In today's era of high stakes accountability and with the recent economic downturn, educators across the country are expected to demonstrate a "return" on technology investments. That translates into a need for an educational technology strategy that gets results - in the form of higher student performance.
Profiling Educational Technology Integration, or PETI, includes a framework aligned to No Child Left Behind, Title II D (NCLB IID), as well as a suite of tools designed to assist states, districts, schools, and researchers in profiling their progress with technology over time, documenting both readiness and effective use.
Why are the profiling tools important?
The tools were developed to assist states in making sound, data-driven decisions about educational technology. Metiri Group, which developed these resources under the advisement of the SETDA Common Data Elements committee, has worked over the last year with five states to pilot and revise the instruments and protocols based on data analysis to ensure reliability and validity. Used as outlined here, PETI offers valid, reliable data collection instruments and methodologies that answer the questions in the SETDA framework. Used over time, these tools can provide valuable baseline and trend data for accountability purposes; see Suite of Tools.
How might states, districts, schools, and researchers use these tools?
SETDA anticipates that different stakeholders will use this suite of tools in different ways.
- States, districts, or researchers with sophisticated profiling tools already in place may want to analyze that toolset in light of SETDA's new resources, updating where necessary. [NOTE: States should consider "sets of questions" aligned to indicators in the SETDA framework.]
- States, districts, or researchers currently using surveys only to determine their school districts' technology readiness may want to a new element--site visitation data. Although such visits are not required for valid and reliable profiles, they do seem to increase the credibility of resultant reports to policy makers.
- States, districts, or researchers currently using hardware/software inventories only may want to continue collecting such data, adding the SETDA/Metiri surveys and/or site visitations to get more complete baselines and trend patterns on their school districts' technology readiness over time.
- States, districts, or researchers currently not collecting data state wide or school system wide may want to adopt the SETDA/Metiri tools, using only the three surveys, or a combination of the surveys and the site visitation protocols.
What methodology is recommended for data collection and analysis using these tools?
SUITE OF TOOLS. While some states will want to survey every school district and every school building, others will want to reduce the burden of data collection by surveying representative samples from those populations. Some states will include site visitations (in a sampling of schools representative of the state), while others will rely on the surveys only to determine their school districts' technology readiness.
COPYRIGHT. While SETDA retains rights to the toolsets, broad use is encouraged. However, STEDA respectfully requests that such use acknowledge the developers of these tools: SETDA and Metiri Group.
VENDORS. SETDA asked organizations and companies how they would implement the CDE Resource Guide and instruments in states. The attached matrix includes information from those organizations and companies that submitted information specific to the SETDA CDE Initiative. SETDA does not endorse any particular product or company.
NOTE: SETDA and Metiri recommend that the suite of tools be used as a system to maintain validity and reliability.