Advertisement

Role for Instructional Technology Leadership in K-12 Public Education

  • Thomas EdelbergEmail author
Living reference work entry

Abstract

This chapter examines the role of instructional technology leadership in K-12 public schools. Instructional technology leaders, as opposed to instructional leaders or technology leaders, educate teachers how to integrate technology into instructional practice and evaluate the ways teachers teach with technology. Although broadly defined (International Society for Technology in Education. ISTE Standards for Education Leaders. Retrieved from https://www.iste.org/standards/for-education-leaders, 2018), instructional technology leaders can include school superintendents, principals, technology directors, technology coordinators, digital literacy coaches, instructional coaches, and of course teachers. To explore the function of instructional technology leadership, Indiana public school superintendents and teachers completed a survey where they were asked to rank the skills and experiences (completely essential, important, desirable-but-not-essential, not-at-all-important) that they believed were essential for an instructional technology leader. A comparison of mean scores indicated that both the superintendent and teacher groups tended to rank items similarly. However, an examination of group conception about instructional technology diverged markedly. In other words, how is it possible that both groups can find agreement about what instructional technology leaders should do despite being unable to agree about what instructional technology is? What other factors might explain the shared preferences between Indiana superintendents and teachers who otherwise differ in response to questions about instructional technology? Further research on these questions might help to explain why over 20 years of research on digital technologies in public school classrooms has not been able to show significant increases on student learning outcomes (OECD. Students, computers and learning: Making the connection. OECD Publishing, Paris. Retrieved from http://www.keepeek.com/Digital-Asset-Management/oecd/education/students-computers-and-learning_9789264239555-en, 2015; Player-Koro and Tallvid, Int J Med Technol Lifelong Learn 11:180–193, 2015).

References

  1. Banathy, B.H. 1995. Developing a systems view of education. Educational Technology 35 (3): 53–57. Retrieved from https://www.indiana.edu/~istr711/R711/readings.html.Google Scholar
  2. Baylor, A.L., and D. Ritchie. 2002. What factors facilitate teacher skill, teacher morale, and perceived student learning in technology-using classrooms? Computers & Education 29: 395–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brush, T., and S. Bannon. 1998. Characteristics of technology leaders: A survey of school administrators in the United States. International Studies in Educational Administration 26 (2): 47–56.Google Scholar
  4. Camburn, E.M., B. Rowan, and J.T. Taylor. 2003. Distributed leadership in schools: The case of elementary schoolsadopting comprehensive school reform models. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 25 (4): 347–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen, F.-H., C.-K. Looi, and W. Chen. 2009. Integrating technology in the classroom: A visual conceptualization of teachers’ knowledge, goals and beliefs. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 25: 470–488.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2009.00323.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Copland, M.A. 2003. Leadership of inquiry: Building and sustaining capacity for school improvement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 25 (4): 375–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cuban, L. 2001. Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Cuban, L. 2013. Inside the black box of classroom practice: Change without reform in American education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
  9. Davies, R.S., D.L. Dean, and N. Ball. 2013. Flipping the classroom and instructional technology integration in a college-level information systems spreadsheet course. Educational technology research and development, 61 (4): 563–580.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-013-9305-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Davies, R.S., and R.E. West. 2014. Technology integration in schools. In Handbook of research on educational communications and technology, ed. J.M. Spector, M.D. Merrill, J. Elen, and M.J. Bishop, 841–850. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dillman, D.A., J.D. Smyth, and L.M. Christian. 2014. Internet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method. 4th ed. Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  12. Ertmer, P.A. 2005. Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational technology research and development, 53 (4): 25–39.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Earthman, G.I. 2013. Planning educational facilities: What educators need to know. 4th ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Education.Google Scholar
  14. Faris, M.J., and S.A. Selber. 2013. iPads in the technical communication classroom: An empirical study of technology integration and use. Journal of Business and Technical Communication 27 (4): 359–408.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1050651913490942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Flanagan, L., and M. Jacobsen. 2003. Technology leadership for the twenty-first century principal. Journal of Educational Administration 41 (2): 124–142.  https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230310464648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fowler, F.J. 1995. Improving survey questions: Design and evaluation. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.Google Scholar
  17. Fraenkel, J.R., N.E. Wallen, and H.H. Hyun. 2012. How to design and evaluate research in education. 8th ed. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  18. Frazier, M. 2012. The technology coordinator’s handbook. 2nd ed. Eugene: International Society for Technology in Education.Google Scholar
  19. Frick, T.W. 1996. Keynote address to the international symposium on new Technologies of Instruction National Taipei Teachers’ College. In Criteria for evaluating use of information technology in K-12 education. Taipei: Frick. Retrieved from https://www.indiana.edu/~tedfrick/keyfrick.html.Google Scholar
  20. Gosmire, D., and M.L. Grady. 2007. A bumpy road: Principal as technology leader. Principal Leadership 7 (6): 16–21. Retrieved from https://www.nassp.org/portals/0/content/55193.pdf.Google Scholar
  21. Groves, R.M., F.J. Fowler Jr., M.P. Couper, J.M. Lepkowski, E. Singer, and R. Tourangeau. 2011. Survey methodology. 2nd ed. Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  22. Hammond, M. 2010. What is an affordance and can it help us understand the use of ICT in education? Education and Information Technologies 15 (3): 205–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hammond, M. 2014. Introducing ICT in schools in English: Rationale and consequences. British Journal of Educational Technology 45 (2): 191–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Harris, A. 2008. Distributed leadership in schools: Developing the leaders of tomorrow. London: Routledge & Falme.Google Scholar
  25. Hartley, D. 2007. The emergence of distributed leadership in education: Why now? British Journal of Educational Studies 55 (2): 202–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hartley, D. 2010. Paradigms: How far does research in distributed leadership ‘Stretch’? Educational Management Administration & Leadership 38 (3): 271–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Heller, M.F., and W.A. Firestone. 1995. Who’s in charge here? Sources of leadership for change in eight schools. Elementary School Journal 96 (1): 65–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hew, K.F., and T. Brush. 2007. Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Education Technology Research and Development 55: 223–252.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9022-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hulpia, H., G. Devos, and H. Van Keer. 2011. The relation between school leadership from a distributed perspectiveand teachers’ organizational commitment: Examining the source of the leadership function. Educational Administration Quarterly 47 (5): 728–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hutchison, A., B. Beschorner, and D. Schmidt-Crawford. 2012. Exploring the use of the iPad for literacy learning. The Reading Teacher 66 (1): 15–23.  https://doi.org/10.1002/TRTR.01090.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. International Society for Technology in Education (2018). ISTE Standards for Education Leaders Retrieved from https://www.iste.org/standards/for-education-leaders
  32. Kowalski, T.J. 2005. The school superintendent: Theory, practice, and cases. Northridge: SAGE.Google Scholar
  33. Leithwood, K., and D. Jantzi. 2006. Transformational school leadership for large-scale reform: Effects on students, teachers, and their classroom practices. School effectiveness and school improvement, 17 (2): 201–227.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09243450600565829CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Loewenthal, K.M. 2001. An introduction to psychological tests and scales. 2nd ed. London: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  35. Luschei, T.F. 2014. Assessing the costs and benefits of educational technology. In Handbook of research on educational communications and technology, ed. J.M. Spector, M.D. Merrill, J. Elen, and M.J. Bishop, 239–248. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. McLeod, S. 2015. The challenges of digital leadership. Independent School 74 (2): 50–56. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1062593.Google Scholar
  37. Mishra, P., and M.J. Koehler. 2006. Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A new framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record. 108 (6): 1017–1054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Noeth, R.J., and B.B. Volkov. 2004. Evaluating the effectiveness of technology in our schools, ACT policy report, 2004. Iowa City. Retrieved from http://www.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/school_tech.pdf.
  39. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 2015. Students, computers and learning: Making the connection. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved from http://www.keepeek.com/Digital-Asset-Management/oecd/education/students-computers-and-learning_9789264239555-en.Google Scholar
  40. Pallant, J. 2013. SPSS survival manual. 5th ed. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education.Google Scholar
  41. Player-Koro, C., and M. Tallvid. 2015. Title one laptop on each desk: Teaching methods in technology rich classrooms. International Journal of Media, Technology and Lifelong Learning 11 (3): 180–193.Google Scholar
  42. Rogers, E.M. 2003. Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  43. Shattuck, G. 2010. Understanding school leaders’ role in teachers’ adoption of technology integration classroom practices. In Educational media and technology yearbook, ed. M. Orey, S.A. Jones, and R.M. Branch, vol. 35, 7–28. New York: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1516-0_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Shuldman, M. 2004. Superintendent conceptions of institutional conditions that impact teacher technology integration. Journal of Research on Technology in Education 4 (36): 319–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Shulman, L.S. 1986. Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher 15 (2): 4–14.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015002004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Spillane, J.P. 2015. Leadership and learning: Conceptualizing relations between school administrative practice and instructional practice. Societies 5: 277–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Spillane, J.P., and J.B. Diamond. 2007. Distributed leadership in practice. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  48. Staples, A., M.C. Pugach, and D. Himes. 2005. Rethinking the technology integration challenge. Journal of Research on Technology in Education 37 (3): 285–311.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2005.10782438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sugar, W. 2005. Instructional technologist as a coach: Impact of a situated professional development program on teachers’ technology use. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education 13 (4): 547–571.Google Scholar
  50. Sugar, W., and H. Hollomon. 2009. Technology leaders wanted: Acknowledging the leadership role of a technology coordinator. TechTrends 53 (6): 66–75.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-009-0346-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Tan, S.C. 2010. School technology leadership: Lessons from empirical research. In Curriculum, technology & transformation for an unknown future. Proceedings ascilite Sydney 2010, ed. C.H. Steel, M.J. Keppell, P. Gerbic, and S. Housego, 896–906. Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/sydney10/procs/Seng_chee_tan-full.pdf.Google Scholar
  52. Technology Standards for School Administrators. 2001. Technology standards for school administrators collaborative. Eugene: International Society for Technology in Education. Retrieved from: http://www.kyepsb.net/documents/EduPrep/tssa.pdf.Google Scholar
  53. Tourangeau, R. 2000. The psychology of survey responses. New York: Cambridge University.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. 2010. Teachers’ use of educational technology in U.S. Public Schools: 2009. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED509514.pdf.
  55. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. 2016. Future ready learning: Reimagining the role of technology in education (National Educational Technology Plan). Retrieved from https://tech.ed.gov/netp/.
  56. Vavasseur, C.B., and S.K. MacGregor. 2008. Extending content-focused professional development through online communities of practice. Journal of Research on Technology in Education 40 (4): 517–536. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ826089.pdf.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Virginia Department of Education. 2008. Instructional technology resource teacher: Guidelines for teachers and administrators. Richmond. Retrieved from http://www.doe.virginia.gov/support/technology/administrators_teachers_staff/teacher_guidelines.pdf.
  58. Wolff, E.N., W.J. Baumol, and A.N. Saini. 2014. A comparative analysis of education costs and outcomes: The United States vs. other OECD countries. Economics of Education Review 39: 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Yepes-Baraya, M. 2002. Technology integration. In Assessing the impact of technology in teaching and learning, ed. J. Johnston and L.T. Barker, 139–160. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
  60. Zemelman, S., H. Daniels, and A. Hyde. 2012. Best practices: Bringing standards to life in America’s classrooms. 4th ed. Portsmouth: Heinemann.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Instructional Systems TechnologyIndiana University, BloomingtonBloomingtonUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Belinda Gimbert
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Educational StudiesThe Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations