# data[].attributes.headline
Please post your district as the title and your story as the text body. Feel free to attach images, documents, and videos if they are related. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Please post your district as the title and your story as the text body. Feel free to attach images, documents, and videos if they are related. 

# data[].attributes.body
We are preparing for a levy renewal in the next year or two.  We have not engaged in this process at all yet but there are definitely some take-aways from both presentations - Thank you!

I am struggling with knowing what is coming next.  We aren't a district that is at the cutting edge nor do I think we will be any time soon, but I struggle with putting tools in classrooms that cost significant money but are outdated very, very quickly.  Perhaps I just need to get over that!

We have classroom tech standards that were developed over 5 years ago so they most definitely need to be refreshed.  I like the idea of working with each building/grade span to determine the needs specific to grade levels or content areas.  Why have 1 standard if it doesn't meet the needs of all students and teachers?

# data[].attributes.body
1) What are pain points in classroom?
2)  Have other districts already addressed this so we can learn what worked and what didn't?
3)  Do we have the resources available to implement?

Current Challenges
Our current biggest challenge is assignment-level grade pass back from Schoology to Campus. Our staff hear stories of other districts successfully doing this while we continue to have issues.  When talking to those districts we learn that what they are doing is different than our goal so it is a challenge to maintain expectations internally.
Another immediate conversation taking place is whether or not our schools should renew their SMART Notebook maintenance as we are at the end of a 5-year agreement.
Finally, tied to the SMART issue is the continued review of what technology should be in a classroom.

# data[].attributes.body
We are just starting the process of developing classroom technology standards and a future technology levy to support the standards.

# data[].attributes.body
Core classrooms have classroom carts of Chromebooks-w teacher CB. Smart Boards and/or projectors in all classrooms. Smart NB licenses-
We are beginning to explore student and teacher devices to support flexible learning and flex spaces. Software/web app needs, Device needs, display and distribution needs, along with PD are all included. We understand that we will likely break from past standards of all classrooms looking the same.

# data[].attributes.body
We are working through a process to determine our instructional focus/outcomes at the elementary levels to drive what we put in a new school, opening Fall 2019. The challenge has been to gather feedback from other elem schools that are not being remodeled immediately, but need to help develop the current reality. Currently, we have promethoms. ean boards PreK-12 in almost all ro
http://bit.ly/CLtechProcessElem

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Elementary Classroom Technology Pilots | Piktochart Visual Editor

# data[].attributes.body
Strategy in place for student devices K-12. We used steering committees to build. Flexible classrooms new at high school, currently reviewing classrooms, aligning to facilities schedules, working with teaching and learning, collecting tech input into our next tech plan.

# data[].attributes.body
Technology Adoption plans are decided upon by the leadership of the technology director and consensus of the technology committee. Analysis of technology feedback and formulating it into larger scale decisions, like which grades should receive which devices, are better decided by the committee, while smaller scale decisions, including types of devices, infrastructure design, or methods of device deployment, are left to the director.

# data[].attributes.body
Recent HS Classroom Refresh Includes:
* Repositioned Epson 109W projector w/110" image
* Removed 12 yr old Smart Boards
Installed 110" in house made white boards
* Tied with the purchase of the HP X360 convertible tablet/laptop for mobility
* Wireless projection was attained using an Actiontech Screenbeam Miracast device

# data[].attributes.body
Our classroom standards have been developed during times of need or because of resource availability more that an overall strategic plan.

Elementary--Smart Notebook Heavy with smartboards or interactive flat screens; Teacher devices are MacBooks; Student 2:1 devices are K-2 ipads; 3-4 Chromebooks; Grade 5  BYOD;  Seesaw k-1 and Schoology 2-5; GSuite; Half time integrationist in each building

Secondary-much lighter use of Smart Notebook; 1:1 BYOD 85% Chromebooks; schoology; Teacher devices are heavily windows laptops; Most smartboards with a small percentage of Flat screen interactvies; Heavy G-Suite; Hapara; Integrationist in each building

# data[].attributes.body
Currently in process of reviewing our elementary classroom standard.  Have ancient smartboards and the majority of staff are heavily invested in Notebook 11.
We were fortunate to pass a capital levy in November and a committee of elementary teachers have been working to identify needs and wants for what's next.
We are having a vendor showcase where vendors will present and allow committee reps to have a hands on experience with each product.  Demo devices will be left in district for any elementary staff to experience if interested.
Solutions we are considering:
1. Interactive panels
2. Projector, screenbeam, and convertible laptop
3. Simple projector
Committee will reconvene this spring to make a recommendation.

# data[].attributes.body
Current:
We recently revised our digital digital learning plan focused on instruction while also going through a facility study. Through our new plan we have done a review and implementation at HS with the personal learning device and instructional. We are in the review process at MS this year with Elementary coming next year.
Questions:
What have been processes that have worked for defining next generation classrooms (tech in connection with flex concept)?

# data[].attributes.body
We are in the process of selecting student devices, as our current iPad leases are in their last year. I invited district staff to participate in a focus group. The group went over survey data that we had from all licensed staff at our first meeting, next we'll see presentations from vendors, then we'll focus in on our teaching and learning goals and how devices will support those goals.

# data[].attributes.body
We are in the process of testing out non-interactive displays. Two teachers have SMART displays that we are struggling with getting the casting to consistently work.  Two other displays are connected via an AirTame device. What we have found is that a Chromecast works better than the AirTame.

# data[].attributes.body
Student device choice of iPads is supported by all. 1:1 in grades 7-12
Currently reviewing classroom projection options.
We are giving teachers the option of interactive device ( Smartboard) or standard 70' TV as their existing projection system fails.
All teachers have iPads so projection to TV or projector is possible either way.
We struggling with creating an organized replacement plan for existing Smartboards/projectors because we do not have dedicated tech levy.

# data[].attributes.body
Have mindsets, philosophies, pedagogical approaches changed to embrace leveraging new technologies with new behaviors (e.g. minimize the retrofit of previous practice with new tools)?

Is the learner at the center of the proposed changes and are teachers willing to lead the cause?

Are we able to implement and sustain?

# data[].attributes.body
Very similar in the process to Richfield. We have identified the need for change the design of the classroom. I really like the ideate and change with the feedback of staff and students.

# data[].attributes.body
We are still purchasing and installing Smartboards as we kick the can further into the future.
The plan for a new selection process for classroom AV will be a very personalized approach on a program-by-program basis. One of our programs, for example use the Smartboards and Notebook software every day and as intended. Many other programs could get by with a simple, non-touch, display.
The top 3 things we would want to learn about before looking at a new technology adoption would be:
- What are the needs of the teachers/program/students...how do they teach...how do they learn?
- What are other districts doing...what's working...what's not?
- What is out there and what resources do we have to implement effectively...staff resources...financial resources...time?

# data[].attributes.body
Figuring out attitudes towards technology, changing mindsets, making PD a priority.

# data[].attributes.body
Presently living in multiple major ecosystems and degrees of mobility. Examining end-of-life for Smartboards through a lens of being more student-centered, mobile, and capable through the influx of powerful mobile devices, supporting displays, and professional coaching. Excited for what lies ahead for learning, collaboration, and creativity.

# data[].attributes.body
For our HS building project we had a tech day and brought in vendors for displays and classroom audio. We had teachers and technology folks there. We gathered information from this event. This information was used by the tech committee and building admin to decide the classroom tech.

# data[].attributes.body
Currently
• Long history of 1:1. iPad still remains device of choice. Grades 4-12. Potential plan to add 3rd grade next year.
• Teach "coaching" positions continued to be seen as essential.
• Evolving (revolving?) conversations on place of IWBs and and associated software.
Questions
• What's the current value and place of IWB's and IWB software?
• How will we position both use of our LMS and our broader online learning program?

# data[].attributes.headline
Cannon Valley Special Education Cooperative (Faribault)

# data[].attributes.subject
Cannon Valley Special Education Cooperative (Faribault)

# data[].attributes.body
Much of our Technology Adoption is IEP driven. The current baseline is I-Pad or Chromebook depending on student need / grade level.

We are a very new district, so we draw knowledge from member districts, and through experience, develop process and methods that "work best" as a baseline build or template (access controls, filtering, safety, accessibility) then customize apps or deployments to the student through MDM or other tools.

# data[].attributes.body
Beginning to define our process.

# data[].attributes.body
We have 1:1 chromebooks at HT Elem, iPads at Park Elem and Chromebooks at MSHS - with entirely new admin team, we are evaluating our status and putting together a short and long range plan. Todays sharing of talking with each teacher was noted - good idea as we are doing this via PD and student learning with Tech but I will add some ideas from this presentation to meetings. Note - facilities steering committee meetings start this month which could affect plan.

# data[].attributes.body
We are 1:1 3rd through 12th grade.  K-2nd have iPads in the classroom.  3rd-5th are 1:1 with iPads.  6th-12th are either 1:1 (HP Streams) or BYOD.  Smartboards in every room.  We are in the process of changing out Smartboards in 6th-12th grade rooms to 75" TVs with Airserver Connect so that students can cast their screen (https://www.airserver.com/Connect)

# data[].attributes.body
We are in the process of finalizing the maximization of our cat2 erate funding for this period and will be focusing on upgrading our entire wireless network infrastructure. Because of budget limitations - and as a Charter School - we have been more ad-hoc with regards to initiatives though are are able to leverage significant resources into Technology. A number of significant initiatives we engaged in are interactive boards in every instructional space, transitioning to Gsuites and expanding significantly to a Chromebook environment (we are at a 1:1 ratio with students and have a 1:1 program in our junior academy along with a BYOD program - these are now starting to tax our wireless resources (we have a fully-managed cloud-based Meraki system with AP's in every classroom). Smartboards are weighing heavily on future planning - projectors / bulbs are a constant budget expense. We have piloted LCD TV's paired with Chromecasts and apple TV's with great success and will be piloting some interactive LCD Flat-Panels (Infocus JTouch) . We've also have been expanding our STEM / STEAM programming significantly with the conversion of our traditional computer labs into STEAM / Maker spaces with the compliments of 3D printers, LEGO's robotics, Arduino's , Littlebits in addition to what was traditionally shop-based tools (welding, electronics, woodworking, etc.). The challenges with all this include being able to support all of this technology, make it a sustainable programming venture, and keep staff and students engaged. We have a small staff to support all this - Myself, a user support technician and a technology integration specialist along with a data owner to manage our SIS. We have a model of allowing teachers to pilot ideas and provide full technology support / input. Longer term goals include integrating multiple solutions into singular ones (SIS / HR / etc.) - Also are trying to tie all the technology initiatives together - LMS / Schoology for example.