EnvironmentsEnvironmentsEnvironmentsEnvironmentsEnvironmentsTeaching & Learning

Making Change

TeachingTeaching LearningLearningLearningCreating 21st Century

Web 2.0Web 2.0Web 2.0Web 2.0Web 2.0Web 2.0Web 2.0Web 2.0Web 2.0Web 2.0Web 2.0Web 2.0Web 2.0Web 2.0Web 2.0

AdoptingAdoptingAdoptingAdoptingAdoptingAdoptingAdoptingAdoptingAdoptingInnovationsInnovationsInnovationsInnovationsInnovationsInnovationsInnovationsInnovationsInnovationsInnovationsInnovationsInnovations

Tools for Tools for Tools for Tools for Tools for Tools for Tools for Tools for Tools for Tools for Tools for Tools for MeasuringMeasuringMeasuringMeasuringMeasuringMeasuringMeasuringMeasuringMeasuringMeasuringMeasuringMeasuringMeasuringMeasuringMeasuringMeasuringMeasuringMeasuring

Student Student Student Student Student Student Student Student Student Student Student Student Student Student Student Student Student Student CenteredCenteredCenteredCenteredCenteredCenteredCenteredCenteredCenteredCenteredCenteredCenteredCenteredCenteredCenteredCenteredCenteredCentered

21st Century 21st Century 21st Century 21st Century 21st Century 21st Century 21st Century 21st Century 21st Century 21st Century 21st Century 21st Century 21st Century 21st Century 21st Century 21st Century 21st Century 21st Century 21st Century 21st Century 21st Century SkillsSkillsSkillsSkillsSkillsSkillsSkillsSkillsSkillsSkillsSkillsSkillsSkillsSkillsSkillsSkillsSkillsSkillsSkillsSkillsSkills

Handheld Handheld Handheld Handheld Handheld Handheld Handheld Handheld Handheld Handheld Handheld Handheld Handheld Handheld Handheld DevicesDevicesDevicesDevicesDevicesDevicesDevicesDevicesDevicesDevicesDevicesDevicesDevicesDevicesDevicesDevicesDevicesDevicesDevicesDevicesDevices

SoftwareSoftwareSoftwareSoftwareSoftwareSoftwareSoftwareSoftwareSoftware

TechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnologyTechnology

StudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudentsStudents

ChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcessProcess

School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School School ReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadinessReadiness

ChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChangeChange

Loretta Donovan Timothy Green

Foreword by Jerry Michel

Do you nd yourself wanting to implement new technology in your classroom or school, but you just dont know how to go about doing it? Making Change: Creating a 21st Century Teaching & Learning Environment provides you with the tools and implementation models to be successful. Students in todays classrooms need to be provided opportunities to interact with and learn through new technologies in order to be prepared for life outside of the classroom. Using the strategies, tips, and resources provided in this book, you can begin to transform your classroom or school into engaging and motivating environment for student success!

is book is a useful guide for moving schools and classrooms toward having 21st century uses of technology in teaching and learning. It provides readers concrete, sensible, and useful steps and suggestions for using the technology they have to enhance student learning.

Gene Hall, Ph.D.Author and Professor,

School of Environmental and Public A airs

University of Nevada, Las Vegas

Loretta Donovan, Ph.D., has been formally involved in educational technology since earning her doctorate from the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Loretta has worked as a K12 teacher, teacher educator, and technology specialist, and is now faculty at California State University Fullerton. She regularly presents at national conferences

and consults with school districts and departments of education on planning, implementing, and promoting technology initiatives. Dr. Donovan is published in journals such as Journal of Research on Technology in Education.

Tim Green, Ph.D., has been a professor of educational technology and teacher education at California State University, Fullerton for the past 15 years and has served as the Director of Distance Education. He has authored numerous articles and books and has presented on the integration of educational technology, instructional design,

and on online education. Tim is passionate about working with schools and districts to implement technology initiatives.

EnvironmentsEnvironmentsEnvironmentsEnvironmentsTeaching & Learning

Making Change

TeachingTeaching & LearningCreating 21st Century

SEP 50757 $24.99

Creating 21st Century Teaching & Learning Environments

Donovan G

reen

www.shelleducation.com

S964

5301 Oceanus Drive Huntington Beach, CA 92649-1030 714.489.2080 FAX 714.230.7070 www.shelleducation.com

Quality Resources for Every Classroom Instant Delivery 24 Hours a Day

Thank you for purchasing the following e-bookanother quality product from Shell Education

For more information or to purchase additional books and materials, please visit our website at:

www.shelleducation.com

This e-book is copyrighted. If you accessed this e-book without making payment, you should be aware that neither the author nor the publisher has received any compensation, and you may be in violation of state and federal law.

For further information about our products and services, please e-mail us at: customerservice@shelleducation.com

To receive special offers via e-mail, please join our mailing list at:www.shelleducation.com/emailoffers

AuthorsLoretta Donovan, Ph.D. Timothy Green, Ph.D.

Foreword byJerry Michel

2Shell Education5301 Oceanus Drive

Huntington Beach, CA 92649-1030http://www.shelleducation.com

ISBN 978-1-4258-0757-3 2014 Shell Educational Publishing, Inc.

Publishing Credits

Robin Erickson, Production Director; Lee Aucoin, Creative Director;Sara Johnson, M.S.Ed., Editorial Director; Maribel Rendn, Editor; Grace Alba, Designer; Corinne Burton, M.A.Ed., Publisher

The classroom teacher may reproduce copies of materials in this book for classroom use only. The reproduction of any part for an entire school or school system is strictly prohibited. No part of this publication may be transmitted, stored, or recorded in any form without written permission from the publisher.

3Table of Contents

Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7Chapter 1: Building a Foundation for a 21st Century Teaching

and Learning Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9Chapter 2: Understanding the Change Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25Chapter 3: Understanding the 21st Century Student . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57Chapter 4: Understanding 21st Century Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77Chapter 5: Understanding Your Schools Readiness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93Chapter 6: Putting It All Together . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111References Cited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143Appendix: Technology Readiness Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147

4

5Foreword

We are living in an era of continual change and innovation. School systems everywhere are searching for ways to make standards and ever-growing expectations accessible and meaningful to students and educators alike, all against the backdrop of preparing students to live, learn, and work in the 21st century. The sheer volume of information available to students today is growing exponentially; now it is less about what you know and more about how you access and apply what you learn. As our students begin to consider colleges and careers, it is important to remember that many students are preparing for jobs that do not yet exist.

Teaching, an ancient profession, has always been about connecting the not-yet-known to the known. But teaching today requires a greater range of skills and strategies than ever before, which is perhaps why we often feel we have so much catching up to do. This is partly because our constant and collective will to improve our teaching methods and our students understanding continues to influence how we define success. Success is a moving target.

Teachers today have a much wider array of technological tools at their disposal than ever before. Technology allows learners of all ages to author content, collaborate with others, organize information, and customize how they interact with and share information. With such rich potential literally at our fingertips with the advance of electronic devices and other technology, we must strive to make sure that these tools do not turn into what Alan November described as $2,000 pencils, when walking into many classrooms where students were using laptops primarily to take notes and little else.

6Daunting as it may seem, teaching and learning in the 21st century has the potential to become the golden age of education. As you read Making Change: Creating 21st Century Teaching & Learning Environments, keep this in mind: No matter what the challenge, finding the solution always begins with making a plan. Dreams become achievable goals when your plan is thoughtful, cognizant of challenges, and realistically organized. Not sure where to start? That is the beauty of this book; Loretta Donovan and Tim Green provide you with a roadmap to developing student-centered plans rife with details and resources.

Each step you will take in this book is an exercise in developing deeper understanding. You will explore the change process, examine the characteristics of 21st century students, learn about the technology supporting 21st century learning environments, and most importantly, understand how to gauge and address your own schools readiness to transform into a world-class 21st century school. Your engagement will extend beyond the end of each chapter, as Tim and Loretta lead you to additional online resources and encourage you to reflect on scenarios, questions, and established frameworks that you will utilize in your schools improvement plan and process.

Our learning goals for todays students are ambitious, and if we want them to be the creative, collaborative problem solvers that the 21st century requires, we have to plan for greater engagement in learning. To quote Loretta and Tim, we must exploit students excitement and skill in using technology for entertainment and personal uses as we help them learn how to effectively use technology to learn academic content and 21st century skills. The future is now; Making Change: Creating 21st Century Teaching & Learning Environments is your guide to making it happen at your school.

Jerry Michel, Principal and co-author of Can You Hear Me Now? Applying Brain Research and

Technology to Engage Todays StudentsWillard School

7Acknowledgments

Wed like to express our gratitude to those who have helped us get to where we are today: our former teachers and professors, our students, our friends, and our families. Each has in some waybig or small, directly or indirectlyplayed a role in helping us write this book.

We would also like to thank the wonderful people at Shell Education:

Sara Johnson, for approaching us about writing for Shell and for continuing to have faith that we would actually finish the book!

Maribel Rendn, for her tireless work to get our book ready for publication.

Tracy Edmunds, for her editing of our initial manuscript draft.

Loretta and Tim

8To those in my life who have been through thick and thin with me, I can never repay you for all you have done for me.

Loretta

Specifically to my familyI will be forever grateful for your constant and unwavering support. Thanks, J, B, and H!

Tim

91

Building A Foundation For a 21st Century Teaching and Learning

Environment

Chapter Scenario: For the past three years, your schools enrollment has been declining. Each year during this time period, you have lost on average 3 percent of your student population. This is a troubling trend that needs to be reversed. You and your schools instructional leadership team have investigated why students are leaving, and through your investigation, you have found that a major reason that students are transferring to a neighboring district is due to this districts focus on technology. It seems odd that students are transferring for this reason because your students are using technology as well. Your school has two computer labs. Students use technology to write Word documents, to create presentations, and to research information on the Internet. Students frequently use computers to practice and reinforce math and reading skills. There are interactive whiteboards in several classrooms. Teachers use these regularly in their teaching. Several teachers have document cameras on which they can project a variety of content to students. Every teacher has a computer in his or her classroom with access to the Internet. You believe that your school also has a focus on technology.

It is undeniable that computer-based technology is a pervasive part of our society. From communicating with friends, family, and colleagues to making dinner, withdrawing money from the bank, and checking out at the grocery store, computer-based technology plays a role. It is safe to say that rarely, if ever, will a day go by when you do not use some form of technology. Our students need to be able to live and work in a world that is not only filled with

10

students need to be able to live and work in a world that is not only filled with technology but that is also rapidly changing in many ways. We are preparing our students to be college and career ready by fulfilling the requirements of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). The question we have for you ishow ready and equipped is your school to help prepare your students to live and thrive in the 21st century?

As you contemplate this question, consider the following statistics from Project Tomorrows Speak Up (2011) report. This annual report provides a summary of the level of access that U.S. students have to technology, and how these students are using and wanting to use technology for learning. Student technology access continues to increase significantly from year to year, especially when pertaining to mobile devices (e.g., cell phones, smartphones, laptops, MP3 players, and tablet devices). There has been a 42 percent jump from 2009 to 2010 in access to smartphones for middle school (33 percent ownership) and high school students (44 percent ownership). Access to laptops is significant as well: 37 percent for students in grades K2; 42 percent for grades 35; 60 percent for grades 68; and 67 percent for grades 912. It is important to note that student access is not limited to a specific demographic. When the data is analyzed for differences in community type (e.g., urban, rural, or suburban) and socioeconomics, little to no difference can be found. This is extremely important to recognizestudents from varying backgrounds do have access to technology in ever-increasing numbers.

Another key finding from this report is that in addition to K12 students having access to a variety of technology, they also have the desire to use these tools to engage in learning in ways that many schools are not currently providing. When asked the question, Is your school doing a good job using technology to enhance learning and/or student achievement? more than half of high school students surveyed indicated, No (Project Tomorrow 2011, 15). What, then, do students want from school regarding technology use?

Our students want a learning environment where they can use technology in meaningful ways to explore digital content (e.g., e-textbooks, online resources), communicate with their peers and teachers, collaborate with their peers and others throughout the world, and learn anywhere at any time. Our students crave a technology-enabled learning environment that empowers them with choices as to how and when they engage in learning experiences (Project Tomorrow 2011).

11

Picture This!

We are going to assume that because you are reading this book, you have a strong desire for your school to be a place where students feel empowered to use technology to engage in learning. You want to equip your students with the content and skills they will need to be successful in the 21st century workforce. Accomplishing this requires your school to be a place where 21st century skills are at the core of what goes on. For some schools, getting to this point may require a fundamental shift in what is taking place. This book was written to help you establish this type of environment at your school no matter what your current situation may be.

Starting with a Plan

Think back to the scenario that opened this chapter. Although technology was being used in the school, technology was not being used in ways that promoted 21st century skills or the Common Core State Standards. How can this school (or any school, for that matter) transform into a 21st century teaching and learning environment where students learn 21st century skills? It begins with a plan. To start, talk with others who have successfully changed their school. Read about what other schools have accomplished. You can even visit schools where educational technology innovations are taking place. These are all excellent activities. However, until you thoughtfully examine your own school and then develop a clear and detailed plan based on what you have found, your school will not transform into an environment where 21st century teaching and learning will take place. Furthermore, students

12

will not be prepared for college and career readiness will fail to take place. A plan is essential in helping build a solid foundation that will support 21st century teaching and learning that engages and empowers students.

Creating a plan for transforming your school is like remodeling a house. A homeowner wanting to remodel will typically start with the idea of what the house will look like, and what the changes to the existing structure will bea master bedroom suite, an upgraded kitchen, an additional bedroom, and so forth. The homeowner might discuss the remodeling idea with family and friends. She may read magazines or books about home design. She may even drive through various neighborhoods to see different examples of homes that have been remodeled. However, until the homeowner consults with building professionalsan architect, a contractor, and a bankerto create blueprints and set a budget, the remodel will not become a reality. It will remain just an idea.

Developing a plan for your school is the purpose of this book. The book provides a systematic method for creating a plan that can help move your school from where it currently is to a place where educational technology innovation becomes part of the culture. The method we have developed and advocate is based on our years of experience working with schools throughout the world. The various components of our method are based on proven, research-based practices. Following our method will assist you in developing a plan that can be followed to transform your school into an environment where 21st century learning takes place.

Developing a PlanThere are four major components that make up our method: understanding

the change process, understanding 21st century students, understanding 21st century technology, and understanding 21st century school readiness. To help you gain an understanding of these components, we devote a chapter to each. Our concluding chapter, Chapter 6, demonstrates how all of the components fit together. We discuss how to interpret all the data you collect about your students, your colleagues, and your schools readiness for 21st century teaching and learning as your plan is created and then put into action.

13

The change process is the focus of Chapter 2. In this chapter, we discuss the theory and application of the change process and examine change theories as they apply to technology in schools. We also describe the dispositions that successful change facilitators have. This chapter helps build the foundation for a 21st century learning environment by helping you understand how change occurs, how innovations are adopted, and why your role as a change agent in this process is crucial. Everyone involvedadministrators, technology coordinators, and teachersneeds to understand the change process and how innovations are implemented. Without this understanding, long-term change will not take place and innovation adoption will rarely be sustainable.

Chapter 3 focuses on students. We describe students you most likely have in your classroom. We profile the K12 student population based on current research and annual reports that describe student access to technology and media, student use of technology and media, and their attitudes and dispositions regarding technology and media. The chapter also includes a description of the 21st century skills these students need to be competitive in a global economy. The goal of the chapter is to provide a roadmap to the skills students need to master in order to be successful 21st century learners and citizens. This roadmap will help guide the entire change process as you move your school toward a 21st century environment by allowing you to better understand who your students are and what skills they need.

Chapter 4 concentrates on the technology that is part of a 21st century learning environment. Access to technology provides unique opportunities for students to develop skills they need to be true 21st century learners; however, access alone does not ensure that these opportunities will be effective. Effective learning opportunities are created by educators who have an understanding of the types of technology available and what these technologies are designed to do. This chapter outlines and describes an approach to help teachers and administrators make sense of the vast options available in order to be able to select those most appropriate to create and facilitate 21st century teaching and learning.

Chapter 5 focuses on the concept of readiness. In the context of this book, readiness refers to how willing and prepared your school is to transition into being a 21st century school. The chapter provides step-by-step instruction to determine your schools readiness level. To help you determine this, we

14

provide strategies and tools that help identify strengths and areas of need in your school. We help you gain a clear understanding of your schools infrastructure and its use. We also help you determine your staff s 21st century readiness. Understanding school readiness is important because it helps determine the starting point for change to occur.

The final chapter, Chapter 6, brings the book full circle by revisiting what was discussed in the previous chapters. The chapter outlines how to use the components (e.g., understanding change, students, 21st century tools and skills, and readiness) discussed in the previous chapters to create a strategic plan for developing a 21st century learning environment. Once you have completed Chapter 6, you will have a plan that can be used to guide your school.

21st Century Learning

Before concluding this chapter and sending you on to read about the different components of our method, it is essential to discuss foundational ideas that our method is built on. Lets start by defining 21st century learning. First, consider the term. When you hear 21st century learning, what comes to mind? How do you define 21st century learning? Pause for a moment to consider these two questions. Now, bring your ideas about 21st century learning into sharper focus and make them more concrete. Imagine touring a 21st century school and ask yourself these questions:

What do you see taking place in the school? What are students doing? What are they learning? What are teachers doing? What are the administrators doing? What does the physical environment look like?

Keep these in mind as you read through the next few paragraphs. See how similar your concept of what 21st century learning is to what we provide.

15

It is important to understand that 21st century learning has been defined in numerous ways. At the core of most, if not all, definitions of 21st century learning is the recognition that students need to have both knowledge and skills that will allow them to be successful in a diverse, global society that is technology-centric. This means that students must be able to master content knowledge and be able to demonstrate competence in higher-order thinking. It also means that students are critical thinkers who are capable of solving complex problems using creative and collaborative approaches. Twenty-first century learning is as much or more about how to learn and think as it is about what students learn and think about.

The Partnership for 21st Century SkillsThe most cited approach to 21st century learning comes from the

Partnership for 21st Century Skills (P21) (http://www.p21.org). Partnership for 21st Century Skills is a national organization formed in 2002 through a collaborative effort of the U.S. Department of Education and a variety of private organizations (AOL Time Warner Foundation; Apple Computer, Inc.; Cable in the Classroom; Cisco Systems, Inc.; Dell Computer Corporation; Microsoft Corporation; National Education Association; SAP). Partnership for 21st Century Skills advocates for the 21st century readiness of every K12 student by helping develop collaborative partnerships among education, business, government, and community leaders (http://p21.org/overview/p21-faq). According to P21, Every child in America needs to be ready for todays and tomorrows world. A profound gap exists between the knowledge and skills most students learn in school and the knowledge and skills they need for success in their communities and workplaces (http://p21.org/overview/p21-faq, para. 11).

P21 developed the Framework for 21st Century Learning as a guide to help bridge this gap. The framework is a combination of 1) content knowledge, specific skills, expertise, and literacies that students need to master in order to be successful and productive citizens in a global economy and 2) the support systems that are necessary to help this become a reality (http://p21.org/storage/documents/P21_Framework.pdf). The content and skills students need to master are broken into four categories: Core Subjects and 21st Century Themes; Life and Career Skills; Learning and Innovation Skills; and Information, Media, and Technology Skills (Figure 1.1).

16

Core Subjects and 21st Century Themes

In addition to core subjects, the 21st century themes that should be integrated throughout the subjects are:

Global Awareness

Financial, Economic, Business, and Entrepreneurial Literacy

Civic Literacy

Health Literacy

Environmental Literacy

Life and Career Skills

Flexibility and Adaptability

Initiative and Self-Direction

Social and Cross-Cultural Skills

Productivity and Accountability

Leadership and Responsibility

Learning and Innovation Skills

Creativity and Innovation

Critical Thinking and Problem Solving

Communication and Collaboration

Information, Media, and Technology Skills

Information Literacy

Media Literacy

ICT (Information, Communications, and Technology) Literacy

(Adapted from http://p21.org/storage/documents/P21_Framework.pdf)

There are four support systems (Standards and Assessments, Curriculum and Instruction, Professional Development, and Learning Environments) that need to be in place to help students master the content and skills.

We believe that this framework provides a solid overview of the elements that need to be considered to create a 21st century learning environment at your school. Rather than focusing on the individual elements separately, we encourage you to think about the concept as a whole. In essence, the framework can be thought of as a collection of states that operate individually but collectively combine into a unified country.

17

ISTE Essential Conditions and NETS

The International Society for Technology in Educations (ISTE) Essential Conditions and National Educational Technology Standards (NETS) are the next two foundational ideas that you should be aware of and understand. The International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE 2010), the premier organization on the integration of educational technology in the classroom, has identified 14 conditions that are necessary for a school to be able to effectively leverage technology for learning. These essential conditions include:

Shared vision Empowered leaders Implementation planning Consistent and adequate funding Support policies Equitable access Skilled personnel Assessment and evaluation Engaged communities Ongoing professional learning Technical support Curriculum framework Student-centered learning Supportive external context

Check This Ou

t!

18

ISTE has also developed technology standards (referred to as the NETS) for students, teachers, administrators, technology coaches, and computer science teachers that are used to evaluate the skills and knowledge each group should have regarding educational technology. The NETS for students (NETS-S) is comprised of six standards (ISTE 2010). These standards are:

1. Creativity and Innovation: Students demonstrate creative thinking, construct knowledge, and develop innovative products and processes using technology.

2. Communication and Collaboration: Students use digital media and environments to communicate and work collaboratively, including at a distance, to support individual learning and contribute to the learning of others.

3. Research and Information Fluency: Students apply digital tools to gather, evaluate, and use information.

4. Critical Thinking, Problem Solving, and Decision Making:Students use critical thinking skills to plan and conduct research, manage projects, solve problems, and make informed decisions using appropriate digital tools and resources.

5. Digital Citizenship: Students understand human, cultural, and societal issues related to technology and practice legal and ethical behavior.

6. Technology Operations and Concepts: Students demonstrate a sound understanding of technology concepts, systems, and operations.

Check This Ou

t!

19

The NETS for teachers (NETS-T) comprise five standards (ISTE 2012). They are:

1. Facilitate and Inspire Student Learning and Creativity: Teachers use their knowledge of subject matter, teaching and learning, and technology to facilitate experiences that advance student learning, creativity, and innovation in both face-to-face and virtual environments.

2. Design and Develop Digital-Age Learning Experiences and Assessments: Teachers design, develop, and evaluate authentic learning experiences and assessments incorporating contemporary tools and resources to maximize content learning in context and to develop the knowledge, skills, and attitudes identified in the NETS-S.

3. Model-Digital Age Work and Learning: Teachers exhibit knowledge, skills, and work processes representative of an innovative professional in a global and digital society.

4. Promote and Model Digital Citizenship and Responsibility:Teachers understand local and global societal issues and responsibilities in an evolving digital culture and exhibit legal and ethical behavior in their professional practices.

5. Engage in Professional Growth and Leadership: Teachers continuously improve their professional practice, model lifelong learning, and exhibit leadership in their school and professional community by promoting and demonstrating the effective use of digital tools and resources.

Check This Ou

t!

20

The NETS for administrators (NETS-A) comprise five standards as well (ISTE 2012). The standards are:

1. Visionary Leadership: Educational administrators inspire and lead development and implementation of a shared vision for comprehensive integration of technology to promote excellence and support transformation throughout the organization.

2. Digital-Age Learning Culture: Educational administrators create, promote, and sustain a dynamic digital-age learning culture that provides a rigorous, relevant, and engaging education for all students.

3. Excellence in Professional Practice: Educational administrators promote an environment of professional learning and innovation that empowers educators to enhance student learning through the infusion of contemporary technologies and digital resources.

4. Systemic Improvement: Educational administrators provide digital-age leadership and management to continuously improve the organization through the effective use of information and technology resources.

5. Digital Citizenship: Educational administrators model and facilitate understanding of social, ethical, and legal issues and responsibilities related to an evolving digital culture.

These sets of technology standards have been adopted and used throughout the world to help schools successfully integrate educational technology into the classroom. It is important to understand that for the NETS to be successfully integrated into the classroom, a school needs to have the essential conditions in place. As you move through our model to create your plan for a 21st century school, the

Check This Ou

t!

21

essential conditions and the NETS will be carefully considered. It is important that you are aware of both the essential conditions and the NETS.

Student-Centered InstructionThe final foundational idea that we believe

is important for you to understand is how student-centered instruction and teacher-centered instruction differ. This is important because true 21st century learning requires student-centered instruction. Discussions of student-centered instruction and student-centered learning can be found throughout the research literature (e.g., Hall and Saunders 1997; Hannafin, Hill, and Land 1997; OSullivan 2003). According to OSullivan (2003), the concept of student-centered learning has been credited to Hayward as early as 1905; additionally, the work of Dewey and Piaget has often been credited with developing the concept of student-centered learning as well.

Student-centered learning and student-centered instruction have been defined in numerous ways. In essence, student-centered instruction shifts the focus from teacher to students. As a result, students become more active participants by engaging in activities that move them away from being passive receivers of information. Moving to an environment of student-centered instruction requires a shift in the pedagogy and assessment that we use. Figure 1.2 provides a comparison of teacher- versus student-centered instruction.

Check This Ou

t!

22

Teacher-Centered Student-Centered

Primary focus is on the teacher. The student and teacher share the focus.

The teacher talks and lectures; students listen.

The teacher models and guides; students interact with other students and the teacher.

Students work alone. Students work with other students in pairs, groups, or alone depending on what is necessary to complete an activity.

The teacher is solely responsible for monitoring and correcting everything students say.

Students talk without continuous instructor monitoring; teacher provides feedback and correction when questions surface.

The teacher answers students questions.

Students answer each others questions, only using the teacher as an information resource when needed.

The teacher chooses topics. Students are given opportunities to choose topics.

The teacher is solely responsible for evaluating student learning.

Students evaluate their own learning; teacher evaluates student learning as well.

The classroom is quiet and often subdued.

The classroom is often noisy and busy.

(Adapted from http://www.nclrc.org/essentials/goalsmethods/learncentpop.html)

Wrapping Things Up

Transforming your school into a 21st century teaching and learning environment requires a clear, well-articulated plan. Without such a plan, transformation will not occur. A clear, well-articulated plan serves as a guide to help ensure that change is approached strategically in order to ensure that long-term adoption of educational technology innovation occurs at your school and supports the Common Core State Standards. Helping you create a plan for your school is the purpose of this book. In doing so, we explicitly guide you through the various components of a model we have developed that is based on best practices and our own experiences working with schools.

23

Review and Refl ect

As you review what you read in this opening chapter, we invite you to reflect on the key ideas you encountered. Reflection is an important element in the change process. We provide five questions to consider as you reflect on what you read.

1. What concerns you the most about transforming your school into a 21st century teaching and learning environment?

2. What do you anticipate being the major obstacles to overcome?

3. What student-centered teaching and learning do you currently observe going on at your school?

4. What are the greatest strengths your school has that will be helpful in moving toward a 21st century teaching and learning environment?

5. Reflect back on the opening scenario. How ready do you believe this school is to move into a 21st century teaching and learning environment?

24

25

2

Understanding the Change Process

Chapter Scenario: It is time for the weekly grade-level meeting. You are wondering what latest and greatest thing will be discussed today. Last week, it was a new reading series you were asked to preview for possible adoption; three weeks ago, it was a district wide character-building curriculum; and several weeks prior, it was new math software. Why does it seem that new things are continually being brought up? Who decides that these new things are needed? Why are you not given time to get used to something before decisions are made about whether to implement or not implement? Your head is spinning with questions running through your mind!

Many of us can relate to the image of an educators head spinning as a result of being asked to think about and try too many things at once. Frustration at being asked to try new things and change the way you teach or how you do things in your classroom is not a new phenomenon. Like us, many of you have probably thought to yourself, Here we go again! and The pendulum swings again! or similar comments that express frustration at what seems to be the revolving door of educational change.

The purpose of this chapter is to explore educational change by examining change principles, theories, and models. We believe this exploration will help demystify educational change and increase your understanding of what is involved with the change process in educational environments. This understanding will put you in a better position to make sense of the institutional changes that take place in your school and district, which we hope will help decrease your frustration level when change is asked or

26

required of you. Additionally, we believe the knowledge you gain in this chapter will help you be more informed of what needs to take place when you are in the position of asking others to adopt and make changes.

Foundational Ideas

As a reminder of what we discussed in Chapter 1, our approach to educational change is not based on a single perspective. We believe that following a single perspective does a disservice to you and your school or district by limiting the concepts, processes, and tools that are at your disposal. Our experiences as change agents have led us to develop an approach that integrates concepts, theories, and models from multiple experts in the field of change. We have found that the ideas of these experts complement each other, and when used together, provide an approach that is more robust than when their ideas are used separately.

It is important to know that there are numerous perspectives on the change process and specifically on educational change. Our approach is based on the work of Gene Hall and Shirley Hord (2011), Michael Fullan (2007), and Everett Rogers (2003). We concentrate on the work of these four individuals because they are among the most well-known experts in Change Theory and their perspectives have had a great deal of influence on understanding and bringing about change in educational environments. In the remaining sections of this chapter, we explore their different perspectives regarding Change Theory and how their own positions manifest in an educational technology environment.

Fundamental Understandings About Change

Before we begin our exploration of the specific theorists perspectives that guide our approach to change, it is important that you are aware of four fundamental understandings about change. Although each may seem obvious once youve read them, we feel it is important to remind you of them, and what each means in the educational context. These fundamental understandings are:

27

1. Change is a process: As educators, you are well aware that teaching and learning is a process through which we carefully plan and consider consequences. When planning instruction, we think about intended learning outcomes, individual students, and strategies to help students meet learning outcomes. The process of change is analogous to the process of teaching. Knowledge acquisition does not happen overnight, and neither does change. Hall and Hord (2011) suggest that it takes three to five years for an innovation to shift from being an idea to being the norm. This is a very important consideration to remember as we plan technological change at our educational institutions, where we are usually given two years to show change. As change agents, we must be procedural in our actions and consider the individuals being impacted by or implementing the changeas well as what the intended outcomes of the change are. A systematic approach is necessary for successful change.

2. Change is often initially discomforting: We are all creatures of habit. Each of us sits at the same table during meetings, shops at the same grocery stores, and arranges our classrooms the same way each year. We go through the same routines for almost everything we do. These habits make life less complicated and seemingly more manageable. It is not surprising, then, that you feel somewhat uncomfortable when you arrive at a meeting and someone is sitting at your seat, which requires you to sit in a different part of the room. Why do you feel discomfort? Can you even explain why you feel upset? Is it the perspective of sitting somewhere new and not having the safety net of knowing the people around you? We often see people having a similar reaction when they are asked to change what they do as professional educators. They experience discomfort. The reality is, though, that we always manage to survive change. We make it through the meeting. We eventually find all our groceries despite being at a new store. We are able to work out how to get home when our usual road is closed. The same applies to educational technology changewe make the situation work. As change agents, we can make the process less stressful if we understand that there will be initial discomfort, and that its natural.

28

3. Change is complex and dynamic: When we consider the first two characteristics of change, it is easy to see how change is complex and dynamic. The process of change involves people (as individuals and as groups), space, materials/equipment, and time, with each interacting with the others. Similar to our classrooms, schools, or districts, each individual involved has different experiences that influence how he or she engages in the process of change. Similarly, no two technology initiatives are the same, thus adding to the complexity.

4. Change can be understood: Although change is a complex and dynamic process that can initially cause discomfort, if approached with an open mind and in a procedural manner, the process of change can be understood (Fullan 2007; Hall and Hord 2011; Persichitte 1999; Rogers 2003).

Despite their different perspectives, Hall and Hord, Fullan, and Rogers are guided by these fundamental understandings about change. As such, our approach is as well; these understandings serve as the foundation for this chapter.

Understanding Change by Looking at the Sources of Change

In education, we often see the need for technological change for one of two reasonsto improve student learning or to improve how a district, school, or classroom functions. Granted, in every situation where change is initiated in education, the improvement may not be realized. Despite this, we still believe that the desire for improvement is at the core of why change is initiated. The majority of changes that educators have been asked to make over the past five years have centered on different or increased use of technology. Although possibly frustrating, this makes sense because of the rapid rate at which technology is itself changing and the rate at which it is forcing change in society.

When we think about educational change in light of the four basic understandings we described previously, it is easy to see that the change process is a complex one. A good starting point for understanding educational

29

change is to think about the source of the change. Where do the changes come from? Who initiates the changes? There is a range of sources that can be the cause or impetus for educational change. We view these sources as internal and external. It is important to realize that you can be a source for change. Change should not be something that is only forced on you.

Internal SourcesInternal sources can be internal to an individual or internal to an institution

desiring to implement change. With smaller-scale change, an individual educator might be the impetus or source because he or she is dissatisfied with what is going on in his or her classroom or school. The source for change, therefore, comes from within an individual. We have worked with teachers who, because they are not satisfied with some aspect of what is going on in the classroom, take it upon themselves to learn a new technology tool and effective pedagogy that allows for the successful use of the tool for teaching and learning (e.g., using wikis in a middle school language arts program). Internal sources for change are more common with smaller-scale change. The key idea here is that the source of change is the individual or individuals who chose to implement an innovation or try a new pedagogy. When we consider internal sources of change in light of the characteristics of change (process, discomforting, complex, and dynamic), we can see that in this case, that the teacher would have some control over the process and level or degree of discomfort, and because it is a smaller-scale change, it is limited in complexity.

On a larger scale, an internal source of change can be a group of teachers at the same school site for reasons similar to an individual being a source of change. For example, as a grade-level team, a group of teachers decide to apply for a grant to receive new technology. This is coming from a personal decision made by this group of teachers and is therefore internal. This could also happen at the school level, but the only people for whom it would be an internal source are those who were involved in the initial decision-making process. For those not involved, it would be an external source of change.

30

External SourcesExternal sources of change can be close or distant. Close external sources

could be decisions made at the school level or by other people personally involved with the school. If your colleagues initiate change on a personal level, but it requires you to change the way you teach (perhaps using computer carts in class instead of taking students to the computer lab, or assigning a multimedia presentation as part of a school-wide assessment) and you are expected to join in, this would be a source of change that is external to you as an individual (even though it was internal for the others).

There could be a change in resources and the educational environment that is naturally occurring (e.g., shifting zoning lines, new administration, replacement of outdated curriculum, or the addition of new technology). With these situations, the source for change would be external to the individual who is actually implementing or impacted by the change. For example, schools we have worked with most recently have been impacted by a changing educational context in which each year, parents were an external source for decision making about implementation (or not) of a one-to-one laptop program. What occurred at these schools was that from year to year, their classrooms would either have a one-to-one laptop ratio or not, based on a parent consensus. Teachers and administrators had little say on the future of the program, yet teachers were expected to implement the program.

Even more distant external sources of change can be in the form of a new educational policy or a statewide initiative that is mandated by individuals who have limited knowledge of your specific environment. The key idea is that the source of the change is coming from a source outside or external to the individuals (teachers and administrators) being asked to implement the change.

Whether change is coming from an internal or external source, personal involvement or closeness to the source can impact the rate at which the individual accepts or embraces the change. The closer the better!

31

Students as External Sources of ChangeStudents may also be sources of change. There is no denying that todays

students learn in many different ways and use technology differently from how students of only five years ago did.

Picture This!

Many (but not all) students born into the digital world, in which they have been surrounded by electronic devices such as remote controls, mobile/cellular phones, MP3 players, computers, and tablets, have a higher comfort level than do the rest of us. Although we may be adept at using these digital tools, we may not possess the same level of comfort. These students may be putting pressure on teachers and schools to permit them to bring digital delivery to school, complete assignments using technology that is unfamiliar or new to teachers, or use applications and the Internet in ways that seem nontraditional for education. This of course, would promote a change in pedagogy and classroom management.

Innovation as an External Source of ChangeAnother very important source for change is innovation. We define

innovation as something that is new to the user. What is an innovation to one may actually be commonplace or at least familiar to another, which highlights

32

the complex nature of this source of change. A classic example of innovation can be seen in the evolution of how music has been listened to during the last 40 years. Music recordings have gone from 8-track tapes to smaller cassette tapes to compact discs (CDs) to other various digital formats like MP3s. Each type of recording had its own specific music format. If you wanted to listen to music, you would use the specific device that played the specific music format. Now, music can be accessed through a variety of devices rather than just one specific device designed for each particular media type. There are satellite radios in our cars. We can access and listen to music through our televisions. Smartphones have the capability of playing music. There are a number of portable digital music devices like iPods. The list could go on and on, but we think the point has been made. Like it or not, the way we listen to and access music has changed, and we are forced to change with it. In light of the characteristics of change, it is clear to see how this external source of change adds to the complexity and dynamic nature of change. In just 40 years, technology has completely altered the way we listen to music.

Technology as a Source of ChangeAs evidenced by the technological example of an innovation, perhaps the

biggest and most common source of educational change is increased access to technology. One of the most well-known examples of educational change stemming from increased access is classroom television. Although many do not believe this is a change that ever truly stuck, it is an excellent example of change being spurred by access. Another example is access to the photocopy machine and how this changed the way teachers were being asked to teach and students were being asked to learn. A more recent example is access to the Internet. Access to the Internet, in our opinion, has promoted more change in education than almost all the other technology changes combined. As early as 2000, Soloway et al. discussed howwhether we like it or notthe Internet uniquely supports learning but at the same time brings with it other issues. The Internet has affected the way we communicate and collaborate. It has provided us with a wealth of instructional resources. We are able to use the Internet to store and retrieve files. In addition, the Internet has also brought about some less than positive changesstudent safety, privacy issues, and cheating and plagiarism concerns.

33

Summary of Sources of Change and Complexity of ChangeThis section has highlighted the many sources of changeboth internal

and external. It is understandable that with internal sources of change, the impact will probably be on a smaller scale, less intimidating, and less complex.External sources, on the other hand, although discussed as discrete sources, rarely come upon us in isolation. The No Child Left Behind Act, for example, is an external source of change requiring that all schools in the country have all students in third grade reading at or above grade level by 2014. Perhaps your district recently was restructured and your student population has changed (students as a source of change). Maybe at the same time, your administration has looked into the research and found that technology has a positive impact on student achievement in language arts and is requiring more technology integration (technology as a source of change). This requirement gave one of your colleagues the idea to apply for a grant to get a grade-level set of the latest innovative handheld technology, and students cannot wait to try it out (innovation and students as a source of change). This seems very daunting, doesnt it? However, with a systematic approach to the change process, over time, change can lead to the desired improvement.

Top-Down and Bottom-Up Change

Hall and Hord (2011) discuss change initiatives as traditionally being either top-down or bottom-up. Top-down change comes from an external source, specifically from a policy put in place by your boss. For example, your administrator or your superintendent might ask your school to adopt a schoolwide technology policy. As the person being expected to implement this change, you are expected to passively accept it despite not having a say in the decision to implement it. When we think of this in light of the characteristics of change (process, complex, dynamic), we can see why this may not always be the best approach.

On the other hand, bottom-up change comes from an individual or perhaps a group of individuals who have made a decision to change. For example, despite it not being school policy, a team of third grade teachers may decide to give their students 15 minutes of free time outside (weather permitting) in the afternoon, sitting at picnic tables near the classrooms to use the classroom

34

sets of iPads. They make this decision based on what they are seeing with their students in the time between lunch and dismissala lack of interest, difficulty staying on task, and fidgeting. They believe that the free time, when students can work together or alone to explore apps on the iPads, will give their students a needed break that will help students be more focused. When we look at this in light of the characteristics of change, we can see that it may be sustainable, but we also know that without administrator support, teachers may be forced to abandon the change.

Ultimately, the direction of change should be both top-down and bottom-up. An example of this, that we like to share, comes from a group of kindergarten teachers who were in one of our graduate educational-technology courses. At the beginning of the course, school policy was that kindergarten classes were not assigned a time in the school computer lab. An assignment in our course required the teacher to teach a technology-based lesson and be observed by the administrator. Excited to finally integrate technology into the learning environment, the teacher planned and implemented a lesson that was observed by the administration. The administration was so impressed with the lesson (perhaps dispelling their understanding that kindergarten students were not capable of using computers) that a new school policy was put in place. Kindergarten students were given a scheduled time in the computer lab. In this case, the source of change was both internal to the individuals (kindergarten teachers) and external to them (the administration). The direction of the change was both bottom-up (teachers/individuals initiated the change) and top-down (administrator made the decision).

Innovation Adoption

As a reminder, no matter what the source of change, it is going to involve adoption of an innovation. We continue with our definition of innovation as something that is new to you. For example, an innovation may be a physical thing such as a new piece of technology, or it could be a new pedagogical approach to teaching math. An innovation may also be policy related, such as a change in schedule, changing grade levels, or new standards. Regardless of the innovation you are adopting, remember that change is a process and you are going to go through specific phases as you move through this process. For the purpose of this chapter, we apply what we know from the different change

35

experts and discuss three phases of innovation adoption. It is important to note that these phases may have mini-phases within them.

Important Considerations of Innovation AdoptionThe term innovation adoption is typically connected to the work of Everett

Rogers (2003). The idea of innovation adoption, however, is not exclusive to Rogers. As with understanding change, there are certain characteristics of innovation adoption that have relevancy to all the models and theories of the change experts we discuss. These are:

1. Innovation adoption is not a linear process that people move through as a group. This idea stems from the concept that change is a process and is dynamic. Throughout the process, you will have individuals at different phases at different times. Some individuals may stay at one phase for a considerably longer period than other individuals, or they may stay at one phase longer than they stay at other phases. For example, you may have individuals who readily adopt an innovation and become champions of it while others resist adopting the innovation.

2. Like change itself, innovation adoption is complex and dynamic. Each phase of the innovation adoption process builds on the phases before it and then impacts the phases after it. In some ways, we could consider innovation adoption to be a spiral, or more specifically, a series of spirals.

3. In order to be sustained and implemented as intended, innovation adoption cannot be forced. As human beings, we rarely like being told what to do. That also applies to innovation adoption. Change theorists such as Rogers (2003) and Hall and Hord (2011) would suggest that in order for innovation adoption to be sustained, it must be meaningful and the individuals adopting it must have at least a small amount of buy-in. For example, can you think of a time when you closed your door and didnt teach out of the book as you were supposed to? Why did you do this? Because you didnt believe in the way the book approached the content? No matter what the reason, all teachers will do what they feel is best, whether they are forced to do

36

something different or not. In Chapter 5, we discuss how to identify whether individuals and a school are ready for innovation adoption.

4. Innovation adoption can have multiple forms within the same environment. Knowing that individuals accept change at different rates, it is natural to assume that innovation adoption may look different based on the unique learning environment in which it is being implemented. In our own research on one-to-one laptop programs in schools (Donovan, Green, and Hartley 2010), we saw three different models of innovation adoption within one school. Where some individuals embraced the laptops quickly and used them for student-centered learning, other teachers were slower. Most interesting is that even though the same group of students were taught together, student interaction with the laptops varied greatly by teacher. The third group barely used the laptops at all. When they did, it was for very basic purposes such as using the laptop as a calculator or for word processing. The key ideas to learn from this are that the role of the teacher is crucial, and that before decisions are made, it is important to have a complete image of what is occurring rather than just a small snapshot. Can you imagine the decision the administration would have made if they only saw the laptops being used as calculators and the frustration of teachers integrating the laptops for student-centered learning?

Phases of Innovation AdoptionMichael Fullan (2007) discusses dynamic relationships between the key

phases of change:

Initiation Implementation Institutionalization

37

Picture This!

Although not using the same terms as Fullan (2007), the models and theories of change guiding this chapter all have identifiable phases of innovation adoption similar to Fullans phases. These phases work together in a complex process. In this section, we will look closely at each of the phases, and give examples of how each might look in an educational context.

InitiationEarlier, we discussed how one of the considerations for innovation-adoption

sustainability is related to how meaningful an innovation is to the intended users. This level of meaning or usefulness of the innovation is the focus of the first phase of innovation adoption.

Fullan (2007) labels the first phase of the innovation adoption process initiation. The initiation phase of innovation adoption is where decisions are being made and plans are being established prior to or in the very early stages of starting something new. Fullans initiation phase is closely connected to the sources of change and can be impacted by preexisting conditions such as available equipment and infrastructure, personnel, and, of course, the mindset of the people being asked to change. In addition to being affected by the cause of change, Fullan purports that other factors such as the existence and quality of innovations can also play a role in the initiation phase. For example, teachers may have less enthusiasm about using computers that do not have high-speed Internet access because the quality of this innovation is not advanced enough for their needs.

38

Similar to Fullan, Hall and Hord (2011) indicate that the individuals being asked to change can impact the innovation adoption process. Specifically, in Hall and Hords model of change, the first phase is to identify concerns of those being asked to adopt the innovation and try to address these concerns before the innovation is implemented. Additionally, Hall and Hord discuss the importance of investing time and money in the development phase of innovation adoption as one of the main principles of change. They expand on this to recommend that more money, time, and personnel should be invested in the development phase than in the implementation phase if the change is to be sustained. The unfortunate reality, however, is that more often than not, an equal amount of effort and funds is spent on the two stages.

When change agents are planning for large-scale change, Hall and Hord (2011) suggest they start by determining the concerns of the individuals being asked to change before making decisions about how best to approach the process. Doing this will allow for the planning of professional development, phasing in of an innovation, recruiting key players, and allowing for a top-down and bottom-up second phase. To this effect, Hall and Hord developed the Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM) of change. The CBAM consists of three major tools: Stages of Concern, Innovation Configurations, and Levels of Use. We have used both the Stages of Concern and Innovation Configurations in our work with one-to-one programs at the middle school level and within teacher education. We found that the Stages of Concern offered excellent insights into the starting place for our innovation adoption and how we could help teachers and teacher educators who were part of the laptop programs. The Innovation Configurations were used more in phase two: Implementation.

The Stages of Concern is primarily a survey tool that allows change agents to see change from the perspective of those being asked to change (Hall and Hord 2011). It consists of 35 Likert scale statements such as I am concerned about how the innovation affects students, I would like to know the effect of the innovation on my professional status, and I would like to know what others are doing in this area. Participants select from seven levels (0, Irrelevant; 12, Not true of me; 34, Somewhat true of me now, and 57, Very true of me now). An additional open-ended question is included: What other concerns, if any, do you have at this time? Our experience is that in response to the open-ended statement, many people reiterate some of the

39

issues raised in the Likert scale items, but with more depth. The goal of the Stages of Concern survey is to gain an understanding of the concerns about the innovation they are being asked to adopt. The Stages of Concern are identifiable in levels and stages. Figure 2.1 describes these levels and stages.

Level (Stage of Concern) Description

0 Unrelated (Unconcerned)

Just beginning to think about the innovation but not concerned about it at all

1 Self (Informational)

Interested, but not concerned beyond curiosity about features of the innovation

2 Self (Personal)

Concerned about own role in innovation adoption and how it will impact me as an individual

3 Task (Management)

Concerned about how to use the innovation, how best to fi nd and use resources, and how much time and effort are being put into the innovation

4 Impact (Consequence)

Concerned about how the innovation is impacting others (e.g., students and community)

5 Impact (Collaboration)

Concerned about sharing impact of innovation with others in local and global community

6 Impact (Refocusing)

Concerned about modifying or replacing the innovation

Results of the survey are analyzed, and by representing the results on a graph, change agents can see where the greatest concern lies. The graph can be a quick view as to what people are thinking about the change.

70

00 1 2 3 4 5 6

10

20

30

40

50

60

Stage of Concern

% o

f Con

cern

40

Picture This!

Although Hall and Hord (2011) suggest looking at results at the group level, we have also found that by examining smaller groups (e.g., grade level or teaching specialty), more effective professional-development decisions can be made. For example, our work with middle school teachers found that within one school, the concerns fell into two categories. The first category was concern about how the laptop program would impact them personally (e.g., take up my time, make me change how I teach). The second was concern about how the innovation would help students. With this knowledge, we were able to identify the need for professional development to help teachers feel more comfortable in using the technology. This increased comfort would lead to increased integration, which would lead to successful adoption of the innovation.

Like Hall and Hords desire to understand change from the perspective of the individual being asked to change, Rogers (2003) acknowledges that individuals within a greater organization undergo similar thought processes when being asked to consider change. For Rogers, the first phase of the innovation-adoption process is the decision-making phase. We feel that being mindful of these thought processes can help change agents plan ahead and make the transition smooth by keeping individuals informed. Rather than having a formal tool, Rogers suggests that during an initiation phase, individuals who are being asked to change (or even considering introducing change) ask themselves questions within the following categories:

41

1. Relative advantage: Is the innovation better than what is in existence?

2. Compatibility: Is this innovation consistent with my values, experiences, and needs?

3. Complexity: Is this innovation going to be hard for me to understand and use?

4. Trialability: Can I just use this innovation on a trial basis and then decide?

5. Observability: Will others even be able to tell that things have changed?

Answers to these questions can help determine how ready an individual is to accept the change he or she is being asked to potentially adopt and to what degree he or she will adopt it. These questions are, in essence, determining the usefulness of the innovation as perceived by the individual being asked to adopt it. For example, although we did not use Rogers (2003) decision-making categories, we might suggest that teachers in our middle school one-to-one studywho were concerned about personal impact of laptopsmight have been asking themselves the following questions: How much of my time is this going to take? Is using laptops any better than what Im currently doing? Im not good with computerswill I be able to just use the laptops a little bit? Not surprisingly, we all have our own answers to these questions, which would help explain why some of us jump on board early and others are a little slower. However, as we ask ourselves these questions or discuss them with colleagues, we are beginning to engage in the innovation-decision process (Rogers 2003).

42

Parallel to the Stages of Concern, which can be used to identify readiness to adopt an innovation, Rogers (2003) identifies stages within the decision-making process that help us understand why and how people accept an innovation at different rates. There are distinct stages in this process:

1. Knowledge: Basic awareness

2. Persuasion: Beginning to form an opinion

3. Decision: Decided to use it or did not

4. Implementation: Beginning to actually use it

5. Confirmation: Beginning to confirm or deny prior decision

The first three stages are integral to the initiation phase of innovation adoption. One of the most important things to remember about the initiation phase is that it may take years (Fullan 2007).

ImplementationThe implementation phase of innovation adoption is the phase in which

people are beginning to use the innovation. Fullan (2007) reminds us that the change will be in curriculum, teaching, or beliefs and that once again there will be factors impacting the implementation. According to Fullan, characteristics that impact the implementation phase can be categorized into characteristics of change (need, clarity, complexity, practicality), local characteristics (district, community, principal, teachers), and external factors (policy and government). There are striking similarities between these characteristics and the innovation adoption decision-making process questions suggested by Rogers (2003) (relative advantage, compatibility, observability).

One of the most important things to remember about the implementation phase is that it is not always consistent in how it looks. Hall and Hord (2006) call this range of implementations Innovation Configurations (IC), and the variety of configurations are represented on an Innovation Configuration Map. Our work with one-to-one laptop programs in middle school gave us insights into the multitude of ways the laptop program was put into action depending

43

on the unique classroom circumstances. We created an IC Map that showed that even with the same teacher and same content area, the laptops were being used differently by a different group of students. Similarly, with the same teacher and same students but different content area, the laptops were being used differently. In essence, each configuration is unique to the individuals and the specific learning environment. IC Map development is complex and time consuming, and while we do not feel it is necessary for change agents to complete during the implementation phase of each innovation adoption, it is important to acknowledge that implementation can look different for each individual and that you should be careful not to jump to conclusions about whether one configuration is better or worse than another.

As with the initiation phase, it is important to consider the individual as part of the whole during the implementation phase. Rogers (2003) discusses categories that help us understand the different rates at which people begin implementation. Known as Adopter Categories, each category consists of individuals with a similar degree of innovativeness (267). Rogers developed a model of clearly identifiable adopter categories based on his work in statistics and change. These categories are described below. They describe how an individual is using the innovation relative to individuals involved in the same change system.

Innovators: These individuals are the small minority who take risks and are willing to always try new things. You are never surprised when they have the latest gadgets or are trying the newest strategies.

Early Adopters: These individuals are highly respected peers whose action and decisions you respect. They are usually one or two steps ahead of the group on making the decision to try something new.

Early Majority: As the name suggests, these individuals are possibly one step ahead of the rest of the group. They are deliberate in their decisions and cautious in their actions. They are usually followers more than leaders.

Late Majority: These individuals are barely behind the Early Majority, but they are a little more skeptical. They most likely had an equal number of yes and no answers for the innovation questions they asked themselves. They will try something because they know that eventually they have to; however, they are somewhat hesitant and are not very adventurous in how they use the new tool or equipment.

44

Laggards: We all know who these individuals are. They are just getting started on using the innovation when everyone else has already made it a part of their everyday practice. They are the ones who answered no to most of the questions about the innovation and are the first to say, Ive seen stuff like this before, and it doesnt work. These individuals do not understand the innovators or early adopters, and they like to stay within their comfort zone. One thing to remember about this group is that it is important to determine why they are hesitant to adopt an innovation. Sometimes it is just fear or insecurity, and with a little mentoring and understanding, they are actually much more receptive to change.

Think about the latest innovation you were asked to adopt. Was it a new type of electronic textbook? Was it a new grading software? Was it a new piece of technology? Now think about your colleagues and the category each would fall into based on their adoption of this innovation. You probably can identify one or two Innovators, one or two Early Adopters, and about the same number of Laggards. You may also find that nearly everyone else is an Early or a Late Majority. If you were to draw out where your colleagues fit on a line graph, you would have a bell curve. What is interesting to note about the adopter categories is that while an individual may be an Innovator with one innovation, the individual could be a Late Majority with a different innovation.

We can also gain insights into the implementation stage and the different ways people work on implementing innovations by looking at the research completed on the Apple Classrooms of Tomorrow (ACOT). Although the ACOT study occurred in the 1980s and 1990s, it still holds relevance today. ACOT was a project that provided students and teachers with personal computers. The project set out to examine the impact of routine use of technology on teaching and learning. The goal was to positively change education by integrating technology into the structure of schooling through a saturation of classrooms (and homes) with computers (Sandholtz, Ringstaff, and Dwyer 1997). More recently, we have been working with schools that are implementing a one-to-one iPad program, and not surprisingly, we are seeing many parallels with ACOT. The findings of the ACOT study are extensive, but most relevant to a discussion of innovation implementation are the Stages of Adoption identified in this research.

45

Classified as the Stages of Adoption, the ACOT research highlighted that when asked to try new things, teachers generally are procedural in how they adopt. The Stages of Adoption are:

1. Entry: The teacher is mostly still using traditional technology (teacher centered), and the introduction of the technology makes the teacher uncomfortable.

2. Adoption: The teacher is beginning to use the technology but mostly in teacher-centered ways; however, at least the teacher is attempting to use the technology.

3. Adaptation: The technology is being used as any other teaching and learning tool is used.

4. Appropriation: The use of technology for teaching and learning is purposeful and natural.

5. Invention: The technology is a way of life and dont you even think about taking it away from me!about taking it away from me!

Picture This!

46

Note that with the Entry and Adoption stages, the teacher is still the focus. With the different phases, the shift of focus is on using the technology. Most individuals will start at Entry and progress to Invention, but this can take time. As change agents, we need to remember that everyone is at a different stage of adoption. Understanding this allows us to provide the necessary support as individuals move along the continuum.

Within your own school or district, or perhaps even reflecting on your own behaviors and understandings, you can see people who are at different stages of this process.

Picture This!

InstitutionalizationThis is the stage of innovation adoption in which the innovation is no

longer something you need to work on but something that has become part of everyday life that you cannot live without. Think about your use of email. When you first were introduced to email, you may have been hesitant, wondering why we cannot send things via mail or just make a phone call. Then, it became something that you were required to access as part of your professional responsibilities. This gave you insights into the usefulness and potential of using email for communication. You started using it more and more, and now you find that checking email is just another part of your day. This is an example of an innovationemailbeing institutionalized.

47

When we think about the institutionalization of an innovation from the perspective of Hall and Hords (2011) CBAM Stages of Concern and the ACOT Stages of Adoption (1997), we can see that once an innovation is institutionalized, the cycle begins again. We start thinking about new ways to use the innovation, ways to share what we know with others, and ways to make sure the innovation is not taken away from us.

Predictably, it takes a long time to get to the institutionalization phase. It is easier to understand the time it can take to get to this stage by looking at the different stages in the ACOT Stages of Adoption. It really is not until stages four and five (Appropriation and Invention) that an innovation is institutionalized. At this time, professional development is no longer a necessity, and perhaps the biggest challenge is budgetary to ensure that the innovation can continue to be maintained and supported.

The Role of the Individual in Each Phase

Becoming a Change AgentNow that you have a general sense of what change can entail for other

people, it is time to consider your role in this process. Change agents have no easy task ahead of them. We all know that teachers, especially, have a tendency to be resistant to change. As a change agent, you are either going to be the top-down force or the bottom-up force; depending on where you are in relation to the individuals being asked to change (their boss or their colleague), your role will be different. It is crucial for you to remember that even though we talk about the three phases of innovation adoption, we generally think of this from the school or district level. As a change agent, you should also consider it from the individual level and be mindful that within your institution, you will have some people at the initiation phase (in which they are just beginning to think about the innovation), while others will already be implementers, and some may be at the institutionalized phase. Your role will be to consider all of these individuals.

48

Top-Down Change AgentsAs an administrator or school leader, your decision to promote change

may come from your own experience and expertise or it may come from your superiors. Either way, it is your job to get people on board so you can begin the change process. Remember that there are three main phases of innovation adoptioninitiation, implementation, and institutionalization. You have a pivotal role in all three phases.

During the initiation phase, it will be important that you get teachers excited about the innovation. You should make sure you know as much as possible about the innovation as well as examples of it in action. This may mean that you visit a school where the innovation is being implemented or even take your teachers to see the innovation in action. You should also be realistic in your expectations. Think about the adopter categories described by Rogers (2003). Most of your staff will be Early to Late Majority adopters. Additionally, think about the questions they will be asking themselves (innovation-adoption decision process) and the ways you can help them to see the benefits of the innovation. If you personally do not believe in the innovation, it will be difficult for you to convince others to believe in it.

Think about a recent innovation that has made its way to your school. Who started it? How quickly did it spread, and how far reaching is it? Chances are that if it is something that has taken off slowly but is gaining momentum, you have a few key players who are impacting the rate of adoption. If Innovators predominantly used the innovation, then the rate of adoption is going to be somewhat slower than if you have Innovators and one or two Early Majority adopters. Rogers (2003) explains this idea when discussing the role of what he calls Opinion Leaders. Opinion Leaders are not from the Innovator adopter category but are more often from Early Majority. Opinion Leaders are those educators who peers can relate to; as a result, their peers often follow what the Opinion Leaders do. The followers will often say, Well if she can do it, I can probably do it too. This is not because the followers feel superior to the Opinion Leaderit is because the Opinion Leader is an individual the followers can relate to. For example, if an Innovator uses an iPad at meetings and presentations, the majority/followers would not be surprised. They would think, Of course he is using the iPadhe is a techie. However, if an Opinion Leader uses an iPad, the followers would consider using one as well because they would consider their skills to be at the same level; therefore,

49

it probably is not that scary to try out an iPad. Opinion Leaders play a key role in the innovation-adoption process, and as a change agent, it is ex