Databus Issue: 2008 3 07/31/2008
Tech Six
Hal Shimmin Director of Information ServicesFirst Year Success with Professional Development Initiative
PDF
A glittering array of expectations for technology is published each year: greater administrative efficiency, smarter decision making, bold, student-focused outcomes. As technology leaders in the Ontario-Montclair School District updated our own Technology Master Plan, a list published in a recent Cisco white paper (Fadel & Lemke, 2006) looked frustratingly familiar. Technology was to be the panacea for education, with better test scores, increased student engagement, launching all of our students into the 21st Century with skills to close the digital divide. Despite 20 hopeful years we saw slim evidence documenting attainment of these outcomes.
Project Targets
Believing we could get better traction by paying more attention to changing staff behavior, we proposed to focus technology funding and manpower on a cohort of six schools each year. The district had engaged three mentors to support the migration to our new student information system and work with classroom teachers on other technology priorities. We asked the Tech Six schools to guarantee that every teacher would participate in six hours of tech-focused staff development per trimester, confident that they would find the strategies modeled by three star teachers beneficial.
Drawing against a general fund commitment and Microsoft vouchers, participating schools could claim up to $65,000 in a dollar-for-dollar match against site-controlled funds for equipment or software. Campus-wide wireless access to the network was installed, and each certificated staff member received a notebook computer. Project participation came with a staff commitment to integrate technology in bringing students to mastery of critical standards – we needed to demonstrate success in reaching clear, measurable outcomes. Six schools and six objectives – we started out certain that we would know more about teaching teachers by year’s end and would have evidence of project impact in hand.
Project Outcomes
1. All Principals reported that daily attendance was being electronically submitted by all teachers, a milestone confirmed with follow-up checks of Collection Status reports.
2. Collaboration to improve teaching centered on two approaches, (a) small group support sessions emphasized strategies and lessons expected to improve student performance, and (b) the MyOMSD Intranet site, developed with Microsoft SharePont, provided a forum for sharing lessons and support materials. Ratings from 161 teachers valued the small group workshops very highly, far (4.22 out of 5) ahead of large group (3.71) or other training formats (4.15), and as more valuable than the MyOMSD technology-based option (4.06). Comments emphasized the benefits of professional interaction and focused feedback. Teachers consistently reported having more impact on pupil performance this year, and cited improved student interaction or engagement through the use of instructional technology, particularly whole-class tools such as interactive whiteboards and document cameras.
3. Responding to the latest California School Technology Survey, teachers indicated that students have been involved with word processing, creating reports or projects, solving problems and/or analyzing data, and presenting materials electronically. Reported student use at Tech Six sites was markedly higher than at non-Tech Six sites for these four categories, although comparing 2006-07 data, before the project began, they showed no differences from the non-Tech Six schools. Analysis of changes in student performance measured against the California Standards Test (CST) results is an imperative in the working world of Program Improvement. It remains unclear, however, whether year-to-year CST comparisons could provide a reliable indicator of technology project impact.
4. Teachers at Tech Six sites reported a significantly higher level of skill with email than is typical throughout the district. Ninety percent of survey respondents rated themselves between average and very proficient. Principals at all six sites said that routine communications across the campus were sent only as email. Only six individuals identified themselves as Luddites, never using email.
5. During the second trimester Information Services implemented MyOMSD as a web-accessible document library, including both professional materials and resources provided by textbook publishers. Adoption by Tech Six teachers has varied. During March 300 district users downloaded content from MyOMSD, 31 percent (92) of them working at Tech Six schools. From more than 400 web requests processed daily, usage was heavily skewed toward elementary curriculum materials. A similar pattern was seen among teachers posting SMART lessons, with half (62) coming from one of the Tech Six elementary sites. Only nine originated from middle school teachers, none at the Tech Six middle school site. Many teachers have expressed reluctance to upload lessons, citing concerns related to (a) the suitability of their work for more general use, and (b) for making a work product that represents their substantial investment publicly available as a free commodity.
6. Increasing professional competency with tech fundamentals was examined through three windows, self reports to survey questions, Principal interviews, and direct observations by Technology Support Providers working with teachers. Nearly all teachers at Tech Six schools have adopted email and word processing as useful applications, and report retrieving content-specific resources using the Internet. Most use technology to present some lessons, with SMART Boards and document cameras finding widest use. Despite the emphasis seen in California’s math standards adopted a decade back, most teachers remain unfamiliar with Excel, and do not lead students in using this application to organize, manipulate or chart numeric information. Regardless of the survey responses, almost no instructional time is allocated for projects requiring students to (a) recognize that accurate and complete information is the basis for intelligent decision making, (b) formulate questions based on information needs, (c) develop successful search strategies, and (d) access technology-based sources of information. This constraint to quality teaching continues to keep most OMSD students from lessons targeting proficiency levels beyond basic.
First-year gains have been founded on successful professional development and secured as teachers realized the benefits of broader collaboration. These are surely smart first steps, and echo the results reported for Pennsylvania’s comprehensive program (Rother, 2007).
We have not reached our goals for students. Project teachers claimed high levels of student engagement, creating reports or projects, solving problems and/or analyzing data. Walk-through observations reported by all six Principals and from Support Providers said no. Few student computers were available in classrooms, and time at keyboards was concentrated on reinforcing language arts and math fundamentals. Teachers may recognize the value in project-based assignments, but have not found a suitable solution to the puzzle.
After 40 years as a national leader in education policy, Chester Finn (2008) concluded, “Teaching is truly hard, and being smart and well educated doesn’t make one good at it.” Nothing important is easy.
References
1. Fadel, Charles & Lemke, Cheryl. Technology In Schools: What the Research Says, Cisco White Paper, June 2006. http://www.cisco.com/web/strategy/docs/education/TechnologyinSchoolsReport.pdf
2. Finn, Chester E, Jr, Lessons Learned, Education Week, February 27, 2008, Vol. 27, Issue 25, Pages 28,36. http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2008/02/27/25finn_ep.h27.html?qs=Chester+Finn
3. Rother, Chris, Sparking School Reform, EdTech, November/December, 2007. http://www.edtechmag.com/k12/issues/november-december-2007/sparking-school-reform.html
