This study was designed to investigate the duties and responsibilities of the position of K-12 Technology Coordinators.

Participants for this study were technology coordinators for school districts or individuals who administered the districts' technology programs to some degree because the school districts lacked an official "technology coordinator". Participants were located via listservs that were identified as educational technology related. Surveys were distributed electronically on the internet which was accessible worldwide.

The survey instrument (see Appendix A and B) featured several open-ended questions, yet it relied heavily on frequency data analysis to interpret results. The first portion of the survey explained the purpose of the study to the participant. Some historical information concerning the evolution of technology relating to professionals' titles was also provided for clarification.

All surveys used in the study were completed and returned electronically with the exception of one survey that was returned via the post office.

One section of the survey requested participants' demographic information. The information included name and location of the school district at which the participants were employed, enrollment of the district, and participant’s job title. Name and location of the school district was not included within the results due to confidentiality purposes. The job title inquiry was made to ensure that the respondent was directly involved with the position of technology coordinator.

A series of open-ended questions were asked concerning the education or certification that the technology coordinator possessed, the number of months of the participant’s contract, the individual’s annual salary (which was an optional question due to confidentiality), and whether or not the technology coordinator had regular teaching duties. Respondents who had regular teaching responsibilities were asked to describe them in more detail.

The last two open-ended questions involved the school district’s budget. One question asked if the school district had a specific technology budget (if so, approximate size was requested). The second question asked how the budget at the district was determined. Examples of basing the budget on the number of students, an annual amount, or grant money were given to ensure the appropriate response to the question.

The next part of the survey identified specific responsibilities of the technology coordinators. The participants were asked to place an "X" next to all the items in the list included in the district technology coordinator’s responsibilities. The items in the list included maintaining a dial-up modem pool; computer trouble shooting; software and hardware installation; knowledge of HTML; remaining technically competent by attending workshops, classes, and conferences; developing multimedia presentations using software such as Powerpoint and Hyperstudio; maintaining a LAN; maintaining district/classroom websites; writing technology grants; working with a budget to secure adequate resources for technology instruction; developing acceptable use policies; staff development and training; developing, implementing, delivering, and evaluating a district technology plan; maintaining accurate inventory of computer hardware and software; public speaking publicizing plans/progress; planning and evaluating technology facilities; and developing technology curriculum.

In addition, the participants were asked to identify any other non-computer responsibilities required of the position. Examples such as VCR repair, video editing, and maintenance of audiovisual equipment were given to assure the appropriate response to the question.

Each participant was also asked to identify the top five primary responsibilities of the position.

BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS