Leadership project presentation

740 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
740
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
49
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Hello, my name is Bill Harris and welcome to my Recipe For Success: A View of Technology Adoption.
  • I will be covering my findings from my action research project titled, Professional Development: Is It Important for a Successful Technology Adoption Program? This review highlighted the factors of teacher professional development and growth, the impact of the approach to training, and lastly the building-level leadership provided.
  • In defining what a successful technology adoption program looked like the research strongly implied a direct correlation between student achievement and the integration of technology.
  • Four key factors identified as the predominant matters affecting technology adoption in education were:[CLICK]organizational support, [CLICK]leadership, [CLICK]training and revealed that professional development and available [CLICK]resources were significantly related to technology adoption. 
  • By building strong professional development programs revolved around teacher’s needs to support a focused goal [CLICK], established by distributed leadership, [CLICK] supported by a leader who understood his or her leadership role in technology adoption, a school could succeed in technology adoption. This success in adoption would ultimately lead to improved student achievement and performance.
  • The most effective approach to professional development for educators was characterized as organic. Organic revolves around the teachers’ needs and learning styles. The research says that training should be conducted face-to-face in four modules: [CLICK] [CLICK]the teacher’s personal use of technology, [CLICK]classroom management related to the use of technology [CLICK] with students, [CLICK] evaluating the impact of technology on learning, and lastly, [CLICK] changing teaching practices by building confidence in teachers capacity.
  • The action plan for this research was to be completed in two cycles. [CLICK VIDEO] Cycle I included data collection and professional development training for a group of classroom teachers[CLICK VIDEO] Cycle II included data collection and professional development from a group of building-level administrators.  
  • Target Audience 26 High school teachers - SHS rural high school of approximately 800 students. The school in which this group of teachers were employed was selected for a State awarded Title IID Grant in which every student received a netbook equipped with available eTextbooks for courses. The experience levels of the teachers in technology integration was low to intermediate. The average classroom contained an overhead projector, pull-down screen, and dry erase boards. The Mathematics department, due to a previous year’s grant, had mounted digital projectors, and either a Promethean Activboard or a Mimio interactive board device. The number of high school teachers who responded to the research survey in this cycle were 26 of a population of 32 (81%), 12 male and 14 female. The ages of the teachers range from 23 to 59 with mean age being 36. Fourteen of the teachers in this cycle have been teaching for less than 12 years and 12 teachers, for more than 13 years. The academic content areas taught by the teachers included: Language Arts, Science, Social Studies, Mathematics, Music, Art, Languages (Spanish), Career, Technical, and Agricultural Education (CTAE), and Athletics.
  • Implementation Process Establish project goals – to empower classroom teachers with skills and knowledge of technology integration and to empower teachers to conduct instruction in a 1:1 computer environment to improve teaching, learning and assessment. My expectations are that teachers will become more confident in their technology integration skills with evidence shown by the increase and frequency of engaging technology-connected lesson activities for students.
  • Technology tools used during the project will include a variety of instructional technology devices due to the individual needs of each teacher and demands of the content. A needs assessment analysis had previously been conducted prior to this research being initiated and the following training needs found deficient: interactive whiteboards, digital projectors, computers/netbooks (PC platforms), Web 2.0 tools, digital still and video cameras, student response devices, and online assessment. 
  • Implementing my Plan of Action will be limited by time and the number of professional development sessions scheduled during the project period. Professional development training will be conducted in small group sessions for 50 minutes twice per month. Training topics will vary since the groups will be grouped by academic content areas with a balance of additional resource teachers added. Initially, all teachers will receive training on effective use of interactive whiteboards in the classroom. All teachers will participate in an online Level of Technology Innovation Survey at the beginning of the school year to determine the current level of technology integration in their classrooms. Another survey (Post-Survey) will be conducted at the end of the research period to determine any changes in attitude, instructional behaviors, or frequency of use.My expectations are that teachers will become more confident in their technology integration skills with evidence shown by the increase and frequency of engaging technology-connected lesson activities for students.
  • Administrators selected for this research were all from one urban school district with a student population of approximately 35,000.  The administrators who responded to the research survey numbered 54, of which 18 (33%) were male, 34 (63%) female, and 2 no responses. The mean ages of the responders were between 45 and 54 years of age. Forty-seven (87%) of the administrators achieved masters degrees while 6 (11%) achieved doctorates and one no response. The current positions of the responders were 28 (52%) principals, 21 (39%) Assistant principals, 2 (4%) technology directors, and 3 (5%) others. These administrators were the leaders and decision-makers for 39 elementary schools, 5 middle schools, 4 high schools, and 6 other district-level schools
  • Establish project goals - To provide background, overview, and awareness in technology integration and support to assist education leaders in planning, promoting, modeling, and supporting the effective integration of technology as a learning tool in order to support teacher effectiveness in improving student achievement.
  • Technology tools used during the training included: Intel’s Teach Program: Leadership Forum (Version 3.5) online, the Internet, interactive whiteboards, digital projectors, computers (PC laptops), various Web 2.0 tools, student response devices.
  • Plan of Action could be hindered by the availability and attendance of participants during the scheduled training. Implementation of training and related events are as follows: Participants enrolled in scheduled training sessionsConduct Session One (4 hours): Intel’s Teach Program: Leadership Forum in four different sessions. Collect survey data (Technology Leadership Pre-Survey) at the beginning of each session.Conduct Session Two (3 hours):  Web 2.0 Tools in the Classroom and Evaluating Effective Instruction: Turning Up the H.E.A.T.Conduct Session Three (3 hours): Effective Use of the Interactive Whiteboard, Formative Assessment with Clickers.Participants will participate in a post-survey (Technology Leadership Post-Survey) by email at the end of Cycle II in order to determine changes in leadership, attitudes, or behaviors effected by their training.
  • Plan of Action could be hindered by the availability and attendance of participants during the scheduled training. Implementation of training and related events are as follows: Participants enrolled in scheduled training sessionsConduct Session One (4 hours): Intel’s Teach Program: Leadership Forum in four different sessions. Collect survey data (Technology Leadership Pre-Survey) at the beginning of each session.Conduct Session Two (3 hours):  Web 2.0 Tools in the Classroom and Evaluating Effective Instruction: Turning Up the H.E.A.T.Conduct Session Three (3 hours): Effective Use of the Interactive Whiteboard, Formative Assessment with Clickers.Participants will participate in a post-survey (Technology Leadership Post-Survey) by email at the end of Cycle II in order to determine changes in leadership, attitudes, or behaviors effected by their training.
  • Expectations were that a large percentage of administrators who affected changes in their schools due to training are more confident and better prepared to support teachers to be better in implementing technology to support student achievement.
  • The pre-survey data shows that the teachers were not truly brought into the planning stages of the grant implementation plan. There was no comprehensive plan of action for using the netbooks. During the initial stages of adoption teachers should have received professional development session concerning classroom management in a one to one classroom. Decisions on how security was going to be handled and how was district tech support going to handle this influx of technology and still maintain the level of proficiency throughout the district?
  • In analyzing the data, I grouped the survey questions by specific categories. This allowed me to determine the reliability and look for trends in my participant’s responses. The survey questions fell into six functional areas: Vision, Planning, Advocacy, Professional Development, Support, and Accountability. The six areas along with an analysis are detailed as follows:Vision: With the large number of those believing in sharing the vision (93%) there should be a correspondingly large number articulating that vision (43%). My respondents are not practicing their beliefs.Planning: 31 % of therespondents empowered a technology planning team and (33%) indicate they evaluate technology plans. The data appears consistent.However since data was not correlated to determine the number of respondents empowering technology teams against those that responded this data is inconclusive. Advocacy:Respondents indicating that they advocate for technology resources (93%) also believe it is important to advocate for these resources as well.Support: The data is consistent with showing that administrator’s beliefs are not consistent with their actions. One hundred percent of my respondents indicate that they understand the technology needs and concerns of their faculty, staff, and students and that 98% maintain positive relationships with the same group in regards to technology. Yet only 57% say they ensure appropriate technology facilities for their school and 59% ensure equal access to technology resources. Accountability: 96% agree overall in the belief that it is important to consider effective technology use as aperformance assessment component for the instructional staff. The literature states that if teachers are to be held accountable for successful technology adoption then they should be given the opportunity for professional development and provided the resources necessary to succeed
  • No matter the detail of these findings, the end result should be to reorganize the training to generate motivation and confidence in the teachers. The interview questions provides the information to adjust training to make this program an effective professional development program, one of the factors to successful technology adoption.My research showed that teachers must be held accountable for implementing newly acquired knowledge and skills if technology adoption is to be successful. Teachers must appropriately use the technology, receive feedback, and review technology in context. It is not only important to consider effective technology use as one performance assessment components of instructional staff, it is necessary in an effective technology adoption program.Beyond the scope of this project is the last piece of the technology adoption issue. What defines an effective educational technology adoption program? The assumption is that such a program is one that improves student achievement through the employment of technology. A third cycle must be concentrated on the impact that a strong professional development program and trained educational leadership has on student achievement.I have changed my priorities in looking at the factors of a successful technology adoption program. I now feel the most important factor is the administration’s leadership and the second an effective professional development program. The issues and problems that are represented by the data and my observations are directly related to leadership and not the professional development. This will be further detailed and concluded after the post-survey and Cycle II.
  • I have changed my priorities in looking at the factors of a successful technology adoption program. I now feel the most important factor is the administration’s leadership and the second an effective professional development program. The issues and problems that are represented by the data and my observations are directly related to leadership and not the professional development. This will be further detailed and concluded after the post-survey and Cycle II.
  • Leadership project presentation

    1. 1. Recipe For Success:A View of Technology Adoption Your Presenter Bill Harris Instructional Technology Specialist Armstrong Atlantic State University
    2. 2. AgendaA Review of the LiteratureMethodologyResultsConclusion
    3. 3. A Review of the Literature
    4. 4. A Review of the Literature Factors that hindered technology adoption lack of teacher technology training the lack of funding for technical support intended use of available technology Defining successful technology adoption
    5. 5. A Review of the Literature Four Key Factors  Organizational support  Leadership  Training and Development  Technical Support Resources
    6. 6. A Review of the Literature Effective Professional Development Program Aligned organizational policies & procedures Increase training opportunities
    7. 7. A Review of the Literature Faculty need to:  Become familiar with the specific technology  Use the technology  Integrate the technology into their teaching  Utilize formative assessment  Realign teaching and student learning outcomes  Fundamentally change teaching practice
    8. 8. Methodology
    9. 9. Methodology Research conducted in two cycles Cycle 1 Cycle 2
    10. 10. Methodology Cycle 1 - Classroom Teachers  Target Audience • 26 High School Teachers • 12 Male, 14 Female • Ages 23 – 59 (mean 36) • Experience • 14 teachers < 12 years • 12 teachers > 13 years
    11. 11. Methodology Cycle 1 - Classroom Teachers  Implementation Establish project goals • Skills and knowledge of technology integration • Instruction in a 1:1 computer environment • Increase number of engaging technology-connected lesson activities
    12. 12. Methodology Cycle 1 - Classroom Teachers  Implementation Technology tools • Interactive whiteboards • Digital projectors • Netbooks (PC platforms) • Web 2.0 tools • Digital still and video cameras • Student online response devices systems
    13. 13. Methodology Cycle 1 - Classroom Teachers  Implementation Plan of Action • Professional development small group sessions • 50 minutes sessions X2 per month • Grouped by content area • Training topics • Interactive whiteboards • Web 2.0 Tools • Online Resources • Intel Teach Tools online
    14. 14. Methodology Cycle 2 - Educational Leaders  Target Audience• 54 Educational Leaders• 18 Male, 34 Female, 2 no response• Age 45 – 54• Positions • 28 Principals • 21 Assistant Principals • 5 Technology Directors• Schools: 39 ES, 5 MS, 4 HS, 6 District-Level
    15. 15. Methodology Cycle 2 - Educational Leaders  ImplementationEstablish project goals• To provide background, overview, and awareness in technology integration• Assist education leaders in planning, promoting, modeling, and supporting the effective integration of technology
    16. 16. Methodology Cycle 2 - Educational Leaders  ImplementationTechnology Tools• Intel’s: Leadership Forum online• Internet• Interactive whiteboards• Digital projectors• Computers (PC laptops)• Web 2.0 tools• Student response devices
    17. 17. Methodology Cycle 2 - Educational Leaders  ImplementationProfessional Development• Session 1 (4 hours): • Intel’s Teach Program: Leadership Forum• Session 2 (3 hours): • Web 2.0 Tools • Evaluating Effective Instruction: Turning Up the H.E.A.T.
    18. 18. Methodology Cycle 2 - Educational Leaders  ImplementationProfessional Development (cont.)• Session 3 (3 hours): • Interactive Whiteboard • Formative Assessment with Clickers
    19. 19. Methodology Cycle 2 - Educational Leaders  ImplementationExpectations• Large percentage of administrators more confident• Better prepared to support teachers in implementing technology
    20. 20. Results
    21. 21. Results: Cycle 1 Conducted  Pre and Post Surveys  Teacher Interviews Results  Teacher “buy-in”  Incomplete plan  Classroom management  Security issues  Technical support
    22. 22. Results: Cycle 2 Conducted  Pre-Survey  Post Survey Results  Vision  Planning  Advocacy  Professional Development  Support  Accountability
    23. 23. Conclusion
    24. 24. Conclusion Professional Development Teacher Training Educational Leadership Training Educational Leadership Where to from here? – Cycle 3
    25. 25. Conclusion Strong Educational Leadership +Effective Professional Development = Successful Technology Adoption
    26. 26. QuestionsBill HarrisEmail: wiharris@fullsail.eduBlog: http://bilharris.wordpress.com/

    ×