Up to this point planning for technology training, utilization and assessment by teachers and students has focused on atomic skills centered on hardware or particular types of software. Instead we suggest that the focus should be much broader and longer range.

First, the goal must be set on a point farther in the future. The goal that seems to have general agreement is "integration of technology into the curriculum." However, a definition for that has been elusive. In 1995, Christopher Moersch developed the LoTi scale (Levels of Technology Integration) which can provide a working definition. Integration is considered level four of seven.

Second, learning and progress toward this goal is not linear. Teachers and students will have different access to hardware and software, will have different needs at different times, and will experience various levels of difficulty in learning different tools and approaches.

Third, individuals will experience different levels of success in different areas of technology. For example, individuals who are fluent users of e-mail and the Web may not be able to do the simplest tasks related to file management on the PC or network.

Fourth, the district has expressed a desire to encourage advancement with incentives based on assessment and to not allow people to "opt out."

Fifth, across the state and nationally educators are involved in applying new strategies for instruction and assessment. Those new strategies can also find application in the area of educational technology.

With these things in mind, a project to begin assessing teacher technology skills would contain the follow tasks.

1. Based on the long-term goals and the skills checklists that Milford School District has already begun, identify several large competency areas. Some that spring to mind are Computer and Network Competencies, Word Processing, Spreadsheets, Communication and Internet Use and Graphics and Presentation technologies. Within each of these areas, define dimensions of skills.
2. Within and across each of these areas, develop several tasks that allow users to perform across a range of skill levels. For example, a word processing task might be to create a newsletter using some raw materials in the form of text, graphics and numeric data. The finished product could be a straightforward document or a multi-column document with graphics with wraparound text. In other words, individuals would be able to use a range of tools and a broad set of capabilities to complete the task.
3. For each of the competency areas, rubrics would be created to assess each task across all of the dimensions of skills. Some areas might have rubrics but no stand-alone assessment tasks. For example, the Computer and Network Competencies rubric might be used when reviewing tasks in any of the other areas. Some rubrics may be developed to examine non-skill specific areas such as integration across competency areas.
4. Training and support could then be developed across two levels. First, the skills training would be developed for those who need to acquire skills at the lower levels. Second, individuals within the district could be trained to use the rubrics to assess others. Those familiar with the rubrics would then also be improving their own skills and become more capable guides for others in the district.