Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

The EdTech Genome Project - Jefferson Education Exchange

143 views

Published on

The Jefferson Education Exchange is coordinating The EdTech Genome Project, a sector-wide initiative aimed at helping educators and education leaders make better-informed decisions about edtech.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

The EdTech Genome Project - Jefferson Education Exchange

  1. 1. The EdTech Genome Project A sector-wide effort tounderstand why education technology performs differently in various contexts 1
  2. 2. Our schools have been hit by atechnological explosion they were not readyfor. In many ways, they’re still NOT READY. 2
  3. 3. Every year, nearly14,000 school districts spend more than $13.2 billion (and growing) on 6,000+ edtech tools. Thedecision makers (administrators and teachers)who purchase these tools largely rely on personal networks and internet searchesto decide how tospend their edtechbudgets. Thisis aninefficient, fragmented way for educatorsto spend so muchtime and money,and it leads toenormouswaste. 3
  4. 4. …is spent on tools that are a GOODFIT and IMPLEMENTED CORRECTLY. 15% …is spent on tools that could be a GOOD FIT but are NOTIMPLEMENTED CORRECTLY. 30% …is spent on tools that are DOOMED TO FAIL because they are a POORFIT. 55% In multiple surveys of thousands of educators, the view from the groundis that edtechpurchasingandimplementationare a mess: 4
  5. 5. 5 Educators estimate more than 85% of our $13.2B edtech investment is wasted every year.
  6. 6. Dataabout this problem is finallybeing discovered and reported. Unfortunately, there are no easy answers. 6
  7. 7. Why are students and educators not using the technologies purchased for them? 7
  8. 8. As a result, well-intentionededucators (administrators and teachers) often: select ill-fitting products; and or are unable to implement products properly. 1 2 Why are students andeducatorsnot using the technologies purchasedfor them? The root cause appearsto be that educatorslackaccessto informationabout how edtechtools perform indifferent contexts, and why. 8
  9. 9. 9 Every edtech decision-maker wouldbenefit from accessing the wisdom,experiences, and perspectives of peers in similar contexts.
  10. 10. Yet no educator is in a position to make that level of documentation andsharing a reality. Economists callthis a “collectiveaction”problem. The Jefferson EducationExchangehas been exploringthis since the first EdTech Efficacy Research Symposium in 2017. 10
  11. 11. 11 First EdTech Efficacy Research Academic Symposium • Convenednearly 300leading investors, academics,educators, researchers, philanthropists,and entrepreneurs. • Tencross-functionalparticipantworking groups,eachsupported by a professional researcher, presented white papers at the Symposium.
  12. 12. 12 First EdTech Efficacy Research Academic Symposium • Thelackof contextuallyrelevant informationaboutedtech implementations is ahuge “collectiveaction”problem. • Everyoneagrees onwhosefaultitis. • “Somebody”needs to lead. Astrong consensusemerged:
  13. 13. The key takeawayfrom the Symposium: “Somebody” needs to tackle these collective action problems or nothing will improve. 13
  14. 14. 14
  15. 15. The Jefferson Education Exchange has stepped forwardto be “the somebody” to facilitate the collectivetacklingof this problem. 15
  16. 16. 16 The EdTech GenomeProject Properusage of edtechtools increasessharplyas we collectivelylearnhowtobetter select andimplementeach product. Billions of dollarsaresaved and millionsof instructionalhours arerecovered. IMPACT Educatorsuse dataandanalysis toincrease qualityoftoolselection and toimplement thosewell-selectedselected toolsmore effectively. Industryuses dataandanalysis tobetter understandtheconditions thatdrive success and failureof their implementations. CONNECT&ANALYZE Createandtestmethodologies tosupporteducatorsandto incentivize themtoshareinformationabouttheir implementations,atscale. Build “Exchange” platformthatallows decision-makerstoaccess dataand analysis aboutedtechimplementations nationwide. DESIGN&COLLECT Researchers,practitioners,stakeholders,and expertscollaboratetodecide which “edtech implementationvariables”should be studied first. Ten workingandtechnical groups build consensus onhow bestto define andmeasure each variablein thefield,creatingThe EdTech ImplementationFramework,Version 1.0. DISCOVER& DEFINE
  17. 17. 17 The EdTech GenomeProject Properusage of edtechtools increasessharplyas we collectivelylearnhowtobetter select andimplementeach product. Billions of dollarsaresaved and millionsof instructionalhours arerecovered. IMPACT Educatorsuse dataandanalysis toincrease qualityoftoolselection and toimplement thosewell-selectedselected toolsmore effectively. Industryuses dataandanalysis tobetter understandtheconditions thatdrive success and failureof their implementations. CONNECT&ANALYZE Createandtestmethodologies tosupporteducatorsandto incentivize themtoshareinformationabouttheir implementations,atscale. Build “Exchange” platformthatallows decision-makerstoaccess dataand analysis aboutedtechimplementations nationwide. DESIGN&COLLECT Researchers,practitioners,stakeholders,and expertscollaboratetodecide which “edtech implementationvariables”should be studied first. Ten workingandtechnical groups build consensus onhow bestto define andmeasure each variablein thefield,creatingThe EdTech ImplementationFramework,Version 1.0. DISCOVER& DEFINE ThroughJanuary6, 2020,the Jefferson EducationExchangeis seeking: • Public commenton 13contextual“contendervariables”thatmaybeassociatedwith edtech implementationsuccessorfailure (SeeJefferson EducationExchangewebsite forlink topublic comment survey.) • Applicationsto join 13VariableWorkingGroups,withone WorkingGrouppervariable(See JeffersonEducationExchangewebsitefordetailson thisopportunityanda linkto the application.)
  18. 18. The EdTech Genome Project is a sector-wide technical working network. In December 2020, the initiative will publish the EdTech Implementation Framework Version 1.0, which will be comprised of 10 contextual variables with consensus definitions and measurement instruments for each variable. 18 Stakeholders AdvisoryBoard IndustryCouncil Dedicated ProjectManager Universityof Virginia ResearchTeam SteeringCommittee WorkingGroups for10SelectedVariables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
  19. 19. • Adoption Plan • Alignment of Technologies to Instructional Purposes • Coaching • Competing Priorities • Foundational Resources (Technology Resources, Operational Tech Support, Financial Resources) • Implementation Plan • Professional Learning (Development) / Support • School (Staff) Culture • Support from School and District Administration • Teacher Agency/Autonomy • Teacher Beliefs about Tech/Self-Efficacy & Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge) • Time and Scheduling • Vision for Teaching and Learning with Technology Which “contender variables” have been advanced by the EdTech Genome Steering Committee for public comment?
  20. 20. Adoption Plan ...is the presence and quality of systematic and inclusive processes and associated resources a school/district/state uses to vet and select technology prior to purchasing and full-scale implementation. This includes understanding and use of efficacy research, as well as the use of pilot trials. Alignment of Technologies to Instructional Purposes ...is the extent to which educators are able to articulate a clear and appropriate purpose for technology use, grounded in instructional needs, prior to selecting technologies. Coaching ...is the access to and quality of dedicated instructional technology staff to provide personalized, ongoing instructional support for educators implementing an edtech tool. These staff members are knowledgeable about the integration of pedagogy, subject-area content, and technology. Competing Priorities ...is the extent to which a school/district has other prioritized initiatives such that an edtech implementation "moves up or down on the list" for educators. This includes the presence of too many technology initiatives, as well as the competition between tech and non-tech initiatives. Which “contender variables” have been advanced by the EdTech Genome Steering Committee for public comment?
  21. 21. Foundational Resources …are the essential structural resources needed for edtech implementation, including technology resources (i.e. hardware, software, Internet), operational technology support, and financial resources. Implementation Plan ...is the presence and quality of systematic and inclusive processes a school/district uses to implement edtech tools after procurement and over multiple years. This includes setting and monitoring usage and engagement goals, as well as evaluating effectiveness. Professional Learning (Development) / Support ...is the presence and quality of independent/informal and formal professional learning and collaboration opportunities for teachers implementing edtech tools. School (Staff) Culture ... is the way teachers and other staff members work together and the set of beliefs, values, and assumptions they share.1 1 Root definition from ASCD Support from School and District Administration ...is the encouragement and tactical support provided by school/district administrators to teachers implementing edtech tools. Which “contender variables” have been advanced by the EdTech Genome Steering Committee for public comment?
  22. 22. Teacher Agency/Autonomy ...is teachers’ active contribution to shaping their work, tools, and conditions. In particular, this is the extent to which a school/district includes teachers in edtech decision-making for adoption and implementation. Teacher Beliefs about Technology/Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge/Self-Efficacy ..is educators’ beliefs about the value of edtech, their understanding of pedagogical best practices for integrating technology, and their beliefs that their implementation of edtech will effectively support instruction and student outcomes. Time and Scheduling ...is instructional time and professional time (including time for learning, time for decision-making, and time for collaboration) allotted for implementing an edtech tool. This is also the extent to which schedules are responsive to edtech implementation needs. Vision for Teaching and Learning with Technology ...is the presence, quality, and communication of a school/district vision for edtech implementation. Specifically, this considers the extent to which that vision articulates the way in which technologies are leveraged as tools for supporting instruction and student outcomes. Which “contender variables” have been advanced by the EdTech Genome Steering Committee for public comment?
  23. 23. The missionof the Jefferson Education Exchange is to help educators tomake better-informed decisions about educationtechnology. The Jefferson Education Exchange is structured as a public charity that is supported exclusivelyby grants,philanthropy, and support froma growing list of funders including the Universityof VirginiaCurry School of Education, Strada Education Network, Billand Melinda Gates Foundation, Carnegie Corporation of New York, and the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative. 23
  24. 24. Contact Dan Brown Director of National Engagement Jefferson Education Exchange dan@jexuva.org Let’s talk. 24

×