554ferdon dataanalysis rec

Technology Integration:
Data Analysis and
Recommendations
by Susan Ferdon EDTECH 554
Master of Educational Technology Program FA10
Boise State University

Table of Contents
List of Tables and Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 3
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 4
Data Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 4
Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 5
Discussion and Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 11
Initial Technology Integration Survey page 11
Survey Return Rate page 12
Professional Development - Planning page 13
Professional Development - Training Sessions page 15
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 20
Appendices
Appendix A Technology Integration Tiers page 21
Appendix B Data Cell Label Edits – Excel Spreadsheet page 23

List of Tables and Figures
Table 1: Technology Integration Survey Return Rate . . . . . . . . . . . page 6
Table 2: Technology Integration - Highest Performing Schools . . . page 10
Figure 1: Technology Integration Tiers - District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . page 7
Figure 2: Technology Integration Tiers - Primary Role . . . . . . . . . . page 8
Figure 3: Technology Integration Tiers - Elementary Schools . . . . page 9
Figure 4: Technology Integration Tiers - Middle Schools . . . . . . . . . page 9
Figure 5: Technology Integration Tiers - High Schools . . . . . . . . . . page 11

Introduction
In this scenario, the Pleasant View school district is addressing concerns that
technology is not being used to its full potential in classrooms. Board members are
concerned about adequately preparing students with the 21st
century learning skills
necessary upon graduating from High School in Pleasant View School District. Further,
the district did not meet the federal Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in Math for the
second year in a row, placing it in improvement status. Pleasant View teachers took a
Self-Evaluation Technology Integration survey and the purpose of this report is to
present an analysis of survey data and submit recommendations for staff development.
Data Collection
Participants
Teachers and administrators in Pleasant View School District’s 23 schools - 13
elementary schools, four middle schools, five high schools, and Hunt Center -
completed a survey in which they identified their current level of technology integration
based on a three-tiered system (see Appendix A). Though the actual number of
teachers at each school is not known, it is assumed that the return rate on the surveys
was significantly less than 100%. Also, some schools had a much lower return rate than
others. For example, one would expect at least two administrators per school (46+ in all)
yet only four administrators returned surveys (9%).
Procedures
A self-evaluation survey was completed. It is assumed that respondents added
text to survey form fields, as there is little consistency among data labels (i.e. teacher –
3rd
grade, 3rd
grade, 3rd
grade teacher, teacher, no title, blank, etc.).
Data Sources
Original survey data were provided in the form of an Excel spreadsheet with
respondent information grouped by school. Data were displayed in five columns: Tier 1,
Tier 2, Tier 3, Position, and Building/Department. Lack consistency in labeling made
sorting and data analysis difficult, so the original data was saved in a new Excel
spreadsheet (see Appendix B) and edited. The new spreadsheet placed content in

seven columns: Tier, School Type, Role 1, Role 2, Grade/Subject 1, Grade/Subject 2,
and School. Information within cells was edited for consistency of labeling. In the case
of dual roles, leadership positions were listed first as those individuals will impact more
than just their own classrooms/students. When multiple subject areas were indicated,
content areas were listed before assistant/support roles and NCLB subjects were listed
first. In addition to the worksheet with data from all respondents, worksheets were
generated that display data by school, by tier, and by role.
Formulas were used to disaggregate data by
• Integration Tier: 1, 2, 3.
• School Type: Elementary, Middle School, High School, Hunt Center.
• Role: Administrator, Instructional Coach, Coordinator, Department Head,
Interventionist, Library Media Specialist, Student Services, Support Staff,
Teacher, no title.
For ease of sorting, Excel spreadsheet data were exported into a database program,
FileMaker Pro™. The original spreadsheet may be accessed at
http://edtech2.boisestate.edu/ferdons/554/data_oldview.xls. The new spreadsheet may
be accessed at http://edtech2.boisestate.edu/ferdons/554/data_newview.xlsx.
Results
The following results are based upon the 510 surveys completed by Pleasant
View teachers and administrators. Technology integration by other staff members is not
known at this time. For the purposes of this study a significant difference is one that is
calculated to be 5% or greater.
Return Rate
The number of teachers and administrators who returned the survey are
indicated in Table 1.

Survey Return Rate
Administrator
Instructional
Coach
Coordinator/
Dept.Head
Interventionist
LibraryMedia
Specialist
Student
Services
SupportStaff
Teacher
(notitle)
TOTAL
Significant
Difference
Hunt Center 1 NA 1 18 1 21 (N/A)
Adams NA 1 13 1 15
Apple 2 NA 1 1 20 24 +67%
Brown 1 NA 1 11 1 14
Bryant NA 9 1 10 -30%
Cherry 1 3 NA 1 1 8 1 15
Evergreen 1 NA 1 1 2 14 19 +32%
Garfield 1 NA 11 3 15
Jones 1 NA 2 2 2 16 23 +60%
Lynwood NA 24 24 +67%
Maple 1 NA 1 8 10 -30%
Prairie NA 1 9 10 -30%
Sandburg NA 1 2 10 13 -10%
ElementarySchools
Wilson 1 NA 10 2 13 -10%
East PV 1 1 1 9 9 -45%
Lincoln 20 20 +15%
Washington 4 2 1 1 14 1 23 +32%
Middle
Schools
West PV 2 1 13 1 17
Franklin 1 1 1 1 1 35 2 42
Huntington 1 1 1 2 1 5 50 61 +41%
Mountainview 27 27 -36%
Newport 1 2 4 37 44
HighSchools
Pleasant
View
1 3 1 1 35 41
TOTALS 4 21 8 8 15 20 2 418 14 510
Table 1.
Assuming that schools of the same type (elementary, middle school, etc.) are roughly
the same size, it is evident that there was quite a disparity in return rates between

buildings. In the table above, those schools with return rates that were significantly
lower (5% lower, or more) than the average are marked in red and those that are
significantly higher (5% higher, or more) are marked in green. Average return rates
were:
• Elementary School - Average number of returned surveys is14.6; 5% of 14.6 is .7.
• Middle School - Average number of returned surveys is 17.3; 5% of 17.3 is .9.
• High School - Average number of returned surveys is 43; 5% of 43 is 2.2.
District
Survey data show that the majority (78%) of Pleasant View teachers are
functioning at Technology Integration Tier 1.
Technology Integration Tiers - District
Figure 1.
Subgroups – Role
When viewed as subgroups, based on primary role, most show similar
percentages of teachers at each tier (Figure 2). Exceptions are as follows:
• Administrators: 25% at Tier 3. However, that represents only one respondent, as
there are only four in this subgroup.
• Coordinator/Department Head: None at Tier 3.
• Student Services: None at Tier 2, higher percentages at Tiers 1 and 3.
• Support Staff: All at Tier 1. However, there were only two respondents that could
be identified as Support Staff.
• No Title: Larger percentages at Tier 2 (21%) and Tier 3 (14%), However,
incomplete information makes it impossible to know the roles of these individuals.
• Of those subgroups with ten or more respondents, Library Media Specialists
have the greatest percentage at Tiers 2 and 3 (33% in all).

Technology Integration Tiers – Primary Role
Figure 2.
Subgroups – Elementary Schools
When viewed as subgroups, based on school, disparity was noted between
groups and when comparing groups to district percentages. Elementary data show that:
• Roughly half (6 of 13) of district elementary schools have teachers at all three
Tiers.
• Seven elementary schools have teachers at one or two Tiers:
o Maple Elementary teachers are at Tier 1 only.
o Bryant Elementary has no teachers at Tier 2.
o Five elementary schools have no teachers at Tier 3: Garfield, Jones,
Lynwood, Prairie and Wilson.
• Brown Elementary has a significantly larger percentage of teachers at Tier 3
(21%) than the district average (8%).
• Evergreen has the smallest percentage of teachers at Tier 1 (68%).

Technology Integration Tiers – Elementary Schools
Figure 3.
Subgroups – Middle Schools
Survey results from middle schools are, on the whole, similar to district
percentages. Three of the four middle schools have a higher than average percentage
of teachers at Tier 3, and one, Washington Middle School, has significantly fewer at Tier
1 (65%). West Pleasant View Middle School has none at Tier 3.
Technology Integration Tiers – Middle Schools
Figure 4.

Subgroups – High Schools
Survey results from high schools show that three of the five schools have a
significantly larger number of teachers at Tier 1 (Franklin - 83%, Mountainview - 85%)
and one, Newport High School, has a significantly larger number of teachers at Tier 2
(23%) and Tier 3 (20%). Of all 23 schools in the district, Newport High School is the
most high-performing school in terms of self-reported technology integration.
Technology Integration Tiers – High Schools
Figure 5.
Hunt Center and Highest Performing Schools
Hunt Center shows a significantly level of technology integration than the district
average and is in the top five when looking at both the lowest percentage at Tier 1 and
the highest percentage Tier 3 (Table 2).

Technology Integration - Highest Performing Schools
District
Newport
HS
Washington
MS
Hunt
Center
Evergreen
Elem.
Brown
Elem.
Tier 3 8% 20% 13% 19% 11% 21%
Tier 2 14%
22%
23%
43%
22%
35%
14%
33%
21%
33%
7%
28%
Tier 1 78% 57% 65% 67% 68% 71%
Table 2.
Discussion and Recommendations
Initial Technology Integration Survey
Discussion:
The Technology Integration Survey that district administrators, teachers and staff
completed provides a good starting point for the planning of technology related staff
development activities. Classification into three tiers provides distinct separation
between levels of technology integration by respondents. However, survey construction
and format provides information that is, at times, limited. Some fields were left blank and
lack of standardization in labeling resulted in a wide variety of responses. In some
cases, erroneous information was entered. For example, in rows 271-274 the building is
a middle school but elementary grade levels are listed. Form fields that allow open-
ended responses provide great flexibility but make sorting and grouping a challenge.
The greatest percentage of individuals is in Tier 1 and there is likely quite a
diverse skill set represented, from those who have little or no experience with
technology to those who are on the borderline between Tiers 1 and 2. The combination
of gaps in information, large numbers of individuals at Tier 1, and low return rates result
in an incomplete picture of staff development needs. The gathering of additional
information would allow for staff development activities to most effectively address the
needs of this large and diverse staff.
Recommendations:
1.1 Prior to the planning of specific staff development activities, it is recommended
that staff be surveyed to determine more specific needs related to technology
training.

1.2 A survey similar to Sun Associates Sample Survey Instrument
(http://www.sun-associates.com/eval/samples/samplesurv.html) would provide
greater specificity when assessing needs.
1.3 In constructing the next survey, use of an electronic format would make data
collection and analysis much more efficient.
1.4 Checkboxes and other survey content should be made to correlate to district
hardware, software, and the desired uses of technology resources.
1.5 Eliminate acronyms (i.e., MHOH, SVL) or provide a listing of descriptions. This
will allow information to be more easily read and understood by a variety of
stakeholder groups.
1.6 If possible, survey selected parents and students to see how their perceptions
of technology integration compare with district administrators, teachers, and
staff.
Caveat: As with any self-reporting instrument, one must consider the possibility that
survey results have some degree of inherent bias. For example, individuals may inflate
reported skill levels as a means of enhancing their perceived effectiveness in the
classroom.
Survey Return Rate
Discussion:
Return rate varied a great deal between buildings and the return rate by
administrators was notably low (4). The fact that administrator return rate was so low in
an indication that one of several problems may have occurred:
• Administrators may not have been aware that they were expected to complete
the survey.
• The timing of survey may have made completion problematic.
• Lack of buy-in.
Building-level leaders are a valuable resource, particularly in a large district like
Pleasant View. Effective strategies and procedures from those buildings with higher
return rates (see Table 1) can be identified and replicated elsewhere in the district.

Recommendations:
2.1 Encourage administrators, department heads, and coordinators to lead by
example. If technology integration, related needs assessments, and staff
development, are viewed as a priority by those in leadership positions, there is
a greater likelihood that other staff will make it a priority as well.
Useful resources are:
• The Consortium for School Networking provides resources, information
and programs for school district technology leaders:
http://www.cosn.org/
• Publication: Leadership for Web 2.0 in Education: Promise and Reality
http://www.cosn.org/Portals/7/docs/Web%202.0/CoSN%20Report%20042809Final%2
0w-cover.pdf
2.2 Factors that contributed to higher return rates (Table 1) should be identified,
celebrated, and shared.
2.3 Factors that contributed to low return rates should be addressed prior to
distribution of the new survey.
2.4 Provide staff with time to complete the survey during contractual hours (i.e.
faculty meeting, team planning time, etc.). That, coupled with the expectation
that all staff complete the survey, will result in a much clearer picture of needs
that should be addressed.
Professional Development - Planning
“Truly transformational staff development activities are but one piece of a larger
change effort initiated by the entire school community.”
Holmes & Duffey, p. 4
Discussion:
The district has numerous goals, including those that have been identified: 1)
Preparing graduates with 21st
century learning skills, 2) Utilizing the full potential of
technology resources, and 3) Increasing student achievement as measured by
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). To address these and other considerations, a
comprehensive plan is needed. Survey data will assist in the identification of ways in
which technology can be effectively integrated into classrooms and school operations
but is just one of many data points to consider. Technology integration can be an
effective tool in the development of students’ 21st
century skills but specific skills need to

be targeted and instructional strategies and methods identified. The act of using
technology in the classroom is not sufficient to ensure that students are developing
needed skills. Technology integration will provide the tools and resources needed to
meet instructional goals but clear direction is needed.
Recommendations:
3.1 Develop a 3-5 year strategic plan that encompasses district goals including
raising of academic achievement, development of 21st
century skills, and
effective use of technology resources. Include initial training, follow-up training,
ongoing coaching, mentoring, tech support, and support the plan with human
and fiscal resources needed for implementation.
3.2 Analyze assessment data and target subgroups and content standards that
currently do not meet expectations for AYP. Use that information to plan math-
related staff development activities for appropriate staff. Though the NCLB
goal of 100% meeting expectations by 2014 may be considered unrealistic,
targeting specific subgroups and standards will allow students to make
ongoing progress.
3.3 Clearly identify 21st
century skills including standards, benchmarks,
assessment and evaluation. Useful resources include:
• Partnership for 21st
Century Learning (http://www.p21.org/) is a national
organization that advocates for 21st
century readiness and provides
information, tools and resources to assist districts and schools.
• Pearson Foundation videos provide a model of 21st
century skill
development and assessment in the K-12 classroom:
http://www.youtube.com/user/PearsonFdtn#p/c/BCB47540BEBC02EC/2/HiyaQ2WbB
VU
3.4 Incorporate NETS for students and teachers into district planning. Useful
resources include:
• ISTE NETS Student Profiles: http://www.iste.org/standards/nets-for-
students/nets-for-students-2007-profiles.aspx
• ISTE Necessary Conditions: http://www.iste.org/standards/nets-for-
students/nets-for-students-essential-conditions.aspx
• NETS Implementation Wiki: http://nets-
implementation.iste.wikispaces.net/
3.5 Identify resources that will aid in the successful integration of technology in

district classrooms. Possibilities include:
• Forum Unified Technology Suite:
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2005/tech_suite/
• Technology Integration Matrix: http://fcit.usf.edu/matrix/
Professional Development – Training Sessions
“Since any large-scale change results from the actions of individuals, individuals
must be the focus of all change efforts.”
Holmes & Duffey, p. 6
Discussion:
Pleasant View is a large district and professional development needs are quite
diverse. Though a comprehensive plan is needed, staff development activities can
address needs identified through the Technology Integration Survey.
Recommendations:
4.1 Train-the-Trainer Model: Target school personnel who will act as trainers,
providing just-in-time support as well as lead professional development
training activities.
4.1.1 Coaches: Provide training for Instructional Coaches so that they can
model technology rich lessons that support best practice in content
area instruction. Currently, 76% of Instructional Coaches are at Tier 1.
Plan professional development activities so that all advance to Tier 2
within one year, and to Tier 3 by the end of the second year.
4.1.2 Department Heads: Provide training for department heads and
curriculum leaders so that technology use is embedded in district
curriculum and modeled for district staff. Survey results show that
“Department Head” is the only role in which there are currently no
individuals at Tier 3, so it is expected that training needs will be more
intensive. As above, plan professional development activities so that
all advance to Tier 2 within one year, and to Tier 3 by the end of the
second year.
4.1.3 Technology Leaders: Provide training for elementary teachers who

will act as technology leaders within their buildings. 15 of 23 schools
already have individuals at Tier 3; encourage them to serve in a
building-level technology leadership role. Of the remaining eight
schools, all but one (Maple Elementary) have staff at Tier 2.
4.2 Differentiation: Direct applicability to one’s experience, responsibilities, and
learning style, will help ensure that training is useful and acted upon. It is
recommended that training sessions be limited to software, hardware and
technology resources that participants have direct and ongoing access to.
4.2.1 Administrators: With just four administrators returning surveys it is
difficult to judge needs of all. Focusing training for administrators on
the effective evaluation of technology integration will help them to
identify, encourage, and support effective use of technology by their
staff. Further, training administrators on use of specific productivity,
collaboration, and communication tools will further professional and
school goals while modeling effective use of technology. Those at Tier
3 may serve as mentors.
4.2.2 Library Media Specialists: In many districts, Library Media
Specialists provide direct instruction to students in the areas of
research and computer applications. 67% of district Library Media
Specialists are currently at Tier 1. Plan professional development
activities so that all Library Media Specialists are at Tier 2 within one
year.
4.2.3 Student Services: Student Services Personnel (Social Workers,
School Psychologists, Speech/Language Pathologists, PT/OT) will
benefit training on the use of specific software and hardware that can
be used with students as well as productivity, progress monitoring,
and IEP software. It is recommended that those at Tier 3 (15%) be
questioned about what has been most useful and effective for them
and that input drive content selection for professional development for
the remaining 85%, all of whom are at Tier 1.

4.2.4 Teachers: For those trainings that are more general in nature, like the
use of specific hardware, opportunities to work with grade level and
subject matter peers is beneficial. Allowing time to relate new skills
and understanding to classroom practices will make new learning
more meaningful and improve implementation. Teachers of NCLB
subjects will benefit working as subject matter teams to share
resources, lessons and successes that support achievement
standards. Since all middle school math teachers are at Tier 1, and
the district did not make AYP in math, it is recommended that middle
school math teachers receive more intensive training.
4.2.5 Support Staff: Training for support staff should related directly to the
hardware and software used by students they work with.
4.2.6 Tier 1: 78% of survey respondents are at Tier 1. Within a group this
size it is expected that there are variety of skills sets - some
individuals will be farther along that others. Offering modules/sessions
which teachers can self-select will help ensure that training takes
individuals where they are and moves them forward.
4.2.7 Tier 2: 14% of survey respondents are at Tier 2. Professional
development offerings of sufficient challenge are needed for this
group. It is recommended that individuals submit topics of interest for
training sessions. Information gathered from this group can be used to
guide training of those currently at Tier 1: What has facilitated your
ability to integrate technology? What roadblocks did you find along the
way? What suggestions do you have for professional development?
4.2.8 Tier 3: 8% of survey respondents are at Tier 3. Those at Tier 3 are
technology leaders in the district and providing them opportunities for
collaboration and sharing will build a supportive environment for
continued growth of technology integration in skills. It is
recommended that release time and funding be provided to allow Tier
3 teachers to attend state, regional, and national technology

conferences. As numbers grow within Tier 3 greater in-house
expertise will be needed to continue the train-the-trainer model.
4.2.9 Learning Styles: Training sessions should present information
verbally and in writing, provide support materials for those who need
more time to work and process information, and provide time for
hands-on application for all participants. Building an online library of
training documents and videos, which could be accessed any time,
will allow district staff to work at their own pace.
4.2.10 Site-Based Training: Staff development that is site-based and
promotes collegiality has been found to be most effective (Holmes &
Duffey). Working with smaller groups within buildings - 1:1 when
needed – will provide just-in-time support that relates directly to
classroom instruction. Building-level training can occur as mini-
sessions before school, after school, during team meetings, and by
individual appointment. Gathering information from higher functioning
schools (see Table 2) will help to identify and build upon current
practices that have been successful in the district. Additional training
sessions and sister school mentoring should be planned for those
buildings with few teachers at Tiers 2 and 3:
• Maple Elementary teachers are at Tier 1 only.
• Bryant Elementary has no teachers at Tier 2.
• Six schools have no teachers at Tier 3: Garfield, Jones,
Lynwood, Prairie, and Wilson elementary schools and West
Pleasant View MS.
4.3 Timeline: Large-scale training sessions may be scheduled for Staff
Development/Inservice days as well as evening, weekend, and summer
sessions. Release time training sessions will allow individuals with like roles,
who work in different buildings, to be trained together. Collegial support and
content-specific training will increase the effectiveness of the staff
development activities (Holmes & Duffey).
4.3.1 Initial Training: Target specific learning goals/teaching strategies as

opposed to focusing on the technology itself.
4.3.2 Follow-Up Training: Support efforts to implement training and build
on prior learning.
4.3.3 New Hires: In a district this size it is expected that technology training
will be needed on a yearly basis to teach new hires to use the district
network, access district resources, and use technology hardware and
software that is available in their classrooms and work spaces.
4.3.4 Ongoing Support: Ongoing, building-level support for further training
along with troubleshooting, brainstorming, and modeling of
technology-rich lessons that build 21st
century skills and increase
achievement.
4.4 Compensation: It is recommended that the district budget monies for
hardware, software, and release time substitutes to support training goals.
Budget monies should also be allocated to compensate staff members who
attend training sessions outside of contractual hours. Compensation, in the
form of stipends, release time, and adjustments to teaching responsibilities
may also be made for identified mentors and other technology leaders. Also,
offering training courses with Continuing Education/CPDU credit will provide
added incentive for teachers.
4.5 Evaluation: As specific training sessions and materials are development, a
system for evaluating their effectiveness should be put into place. Ongoing
evaluation will allow for continuous improvement and effective use of training
resources. In evaluating how well technology resources are being utilized in
district classrooms, it is important for administrators, teachers, staff and school
board members alike, to be aware that “time requirements are an unusually
salient factor when technology is the focus of staff development. It takes
longer for technology to become a part of classroom practice than other
innovations – two to three years” (Holmes & Duffey, p. 18).

References
Holmes, K., & Duffey, D. (1993). Technology staff development: Designing an effective
process. Denton, TX: Texas Center for Educational Technology. Retrieved from
http://www.tcet.unt.edu/pubs/staff/
Image Credit
LCD Monitor:
http://www.clker.com/cliparts/4/1/e/6/11949838211786721468lcd_monitor_the_structor_
.svg.hi.png

Appendix A: Technology Integration Tiers

Tiers of Technology Integration into the Classroom Indicators
Tier 1: Teacher Focus on
Productivity
Tier 2: Instructional Presentation
and Student Productivity
Tier 3: Powerful Student-Centered 21st Century
Learning Environment
This tier focuses on the teacher using
technology to get their job done.
This tier involves teacher facilitation of large group
learning activities and student productivity use of
technology.
This tier promotes students to be actively engaged in using
technology in individual and collaborative learning
activities.
Observable
Indicators
Teachers:
• Locate standards using electronic
tools to align lessons (e.g., use the
online Grade-Level Resources site
and locate EALRs/GLEs on OSPI
website)
• Find instructional resources on the
Internet (e.g., find lesson resources
at Marco Polo, district, or state
websites)
• Produce, store, and retrieve learning
materials electronically (e.g., create
lesson plans in Word and store them
on file server, create and print
handouts for students that can be
saved and modified in future years)
• Keep/organize student information,
grades more effectively (e.g., use
electronic gradebook, extract
achievement data from student
information system, graph student
progress using Excel)
• Communicate information to parents
and students via web or e-mail (e.g.,
post upcoming events or
assignments on school webpage)
• Communicate quickly with e-mail
(e.g., respond to e-mail from
parents, learn about school
meetings and events via internal e-
mail)
Teachers:
• Conduct one-computer classroom lessons (e.g.,
use software such as Decisions, Decisions and
Timeliner by Tom Snyder, lead virtual field trips to
museums using K-20 Network)
• Deliver presentations with graphics and sound
(e.g., teachers use software such as PowerPoint,
Keynote, or audio production software)
• Lead students in brainstorming and sharing ideas
(e.g., teachers use word processing programs or
software such as Inspiration, use Intel Visual
Ranking website)
• Represent information visually (e.g., teachers
create graphs in Excel or with a graphing
calculator to visually represent chemical
interactions)
• Facilitate group discussions and lessons (e.g.,
teachers use interactive whiteboards, LCD
projectors, student response systems)
• Have students write papers and reports on
assigned topics using computers or “smart
keyboards” such as AlphaSmarts (e.g., require
that all student papers must be word-processed)
• Create scaffolding for student projects (e.g.,
teachers provide students with writing prompts or
project templates)
• Facilitate students using technology for
assessment (e.g., teachers use online quizzes or
diagnostic tools, graph and analyze progress with
class using Excel)
• Interactively communicate with parents and
students (e.g., teachers initiate and respond to e-
mail, conduct on-line surveys, interact through
website)
Teachers enable students to:
• Create and use online resources to facilitate inquiry
(e.g., students create and use online resources such as
WebQuests)
• Engage in inquiry-based projects driven by essential
questions (e.g., students create major research projects
such as Big 6 essential question projects)
• Direct their own use of technology (e.g., students stay
current with new information through tools such as RSS
feeds)
• Research, analyze data and problem-solve in a global
context (e.g., student engage in projects such as
ThinkQuest with classrooms in other states or countries)
• Engage in individual or collaborative project-based
learning (e.g., students engage in real-world projects
and problem-solving using email or websites)
• Use modeling and simulations (e.g., students conduct
simulations using online resources)
• Write, develop and publish individual and collaborative
products (e.g., students publish projects online to be
reviewed by parents or peers)
• Invent products through programming or production
(e.g., students produce how-to videos or movies to
share with others)
• Create scaffolding for their own projects (e.g., students
create writing prompts or project templates)
• Are involved with their parents and teachers in the
analysis of student data and meeting standards, or
participate in developing their own learning plans (e.g.,
students use classroom-based assessments and assess
their own work)
• Initiate communication with parents, teachers,
community members, or other students (e.g., students
display self-directed communication through tools such
as weblogs)

Appendix B: Revised Excel Spreadsheet Data

1
AN AO AP AQ AR AS AT AU AV
Tier Type Role 1 Role 2
Grade/Subject
1
Grade/Subject
2
Grade/Subject
3 School
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
Tech Integration Tier
Tier 1: 397 77.8%
Tier 2: 71 13.9%
Tier 3: 42 8.2%
TOTAL: 510 100.0%
School Type
Elementary: 205 40.2%
Middle School: 69 13.5%
High School: 215 42.2%
Hunt Center: 21 4.1%
TOTAL: 510 100.0%
Primary Role
Administrator: 4 0.8%
Coach: 21 4.1%
Coordinator: 2 0.4%
Dept. Head: 6 1.2%
Interentionist: 8 1.6%
LMS: 15 2.9%
Student Services: 20 3.9%
Support Staff: 2 0.4%
Teacher: 418 82.0%
(no title): 14 2.7%
TOTAL: 510 100.0%

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Grade/Subject
1
Grade/Subject
2
Grade/Subject
3 School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 1st Grade Adams Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 1st Grade Adams Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 3rd Grade Adams Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 6th Grade Adams Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM
Student
Services
Physical
Therapist Adams Elementary School
Tier 2 ELEM Teacher Adams Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM (no title) Adams Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 1st Grade Apple Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 2/3 teacher Apple Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 2nd Grade Apple Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 3rd Grade Apple Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 5th Grade Apple Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Art Apple Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM
Student
Services
Guidance
Counselor Apple Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Coach
Instructional
Coach,
Literacy Apple Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Coach
Instructional
Coach,
Literacy,
Primary
Instructional
Coach, Math,
Primary Apple Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher
SPED
Resource Apple Elementary School

1
Grade/Subject
1
Grade/Subject
2
Grade/Subject
3 School
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher
SPED
Resource Apple Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Apple Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 1st Grade Apple Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM LMS
Library Media
Specialist Apple Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Coach
Instructional
Coach, Math Brown Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 2nd Grade Brown Elementary School
Tier 3 ELEM Teacher 4th Grade Brown Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM LMS
Library Media
Specialist Brown Elementary School
Tier 3 ELEM Teacher Brown Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 1st Grade Brown Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 3rd Grade Brown Elementary School
Tier 2 ELEM (no title) Brown Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher
SPED
Preschool Bryant Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Bryant Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 3rd Grade Bryant Elementary School

1
Grade/Subject
1
Grade/Subject
2
Grade/Subject
3 School
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 4th Grade Bryant Elementary School
Tier 3 ELEM (no title) Bryant Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 1st Grade Bryant Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Music Bryant Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 6th Grade Bryant Elementary School
Tier 2 ELEM Teacher 6th Grade Cherry Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Career Focus Cherry Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Kindergarten Cherry Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher
SPED
Resource K-6 Cherry Elementary School
Tier 2 ELEM LMS
Library Media
Specialist Cherry Elementary School
Tier 3 ELEM Coach
Instructional
Coach, Math Cherry Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM
Administra
tor Principal Cherry Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Coach
Interventio
nist
Instructional
Coach
Reading
Recovery Cherry Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher
SPED
Resource Cherry Elementary School
Tier 3 ELEM Teacher Cherry Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher
Support
Staff Title I Cherry Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM (no title) Cherry Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 2/3 Grade Cherry Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Coach
Instructional
Coach,
Literacy,
Primary Cherry Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM
Interventio
nist
Title I Reading
Recovery Cherry Elementary School
Tier 1 MS Teacher East Pleasant View Middle School

1
Grade/Subject
1
Grade/Subject
2
Grade/Subject
3 School
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
Tier 1 MS
Coordinato
r Teacher Fitness Health
Activities
Coordinator East Pleasant View Middle School
Tier 2 MS Coach
Instructional
Coach,
Literacy East Pleasant View Middle School
Tier 3 MS Teacher Technology East Pleasant View Middle School
Tier 1 MS LMS
Library Media
Specialist East Pleasant View Middle School
Tier 1 MS Teacher
SPED Life
Skills Fitness East Pleasant View Middle School
Tier 1 ELEM
Student
Services
Guidance
Counselor Evergreen Elementary School
Tier 3 ELEM LMS
Library Media
Specialist Evergreen Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher SPED Evergreen Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM
Student
Services
Speech
Language
Pathologist Evergreen Elementary School
Tier 2 ELEM Teacher Evergreen Elementary School
Tier 2 ELEM Teacher 3rd Grade Evergreen Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Music Evergreen Elementary School
Tier 2 ELEM Teacher 5th Grade Evergreen Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM
Interventio
nist
SPED
Behavioral
Interventionist Evergreen Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Coach
Instructional
Coach,
Literacy Evergreen Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher
Montessori,
Intermediate Evergreen Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher
Montessori,
Primary Evergreen Elementary School

1
Grade/Subject
1
Grade/Subject
2
Grade/Subject
3 School
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
Tier 2 HS Teacher
Social Studies,
History Franklin High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher Fitness Health Franklin High School
Tier 1 HS
Interventio
nist
SPED
Behavioral
Interventionist Franklin High School
Tier 1 HS
Student
Services
Guidance
Counselor Franklin High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher Fitness Health Franklin High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher Math Franklin High School
Tier 2 HS Teacher Science Franklin High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher Franklin High School
Tier 1 HS LMS
Library Media
Specialist Franklin High School

1
Grade/Subject
1
Grade/Subject
2
Grade/Subject
3 School
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
Tier 1 HS (no title) Franklin High School
Tier 3 HS (no title) Franklin High School
Tier 1 HS Coach
Instructional
Coach Franklin High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher English Franklin High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher Reading Franklin High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher SPED Franklin High School
Tier 2 HS Teacher
CTE - Applied
Technology
CTE -
Business
Education Franklin High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher Science, 9/10 Franklin High School
Tier 1 HS
Departmen
t Head Teacher Social Studies Franklin High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher Social Studies Franklin High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher SPED Franklin High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher CTE Fitness Franklin High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher English GPS Franklin High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher Art Franklin High School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher
3rd Grade
Teacher Garfield Elementary School
Tier 2 ELEM (no title) Garfield Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Kindergarten Garfield Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Kindergarten
Reading
Recovery Garfield Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Garfield Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 5th Grade Garfield Elementary School

1
Grade/Subject
1
Grade/Subject
2
Grade/Subject
3 School
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher
Music,
Developmental Garfield Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Coach
Instructional
Coach,
Literacy Garfield Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher SPED MHOH Garfield Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 5/6 Grade Garfield Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 2/3 Grade Garfield Elementary School
Tier 1 Teacher
SPED MHOH
Developmentall
y Impaired Hunt Center
Tier 1 Teacher 3rd Grade Hunt Center
Tier 3 Teacher Art Hunt Center
Tier 1
Student
Services
Guidance
Counselor Hunt Center
Tier 1 Teacher ELL - ELD Hunt Center
Tier 1 (no title) Hunt Center
Tier 2
Administra
tor Principal Hunt Center
Tier 1 Teacher Hunt Center
Tier 1 Teacher Grade 2 Hunt Center
Tier 3 Teacher Tessera Hunt Center
Tier 1 Teacher 6th Grade Hunt Center
Tier 1 Teacher
SPED
Developmentall
y Impaired Hunt Center

1
Grade/Subject
1
Grade/Subject
2
Grade/Subject
3 School
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
Tier 1 Teacher Science Hunt Center
Tier 1 HS Teacher
Language Arts,
7 (?) Huntington High School
Tier 1 HS
Student
Services
Guidance
Counselor Huntington High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher Huntington High School
Tier 3 HS
Student
Services
Guidance
Coordinator Huntington High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher
Health
Sciences Huntington High School
Tier 1 HS
Interventio
nist
Intervention
Specialist Huntington High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher Assistant
Keyboarding
Teacher Math Assistant Huntington High School
Tier 3 HS Teacher
CTE -
Marketing Huntington High School
Tier 1 HS
Student
Services
Occupational
Therapist,
Itinerant Huntington High School
Tier 1 HS
Student
Services
Physical
Therapist Huntington High School
Tier 1 HS
Student
Services
School
Psychologist Huntington High School
Tier 2 HS Teacher Science Huntington High School

1
Grade/Subject
1
Grade/Subject
2
Grade/Subject
3 School
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
Tier 1 HS Teacher
Humanities,
11/12 Huntington High School
Tier 1 HS
Interventio
nist
SPED
Behavioral
Interventionist,
Intermediate Huntington High School
Tier 1 HS LMS
Learning Media
Specialist Huntington High School
Tier 1 HS Coach Teacher
Instructional
Coach World History Huntington High School

1
Grade/Subject
1
Grade/Subject
2
Grade/Subject
3 School
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
Tier 3 HS
Administra
tor
Assistant
Principal Huntington High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher Fitness Huntington High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher
Contract Based
Education Huntington High School
Tier 2 HS
Departmen
t Head Teacher SPED Huntington High School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 5th Grade Jones Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 2nd Grade Jones Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Fitness Health Jones Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher SPED, K-4 Jones Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Coach
Instructional
Coach,
Literacy Jones Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher sp Teacher Jones Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM
Student
Services
Speech
Language
Pathologist Jones Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Jones Elementary School
Tier 2 ELEM Teacher 4/5 Grade Jones Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM
Support
Staff
Title I Math,
Primary Jones Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 3rd Grade Jones Elementary School

1
Grade/Subject
1
Grade/Subject
2
Grade/Subject
3 School
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
Tier 1 ELEM
Support
Staff
Early
Childhood Jones Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM LMS
Learning Media
Specialist Jones Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM LMS
Learning Media
Specialist Jones Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher
SPED
Resource 4-6 Jones Elementary School
Tier 2 ELEM Teacher Jones Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher
SPED
Preschool Jones Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM
Student
Services
Speech
Language
Pathologist Jones Elementary School
Tier 1 MS Teacher
1st Grade?
(MS listed) Lincoln Middle School
Tier 1 MS Teacher
1st Grade?
Tier 1 MS Teacher
4th Grade?
Tier 1 MS Teacher
4th Grade?
Tier 2 MS Teacher Humanities Lincoln Middle School
Tier 1 MS Teacher English History Lincoln Middle School
Tier 1 MS Teacher
Music -
Instrumental
Music Lincoln Middle School
Tier 1 MS Teacher Lincoln Middle School
Tier 1 MS Teacher
Math
Numeracy Lincoln Middle School

1
Grade/Subject
1
Grade/Subject
2
Grade/Subject
3 School
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
Tier 1 MS Teacher
2nd Grade?
Tier 1 MS Teacher
SPED Life
Skills Lincoln Middle School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 6th Grade Lynwood Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Kindergarten Lynwood Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Lynwood Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Fitness Health Lynwood Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 1st/2nd Grade Lynwood Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 1st Grade Lynwood Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 2nd/3rd Grade Lynwood Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher
SPED ADAPT
(Autism) Lynwood Elementary School
Tier 2 ELEM Teacher ELL/ELD Lynwood Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Kindergarten Lynwood Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Music Lynwood Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 2nd Grade Lynwood Elementary School

1
Grade/Subject
1
Grade/Subject
2
Grade/Subject
3 School
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher
SPED
Resource Lynwood Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 3rd Grade Maple Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 6th Grade Maple Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Coach
Instructional
Coach Maple Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Kindergarten Maple Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Montessori Maple Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher
SPED
Resource Maple Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher
SPED
Developmentall
y Impaired Maple Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Maple Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 1st Grade Maple Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM LMS
Learning Media
Specialist Maple Elementary School
Tier 1 HS Teacher English Mountain View High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher Advisor
CTE -
Marketing
DECA Advisor
(marketing
organization for
students) Mountain View High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher Math Mountain View High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher Music Mountain View High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher Mountain View High School
Tier 2 HS Teacher ELL - ESL Mountain View High School

1
Grade/Subject
1
Grade/Subject
2
Grade/Subject
3 School
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
Tier 2 HS Teacher
SPED
Developmentall
y Impaired Mountain View High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher
Music - Choral
Music Newport High School
Tier 1 HS
Student
Services
Guidance
Counselor Newport High School
Tier 3 HS
Student
Services
Guidance
Tier 1 HS Teacher ELL - ELD Newport High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher English Newport High School
Tier 1 HS
Student
Services
Guidance
Tier 2 HS Teacher Health Newport High School
Tier 2 HS Coach
Instructional
Coach,
Literacy Newport High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher Math Newport High School

1
Grade/Subject
1
Grade/Subject
2
Grade/Subject
3 School
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
Tier 2 HS Teacher Math
SVL (Spokane
Virtual
Learning?) Newport High School
Tier 2 HS Teacher Newport High School
Tier 2 HS Teacher
SPED
Resource Newport High School
Tier 2 HS
Departmen
t Head Teacher Newport High School
Tier 1 HS
Departmen
t Head Teacher
Music - Choral
Tier 3 HS Teacher
World
Languages,
French Newport High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher Art Newport High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher Social Studies Newport High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher SPED Newport High School
Tier 1 HS
Student
Services
Guidance
Tier 2 HS Teacher CTE Newport High School

1
Grade/Subject
1
Grade/Subject
2
Grade/Subject
3 School
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
Tier 3 HS Teacher
CTE - Family &
Consumer
Sciences Newport High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher English History Newport High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher
Director of
Music
Music -
Director of
Tier 1 HS Teacher Science Newport High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher
Criminal
Justice Pleasant View High School
Tier 2 HS
Coordinato
r Teacher CTE
Career Focus
Coordinator Pleasant View High School
Tier 2 HS
Departmen
t Head Teacher Pleasant View High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher English Pleasant View High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher English Social Studies Pleasant View High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher Fitness Health Pleasant View High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher Fitness Pleasant View High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher Pleasant View High School
Tier 2 HS Teacher CTE - Graphics Pleasant View High School
Tier 1 HS LMS
Learning Media
Specialist Pleasant View High School
Tier 3 HS Coach
Instructional
Coach Social Studies Pleasant View High School
Tier 2 HS Teacher Math Pleasant View High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher Math Pleasant View High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher Fitness Pleasant View High School
Tier 1 HS Teacher
World
Languages,
Spanish Pleasant View High School

1
Grade/Subject
1
Grade/Subject
2
Grade/Subject
3 School
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
Tier 1 HS
Student
Services
Speech
Language
Pathologist Pleasant View High School
Tier 2 HS Teacher English
World
Languages,
German Pleasant View High School
Tier 1 HS
Departmen
t Head Teacher Pleasant View High School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 6th Grade Prairie Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher
SPED ADAPT
(Autism) Prairie Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher ELL - ELD Prairie Elementary School

1
Grade/Subject
1
Grade/Subject
2
Grade/Subject
3 School
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Art Prairie Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM
Student
Services
Speech
Language
Pathologist Prairie Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Prairie Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher
Music -
Developmental
Music Prairie Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 3rd Grade Sandburg Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 6th Grade Sandburg Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Sandburg Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher
Music -
Developmental
Music K-6 Sandburg Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher
Music -
Developmental
Music K-6 Sandburg Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM
Interventio
nist
SPED
Behavioral
Interventionist Sandburg Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Kindergarten Sandburg Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 2nd Grade Sandburg Elementary School
Tier 2 ELEM LMS
Learning Media
Specialist Sandburg Elementary School
Tier 2 ELEM Teacher 6th Grade Sandburg Elementary School
Tier 3 ELEM LMS
Learning Media
Specialist Sandburg Elementary School
Tier 2 MS Teacher Science Washington Middle School

1
Grade/Subject
1
Grade/Subject
2
Grade/Subject
3 School
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
Tier 1 MS Teacher Art Washington Middle School
Tier 1 MS Teacher
Music -
Instrumental
Music Washington Middle School
Tier 2 MS
Interventio
nist Teacher
SPED
Behavioral
Interventionist FSC Washington Middle School
Tier 3 MS
Student
Services
Guidance
Counselor Washington Middle School
Tier 1 MS Coach
Instructional
Coach Washington Middle School
Tier 1 MS Coach
Instructional
Tier 3 MS
Interventio
nist
SPED
Interventionist Washington Middle School
Tier 2 MS Teacher Language Arts Washington Middle School
Tier 1 MS Teacher Math Washington Middle School
Tier 2 MS Coach
Instructional
Coach -
Science Washington Middle School
Tier 1 MS Teacher SPED Washington Middle School
Tier 1 MS Teacher SPED Science
SPED Social
Studies Washington Middle School
Tier 1 MS Teacher
SPED
Language Arts Washington Middle School
Tier 1 MS Teacher Washington Middle School
Tier 1 MS Teacher Math 8 Washington Middle School
Tier 1 MS Coach
Instructional

1
Grade/Subject
1
Grade/Subject
2
Grade/Subject
3 School
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
Tier 2 MS LMS
Learning Media
Specialist Washington Middle School
Tier 1 MS (no title) Washington Middle School
Tier 2 MS Teacher Humanities West Pleasant View Middle School
Tier 1 MS Coach
Instructional
Coach West Pleasant View Middle School
Tier 1 MS Coach
Instructional
Coach West Pleasant View Middle School
Tier 1 MS Teacher Math West Pleasant View Middle School
Tier 1 MS Teacher Science West Pleasant View Middle School
Tier 1 MS Teacher West Pleasant View Middle School
Tier 1 MS Teacher Math 7 West Pleasant View Middle School
Tier 1 MS LMS
Learning Media
Specialist West Pleasant View Middle School
Tier 1 MS Teacher
SPED
Resource West Pleasant View Middle School
Tier 2 MS Teacher Science 7/8 West Pleasant View Middle School
Tier 1 MS Teacher Science West Pleasant View Middle School
Tier 1 MS (no title) West Pleasant View Middle School
Tier 1 MS Teacher Art West Pleasant View Middle School
Tier 1 MS Teacher Humanities West Pleasant View Middle School
Tier 1 MS Teacher
SPED Life
Skills West Pleasant View Middle School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 2nd Grade Wilson Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 3rd Grade Wilson Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 6th Grade Wilson Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher 1st Grade Wilson Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Music Wilson Elementary School
Tier 2 ELEM
Administra
tor Principal Wilson Elementary School

1
Grade/Subject
1
Grade/Subject
2
Grade/Subject
3 School
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher SPED Wilson Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Wilson Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM Teacher Wilson Elementary School
Tier 2 ELEM (no title) Wilson Elementary School
Tier 1 ELEM (no title) Wilson Elementary School
MHOH =
Mulitply
Handicapp
ed/Orthop
edically
Handicapp
ed
SPED =
Special
Education
DI =
Developm
entally
Impaired
ELL/ELD =
English
Language
Learners,
English
Language
Developm
ent
CTE =
Career/Tec
hnical
Education

554ferdon dataanalysis rec

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked (8)

Similar to 554ferdon dataanalysis rec (20)

More from Susan Ferdon (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

554ferdon dataanalysis rec