butlera3 jcm rev-1 final vicki

8/3/2019 ButlerA3 Jcm Rev-1 Final Vicki

1/18

Leadership and Vision 1

Leadership and Vision in 21st Century School Environments

Vicki Butler

EDLR 617

Seattle University

March 8, 2010


2/18


Abstract

The characteristics of a 21st century educational environment call upon skills of

collaboration, communication, creativity, critical inquiry, and opportunities for real world

engagement for all constituents. Many of these concepts and opportunities involve the

integration of technology into the school curriculum and activities. The transition from

traditional school environments to schools of the future requires an understanding of the 21st

century skills, the ability to engage the school community in the vision, and leadership that

models 21st century skills. This study supports the relationship between an administrators

understanding of this vision and leadership model and a faculty's technological proficiency and

ability to integrate technology in a meaningful manner. Several measures have been created by

national and local educational organizations to assist schools in determining this relationship.

The results of such assessments can further be used to strategically define goals, create school

plans, and determine effective professional development that will create a learning environment

benefiting students and faculty.


3/18


What is the impact of administrator's institutional vision on teachers' integrated technology

competencies in supporting a 21st century learning environment?

School environments have generally been structured in the same manner for the past

century. Schools were based in a relatively closed community based upon geographical location,

cultural or religious characteristics. The school populations were more homogenous and

insulated. With the introduction of technology, increase in media sources, and ability to traverse

the world with expedience our school populations are more diverse and less insulated from the

larger world. The learning experiences and ability to learn in relationship with real time and real

world events have provided the educational community with the opportunity to reexamine the

traditional learning environments and student population. This has created a different

understanding of student learning needs, teaching methodology, physical school environments.

This is a very complex and layered environment. As we prepare students and educators to be co-

learners for the 21st century, we need to understand the role of integrated technology, attributes

of 21st century education, and the implications for professional development.

Review of Literature

Traditional schools once focused on the three r's: reading, 'riting, and 'rithmetic. 21st

century schools enhance the traditional core subjects with the four c's: critical thinking and

problem solving, communication, collaboration, and creativity and innovation (Hurley, 2004). In

recent years the International Society for Technology in Education has revised the technology

standards to reflect the needs of our changing students, changing society, and changing world.


4/18


The National Education Technology Standards reiterate the themes of creativity, collaboration,

communication, critical thinking, as well as global citizenship (Knezek, 2008). Melding core

content knowledge with authentic learning experiences takes the original static levels of Bloom's

Taxonomy into a 21st century dynamic revised model (Forehand, 2005). "The attributes that

business and higher education leaders are calling for in young peoplethat they be independent

thinkers, problem-solvers, and decision-makersare captured by the advanced skills in the

revised Blooms taxonomy, the ability to analyze, evaluate, and create" (Silver, 2008, p 5).

Benchmarks have been created to help leaders assess their school or districts point on a

continuum of 21st century stages. The MILE Guide is one framework that enables educational

leaders to ascertain their level on the continuum of 21st century skills and then use the results to

create a strategic plan to integrate these skills into the learning environment (Hurley, 2009). The

recent release of the National Educational Technology Plan encourages schools to invest in the

professional development that enhances teachers' technology proficiency and models curricular

integration. "Research shows that U.S. teachers have less time in their work week for

professional learning than do their counterparts in countries where students have the best

performance on international examinations (Darling-Hammond, 2010). Increasing the time for

our educators to engage in professional learning will require processes that cross time and space

boundaries" (U.S. Department of Education, 2010, p. 44). Chris Lehmann is the founding

principal the Science Leadership Academy in Philadelphia. Their mission statement has three

essential questions that guide the instructional vision of the school: How do we LEARN? What

do we CREATE? What does it mean to LEAD? (Lehmann, 2009). Those are essential questions

for all of us as we collectively create the learning environments that will embrace the future.


5/18


Definition of terms

Integrated technology: technology tools and resources utilized within a content or core

curriculum.

21st century learning environment: tools, people, places that reflect the attribute of 21st

century skills.


6/18


Procedure

Research hypotheses

A faculty's level of integrated technology proficiency is impacted by their respective

administrative team's level of leadership and vision as it pertains to 21st century learning

environments.

Subjects

The subjects in this study were drawn from thirty five accredited independent schools

serving students in grades 6 through 12 in an urban setting. They included the administrative

team and faculty for each school. The schools were chosen based on accreditation in the Pacific

Northwest Association for Independent Schools, grade levels served, urban location, student

population of 400 to 700, and stated technology program.

Faculty participants were requested to complete a survey tool assessing their own

proficiency including their use of technology in the classroom. Administrative participants were

asked to participate in a self assessment tool to assess their school's level of integration as a 21st

century school. Self reporting measures are subject to bias based upon the responder's

interpretation of the questions, the perceived desired response, and the confidence in anonymous

reporting.

This sampling was one of convenience with the schools being chosen on the above

criteria. All faculty and administration were given access to the instrument and requested to

participate. There was 100% participation at each site. This high participation is not reflective of

real world practices.


7/18


Instruments

Washington State's Educational Technology Support Center created an assessment tool

modeled after theUtah Technology Awareness Project. This tool, PILOT (Prepare to Integrate

Learning Opportunities with Technology), includes assessment surveys for K-12 educators,

administrators, librarians, library media specialists, technical staff, cabinets, central office

personnel, and students. PILOT categories include Productivity Skills, Educator's

Personal/Professional Use, Student Use/Classroom Integration, Technical Skills, Educational

Leadership Skills, and a PILOT Light section, a scaled down version of the comprehensive

survey. The assessment items are based upon the Tiers of Technology Integration into the

Classroom Indicators and the Technological Proficiencies of Administrators, Teachers and

Teacher-Librarians developed as part of the Washington State K-12 Educational Technology

Plan. It is a mandated annual assessment for all public school administrators, librarians, and

certified school employees. It is reviewed and updated to reflect current technology plans and

guidelines.

Reliability and validity data is not offered for this Washington state technology survey

instrument. Managers (technology directors or administrators) may access their school or district

accounts to create reports, determine levels of proficiency and develop strategic plans after

reviewing the information provided. The PILOT survey instrument was created in March 2001

and has become a mandated tool for technology assessment for Washington state public school

educators. The pervasive use of this particular instrument and the ability to obtain information

on a variety of categories and levels make the use of PILOT an appropriate tool for assessing


8/18


technology proficiencies.


9/18

Sample survey questions from PILOT

For questions 1-27, use the following scale for selecting a response for each item that most

accurately describes youruse of technology.

0 Never

1 Rarely (Once or twice a year)

2 Occasionally (Three or four times a semester)

3 Regularly (Weekly or whenever appropriate and useful)

0 1 2 3

1. My students use technology tools to communicate and interact

with teachers, parents, students, community members, or others for

learning purposes.

______________________________________________________

Responses for questions 28-33 are defined here. Please select the one response for each item that

most accurately describes your use of technology.

0 I dont know how to do this at all.

1 I sometimes need help to do this.

2 I feel comfortable doing this by myself.

3 I would feel comfortable showing someone else how to do this.

33. I can use technology tools to manage and analyze student academic data for

the purpose of improving my instructional practice.



10/18


Partnership for 21st Century Skills is a national organization dedicated to providing

educators with tools and resources that support students in developing 21st century learning

skills. The MILE Guide for 21st Century Skills is a self assessment tool utilized by individual

schools and districts to determine the level of engagement in 21st century benchmarks "in terms

of student knowledge and skills; education support systems; leading and teaching; policy

making; partnering; and continuous improvement/strategic planning (Partnership for 21st

Century Skills, 2009). This self assessment provides a tool for assessing, planning and

implementing effective learning and professional development strategies necessary for creating a

21st century school. Partnership for 21st Century Skills works in conjunction with the U.S.

Department of Education. It is a national educational resource site and is cited in numerous

educational publications. Reliability data is in the process of being researched and gathered on

this particular instrument. The issue of validity for 21st century skill level instruments is

discussed in a white paper prepared by the Educational Testing Service. The ETS describes this

particular type of assessment as authentic or using real life situations to evaluate performance.

The Partnership for 21st Century Skills and other government educational agencies were cited in

this paper (Landgraf, 2003). The process of examining the performance data has begun through

various universities and colleges. The identification of levels of implementation and ability to

discern appropriate strategies for transitioning to the next level of proficiency are strong assets of

the MILE guide.


11/18


Method

Schools were identified through the Pacific Northwest Association for Independent

Schools. Contact was made with each administrative team and permission was granted by 35

Sample MILE Guide category and level

Educational Support Systems (Early Stage)

Curricula Instruction Assessments Learning

Environments

Professional

Development

Curricula

design

processes focusprimarily on

core academic

contentknowledge.

Up to 25% of

core academic

contentcurricula

explicitly

integrate 21st

century skills.

Most

instructional

strategiesare teacher led

and focused

exclusively ona subject-

matter

based approach

(e.g., lectures,presentation of

facts).

Learning

activities tendto be the

same for allstudents.

Up to 25% of

student work

is assessed atthe

classroom

level formastery of

21st century

skills.

Up to 25% of

decisions

surroundinglearning

environments

includeconsiderations

for supporting

student mastery of

21st century skills(e.g., parents and

students can access

school records,

assignments andperformance

informationonline).

Professional

development primarily

focuses on improvingeducator capacity to

teach core academic

content.Up to 25% of

professional

development

opportunities areavailable regardless of

time or place (e.g., there

is easy access to self-

paced, technology-enabled professional

devel environments).Some professional

development

opportunitiesfocus on 21st century

skills and/or themes like

global competence or

civic literacy.


12/18


independent 6 -12 schools with documented technology programs. An account was created

through the Pilot Survey administration to enable the researcher to access the individually

submitted survey results given to faculty members of the 35 schools.

Faculty members completed the Technology Integration and Proficiency Self Assessment

for Educators Grades 5-12. This survey has 33 items divided into two sections. The first section

addresses the teacher's use of technology in the classroom. Respondents were asked to answer

questions in this section using the scale ratings: 0 - Never; 1 - Rarely (Once or twice a year), 2 -

Occasionally (Three or four times a semester), or 3 - Regularly (Weekly or whenever appropriate

and useful). The second section addresses the teacher's personal comfort level in using

technology. Respondents were asked to answer questions in this section based on the scale

ratings: 0 - I don't know how to do this at all; 1 - I sometimes need help to do this; 2 - I feel

comfortable doing this by myself; or 3 - I would feel comfortable showing someone else how to

do this.

Administrators participated in the MILE (Milestones for Improving Learning and

Education) Guide for 21st Century Skills self-assessment tool. This was done through

participation in a one hour workshop given at centrally located schools. They rated their schools

in the categories of Learning and Teaching, Leading and Managing, and Partnering by

identifying attributes that best represented their schools in these levels. A simple tally of

identified attributes determined the level at which they assessed their integration of 21st century

skills. The levels ranged from least integrated or "early stage", to the intermediary "transitional

stage", and to the most integrated "21st century" level.

The research process was based on a casual comparative design done with a convenience

sampling. Surveys results were gathered from the administrator/researcher PILOT account.


13/18


Surveys were scored through PILOT and results were compiled for each of the 35 individual

school faculty groups. Scores ranged from 0 to 3 with the lowest score being 1.09 and the highest

score 2.98. Administrative team continuum charts were collected at the end of the hour

workshop. The independent variable was the nominal score of the 21st Century MILES tool

given to the administrative teams. Level one was labeled as the "early stage", level two was

labeled "transformational" and level three was labeled "21st century." The dependent variable

was the individual schools faculty combined scores on the PILOT 5-12 educator survey. The

proposed hypothesis was to determine the effect of the administrative leadership vision on the

respective faculty's level of integrated technology proficiency. The basis of these findings will be

used in the development of strategic professional development targeted to transition schools to

the upper level of 21st century skills in schools.

Table 1

Results of Survey and Vision Level Needs Table Number

School FacultyProf Vision Level School FacultyProf Vision Level

Adams 2.68 21st_Century Raspen 2.34 Transformational

Baker 1.3 Early Squaxin 1.39 Early

Cabrini 2.16 Transformational Tonga 2.56 21st_Century

Deshutte 2.02 Transformational Undone 1.78 Early

Elder 2.33 Transformational Valley 2.45 21st_Century

Finnegan 2.55 21st_Century Wishka 2.03 Transformational

Gallagher 1.43 Early Xavier 1.43 Early

Hamilton 2.45 Transformational Yellam 2.87 21st_CenturyInverse 1.82 Early Zelinski 1.56 Early

Jorge 2.75 21st_Century Naches 3.98 21st_Century

Kachess 2.45 21st_Century Hiyak 2.05 Transformational

Lake 1.09 Transformational Snoqualmie 2.67 21st_Century

Malakwa 2.12 21st_Century Tahoma 1.98 Transformational

Nisqually 1.84 Transformational Glacier 2.65 21st_Centu

Olpine 1.97 Early Chelan 1.76 Early

Pilchuck 1.48 Early Sammamish 2.09 21st_Century

Quilcene 1.76 Early Tatoosh 1.92 Early

Tahuya 1.45 Transformational


14/18


The relation of the continuum scores and the survey scores were analyzed through a one

way ANOVA with three levels. This ANOVA examines the relationship between 21st Century

Skills Adoption with three levels (Early Stage, Transformational, and 21st Century) and faculty

technology proficiency in 35 schools. Of these 35 schools, 12 schools self identified themselves

as in the first level or Early stage. The number of schools self identified as in the middle level or

Transformational stage was 11. The remaining 12 schools self identified themselves as in the

highest or 21st Century stage. Faculty Proficiency scores reflected similar patterns. There was a

full point difference between the Early Stage (1.63) and the 21st Century level (2.65) with the

Transformational level (1.97) falling closer to the Early Stage level. These differences were

Table2

Means Table for faculty technology proficiency

Effect: 21st Century Skill Adoption Level

N Mean

Std.

Deviation Std. Error

Early 12 1.63 .22 .07

Transformational 11 1.97 .40 .12

21st_Century 12 2.65 .48 .14

Total 35 2.09 .57 .10

Table 3

ANOVA table for Faculty technology proficiency hanging title

Sum of

Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups 6.43 2 3.22 21.91 .001

Within Groups 4.69 32 .15

Total 11.12 34


15/18


highly statistically significant with a space p value of .001. This would support the idea that

leadership vision does impact the technological proficiency of faculty.

Threats to validity to consider include the action of self reporting. To minimize this threat

one could, in future research, observe the teacher for examples supporting or discounting the self

reporting aspect of the survey. Other threats could include socio-economic-status of the school

community that would impact the access to technology for students or the school. Possible

threats might also include the number of years of teaching or administrating. Teachers and

administrators with more years in the school environment may not have the experience or

exposure to technology as their younger counterparts.

This study acknowledges the relationship between the administrative vision and a

faculty'sproficient use of integrated technology. Integrated technology is one of the key

components for creating learning environments that are collaborative, encourage critical thinking

and problem solving, provide opportunities for creativity and innovation, and build

communication skills. The classroom becomes a place beyond the school walls that has the

potential to interact with real world situations and to engage students worldwide in meaningful

learning tasks. Through the identification of a school's level of 21st skills implementation,

administrators can provide opportunities to develop strategic plans that will address professional

development that supports, enhances, and transforms the classroom for the teachers, students,

and community.


16/18


References

Barber, M, & Mourshed, M. (2009). Shaping the future: how good education systems can

become great in the decade ahead. McKinsey Education, Retrieved from

http://www.mckinsey.com/locations/southeastasia/knowledge/Education_Roundtable.pdf

Forehand, M. (2005). Bloom's taxonomy: Original and revised. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging

perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved March 6, 2010 from

http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/

Hurley, K. (2004).Partnership for 21st century skills. Retrieved from

http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/

Hurley, K. (2009). The Mile guide: milestones for improving learning and education.

Partnership for 21st Century Skills, Retrieved from

http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/documents/MILE_Guide_

Knezek, D. (2007).National educational technology standards for students. Eugene, OR: ISTE.

Knezek, D. (2008).National educational technology standards for teachers. Eugene, OR: ISTE.

Landgraf, K. (2003). What Higher education must do to address the gap of information and

communication technology proficiencies.Educational testing services, Retrieved from

http://www.ets.org/Media/Tests/Information_and_Communication_Technology_Literacy

/ICTwhitepaperfinal.pdfdoi: M2052

Lehmann, C. (2009). Mission and vision. Retrieved from
http://www.mckinsey.com/locations/southeastasia/knowledge/Education_Roundtable.pdfhttp://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/http://www.ets.org/Media/Tests/Information_and_Communication_Technology_Literacy/ICTwhitepaperfinal.pdfhttp://www.ets.org/Media/Tests/Information_and_Communication_Technology_Literacy/ICTwhitepaperfinal.pdfhttp://www.mckinsey.com/locations/southeastasia/knowledge/Education_Roundtable.pdfhttp://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/http://www.ets.org/Media/Tests/Information_and_Communication_Technology_Literacy/ICTwhitepaperfinal.pdfhttp://www.ets.org/Media/Tests/Information_and_Communication_Technology_Literacy/ICTwhitepaperfinal.pdf


17/18


http://www.scienceleadership.org/drupaled/mission

Moersch, C. (2010, February). Loti turns up the heat!.Learning and Leading with Technology,

37(5), 20-23.

Moersch, L. (2009). The Loti connection. Retrieved from http://loticonnection.com/index.html

Silver, E. (2008). Measuring skills for the 21st century.Education Sector Report, Retrieved from

http://www.educationsector.org/research/research doi: 716323

Small, D. Washington State Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, Education

Technology and K-20. (2005). Washington state educational technology plan (05-0054).

Olympia, WA: Retrieved from

http://www.k12.wa.us/EdTech/pubdocs/EdTechPlan05Full.pdf

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. (2010). Transforming

American education: learning powered by technology (draft). Washington, DC:

Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/os/technology/netp.pdf

Washington State Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, Educational Technology.

(2009).Pilot survey Retrieved from http://www.edtech.wednet.edu/pilot/

Wei, R. C., Darling-Hammond, L., Andree, A., Richardson, N., Orphanos,S. (2009).

Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher

development in the United States and abroad. Dallas, TX. National Staff Development

Council

Williams, K. (2006). Beliefs about technology integration support factors held by school

leadership and school faculty: A mixed methods study. Georgia State University, 333.

(URN . etd-11222006-143045) Retrieved March 2, 2010 from Electronic Dissertations
http://www.k12.wa.us/EdTech/pubdocs/EdTechPlan05Full.pdfhttp://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/os/technology/netp.pdfhttp://www.k12.wa.us/EdTech/pubdocs/EdTechPlan05Full.pdfhttp://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/os/technology/netp.pdf


18/18


and Theses database.

butlera3 jcm rev-1 final vicki

Documents