technology leadership plan

Running head: TECHNOLOGY LEADERSHIP PLAN 1

Technology Leadership Plan:

A Strategic Plan for Integrating Technology into an Educational Institution

Robinder Kahlon

University of Ontario Institute of Technology

TECHNOLOGY LEADERSHIP PLAN 2

Technology Leadership Plan:

A Strategic Plan for Integrating Technology into an Educational Institution

Strategic Plan – The Steps

In this paper, a strategic plan framework will be used to model the process for

reconstruction of educational practice, at the school or school board levels. In this study, the

following steps will be used for developing a Strategic Plan:

1. Problem Statement

2. Project Objectives

3. Proposed Solution

4. Resource Requirements

5. Known Constraints

6. Implementation Plan

7. Evaluation Plan

These steps coincide with the change process described in Valdez (2005), as will be noted

throughout.

Step 1: Problem Statement

Determining the reason for change is the first step in effecting successful change,

according to Valdez (2005). Educational institutions have been in the process of integrating

information and computer technology into educational practice for the last two decades. To date,

technology has been viewed more as a substitution or augmentation of existing practices, as

described by the SAMR model (Holt, 2012). Moving forward, the higher levels of technology

integration, the modification and redefinition of teaching practice, are the desired goal.

Step 2: Project Objectives


The objective of the strategy is to improve the student learning performance through the

efficient and effective application of technology. Technology has been shown to enhance

learning. Cradler (2002) reports that technology improves performance in 3 ways: content area

achievement, higher-order skills development, and workforce preparation. Valdez (2005)

concurs with these findings, adding that technology integration helps students to function in an

technology-rich society. Passey (2003) reports a positive effect of technology integration on

motivation, leading students to be more engaged in their work and to have more positive

attitudes towards work. Therefore, technology integration is a desired goal, but must be

accomplished with respect to the needs of all of the stakeholders.

Step 3: Proposed Solution

Valdez (2005) outlines that forming a “Representative and Enabled Committee” is a key

step in effecting successful change. He suggests that the committee should have representation

across various stakeholder groups, expertise and management skills. Bennett delineates the

merits of the distributed leadership model: that distributed leadership consists of a network of

interacting individuals rather than arising from a single individual, and opens the boundaries so

that members of the school community whose roles need to be considered are included in the

planning and decision-making process. In consideration of these research-based

recommendations, this plan proposes a distributed leadership model in the form of a committee

of stakeholders: administrators, teachers, students and parents.

The usefulness of a committee at the school level is demonstrated in Anderson (2005)

where it is reported as the most second significant factor in producing positive technology

outcomes, the first being professional development. Anderson also suggests that because


technology changes so quickly, technological expertise is rather distributed, and calls for

distributed leadership.

The next step in the change model proposed in Valdez (2005) is the needs assessment

phase. All stakeholders will be consulted to solicit their opinions on the integration of

technology into educational practice.

Consulting stakeholders: teachers

Ertmer (1999) has identified several barriers to ICT integration that arise from teachers:

deeply held beliefs about student-teacher roles, curricular emphases, and assessment practices.

Assuming that first order barriers such as limited equipment, training, and support are dealt with,

the second-order barriers of ingrained beliefs about teaching methods must be addressed.

Integration of technology is much more difficult adjustment for teaching faculty than for students

(Owen, 2004). It is a switch to a learner-centered environment, from a teacher-centered

environment, and comes with anxiety for some teachers. Teachers may have issued with an

increased workload caused by the transition to a new teaching medium.

Any issues that teachers have should be elucidated in this step, and dealt with in later

steps.

Consulting stakeholders: parents

Parents may have several issues regarding the integration of ICT into their children’s

education regarding their ability to afford the required technology, and whether it will be

provided by the educational institution.

Several studies report that socio-economic factors influence the level of technology that

parents can afford: Middleton (2005) reports that households with heads who are less education


or earn less have less technology in the home; Willms (2003) confirms lone-parent families and

guardian families often do not have a computer at home.

While many parents may not be able to provide technology for their children, the positive

impact of having technology at home has been demonstrated to have a positive impact on student

performance in school (Wenglinsky, 2005).

The performance gap between those who can afford technology at home and those who

cannot, may be mitigated by integration of technology into the classroom. From my interview

with a technology leader, the Toronto District School Board is planning on providing technology

to all students. The logistics of allowed these students to take the technology home have not

been determined. (Kahlon, 2012)

Consulting stakeholders: students

The benefits of technology usage in the classroom are controversial. Sutherland (2004),

notes that technology should not be considering the best tool for all purposes, recommends that

“students should also be engaging in discussions about the relative merits of different tools, so

that they can become resourceful learners.” Students should be consulted regarding their

opinions on the appropriate use of technology, though amongst all of the stakeholders in the

educational system, students have been known to adjust most easily to integration of technology

(Owen, 2004).

Step 4: Resource Requirements

While technology requirements must be determined, the technology should not be

mistaken to be the most important part of the integration plan. To date, our system has been

made the mistake of buying technology, and then searching for ways to use it. The earlier stages


of the plan, consulting stakeholders and forming a leadership team, should be complete before

technology requirements are determined.

Technology infrastructure must not be considered the main factor determining the

success of technology integration into educational practice. Anderson (2005) reports that a solid

technology infrastructure must be coupled with technology leadership to produce technology

outcomes. Technology infrastructure and technology leadership have a mutually reinforcing

effect, and it is their combination that leads to successful integration.

Step 5: Known Constraints

Flanagan (2003) identifies four categories of barriers to the successful implementation of

educational technology. For the purposes of this plan, two of these barriers will be used as they

are: lack of informed leadership and equity. Two other categories identified by Flanagan,

pedagogy and inadequate professional development, will be treated as one issue: teacher buy-in.

A final category, not addressed by Flanagan, will be added: budget.

Teacher buy-in

There are two areas of teacher buy-in to ICT integration that must be addressed: the first

concerns the integration of the technology into teaching practice, the second concerns the

leadership principles used to implement the change.

Assuming that the first-order barriers of technology availability, capacity and support

have been resolved, we can move to the second-order barriers. The barriers, centering around

teacher attitude towards technology use, can be alleviated through teacher input into the

integration process, and professional development. The latter is described below. Valdez

(2005) lists numerous factors elucidated by Michael Fullan that can cause change efforts to fail,

including, but not limited to: “The purpose is not made clear; The participants are not involved in


the planning; The habit patterns of the work group are ignored; The present situation seems

satisfactory.” By allowing for input from all stakeholders, these concerns are all addressed by

the two strategies of teacher input and professional development.

Teachers may also need guidance in the new leadership paradigm being proposed in this

plan. Distributed leadership implies a development of leadership capacity within groups not

accustomed to leading. Ideally, the new cultural values “are embedded, or at least developing”

(Bennett, 2004) .

Equity

Several categories of inequitable results from the integration of ICT: socio-economic,

physical disability, and gender (Flanagan, 2003). The socio-economic factors can be broken into

two categories: households with heads who are less education, or earn less (Middleton, 2005).

Each of these groups possesses less technology within the home. Lone-parent families and

guardian families often do not have a computer at home (Willms, 2005). Despite these results,

Willms also reports that the vast majority of Canadian students have access to technology at

home.

The impact of having technology at home has been demonstrated by Wenglinsky (2005),

who reports that having a computer at home has a significant impact on school performance.

After consulting the parents as part of the solution proposed above, provision must be made for

students who do not have technology at home. In my interview with a technology leader within

the TDSB, she indicated that the board is considering ways in which students can take school

board technology home with them (Kahlon, 2012)

Lack of informed leadership


The lack of informed leadership is addressed in two ways: distributed leadership, whose

benefits have been elucidated above, and transformational leadership, which follows.

Transformational leadership involves: setting directions, helping people, and redesigning the

organization (Leithwood, 2005). ICT integration is an opportunity for transformational

leadership. Leithwood indicates that transformational leadership occurs when leaders and

followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation. Three key areas of action were

identified: “developing a vision for the organization, developing commitments and trust among

workers, and facilitating organizational learning”. It has been shown to improve academic

achievement and student engagement. Leadership by administrators is a key factor in successful

ICT integration (Anderson, 2005).

Budget

Principals do report that funding for technology is a significant challenge to integration

(Plant, 2004). However, financial constraints are often misunderstood to be the most significant

factor in technology integration into education. As mentioned previously, Anderson (2005)

indicates that technology infrastructure must be paired with technology leadership to effect

successful technology integration. Funding for technology does not stand alone as the only

critical success factor.

Step 6: Implementation Plan

Content development

There are three categories of potential content developers within the school board:

teachers, the media services department, and students.

While the first two sources of content are rather obvious, the latter, students themselves,

is not. The distributed leadership model suggests that expertise is distributed through an


organization (Bennett, 2003). Students should not be overlooked as a source of content

development. They often possess the capacity for advanced technical skills, and with

pedagogical direction from teachers, can create learning objects.

Professional Development

There are two areas in which teachers may need support: pedagogy as it relates to

technology, and leadership in a new technological environment.

Teachers need skills for designing activities that integrate technology, directing students

in the use of digital resources, and assessment of collaborative work (Ertmer, 1999). This is

supported by King (2002): “Rather than focusing solely on technology skills, incorporating

group discussions, collaborative work groups, and curriculum development can help faculty to

begin to challenge their concepts of teaching and learning as they learn educational technology.”

During professional development, King foresees this being added to teaching practice through

reflective professional development.

Under the distributed leadership model proposed above, teachers and administrators will

also need continued professional development regarding leadership in the new paradigm, in

which parents and students are included as leaders. Bennett (2003) suggests that the reach of

professional development should be extended to include “basic ideas in leadership and

management; working constructively in teams, including conflict resolution; negotiating the

boundaries of leadership (concerning the involvement of diverse participants from different

levels in the hierarchy, including students and members of the school’s external community)”.

Step 7: Evaluation Plan

Evaluation is the final step in the change model proposed by Valdez (2005). The

stakeholders should be surveyed once again to determine their level of satisfaction with the


effort. The main outcome to measure is improved student learning (Valdez, 2005).

Indeed, metrics should be employed to determine student success: student performance

should be measured before and after the implementation of the system. The standardized testing

that already is in place could be used for this purpose.

Conclusion

A strategic plan is necessary for the successful integration of technology. In the past two

decades, technology has augmented the traditional mode of teaching, without substantially

changing teaching practice. By employing a strategic plan that involves a survey of all

stakeholders, addresses the issues raised by this survey, implements the changes, and evaluates

the realization of these changes, successful technology integration can be effected.


References

Anderson, R. E. & Dexter, S. (2005). School technology leadership: An empirical investigation

of prevalence and effect. Educational administration quarterly, 41(1), 49-82.

Bennett, N., Wise, C., Woods, P. A., & Harvey, J. A. (2003). Distributed Leadership: A Review

of Literature. National College for School Leadership.

Cradler, J., McNabb, M., Freeman, M., & Burchett, R. (2002). How does technology influence

student learning? Learning and Leading with Technology, 29(8), 46-56.

Ertmer, P. (1999). Addressing first- and second-order barriers to change: strategies for

technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47-

61.

Flanagan, L. & Jacobsen, M. (2005). Technology leadership for the twenty-first century

principal. Journal of Educational Administration, 41(2), 124-142.

Holt, T. (2012). Digital discoveries: Intro to SAMR. Retrieved from

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jn1nHgFesUs

Kahlon, R. (2012). Technology Leader Interview.

King, K. P (2002) Educational technology professional development as transformative learning

opportunities. Computers & Education, 39, 283-297.

Leithwood, K. & Jantzi D. (2005) A Review of transformational school leadership research

1996-2005. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 4, 177-199.


Middleton, C. A. & Sorensen C. (2005) How connected are Canadians? Inequities in Canadian

households’ internet access. Canadian Journal of Communication, 30, 463-483.

Owen, P. S. & Demb A. (2004) Change dynamics and leadership in technology implementation.

Journal of Higher Education, 75(6), 636-666.

Passey, D., Rogers, C., Machell, J., McHugh, G. & Allaway, D. (2003) The motivational effect

of ICT on Pupils. Nottinghamshire: DfES Publications.

Plant, J. & Beattie, D. (2004) Connectivity and ICT integration in Canadian elementary and

secondary schools: First results from the Information and Communications

Technologies in Schools Survey. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.

Sutherland, R., Armstrong, V., Barnes, S., Brawn, R., Breeze, N., Gall, M., Matthewman, S.,

Olivero, F., Taylor, A., Triggs, P., Wishart, J., & John, P. (2004) Transforming teaching

and learning: embedding ICT into everyday classroom practices. Journal of Computer

Assisted Learning, 20, 413-425.

Valdez, G., (2005). Critical issue: Technology leadership: Enhancing positive educational

change. Retrieved from

http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/educatrs/leadrshp/le700.htm

Wenglinsky, H. (2005) Technology and achievement: The bottom line. Learning in the Digital

Age, 63(4), 29-32.

Willms, J. D. & Corbett B. A. (2003) Information and communication technology: Access and

use. Education Quarterly Review, 8(4).

technology leadership plan

Documents