Tag Archives: ESA Support

Study Results: Tech Support & Equipment Location

This post is part of a series inviting discussion, comments and reflection on the results of my dissertation.

Remember as you review the results of my study that every variable was examined to see its relationship with how often the school was using curriculum videoconferencing and whether that variable could be used to predict the use of videoconferencing.

In this post, we’ll look at the relationship between the school’s use of curriculum videoconferencing and some more support variables.

Who Supports You?

  • The choices were: a technical support person in my school, at my district, at my ESA or the vendor.
  • Each of these answers was not significantly correlated to the schools’ use of videoconferencing. However, when using all the administrative reports in a multiple regression analysis to determine which variables predict use of videoconferencing, tech support from my ESA contributed positively to the regression model (b=67.06, p=.011).

Speed of Support

  • The speed of support that the coordinator received was not significantly related to the schools’ use of videoconferencing.

Location of Equipment

  • Only two of the equipment locations were significantly correlated to the school’s use of videoconferencing.
  • Schools with a mobile cart are using videoconferencing significantly more than the average of all the others (r=.156, p=.009).
  • Where the coordinators support multiple systems in multiple locations, their schools are using videoconferencing significantly less than the average of all the others (r=-.159, p=.008).
  • The schools that have mobile equipment are the only ones that are significantly satisfied with the location of the equipment (r=-.151, p=.012).

Reasons for the Location of Equipment

  • None of the reasons for the location of the equipment were significantly correlated to the school’s use of videoconferencing.
  • However, two of the reasons were significantly correlated to the coordinator’s satisfaction with the location of the equipment.
  • Schools who placed the equipment based on ease of use for teachers were more satisfied with the location of the equipment (r=.278, p=.000).
  • Schools who placed the equipment based on the only available room were less satisfied with the location of the equipment (r=-192, p=.001).

Recommendations / Discussion

  • Do you receive tech support from your ESA? It seems like this is an important piece, and could be because it is hard for overworked district tech coordinators (at least in smaller distrcits) to have the detailed knowledge necessary to make IP videoconferencing work on school networks. What do you think?
  • Do you think there is an ideal location of equipment in a school using VC for curriculum enrichment?
  • Are you satisfied with the current location of your equipment? Do you wish it was somewhere else?
  • Do you agree with these results in your situation? why or why not?

Please comment!

Study Results: Educational Service Agency Support

This post is part of a series inviting discussion, comments and reflection on the results of my dissertation.

Remember as you review the results of my study that every variable was examined to see its relationship with how often the school was using curriculum videoconferencing and whether that variable could be used to predict the use of videoconferencing.

In this post, we’ll look at the relationship between the school’s use of curriculum videoconferencing and support from an educational service agency.

Support from an ESA

  • Whether the school has ESA support or not was not significantly related to the schools’ use of videoconferencing. 

ESA Creates and Facilitates VCs for the School

  • Where the ESA creates and facilitates VCs for the school, the school was using videoconferencing significantly more often (r=.120, p=.046).

ESA Subsidizes Programming from Content Providers

  • Whether the ESA subsidizes programming or not was not significantly related to the schools’ use of videoconferencing.

Percentage of VCs Provided or Facilitated by ESA

  • The percent of VCs provided or facilitated by the ESA was not significantly related to the schools’ use of videoconferencing.

ESAs that Facilitate/Create are also Subsidizing VCs

  • Interestingly, these variables were interrelated. There was a strong positive correlation between ESA’s that create and facilitate VCs for their schools and if they subsidize programming for their schools (r=.591, p=.000).
  • In addition, there was a strong positive correlation between ESA’s that create and facilitate VCs for their schools and the percentage of VCs provided or facilitated by the ESA (r=.506, p=.000).

Recommendations & Discussion

  • What recommendations would you draw from these results?
  • Schools: If you receive support from an educational service agency (or in a big district, your district VC office), what services do you see as essential?
  • Schools: What types of programs do you receive from your ESA?
  • ESAs:  What services do you think are essential to provide to your school districts?
  • What types of programs should ESAs facilitate and provide?

Please comment!

Educational Service Agency Support

This post is part of a series inviting discussion, comments and reflection on the results of my dissertation.

This set of questions tried to determine what type of support the coordinators in my study received from educational service agencies.

What is an ESA?

An educational service agency provides support and services to local districts. Read more about them in the U.S. at the Association of Educational Service Agencies. In Michigan they are called ISDs or RESAs or ESDs. In New York they are BOCES; in Texas ESCs; in Wisconsin CESAs, in Pennsylvania IUs. ESAs represented in the study are listed below. You’ll notice that some of them are organizations other than an ESA including consortiums, statewide networks, and large school districts that offer services similar to ESAs.  The organizations in Canada that stand out are Ontario’s ABEL, KCDC, and Alberta’s Regional Leads Network. How many of these do you know?!

  • ABEL
  • ACELINK
  • BCISD (now Berrien RESA)
  • CESA 11
  • Carbon Lehigh IU
  • Chester County IU
  • CIESC
  • Clare Gladwin RESD
  • CREC
  • CSD
  • Dallas ISD
  • Edmonton Public School Board
  • EEZ NYIT
  • ERVING
  • ESC 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 18, 20 (TX)
  • ETECH
  • Garden State Distance Learning Consortium
  • Genesee Valley BOCES
  • Graham County Consortium
  • GST BOCES
  • Hawaii DOE
  • Pinal ITV Consortium
  • IU 1, 13 (PA)
  • Jefferson-Lewis BOCES
  • KCDC
  • Macomb ISD
  • MAGPI
  • MCOE
  • Montgomery IU
  • NCOCC
  • NYCDOE
  • OAISD
  • Oakland ISD
  • OU BOCES
  • REMC 5
  • REMC 7
  • Saginaw ISD
  • SEOVEC
  • Shasta County Office of Education
  • SOITA
  • South Central Kansas ESC
  • TIES
  • VCRLN
  • ESD 112
  • Wilson Education Center

Do You Receive Support from an ESA?

ESA Support

Does Your ESA Create and Facilitate Free Programming?

ESA Facilitates Programming

Does Your ESA Subsidize Programming from Content Providers?

ESA Subsidizes Programming

What percent of your VCs from 2007-2008 were provided or facilitated by your ESA?

Isn’t it interesting that this graph seems to show basically all or nothing with very little in between?
ESA: Percent Programming Provided by ESA

Your Turn

What do you think?

  • Schools: What videoconferencing services do you receive from your ESA? What services do you wish you could receive?
  • Schools: What services do you think are most essential from your ESA?
  • ESAs: What services do you think are essential to provide to your school districts?
  • What types of programs should ESAs facilitate and provide?