Comments on: Educational Leadership Policy Standards

By: Janet

Janet — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 22:11:24 +0000

The standards eminate from a variety of studies, including the McREL and NCSL. As school leaders, we are now forced to blend politics, relationship managment and agency relations into school districts. True, the standards only touch on technology. However, the new stadnards were created in order to address the changing needs and increasing demands in education.
Districts have the flexibility to place technology in what is being delivered and how it is being delivered. They can also place it as a vision or mission. Therefore, districts are enabled to determine for themselves whether (or not) technology is a priority and where it laids in the realm of their priority.

By: Jon Becker

Jon Becker — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 20:48:42 +0000

Thanks and agreed, Charlie. In this case, it’s hard for those in charge of developing these standards to argue that they didn’t know or didn’t have any good guides. The NETS-A were right there for them to consider and integrate. I didn’t and shouldn’t have expected a large-scale integration, but as integrated, they imply more of the same; acquire technology and support teachers. In other words, “here are some new tools we acquired, here’s three hours of PD…now go to it.” True, good tech. integration inherently involves alignment with the overall vision and that’s what’s missing in the ELPS, IMHO.

By: Charlie Roy

Charlie Roy — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 20:40:36 +0000

Love the post. Sometimes I feel much of the frustration comes from the fact that most of the leadership on such committees presents a more senior level of leadership. The generation gap per se might have much to do with a lack of real technology goals that are tangible and based on current reality. I don’t mean doom and gloom hear. Education is making leaps and bounds in terms of technology but there seems to be strong resistance from the subset that has never had to integrate these tools.