summary - jenniferball52.files.wordpress.com … · web viewthe tis facilitated a 3-hour...

Jennifer Ball, Evaluator

Program Evaluation ReportProfessional Development Program to Support iPad Integration

Submitted to: Sunny Side Up Academy

Professional Development Program to Support iPad Integration 2

SummaryThe program being evaluated is professional development to support iPad integration at a 7-12 single gender school in Southern California. Each faculty member was required to attend fifteen meetings for a total of 30.5 hours of technology professional development, during the 2013-2014 school year.

Although the identified purpose of the technology professional development program was to support the integration of the iPad into classroom instruction, there is no clear identification of a school vision for integration.

Fifteen meetings were held, three of which focused on the following applications: Keynote, Pages and Numbers. Of these applications, not one was utilized in classroom instruction during the 2013-2014 school year. An Apple Inc. distinguished teacher ,who instructed teachers on the basic functions of the iPad, conducted one meeting. The remaining eleven meetings were used to create a list of the apps teachers were using in their classrooms. During each of these meetings teachers were placed in department groups and asked to complete a chart identifying which apps they were using in their classrooms. A new version of the same chart was completed during each professional development meeting. Charts were submitted to the Technology Integration Specialist as proof of integration in each classroom. These charts were used as evidence of iPad use in the classroom. Teachers who did not identify app use were threatened with job loss.

Program DescriptionIn August of 2013, Sunny Side Up Academy initiated a professional development program to support one-to-one iPad use at a private, all-girl’s school in Southern California. The goal of the project was to support the integration of the iPad into each classroom discipline. This program began the week before formal classes started with two technology in-service meetings. Following these initial meetings were thirteen technology meetings. Attendance at these 90-minute technology in-service meetings was mandatory.

To facilitate this program, the school hired a Technology Integration Specialist (TIS). The TIS planned, organized, and facilitated all technology professional development in-service meetings and was available to work with teachers on a one-to-one basis.

During the year, teachers were evaluated and held accountable for the integration of the iPad in classroom instruction. Department chairs were responsible to conduct two formal evaluations, one each semester to identify iPad use. At the end of the school year, the school Principal conducted one summative evaluation based upon the department chair evaluations. The principal did not visit any classrooms. Results of the summative evaluation of iPad use determined employment for the following year.


Program Objectives The professional development program at Sunny Side Up Academy was established to achieve the following:

Support the integration of the iPad use into each classroom discipline.

After an initial meeting with the school administration, several unstated goals emerged. Although unstated, these goals appear to drive the professional development decisions made by the administration regarding iPad use.

Utilize the iPad to create ‘wow’ factor projects. Increase enrollment. Increase revenue.

Program ComponentsIn April of 2013, the administration of Sunny Side Up Academy began the process to implement a one-to-one iPad integration plan during the 2013-2014 school year. Prior to student roll out, teachers were issued an iPad to use during the summer to familiarize them with iPad use. Four staff members and one faculty member attended the iPad training institute in Georgia over the summer. Beginning the 2013-2014 school year, each student, in grades 7-12, was issued an iPad to use during class instruction.

To support one-to-one iPad integration, a Technology Integration Specialist (TIS) was hired. The TIS was responsible for planning, organizing, and implementing a professional development plan to support iPad integration into each classroom discipline. Professional development began with a preliminary meeting held on August 5, 2013. The TIS facilitated a 3-hour introduction to iPad use. The focus of the meeting was to identify best practices by teachers concerning iPad integration. Teachers were asked how they would use the iPad in their classrooms. No direct instruction was offered.

The next meeting was held two-days later on August 7, 2013. A representative from Apple Inc. conducted this daylong meeting (8-hours), which was divided into three segments. In the morning, teachers were introduced to using features on the iPad including turning the device on and off, switching screens, downloading and opening apps, closing apps, changing settings and other basic functions. The second part of the day was spent learning how to use the Keynote and Pages applications. Finally, the last hour was spent in an open discussion. During the discussion teachers were asked how they would use the iPad in their classrooms.

During the school year, thirteen additional professional development opportunities were provided to support the integration of iPad use into the classroom. Teachers were required to attend all professional development meetings as part of their contractual agreement. Meetings were 90-minutes long. Meeting dates for the 2013 – 2014 school year were held on:

August 21


September 4 September 25 October 16 October 23 October 30 November 20 January 22 January 29 February 5 March 12 March 19 March 26

The focus of the first six meetings was to determine best practices of teachers using the iPad. Teachers in attendance were divided into department groups and asked to complete a chart identifying the apps used in their classrooms. During each meeting a new chart was created using paper and pencil. At the end of each meeting, the Technology Integration Specialist collected these documents. After collection, charts were not disseminated to the faculty.

Following the October 30 meeting, online support was developed for iPad use regarding apps such as Comic Life, iMovie, iPhoto, Notability and Showbie. Additional tutorials supporting the use of the new school website were also created. All tutorials were posted to the new school website. No instruction was given during any professional development meeting regarding the use or application of these apps.

During the November 20 meeting, training commenced on the use of the iPad Numbers app. Teachers were walked step-by-step through the app. Teachers created a spreadsheet and saved it as a PDF. Saved PDF’s were successfully emailed to the Technology Integration Specialist. A discussion followed as to the function of the app to classroom use. Departments met together to identify ways the Numbers app could be used within their discipline. A chart was created and submitted to the Technology Integration Specialist. The paper-pencil chart was not generated through the use of the Numbers app.

The last six professional development in-service sessions followed the pattern of the first six but focused around the SAMR model. Dr. Ruben Puentedura, founder and president of the educational technology-consulting firm Hippasus, developed this SMAR model for technology integration. The model establishes four levels of technology integration.

1. Substitution: to use the technology in place of another assignment with no change in assignment function.

2. Augmentation: the technology is used to replace and improve.3. Modification: the technology is used to redesign.4. Redefinition: the technology allows for creation.


During each of the last six sessions, teachers met in department groups and were asked to discuss how they would implement the SAMR model using the iPad in the classroom. Using paper and pencil, a SAMR chart was completed to identify iPad use in the classroom and particularly which apps were being utilized. A new chart was completed each session. These charts were submitted to the TIS at the conclusion of each meeting. After collection, charts were not disseminated to the faculty.

Evaluation MethodThe decision-making model, created by Daniel Stufflebeam in 1983, will be used to evaluate the effectiveness and impact of this program on classroom instruction. Primarily, the evaluation seeks to identify the effectiveness of the professional development offered to support the integration of iPad use into each classroom discipline.

Evaluation methods included: Attendance at all technology in-service meetings. Interview with the Technology Integration Specialist. Faculty surveys on the use of the iPad in classroom instruction. One-on-one interviews with faculty. Classroom visits.

Technology Department PersonnelThe technology department at Sunny Side Up Academy maintains three full time personnel. The Technology Department Director is responsible to oversee technology use at the school and maintain security for all technology systems. The Technology Department Assistant works on a daily basis to trouble shoot technology issues campus wide. He is responsible to make sure that each classroom has access to the Wi-Fi. The Technology Integration Specialist is responsible to create, implement and facilitate the professional development opportunities for integration of iPad use into the classroom.

Faculty Participants48 full-time and part-time faculty members participated in the professional development offered to support iPad integration. Faculty members were identified as belonging to the following departments:

English Fine and Practical Arts Foreign Language Mathematics Religion Science


Social Studies Electives

ProceduresEach faculty member was asked to complete an initial survey after the first professional development in-service opportunity offered to support iPad integration on August 5th. 40 of the 48 faculty members responded. The initial faculty survey may be found on Appendix B. After this initial survey, a sampling of the faculty was interviewed. Faculty interview questions may be found on Appendix C.

After initial faculty surveys and interviews were completed, classroom visitations were made. A sampling of faculty members from each discipline was observed during the first quarter to ascertain iPad use. This procedure of faculty interview, identification of iPad uses and classroom observation was repeated during the fourth quarter of the school year.

As the school year drew to a close, an exit survey and interviews of faculty were conducted. Of the 48 faculty members, 38 completed the exit survey and 19 participated in the exit interview. In total, 40 initial surveys were completed, 99 interviews were conduct and 80 classroom observation visits were made.

Data SourcesInstruments

Technology Integration Specialist interview: Appendix A. Initial Faculty Survey: Appendix B Faculty Interview: Appendix C Classroom Visitation Form: Appendix D Exit Interview: Appendix E

ResultsAdministrationIt is clear from the interviews that the primary focus of the administration is different from the guidelines given to the TIS. This misalignment between the project and project goals added frustration to stakeholders. Attempts were made by the evaluator to clarify goals and alignment for focused support, however, after the initial interview regarding iPad integration, the administration of the school did not make themselves available for further queries.

Technology Integration SpecialistThe TIS noted frustration at the lack of guidance from administration regarding professional development especially in regards to a lack of vision or mission statement connected to iPad integration. According to the TIS, preparation of professional development opportunities for iPad integration lacked focus. Halfway through the year, after conducting research, the TIS relied


heavily on the SAMR model for professional development in-service meetings. This model, introduced to the faculty during the November 20 meeting, was to facilitate the integration of iPad into classroom instruction.

Faculty All faculty members attended 30.5 hours of professional development focused on one-to-one iPad integration.

Analysis of the initial survey, interviews and class observations identified 22 of the 48 faculty members as using the iPad for classroom instruction. The use by department was identified as:

English (2)o Textbooks (reading)o YouTube (viewing)o iTunes University course created (communication and repository)

Fine and Practical Arts (2)o iBook (reading)o YouTube (viewing)

Foreign Language (2)o Class exchange program (digital communication with students in a foreign

country)o Blogging (answering a question posed by teacher)

Mathematics (2)o Textbook (reading)

Religion (1)o Camera, Apple TV (viewing)o iMovie (creating)

Science (4)o Showbie (students turn in work)o YouTube (viewing)o Notability (note-taking)

Social Studies (5)o Google (student created sites to share understanding, drive for work flow, spread

sheets for shared warm-up activities)o Socrative (review)o iMovie (creation)

Electives (4)o Textbook (reading)o Notability (note-taking)o Repository of class documents (reading and sharing)o Robotics (research)


Although 45.6% of the faculty was observed using the iPad to support instruction, it is of note that no faculty was observed or identified using the applications from direct instruction during professional development trainings. Those applications that were the focus of direct instruction during iPad training were:

Keynote Pages Numbers

Additionally, analysis of surveys, interviews and classroom observations brought to light the following faculty concerns regarding iPad use in the classroom.

Lack of focus – why are we doing this? No instruction on how to use the iPad in my classroom Not knowing how to use the iPad Fear of loss of instructional time Wi-Fi access is unreliable Students off task Students cheating Does not align with AP standards There is no time in the curriculum for “fun” projects No time This professional development is a waste of time.

Interestingly, of the 30.5 hours of professional development hours required, only one teacher, out of 48, identified the time spent as supportive of iPad integration. 97.9% of the faculty felt as if the required time spent in technology professional development was a waste of their time and did not support the use of the iPad in their classroom instruction. These same faculty members noted indignation at being asked how they were going to use the iPad and being held accountable to the use of the device without any direct instruction. 90% of all faculty members voiced fear of disciplinary action of they did not use the iPad for instructional purposes. To rectify this issue, 54.1% of the faculty utilized the iPad to take roll, conduct simple research and take notes. Notes were taken using the Notability app.

100% of the faculty noted that one of the major issues was unreliable Wi-Fi access. They felt that if they developed a lesson utilizing the technology, there was a necessity to develop an alternative lesson due to unreliable Wi-Fi access. No faculty member felt that they had the time to produce double lessons.

Discussion and RecommendationsThe purpose of this evaluation was to understand the effectiveness of the professional development in-service training offered to support iPad integration into the classroom. The results of the study identify 45.6% of the faculty as integrating the iPad into the classroom for


instructional purposes. However, 97.9% of faculty felt as if the professional development to support iPad integration was a waste of time. There is no evidence of a connection between the professional development offered and iPad usage for classroom instruction. Recommendations:

1. Involve all stakeholders to create a vision for integration.2. Create a list of goals and benchmarks for the vision for integration.3. Create a backwards plan to work toward your primary goals.4. Assess and identify faculty levels expertise on an integration continuum.5. After assessment, divide faculty into ability level groups according to the level of comfort

and ability regarding integration.6. TIS should lead faculty to create personal short-term and long-term integration goals.7. TIS should develop a personal program for integration for each faculty member.

AdministrationIt is clear from the results of the evaluation that there is no clear vision or goal for iPad integration. Without a vision, there is no way to align professional development to support iPad integration. The first recommendation from the evaluation is to establish a vision for integration followed by a list of goals and benchmarks. All stakeholders should be involved in the process of developing this shared vision. This should be of the highest priority.

Technology Integration SpecialistAlthough knowledgeable in computer use, the TIS will need guidance in establishing professional development to support the goals of the school. It is recommended that a scaffolded design based on backwards design principles be developed. Once the goal of iPad integration has been identified, faculty should be assessed on the level of comfort and ability to integrate the iPad into their classroom instruction. After assessment, faculty should be placed on a scaffolded scale according to ability. Working with small ability level groups, faculty should be led by the TIS to create both short-term and long-term goals for iPad integration. These goals should be based on their level of expertise and aligned with the over all goals of the school. Professional development becomes a personalized approach for success.

FacultyIt is obvious from the interviews that the faculty started off frustrated and became more so as the year progressed. By the end of the 2013-2014 school year, 97.9% of the faculty identified the required technology professional development as a waste of their time.

Faculty did not understand why they were being asked how they would use the iPad for instruction when they had no ideas what to do. When they voiced these opinions, they were met with threatening statements of job loss if they were not cooperative. This led to 45.8% of the faculty spending hours of their own time in research trying to develop some way to use the technology for instruction. The remaining 54.1% of the faculty utilized the iPad to take roll, conduct simple research or allowed students to take notes.


Overall the program allotted ample time for professional development to support iPad integration but lacked focus and purpose therefore was ineffective to achieve the goal.Project CostThe evaluator is a member of the Sunny Side Up Academy faculty and worked on this evaluation during the regular school day therefore there are no travel expenses charged for the evaluation. The evaluator salary is an hourly rate of $62.50. Hourly rate is based on $500.00 per day.

Activity Total in Hours Total Cost

80, 45-minute classroom observations 60 $3,750.0099, 20-minute interviews 33 $2,062.50Review of 78 surveys 6.5 $ 387.50Writing the Evaluation Document 10 $ 620.00Total $6,820.00


AppendicesA: Technology Integration Specialist Interview Questions

1. What is the goal of the professional development program to support iPad integration?

2. What is your role in supporting this goal?

3. Do you have a plan for professional development? If so, could you outline the plan?

4. Do you have any concerns about the professional development program? If so, could you outline your concerns?


B: Initial Faculty Survey 1. What is your name?

2. In which department(s) do you work?

3. What is the goal of technology professional development this year?

4. What do you hope to gain from the technology professional development this year?

5. Do you have a plan for iPad integration? If so, what are your plans?


C: Faculty Interview 1. What is your name?


3. What did you gain from the technology professional development in-service opportunity?

4. How will you use this in your classroom?


D: Classroom Visitation Form1. Teacher name

2. Subject of class

3. What technology is being utilized by:Teacher Student

4. How is the technology being utilized?Teacher Student

5. Additional Observations:


E: Exit Interview 1. What is your name?


3. What did you gain from the technology professional development in-service opportunity?

summary - jenniferball52.files.wordpress.com … · web viewthe tis facilitated a 3-hour...

Documents