Technology decisions that affect the direction of the school should not be delegated in entirety to the IT department;
A leader adds value to an enterprise, school included, by having a perspective that is all inclusive and holistic. Inasmuch as a leader is only as strong as the integrity of the information supplied him, in this case by an IT department head, his accountability to the purpose and vision of the enterprise, could very likely lead to a decision other than one made by the IT department exclusively. Surrendering the decision to IT means that business or education outcomes, profit or learning, respectively, could be compromised if the intentions of the IT department do not correspond well with overall enterprise goals. In an effort to satisfy the needs of a single unit or department, a separate system may be developed that clumsily communicates with the rest of the school; and ultimately, without the appropriate metrics being considered that affect the bottom line, unclear accountability can contribute to a disastrous slide. (Ross and Weill, 2002). Enterprise Architecture = strategy + business + technology, (Scott, 2012) can serve school districts by reducing the likelihood of supporting redundant, overlapping, or unnecessary projects; As leader and change agent, I would have to first perform a comprehensive systems analysis, carefully noting the existing duplication. I would then have to communicate clearly to each of the different departments from teaching and learning, to back office, the degree of waste involved. Paying close attention to the expenses being absorbed, I would need to get a consensus that the status quo was unacceptable, looking for allies to support my cause. The next step would involve looking outward to like districts, in the effort of identifying best practices to guide the purchase and, or development of a more comprehensive system. Accepting the fact that a system that does too many things may not do any one perfectly, the alternative of having taxpayer funds serve a need other than clearly outlined in our school’s mission statement, is exceptionable. Paying attention to the fifteen different roles of the Governance model, will direct smaller districts as to the specific areas of focus of education enterprise architecture. The fifteen different jobs to which the NASCIO Enterprise Architecture Tool-Kit refers would require immense work in order to justify the salaries that would accompany their existences. Districts pay a great deal of attention to the ratio of administrative salaries to the overall budget. Ignoring that reality invalidates searching for efficiencies. Combining roles, inevitably, is the only way to incorporate enterprise architecture into smaller entities. In full, as daunting as the list of roles may seem to a small school district, it does make it clear that there are distinct responsibilities to be carried out with fidelity if the enterprise architecture is to be effective. Ross, Jeanne W. and Weil, Peter (2002). Six IT Decisions Your IT People Shouldn't Make. Retrieved October 25, 2016, from https://hbr.org/2002/11/six-it-decisions-your-it-people-shouldnt-make. (NASCIO). (2004). NASCIO EA Development Tool-Kit: Introduction & Architecture Governance, version 3.0. Retrieved on October 24, 2016 from https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B-sEe_sOSebYcWVibHhVM0RJU00 Bernard, Scott A. (2012-08-13). An Introduction to Enterprise Architecture: Third Edition. AuthorHouse. Kindle Edition.
0 Comments
R. Roger Rowe Elementary and Middle Schools make up the excess-taxes, Rancho Santa Fe School District. This public school which has 450 students at the elementary, K-5 level, and 225 at the middle school 6-8 level, is well situated with an endowment fund and separate parent foundation fund, enjoying the leadership of two principals and a new superintendent. The school board is aggressively responsive to parent criticisms, and demands that the school SBAC test scores lead the forty school districts in San Diego County.
This year all adult stakeholders, including staff, parent body, and community, are excited about leadership that while steadfast in its pursuit of excellence, is more transparent and accessible. The district’s strongest trait and its Achilles heel is its flexibility and its ability to go from standing to sprint, from idea to implementation, in no time flat. In a larger district, too many considerations need to be accounted for, like funding, a union, teacher training, etc., that make decisions more conservative. It can be exciting and frustrating in equal quantities to be a part of decisions. The organizational chart places the Superintendent at the top, reporting, of course, to a five member school board. Below him sits two principals and the director of special education, who in large part are responsible for certificated staffing decisions. On equal par, in that he reports directly to the superintendent, is the director of technology, who in turn manages three technology specialists and a data specialist (largely in charge of the student information system, SDOL). These leaders comprise Cabinet, playing a critical role in all significant decisions of funding and philosophy at Rowe School. No published education plan or technology plan is accessible through the school website. The SARC does list the following: “Vision and Values We first and foremost remain committed to being a “School of Choice” within our community, and we believe the following report supports our resolve in this area. In turn, we have developed an overarching Vision for our District—to provide a unifying goal behind our ambitions and commitment. “Inspiration through Revolutionary Education” Simply stated, we are devoted to preparing our students for the world that awaits them—a world of scientific discovery, ever-shifting paradigms, and increasingly competitive markets.” (RSFschool, 2016) It is difficult to think of developing a technology plan without considering the educational plan; quite frankly the value and content of one informs the other. Currently at Rowe School, the IT director reacts to the needs of the teaching staff. His decisions are based upon feedback of teaching staff; investigative visits to credible, like districts to observe best practices are part of the decision making process. However, a systematic integration of the technology would exponentially increase the worth of the investment. The disruption of new technology would be better accommodated by teachers more motivated to exploit the apps and laptops with focused and reinforced professional development. Teachers would be more motivated as measured by value of and confidence in incorporating the new technology. In that light the district education plan and the tech plan should exist as separate documents, however like a spreadsheet cell referred to in another cell formula, a change in one should not occur without consulting the other. Resources: Financial Audit Reports. (n.d.). Retrieved October 18, 2016, from http://rsfschool.net/sarc/ Brick Topic: Email Solution Description: Messaging client software includes applications that run on workstations and/or the web and enable peer-to-peer, asynchronous communications. The “Brick” graphic organizer above, as originated in the National Institute of Health, outlines present and future technologies being used. It allows decision makers to, at a glance, access knowledge about the commitment the school has made toward using and funding existing technologies. In my current capacity of fifth grade teacher, I can see how this graphic organizer could be used to sketch my options for technologies, hardware or software, that could help in my delivery of instruction. It’s value, however, is directly correlated to the flexibility I would have in choosing how to teach. Rowe School insists on parity between classrooms -- all students must have the same educational experiences. Whereas this may appear smothering, and sometimes it does on the surface seem so, it really encourages me to form more closely knit relationships with my teammates. As such, the brick would have to be agreed upon in a PLC (Professional Learning Community) before I could use it. For example, one ELA Common Core standard (CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.5.6) refers to multimedia publishing of written work, and the question came up as to how we would do so, and using which applications. A brick table could have us organize which apps have worked in the past, which are available to use now (paid licenses etc.), and which we are no longer willing to support using. In subsequent years, referring to the brick would allow us to quickly build upon the work already done, and save us the time loss of indecision. It is true that Rancho Santa Fe, Rowe School, a one campus school district has applications with overlapping functions each set up to meet the specific needs of different departments. What exaggerates these inefficiencies, is the fact that with such a small student base (450 @ elementary, and 250 @ middle school), there are no economies of scale to make up for the waste. For example we currently have seven different ways of communicating information with the parent body. This state of affairs evolved slowly over time, morphing into the beast it is today. Some of the systems were add-ons, tailored to meet a specific need, while others were parts of a larger system that while not needed, requested, or valuable, had a built-in communication function. What was at first convenient has become burdensome, as it is virtually impossible to know the source of the messaging, making it unlikely that future correspondence will be received. Take for instance the scenario where a parent uses our LMS, Canvas to send a note to the child’s teacher while checking on an incomplete assignment. Having received the note, reflexively bounced to our Luisa email system, the teacher responds to the parent’s email address which autofills on the reply. Expecting the reply in Canvas, the teacher reply goes unnoticed, and creates an aggravating situation, all because of overlapping systems that end up working against one another. Multiple methods to perform the same function also puts the onus on staff, parent, administrator, and student to be fluent in the workings of those systems. As leader and change agent, I would have to first perform a comprehensive systems analysis, carefully noting the existing duplication. I would then have to communicate clearly to each of the different departments from teaching and learning, to back office, the degree of waste involved. Paying close attention to the expenses being absorbed, I would need to get a consensus that the status quo was unacceptable, looking for allies to support my cause. The next step would involve looking outward to like districts, in the effort of identifying best practices to guide the purchase and, or development of a more comprehensive system. Accepting the fact that a system that does too many things may not do any one perfectly, the alternative of having taxpayer funds serve a need other than clearly outlined in our school’s mission statement, is exceptionable. When a teacher is planning a lesson, he must consider the goals and objectives, the methodology to be implemented, materials needed, and the metric used to determine if the objective has been met. This lesson must also fit within the context of a larger unit plan, and subsequently support future learning. On a much larger scale, but with very similar structure, data standards govern how a subject or set of curricula are to be delivered. They represent evidence of a school, district, state or federal department having means to 1) meet specific goal; 2) access necessary tools; 3) know if funds are improving learning; and 4) provide aggregate information to the public. (Who Uses..., 2014). "Essential to realizing the target state, Data Architecture describes how data is processed, stored, and utilized in an information system." (Wikipedia, p.1). What system you run the information through, the constraints under which the data is digested affects the integrity of any conclusions reached or inferences drawn. Space enough to store the data is imperative, and the format in which it exists must be communicative with similar data. If data cannot be read and combined, interpretation is hampered. Lastly, how the information is used affects the ultimate goal: improving learning. As a result, considering the data architecture must take place in the planning phase. “CEDS is designed to bridge the communication gap that can exist between education stakeholders.” (CEDS, 2016). If a common language of accepted terminology was not voluntarily adopted, then understanding between stakeholders: teachers, administrators, parents and even students, would be inefficient and wasteful of both time and precious taxpayer dollars. The standards attempt to meet that need so that both written and oral communication can serve the learning needs of the students across the grades and as they move from one year to the next. While observing the need to respect privacy, big data needs to be well dealt with in a carefully planned architecture. Resource: (2016) CEDS Introduction. YouTube. Retrieved September 20, 2016, from https://youtu.be/A2wb72vqI-Q (2011). Data architecture - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved September 20, 2016, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_architecture. (2014). Who Uses Student Data? - YouTube. Retrieved September 20, 2016, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1uj0JkCpgM When I consider the business architecture of my school, I am shaken to see the price being paid being a one campus, K - 8 district. With real estate capital assets exceeding $50 million, and $10 million annual budgets, Rowe School is big business. When you build a home, the per square foot price of construction is highest in the kitchen and bathrooms, whereas the covered patios and garages are least. Developers know that the biggest ROI happens on the square footage BEYOND the kitchen and bathrooms. In a one campus district, you still need a superintendent, and arguably a principal for each school (in our case one for 250 middle schoolers, and one for 440 elementary schoolers). This makes our administrative salaries a much higher percent of our overall budget than larger, multi-school districts. One way to get the percentages back in line, once they become part of the overall salary to budget ratio, is by cutting down on the salaries and benefits of teachers.
As it regards technology, having the total number of iPads and Chromebooks exceed the number of students is embarrassing. It reflects the price the board was willing to pay to be a “cutting-edge” school, seemingly to act out of ego and fear of being left behind, without completely considering what to do with the technology once acquired. When the state of California made a commitment to “class size reduction” they insisted that districts receiving monies conduct professional development trainings to best take advantage of the new situations. Arguably, Rowe School didn’t invest enough into empowering the teachers to use the technology to its potential. I believe this (and of course Chromebooks better complementing SBAC testing) contributed to the circumstance we have now with more rapidly obsolescing tablet devices than students. Our business architecture can be improved by not only looking more holistically at how our $10,000,000 annually is being spent, but also for how long we can commit to the technology purchased. The more I read about Education Enterprise Architecture, the less I know. I feel like I am learning a new concept that while critical to my success as an educational leader, is being taught to me in a new language. An important part of trust is competence; how can I trust myself with the responsibility of running a school, and ask others to follow me, if I don’t have the capability of creating and executing sound business strategies? It is with this urgency that this KWL chart emerges: An enterprise architecture applies a mission and set of values to existing business strategies, and examines the efficacy of information technologies and other support systems already in place. It can be used as an analytical or a management tool, guiding decision-making. “An enterprise architecture framework can describe the underlying infrastructure, thus providing the groundwork for the hardware, software, and networks to work together.” (Urbaczewski, L., 2010, p.1). Of the five Enterprise Architecture Frameworks (EAF) looked at: Zachman Framework (1987), Department of Defense Architecture Framework, Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework, Treasure Enterprise Architecture Framework (2000), and The Open Group Architectural Framework (1995), the latter, TOGAF is the most applicable to education. (Urbaczewski, L., 2010, p.2). “TOGAF helps by documenting the EA discipline, process and work products. An organization can develop an EA that is consistent, reflects the needs of stakeholders, employs best practice, considers current requirements and future needs of [the] business. (TOGAF Distilled, 2014). Essentially, with the preliminary phase defined, eight phases follow and communicate information to the central phase of the architecture development cycle, the requirements management phase. This phase “is a Continuing Ongoing Process to ensure changes to requirements are Well Governed, and Reflected in All Other Phases.” (Key points…, 2014) TOGAF is a flexible methodology designed to fit individual enterprises. Resources: Urbaczewski, L. (2010). A COMPARISON OF ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE FRAMEWORKS. Retrieved from http://ggatz.com/images/SOA_COMPARE.pdf. (2014). TOGAF Distilled - YouTube. Retrieved September 11, 2016, from https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLrAWWpbaj-7KM0uNkxKAf2t4Kzyqr_pYy. (2014) Key points of the architecture development method - YouTube. Retrieved September 11, 2016, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OUKGBmCE64&list=PLrAWWpbaj-7KM0uNkxKAf2t4Kzyqr_pYy&index=8 Enterprise architecture, lofty as it sounds, simply refers to how the guts of an entity work together. As its name implies, education enterprise architecture plays the structure, function, and purpose of an educational institution against its reality. Purpose: do the school stated values serve its mission statement? Function: is the interplay of teacher, student, parent and administrator resulting in a student body that is growing in preparation for becoming fulfilled, global citizens? Structure: is there a clearly defined and respected power structure? For example, if a parent has a problem with how a teacher grades, or does not grade homework, do they speak with the principal BEFORE the teacher, and the principal fails to redirect them? Do the building spaces adequately serve the needs of the student body? For example, if you are at a Title I school receiving funds for free breakfast and lunch programs, do you have kitchen facilities that can get food services delivered well in a timely enough manner to resume classes on schedule?
“For an EA approach to be considered to be complete, … six core elements … must be present and work synergistically together.” (Bernard, 2012, Kindle Locations 560-561). Formally, they are: governance, methodology, framework, artifacts, standards, and best practices. In an indirect way, enterprise architecture has recently become relevant in my school with the arrival of a new superintendent. At a beginning-of-the-year professional development session, he wanted to know if and how a program being taught to teachers affected instructional decisions. Was using the technology impactful when it came to learning? Without being asked, he volunteered that with budget decisions to make, he needed to gather as much good information as possible. In that light, without formalizing his approach, the superintendent was taking a holistic view of the school. In an effort to make sure that prior decisions made by the IT department served the interest of the educational enterprise, he was communicating with important, related, and intersecting subsets of the school. It may be that he may more rigorously examine how this and other decisions fit in with the overall architecture of the school, but until then, that’s where we are. My introduction to the concept of educational enterprise architecture has given me a greater appreciation for paying attention to how all the moving parts in a school affect one another. Resources: Bernard, Scott A. (2012-08-13). An Introduction to Enterprise Architecture: Third Edition. AuthorHouse. Kindle Edition. A leader adds value to an enterprise, school included, by having a perspective that is all inclusive and holistic. Inasmuch as a leader is only as strong as the integrity of the information supplied him, in this case by an IT department head, his accountability to the purpose and vision of the enterprise, could very likely lead to a decision other than one made by the IT department exclusively. Surrendering the decision to IT means that business or education outcomes, profit or learning, respectively, could be compromised if the intentions of the IT department do not correspond well with overall enterprise goals. “Education enterprise architecture, or EEA, is a strategic framework that can provide the structure, plan and processes to achieve an education agency’s vision and goals by aligning its business and program side with information technology (IT).” (Pham, 2016, p. 1). What makes the framework strategic, is that it gives you good information on what to do next. The IT department may not have a composite view of the school, and therefore should not be expected to make the final call.
It may be that the school infrastructure technology department may be “robust, flexible, and efficient” (Weirda, 2013), but without the insight and knowledge provided by examining the entire architecture, the IT department may not have what it needs to make the best decision. Without business leaders processing the information comprehensively, IT departments are subject to decisions that follow perspectives that lack peripheral vision: spending on projects may not contribute to “further[ing] its strategy”; in an effort to satisfy the needs of a single unit or department, a separate system may be developed that clumsily communicates with the rest of the school; and ultimately, without the appropriate metrics being considered that affect the bottom line, unclear accountability can contribute to a disastrous slide. (Ross and Weill, 2002). “Enterprise Architecture is a management and technology practice that is devoted to improving the performance of enterprises by enabling them to see themselves in terms of a holistic and integrated view of their strategic direction, business practices, information flows, and technology resources.” (Bernard, 2012, Kindle Locations 497-499). School leaders should heavily consider the information and the suggestions shared by IT, realizing that it is only one face of a multidimensional situation. Allowing IT to make the decision would be risky and irresponsible, unnecessarily jeopardizing established goals. References: Bernard, Scott A. (2012-08-13). An Introduction to Enterprise Architecture: Third Edition. AuthorHouse. Kindle Edition. Ross, Jeanne W. and Weil, Peter (2002). Six IT Decisions Your IT People Shouldn't Make. Retrieved August 26, 2016, from https://hbr.org/2002/11/six-it-decisions-your-it-people-shouldnt-make. (2016). "Enterprise Architecture Frameworks" Reflection - Kay Pham. Retrieved August 26, 2016, from http://kaypham.weebly.com/edl-680/enterprise-architecture-frameworks-reflection. Orbus Software TV (2014, March 4). What is Enterprise Architecture. Retrieved August 25, 2016, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpv94Vw6R4c&index=1&list=PLrAWWpbaj-7KM0uNkxKAf2t4Kzyqr_pYy Weirda, G. (2013, April 19). Why Enterprise Architecture?. Retrieved August 25, 2016, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDI2oF1bASk&feature=youtu.be |
Information TechnologyThe virtual nuts and bolts. Archives
October 2016
CategoriesClick to set custom HTML #enterprisearchitecture Tweets
|