Technology Integration: Four Points to Remember

1
Technology Integration Four Points to Remember

• David Popp
• Penn State University
• davepopp_at_psu.edu

2
Intended Audience

• Tech coordinators and others responsible for
  integrating technology at the building level

3
Objective

• Can we create a simple model to help us
  interpret the variations in technology
  implementation?

4
Data Source

• Site visits in 32 schools in Pennsylvania and
  Ohio with EETT grants

5
Question

• Why do we observe the following contrasts?

6

• The same application package is used in
  different schools. Some are getting results and
  others are not.

7

• Everyone is on the same page with the project in
  some schools while in others there are varying
  accounts of what is happening with the project.

8

• In some schools teachers are using technology as
  a tool to accomplish a goal while in others it
  appears teachers are using technology to use
  technology. Example Teacher using ILS for whole
  group instruction.

9

• Start with the assumption that everyone is
  trying to do a good job. What are the conditions
  that account for these differences?

10
Leadership

• Administrator leadership and teacher leadership.
  Not only is the administrator engaged in the
  project but the administer engages teachers in
  leadership positions, and administrator relies on
  the leadership provided by the teachers. The
  result is a shared vision.

11
Examples

• Systematic approach (accountability)
• Strategic approach (fit with goals not an add
  on)
• Technology was integrated into the program
• Evidence of team building
• Evidence of teacher leadership input through
  technology, curriculum, PD, and data analysis
  committees or teams.

12
Result

• Teachers believed in the project because
• They were part of the goal setting or,
• The project used a killer ap (if the project
  was top down)

13
Tech-Ready Teachers

• There was evidence of systematic professional
  development with technology well in advance of
  the program.

14
Example

• In the most effective projects, teachers have
  been engaged in professional development with
  computers for years and using technology to do
  the schools business
• In the case where teachers were using an ILS for
  whole group instruction, there was intensive
  profession development on the ILS, but the
  teachers were just learning how to use e-mail.

15
Result

• Exisiting technology skills transfer to the new
  project. Teachers dont need to deal with the
  mental load of learning technology while trying
  to teach with it.

16
Seamless Access

• Teacher engagement requires reliable
  connections and equipment

17
Examples

• Reliable hardware
• Reliable networks
• Timely tech support

18
Result

• Technology doesnt interfere with instruction.
• Teacher confidence in their ability to deliver
  the project is high.

19
Effective Practice

• Instructional strategies
• Assessment strategies
• Data based decision making

20
A Model to Organize the Observations Illustrates
the Interdependence of Four Factors Needed for
Successful Projects

• Based on Four Points to Remember A Tetrahedral
  Model for Memory Experiments. J.J. Jenkins
  (1979)

21
(No Transcript)
22
Conditions
23
Conditions
Results
24
(No Transcript)
25
(No Transcript)
26
(No Transcript)
27
(No Transcript)
28

• We now have a model to help us interpret our
  observations.

29

• The same application package is used in
  different schools. Some are getting results and
  others are not.

30

• Everyone is on the same page with the project in
  some schools while in others there are varying
  accounts of what is happening with the project.
  Example One person picked the solution for
  others to implement.

31

• In some schools teachers are using technology as
  a tool to accomplish a goal while in others it
  appears teachers are using technology to use
  technology. Example Teacher using ILS for whole
  group instruction.

32

• Practice the Model at the EETT Video Case Studies
  Site
• http//www.ed.psu.edu/EETT/CaseStudies

33
The Three Dimensional Tetrahedral Model Became a
Two Dimensional Interface
34
Matrix view of the themes
35
Lessons Learned

• Shared vision - There is a common understanding
  of the project across the administrators and
  teachers

36
Lessons Learned

• Evidence of team building and ownership.

37
Lessons Learned

• The most projects included systemic
  accountability components

38
Lessons Learned

• Projects meet teachers where they are in terms
  of tech skills and provide adequate support

39
Lessons Learned

• Projects allow for individual teacher adaptation

40
Lessons Learned

• Adequate infrastructure and tech support.

41
Lessons Learned

• Technology, applied to achieve a
• specific goal, under effective leadership,
• with appropriate professional development
• and support, leads to goal attainment
• new visions.