010 Planning Report

Minnesota Online Council

Minnesota Department of

Education

K-12 Technology Plan

School Districts

3-yearTechnology Plans

Collaborative Digital Learning Council

Digital Learning Summit

Priority collaborative projects

Standards development

Promotion best practices

On-going statewide planning and policy development

Department of Administration

State Technology Plan

Planning Initiatives

11/24/03 44

Digital Learning Plan Participants

Steering CommitteeUniversity of Minnesota, Minnesota State Colleges & Universities,

Minnesota Department of Education, Minnesota Office of Technology, HESO, Minnesota Private Colleges Council, iSEEK Solutions

StaffMinnesota Office of Technology

Management Analysis Division, Department of Administration,

iSEEK Solutions

Expert Working Groups

Teaching & Learning

Skilled Educators

Student & Administrative Services

Technology

SponsorsiSEEK Solutions, Higher Education Advisory Council (HEAC)

Executive CommitteeLinda Baer, Senior Vice Chancellor, Minnesota State Colleges & Universities

Billie Wahlstrom, Senior Vice Provost, University of Minnesota

Cathy de Moll, Minnesota Office of Technology

11/24/03 45

On-going Leadership

While each institution will use the overarching vision for internal planning, on-going leadership must continue at the level of the state in order to identify and direct collaborative efforts that share services and utilize common assets.

“Align leadership, management and resources with educational goals.”1


11/24/03 46

The planning order for strategic change

1 Articulate the drivers, direction, and destination – a five-year high-level vision

3 Identify the current assets that can serve the mission, and identify the barriers to the desired vision

Develop a sustainable, inclusive governing/planning process that allows for one strategic statewide outcome and one central, representative Digital Learning Council; Create ongoing task forces.

2

Create a dynamic architecture: set guidelines, standards and best practices; do gap analysis & create a long-range strategy; recommend policies that can bring about desired change

4

5 Choose “do-able” projects that provide proof of concept, collaborative process, and results toward the long-range strategy

11/24/03 47

Outcomes of the Digital Learning PlanUsing these guidelines as a foundation, the Digital Learning Plan consists of the following tasks:

Digital Learning Report

A summary of emerging trends and current practices in distributed education in the state of Minnesota and around the nation; an articulated vision of digital learning in Minnesota in the year 2008.

1

2 Digital Learning Council

Recommendation for the creation, structure and operation of an on-going Digital Learning Council with responsibility for direction, standards, policy recommendations, and pilot projects.

11/24/03 48

Digital Learning Plan – the overarching vision1

From Plan to CouncilWith the creation of a Digital Learning Council, we build a statewide resource that can review and implement goals, best practices, standards, policies, existing resources, and collaborative projects for early childhood through adult learning. We combine the expertise of education and technology leaders to move digital learning planning forward throughout the state.

Digital LearningPlanning Council

2

5 Pilot projects

3Inventory relevant assets, identify barriers, do gap analysis

4 Set standards, establish promote best practices, recommend policy change

InstitutionalBusiness Applications

& PracticesTask Force

Educator Standards & Teaching Practices

Task Force

Architecture, Network

& SecurityTask Force

Students &Student Services

Task Force

Digital LibrariesTask Force

Curriculum Standards,

Applications, and Practices Task

Force

5 Pilot projects 5 Pilot projects

11/24/03 49

Sharing Resources

With a common vision and a commitment to collaborate, Minnesota’s educational institutions can identify the extent to which they can effectively share existing resources, and develop a common infrastructure and a unified “digital landscape.”

“Plan collectively and strategically for the future.”1


Minnesota Digital LandscapeMinnesota Digital Landscape

ProfessionalS

upport

Security &

Authentication

Hardw

are S

tandards &S

pecifications

Conc

eptu

al A

rchi

tect

ure

InteroperabilityS

tandards

Infrastructure

Netw

ork

Middlew

are

Applications

Minnesota Digital Learning Platform

System

Man

agem

ent &

Reliab

ility

Data

Interchange

Collaboratio

n & W

orkflow

tools

Content

Managem

ent To

ols

Portfolio T

ools

Instructiona

l Tools

Best P

ractices

Consistent Presentation & Accessibility

Statewide Objectives• Improved learning• Complementary systems• Avoidance of duplication• Sharing of data• Standards & guidelines

Research

Teaching Practice

Professional Development

Student Learning

Student Services

Assessment & Reporting

Records & Management

Library Services

Ed

ucatio

nal F

un

ction

Best P

ractices

Customer Expectation & Demands• Anytime, anywhere access to information• Rapid response• Multi-institutional functions• Quality learning experience

11/24/03 51

What Should We Consider?In a recently released study of the major national policy papers on technology in education during the past twenty

years, researchers found seven consistent recommendations and priorities:

1. Improve access, connectivity, and requisite infrastructure;

2. Create more, high-quality content and software;

3. Provide more, sustained, high-quality professional development and overall support for teachers seeking to innovate and grow in this domain;

4. Increase funding from multiple sources for a range of relevant activities;

5. Define and promote the roles of multiple stakeholders, including the public and private sectors;

6. Increase and diversify research, evaluation, and assessment; and

7. Review, revise and update regulations and policy that affect in-school use of technology, particularly regarding privacy, and security.

* A Retrospective on Twenty Years of Education Technology Policy, Culp, Honey, & Mandinach, Education Development Center, Center for Children and Technology for the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology, October, 2003, http://www.nationaledtechplan.org/participate/20years.pdf

11/24/03 52

What Should We Consider?The State Policy Framework* outlines 7 K-12 policy areas which must be addressed on a statewide level:

• Technology standards and assessments for students.

• Technology standards, assessments, professional development, and assistance for teachers and teacher educators.

• Statewide, subsidized electronic network linking districts and other stakeholders.

• Statewide program to provide data or administrative systems to districts

• Guidelines for technology-related facilities design, equipment, software, connectivity, and infrastructure; statewide consortium purchasing programs; and funding support for technology acquisition.

• State-sponsored research and evaluation of educational technology initiatives; development of education technology devices, applications and approaches; dissemination and adaptation of educational technology

• State strategic plan for educational improvement, including technology; state funding for educational technology plans and initiatives.

* Chris Dede, “State Policy Framework for Assessing Educational Technology Implementation,” Harvard University, 2001. Co-sponsored by the National Science Foundation, the Benton Foundation, the Council of Chief State School Officers and NEIR*TEC, http://www.neirtec.org/statepolicy/documents/chart0112.pdf

11/24/03 53

What Should We Consider?

The Benton Foundation’s Sustainability Challenge report offers a "Sustainability Top Ten List" of reforms necessary for ensuring that the nation's educational technology investments do not go to waste. The list includes:

• Accelerating teacher professional development • Professionalizing technical support • Ensuring all Americans have 21st Century Skills • Adopting a new national goal to bridge the home and community

digital divides

* The Sustainability Challenge: Taking Edtech to the Next Level, The Benton Foundation and the Education Development Center's Center for Children and Technology (CCT), March, 2003 http://www.benton.org/publibrary/sustainability/sus_challenge.pdf

11/24/03 54

The Digital Learning Plan Vision:

Minnesota students shall be prepared to succeed in an increasingly complex, information-rich society. All Minnesota students shall have the higher-order knowledge and skills that will allow them to function effectively in an ever-changing environment and in a variety of roles. Our learning institutions shall have no achievement gap between groups of students, and shall have equal opportunities to meet the learning goals.

11/24/03 55

Building a Digital Structure For Successful Learning

Successful Student Learning

Access to high performance technology

Accountability & improvement through effective research, evaluation & assessment

Tradition of high quality education

Digital age policy and leadership

Pillars of Success

Foundational Prerequisites

Kn

ow

led

ge

ab

le a

nd

ski

lled

ed

uca

tors

21st

Ce

ntu

ry L

ea

rnin

g a

nd

T

ea

chin

g p

ract

ice

s

Eff

ect

ive

ad

min

istr

ativ

e

an

d s

tud

en

t se

rvic

es

11/24/03 56

MN Digital Learning Plan 5-Year Targets (early draft)

Teaching & Learning

Learning Systems

21st C. Skills Academic Support

Assessment

Educational opportunities are everywhere, and available lifelong

Information literacy requirements

strengthen multiple literacy skills

Learning support services are ubiquitous

and seamless

Learner data is available 24/7

11/24/03 57


Skilled Educators

Teacher Preparation Practice

Teacher education is enhanced by research on

multiple literacies, technology-enhanced learning & 21st

century skills

Professional development is available continuously and is

based on best practices

Licensing, tenure & intellectual policies reflect

value and use of technology

11/24/03 58


Business, Administration, and Student Services

Student Services Planning, Policy, & Operations Partner-ships

Student support

services are ubiquitous

and seamless

Libraries support

resource sharing and individual

access across the region

Access to appropriate

technologies, including high

speed networks, is

available to all

Business practices are better aligned

statewide to be consistent with changes in the

classroom

Tech support is adequate

to the technology needs of

educators, students &

administrators

Strategic partnerships

leverage resources

11/24/03 59

Next Steps

Refine 5-year targets and identify priority strategies

(Steering Committee)

Define strategy scope, roles & parameters. Identify “doable”

collaborative projects. Map current technologies & trends

(Expert Working Groups)

Gather constituency feedback

(students, faculty,Administrators, etc.)

Report, including recommended structure

for on-going collaborations

Digital Learning Summit & best practices

showcase

December January February March/April May

11/24/03 60

For More Information

Digital Learning Plan Web site: Http://www.digitallearning.state.mn.us

Contact: Cathy de Moll

Minnesota Office of Technology

[email protected]

651-215-3872

Documents

University of Minnesota Minnesota State Colleges and Universities Minnesota Office of Technology Minnesota Virtual University Minnesota Department of Education