4.1 Digital Equity
Candidates model and promote strategies for achieving equitable access to digital tools and resources and technology-related best practices for all students and teachers. (PSC 4.1/ISTE 5a)
ITEC 7410
Shared Vision Paper
In order to create the Shared Vision paper, I analyzed our school’s mission and vision statements. Then, I revised the Vision statement to reflect a focus on the role of technology in our school’s vision for success of its students. I provided a new vision statement using research-based best practices and current educational approaches as a guide for recommendations for change. I then shared a rationale for the changes I proposed to it, and defined the stakeholders who would participate in the new vision of the school. The paper also defines the role the administration might take in helping the vision to succeed. Finally, I address the dynamic relationship between teachers and an instructional technology coach who work together to build engagement in learning using technology and the resources the school allows.
A technology leader must model and promote strategies for achieving equitable access to digital tools and resources. In our school, a survey of the ISTE Essential Conditions revealed that our school intended to provide access to robust technology, however, it did not necessarily provide equitable access to the instruction needed to help teachers learn how to use it. Our school was not “using technology to do things differently” (Boser, 2013). ISTE describes Student-Centered learning as an approach which engages the student’s curiosity and motivation to solve actual problems using technologies that real experts use (ISTE, 2019). This is a different approach than what our teachers currently do with technology that we have adequate amounts of. So, the Shared Vision paper investigates current research based best-practices for providing challenging work to students whose access to technology outside of school might be low or zero. Most of the research-based best practices involve instructing the teachers in good design and feedback practices. The paper argues that teachers should provide students “learning experiences that permit student independence and foster lifelong learning” (ISTE, Student-Centered Learning, 2019). And so, in the Possible Solutions section of the paper, I propose strategies for achieving equitable access to good learning with technology, not just the devices themselves.
Further, as a Title I school, our budget includes funds for supporting the progress of low-SES populations. We have met ISTE’s essential condition of Consistent and Adequate funding for technology. However, as Warschauer, et al (2004) point out, the ways technology is used at home in low SES populations is still not as effective for learning as the ways that high SES populations use at-home technologies. In the rationale section of the shared Vision paper, I argue that changing cultural beliefs and notions about the ways learning takes place at home may take more time than we have for our graduates to be prepared. Therefore, our school would do well to pay attention to the Equitable Access of technology as it relates to the type of learning and performance expected of our low SES population. Boser (2013) asserts that “students from disadvantaged backgrounds are being given the least engaging, least promising technology-facilitated learning opportunities.” Our teachers at the ground level are the ones who makes the decisions about which learning opportunities to give our students. Currently, most teachers state that they do not trust students to perform at high levels or to demonstrate self-management skills in the learning process. However, to truly make a change toward meeting the vision, I propose a different sort of approach to teachers’ thinking and curriculum design so that they teach these soft skills, not just the standards. ISTE’s Essential Conditions also maintain that stakeholders must be Empowered Leaders capable of generating change from the bottom up and taking risks to change practices. I promote changing the vision statement to encourage work on this particular condition in order to keep students in engaged learning.
The Shared Vision paper gave me an opportunity to investigate the strengths and weaknesses in the implementation of our school’s vision statement. I learned that our school did not have a vision statement that was updated to include technology at all - a surprising fact, given the district’s motto “World-Class Schools.” I also learned that a vision statement is taken for granted, even though time is spent on making it and setting out plans to achieve it. I was able to see the gap in the LSPI goals and the language of the vision statement. Further, I learned that included students representative of the school’s population is helpful in making a statement that is shared. If I’d known the vision statement didn’t align with the LSPI goals and the intent of the district, I may have chosen a different condition to explore besides Empowered Leaders. However, I do think that the latent understanding of these gaps provided me an opportunity for a conversation after the completion of the paper. I was able to approach my principal about my findings, and he said he was interested in changing the statement to more accurately reflect our goals.
Because I realized the gaps between our vision as it was stated and our actions with respect to technology, I was able to provide a rationale for change. I believe that teachers are the ones who will change education, not administrators or the contemporary curricular fad or testing initiatives. So, by advocating for more Empowered Leaders in our building, the Shared Vision paper asserts that changing our practices is possible if teachers are supported and educated themselves. My principal was not aware of the emotional and qualitative reasons for the gaps that persist in the knowledge that our faculty has and their abilities to structure good lessons with technology. So, as a result of this paper, he has asked that I coach a few early adopters with the practices I’ve researched. We hope to change approaches to teaching and learning in our school.
References
Center for American Progress. (2013, June). Are schools getting a big enough bang for their education technology buck? Washington, D.C.:Ulrich Boser.
ISTE (2019). Essential conditions. Retrieved February 22, 2019 from https://www.iste.org/standards/essential-conditions.
ISTE (2008). Student achievement brief.[pdf]. Retrieved from https://computerexplorers.com/Student-Achievement-Brief.pdf
Warschauer, M., Knobel, M., & Stone, L. (2004). Technology and equity in schooling: deconstructing the digital divide. Educational Policy, 18(4), 562–588. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904804266469
Shared Vision Paper
In order to create the Shared Vision paper, I analyzed our school’s mission and vision statements. Then, I revised the Vision statement to reflect a focus on the role of technology in our school’s vision for success of its students. I provided a new vision statement using research-based best practices and current educational approaches as a guide for recommendations for change. I then shared a rationale for the changes I proposed to it, and defined the stakeholders who would participate in the new vision of the school. The paper also defines the role the administration might take in helping the vision to succeed. Finally, I address the dynamic relationship between teachers and an instructional technology coach who work together to build engagement in learning using technology and the resources the school allows.
A technology leader must model and promote strategies for achieving equitable access to digital tools and resources. In our school, a survey of the ISTE Essential Conditions revealed that our school intended to provide access to robust technology, however, it did not necessarily provide equitable access to the instruction needed to help teachers learn how to use it. Our school was not “using technology to do things differently” (Boser, 2013). ISTE describes Student-Centered learning as an approach which engages the student’s curiosity and motivation to solve actual problems using technologies that real experts use (ISTE, 2019). This is a different approach than what our teachers currently do with technology that we have adequate amounts of. So, the Shared Vision paper investigates current research based best-practices for providing challenging work to students whose access to technology outside of school might be low or zero. Most of the research-based best practices involve instructing the teachers in good design and feedback practices. The paper argues that teachers should provide students “learning experiences that permit student independence and foster lifelong learning” (ISTE, Student-Centered Learning, 2019). And so, in the Possible Solutions section of the paper, I propose strategies for achieving equitable access to good learning with technology, not just the devices themselves.
Further, as a Title I school, our budget includes funds for supporting the progress of low-SES populations. We have met ISTE’s essential condition of Consistent and Adequate funding for technology. However, as Warschauer, et al (2004) point out, the ways technology is used at home in low SES populations is still not as effective for learning as the ways that high SES populations use at-home technologies. In the rationale section of the shared Vision paper, I argue that changing cultural beliefs and notions about the ways learning takes place at home may take more time than we have for our graduates to be prepared. Therefore, our school would do well to pay attention to the Equitable Access of technology as it relates to the type of learning and performance expected of our low SES population. Boser (2013) asserts that “students from disadvantaged backgrounds are being given the least engaging, least promising technology-facilitated learning opportunities.” Our teachers at the ground level are the ones who makes the decisions about which learning opportunities to give our students. Currently, most teachers state that they do not trust students to perform at high levels or to demonstrate self-management skills in the learning process. However, to truly make a change toward meeting the vision, I propose a different sort of approach to teachers’ thinking and curriculum design so that they teach these soft skills, not just the standards. ISTE’s Essential Conditions also maintain that stakeholders must be Empowered Leaders capable of generating change from the bottom up and taking risks to change practices. I promote changing the vision statement to encourage work on this particular condition in order to keep students in engaged learning.
The Shared Vision paper gave me an opportunity to investigate the strengths and weaknesses in the implementation of our school’s vision statement. I learned that our school did not have a vision statement that was updated to include technology at all - a surprising fact, given the district’s motto “World-Class Schools.” I also learned that a vision statement is taken for granted, even though time is spent on making it and setting out plans to achieve it. I was able to see the gap in the LSPI goals and the language of the vision statement. Further, I learned that included students representative of the school’s population is helpful in making a statement that is shared. If I’d known the vision statement didn’t align with the LSPI goals and the intent of the district, I may have chosen a different condition to explore besides Empowered Leaders. However, I do think that the latent understanding of these gaps provided me an opportunity for a conversation after the completion of the paper. I was able to approach my principal about my findings, and he said he was interested in changing the statement to more accurately reflect our goals.
Because I realized the gaps between our vision as it was stated and our actions with respect to technology, I was able to provide a rationale for change. I believe that teachers are the ones who will change education, not administrators or the contemporary curricular fad or testing initiatives. So, by advocating for more Empowered Leaders in our building, the Shared Vision paper asserts that changing our practices is possible if teachers are supported and educated themselves. My principal was not aware of the emotional and qualitative reasons for the gaps that persist in the knowledge that our faculty has and their abilities to structure good lessons with technology. So, as a result of this paper, he has asked that I coach a few early adopters with the practices I’ve researched. We hope to change approaches to teaching and learning in our school.
References
Center for American Progress. (2013, June). Are schools getting a big enough bang for their education technology buck? Washington, D.C.:Ulrich Boser.
ISTE (2019). Essential conditions. Retrieved February 22, 2019 from https://www.iste.org/standards/essential-conditions.
ISTE (2008). Student achievement brief.[pdf]. Retrieved from https://computerexplorers.com/Student-Achievement-Brief.pdf
Warschauer, M., Knobel, M., & Stone, L. (2004). Technology and equity in schooling: deconstructing the digital divide. Educational Policy, 18(4), 562–588. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904804266469