Table of Contents 

B.  School Building Census 

This section of the 2005 Census of Technology Report analyzes data from 2,211 buildings, compared to 2,207 buildings in 2004 and 2,250 buildings in 2003. While all buildings in the state complete the School Building Census Form, the report only covers those buildings with regular student populations. Data from juvenile centers, special education cooperatives, and other buildings (such as a gifted center) where attendance is reported at another building are not included in this report.  

The school census is comprised of 19 items that are aligned to the Missouri State Education Technology Strategic Plan (METSP) and its five technology focus areas. Items examine access and distribution of the building’s technology resources, technical support, teacher and student technical skills, and the routine uses of technology by user and technology type or function. A copy of the survey, with aggregated data, is provided as Appendix A, and Appendix B provides a cross reference of the 2005 COT items and METSP goals and objectives. 

Overall, the 2005 data indicate some continued improvements in the kinds and numbers of technologies that can be accessed in Missouri’s school attendance centers as well as in the ways school administrators, teachers, and students are using those technology resources. A good number of the gains are modest, at best, and likely a result of the tight budget year as explained earlier in this report. Some of the differences (or the magnitude of differences) noted in data from 2003 to 2005 can likely be attributed to the setting of higher standards (i.e., the changes in definitions for technology literacy and full integration) as described earlier, and to the change in reporting only buildings with regular student attendance. This is not to say there aren’t areas that show more noteworthy increases.
 

TECHNOLOGY PLANNING
As with the district COT, the building census examines the presence of a long-range technology plan.. A school building plan, like a district plan, should provide a road map to help the school implement strategies that promote the district’s mission, advance district and building improvement plans, and improve the teaching and learning occurring in the building.  

Item 1 – Building technology plans
Building contacts are asked if buildings have technology plans and, if so, whether they are stand-alone plans and/or are embedded in district plans. Table 8 indicates the percentage of school buildings that have technology plans, the percentage of building plans that serve as stand-alone plans, and the percentage of plans that are included in district plans. Data show a continued trend in buildings having technology plans, starting with only 69 percent of buildings having plans in 1998 to 98 percent having plans in 2005. 

Table 8 

Status of Building Technology Plans, 1998-2005
 

TECHNOLOGY PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
The use of technology in the school setting requires professional development aimed at helping educators integrate the appropriate education technologies into curriculum content, instructional teaching strategies, and the day-to-day business of teaching and learning. Teachers, administrators, and school services staff need regular, ongoing, and quality professional development that helps them gain the confidence and skills needed in using the school’s technologies in ways that promote district and school improvement plans and align with Show-Me Standards, board-approved curriculum, and board-approved educational technology standards.
 

Item 2 – Technology skills of building staffs
Building contacts are asked to estimate the technology-related skill levels of principals, teachers, technology support staff, and support services staff. The skill level options are: Beginner – basic technical skills including applications such as word-processing, some stand-alone software, and some Internet usage (email); Intermediate – regular use of applications, software, and Internet resources for increased productivity and the use of applications including word-processor for student writing, research on the Internet, computer-generated presentations; and, Advanced – complete integration and mastery of the technology, using it effortlessly as a tool to accomplish a variety of learning, instructional and/or management tools. 

Since 1998, the percentages of staffs with beginner skills have decreased steadily while the percentages with advanced skills have increased. The proportion of teachers estimated as beginner technology users has decreased from 40 percent reported in 1999 to 19 percent reported in 2004 and 2005. The rate of administrators (e.g., principals) estimated as having beginner skills has decreased from 35 percent in 1999 to eight percent in 2004 (slightly lower than the nine percent reported for 2005).   

Figure 9 illustrates the increase in the percentages of teachers, building administrators, and technology staff rated as having advanced technology skills from 1998 through 2005. (Note that the support services staff category was not included until 2003 and is addressed later.) The rates of teachers and principals reported as advanced users have nearly doubled from 11 to over 20 percent. The group with the highest rate of advanced skills includes technology support staff, at 82 percent in 2005 as compared to 54 percent in 1998.  

Figure 9 

Percent Faculty/Staff with Advanced Skills, 1998-2005

As mentioned above, the Census did not address skill levels of support services staff until 2003. Interestingly, these data have been stagnant, with 52 percent of support services staff rated as having intermediate skills in 2003, 2004, and 2005. Also, the percentages of staff rated as beginner or advanced have fluctuated little, ranging from 29 to 31 percent as beginners and 17 to 19 percent as advanced. The differences are somewhat less marked among the user groups when reporting on combined intermediate and advanced skills, as indicated in Figure 10. Almost all of the technology staffs (98 percent) have intermediate or better skills. Principals are close behind at 91 percent, followed by teachers at 81 percent, and support services staff at 69 percent. 

Figure 10 

Percent Faculty/Staff with Intermediate or Advanced Skills, 1998-2005

Item 3 – Number of eMINTS-trained teachers
Added in 2004, item three asked schools to report the number of teachers in the building who have completed one or both years of eMINTS professional development. The enhancing Missouri’s Instructional Networked Teaching Strategies (eMINTS) program – that serves as the state’s instructional model of technology integration – supports teachers as they learn to integrate multimedia technology into inquiry-based, student-centered, interdisciplinary collaborative teaching practices that result in improved student performance, increased parent involvement, and enriched instructional effectiveness. While the majority of eMINTS-trained teachers received their professional development from eMINTS instructional staff, more and more teachers are receiving their professional development through district staff that has completed the eMINTS program’s “train-the-trainer” professional development.  

In 2004, contacts from 273 buildings reported having 594 teachers with one or both years of eMINTS professional development. For 2005, these numbers increased to 1,071 teachers in 345 buildings. Figure 11 indicates the numbers of staff reported in 2004 and 2005 as having completed one or both years of the eMINTS professional development for teachers. 

Figure 11 

Numbers of eMINTS-Trained Teachers, By Number of Years of Training, 2004 and 2005
 

Item 4 – Building technical support
Building contacts were asked in item four to estimate the total of school staff or others directly responsible for technical maintenance and/or support of the building’s hardware. Table 12 indicates the number and percentage of buildings, and where appropriate the full-time equivalency (FTE), relying on the various types of technical support provider. In general, buildings engage employees rather than non-employees to provide such support. In 2005, all but 94 buildings reported having one or more employees, with nearly three of four buildings relying on district technical staff with an average of 2.66 FTE staff per building. In total, buildings reported an average of 2.73 FTE employees providing technical support. However, the typical (median) building has closer to one employee responsible for support. 

Table 12 

Building Technical Support – 2005 

The 2005 technical support data correspond closely with data collected in 2003 and 2004, as shown in Table 13. Following building-level technical support being provided by district-level staff, the next likely providers of support are certificated staff, vendors, and/or non-certificated staff. While few buildings rely on parent/community support, the percent of buildings making use of student assistance has increased from five to 13. 

Table 13 

Building Technical Support Providers, 2003-2005 

Items 5 and 6 – Computers in the building
Annually, buildings report on the types and locations of computers in the buildings. Item five counts computers by platform and speed capacity, and item six counts Internet-connected and multimedia-equipped computers. Locations include Computer Labs, specifically designated for computer work; Instructional Rooms, designated as classrooms; and Library/Media Centers, designated for library and media services. In 2005, the Instructional Rooms were further broken out, by the grade spans of PreK-2, 3-5, 6-8, 9-12, and area career center. The handheld computer was also added to item five in 2005.

As indicated in Table 14, buildings reported a total of 288,926 computers in 2005 – a six percent increase from the 273,636 building computers reported in 2004. About 85 percent of the computers are PC or PC-compatible, (91 percent are connected to the Internet, 86 percent can operate multimedia programs, and 94 percent are considered Internet-capable. For 2005, the standard for being considered Internet-capable (or modern and able to run the Internet at high speeds) was updated to include: PC computers that run at Pentium or Pentium-equivalent speeds, Power Mac or G series Apple Computers, and AMD computers at or above 450 MHz.  

Approximately 93 percent of all computers are located in instructional rooms (computer labs, classrooms, and library media centers). With the inclusion of handhelds, the total number of computers jumps to over 299,000. Overall, the 2005 data indicate increases in all categories of computers, except for the numbers and percentages of computers that are “Internet-capable” as explained above, and the numbers and percentages of computers located in lab settings because of the shift in moving computers out of labs and into classrooms. 

Table 14 

Numbers, Types, and Location of Computers, 1998-2005
 

The 2005 data continue to document the shift in the location of computers. Since 1999 the range of computers located in a lab setting has ranged from a high of 36 percent in 1998 to a low of 30 percent in 2005. The percentage of computers residing in classrooms has increased from 47 percent in 1999 to 56 percent in 2004 and 2005. The shift is more noticeable when looking at the placement rates of computers within the instructional settings. In 2005, only 32 percent of “instructional” computers are located in labs as compared to 41 percent in 1999. The percent of “instructional” computers in classrooms has grown from 52 percent in 1999 to 59  percent in 2005.  

Figure 15 indicates the numbers of students per computer for 1998 through 2005. Ratios are determined using the COT data regarding numbers and types of computers and Core Data fall enrollment figures. As schools purchase new computers, older computers may be relocated within or surplussed out of the district. The numbers of computers in use continue to climb, resulting in a steady decline in the numbers of students per computers. Ratios are declining related to the number of students per high-speed (Internet-capable) computer and Internet-connected computer. The greatest decline relates to Internet-connected computers, as more and more buildings, classrooms, and computers are being connected to the Internet. Overall, the number of students per all computers has dropped from 6.4 in 1998 to 3.09 in 2005; the number of students per Internet-capable computer has dropped from 8.3 to 3.3; and, the number of students per Internet-connected computer has dropped from 13.5 to 3.4. 

Figure 15  

Number of Students per Computer Type, 1998-2005

Item 7 – Computer Internet connections
For the second year, building contacts were asked to indicate the status of Internet connectivity by type of computer (desktop or laptop) and type of connection (wired or wireless). In both 2004 and 2005, nearly all desktop computers (98 percent) had wired connections to the Internet. In 2005, two of three laptops had wireless connectivity. 

Item 8 – Technology in instructional rooms
Annually, buildings are asked to report on a list of technologies the state believes should be available in instructional rooms, based on current research and the eMINTS instructional model. These resources include telephone access, multimedia-equipped and Internet-connected computers, and teacher workstations that include a dedicated projection device (LCD panel or other type of video projector) and access to a printer.  

Note that a technical problem makes it impossible to report 2005 data. Nonetheless, Tables 16 through 18 are provided to indicate progress noted prior to this year’s reporting. The tables provide snapshots of the technologies located specifically in computer labs, instructional rooms, and library media centers (LMCs) for the base year of 1999, and 2002, 2003, and 2004. Overall, modest gains were noted in the majority of the technology categories.  

In general, computer labs and LMCs have greater access to education technologies than do classrooms. For example, 87 percent of LMCs had phone access in 2004, compared to 63 percent of labs and 56 percent of classrooms. The lowest rates of access for all room types, not surprisingly, involve having the full suite of technology available, followed by telephone access. Note that the item about Internet access was changed in 2004 to indicate real access rather than “wired for” access, thus the expected drop in 2004.
 

Table 16 

Computer Lab Technologies, 1999 and 2002 – 2004* 

Data for the computer labs changed very little from 2002 to 2004, with the 2004 data almost identical to the 2003 data. Only moderate increases are noted in the numbers of labs with Internet-connected computers and labs with complete teacher workstations. In comparison to the other room types, computer labs continue to have the highest rates of Internet access, multimedia-equipped computers, and Internet-connected computers.  

Table 17 

Instructional Room Technologies, 1999 and 2002-2004* 

Classroom technology has improved substantially over the years. Progress was continued in 2004, with gains noted for every category except for the upgraded Internet access data cell. While these gains are marginal, they are noteworthy given the state’s decrease in funding in 2003-2004. Classrooms are approaching parity with labs with regards to having at least one multimedia-equipped and Internet-connected computer. Still, only just over half of the classroom teachers have telephone access in 2004, and only about one in four has access to the full suite of classroom technologies.  

Table 18 

Library Media Center Technologies, 1999 and 2002-2004* 

Data have remained fairly constant for the LMCs during the past years, with a slight gain in the number of libraries with Internet-connected computers and a little larger gain in the number with the complete teacher workstation. For all years, LMCs indicate having telephone access at rates higher than those reported for computer labs and instructional rooms.  

Item 9 – Library automation systems
Item nine deals with automated systems in place in building library media centers (LMCs). Table 19 lists the systems predominantly used during the past four years. While the top systems have remained the same, the number of automated libraries has jumped dramatically since 2002. Only 89 of the 2,211 buildings in 2005 indicate not having any automated system, compared to 200 buildings in 2004, and 237 buildings in 2003. Over