As an SLC pilot district, we appreciate the emphasis on teacher voice. Our teachers embraced the opportunity to collaborate directly with technologists at the Colorado SLC camp, as they have historically been given this opportunity as part of the procurement and development of instructional tech. In other words, the SLC camp was simply an extension of the type of teacher/technologist interaction that our teachers have become accustomed to.

To whatever extent teachers are given control over their PD budget, my hope is that the Learning Registry can be utilized to appropriately tag electronic resources, similar to what is being done for instructional resources for kids. As a technology leader at my district, I see myriad examples where schools and teachers waste a lot of money on bad technology. So before they are given even more control of the PD budget, I’m in favor of providing a technology landscape that provides guides to selecting appropriate tools that are aligned to the CCSS.

On this matter: To what extent do you think we need more than collaboration, but a real marketplace where individual teachers, not whole schools, control large portions of their pro-rated budget for teacher tools, p.d., and curriculum?

I suspect that’s the only way to have a flourishing demand side. Disintermediate district gatekeepers. And what’s unusual…this is a potential education win that is also a political win…teachers would love it.