Building a Sustainable Ed-Tech Culture

Building a Sustainable Ed-Tech Culture

Elaine Surovich

Fordham University

CTGE – 6265

Dr. King

Building a Sustainable Ed-Tech Culture

Students today do not learn in the same way the teachers of today learned. Students have been living in a world of text-messaging, movies, video games, etc (Steele, 2008). “[Students] must ‘power down’ for class” (Steele, 2008, p. 8). As a result, teachers must adjust the ways in which they teach in order to “mirror the world outside of academia” (Steele, 2008, p. 8). One way for teachers to change their teaching approaches is through the use of technology in their classrooms. Building a technology program in a school is a very difficult process. Many decisions have to be made, funding has to be available, teachers have to be on board, and the right technologies have to be chosen to fit the needs of the school community.

In order to integrate a technology program into a school, much planning has to be completed. Schools first need to figure out what technologies they need and/or want (Lomberg, 2006). Once the technology is identified, schools can then begin “doing hands-on research, networking, seeing the product in action and talking to people who can share through past experiences” (Curtis, 2007, p. 24). The main idea of integrating new technology into the school is to help the teaching process and not just be for show (Lomberg, 2006).

Curtis (2007) interviewed many Directors of Technology at different school districts around the country. Each director stated how new technology is chosen for the school district once it is requested. These directors’ processes were all very similar. First of all, they all stated how important it was for them to stay current in the new technologies being introduced. They attend conferences and do web-based research to stay current. In addition, at the conferences they attend, these technology directors are getting to know the vendors of educational technology. They develop a relationship so that they feel comfortable to ask advice on different technologies and ask to see them demonstrated. Jerry Ashton, the Director of Technology at Northwest Independent School District in Texas, states how “…trial runs are especially useful for helping him make decisions about any technology that he hasn’t seen in action in the actual classroom” (Curtis, 2007, p. 24). He used a trial run when selecting projectors for the school district. He had been told that wireless projectors were excellent, but when he tested them, he found that they could not handle all the information and often missed information. As a result, Ashton chose a wired projector (Curtis, 2007).

After appropriate technology is selected, patience is often required in order to set up the technology in the school. For example, when the Richland School District Two in South Carolina wanted to institute new instructional technologies in their schools, they found that some of the schools did not have enough electricity to handle the new technology (Lomberg, 2006). Another problem encountered as new technology is being introduced is the operating system used by the district. On occasion, teachers have tried to implement new technologies, such as computer software in their classrooms, and found that the software did not work. The reason was that the software required a higher operating system than that the school district was currently using (Curtis, 2006).

The cost of technology is very high. This costs includes updating the buildings’ infrastructure, purchasing hardware and software, updating technology every few years, etc. “Securing ongoing funding is a constant challenge” (Lomberg, 2006, p. 32). Heather Ellwood (2007) makes some suggestions on how to stretch the technology money as far as possible.

For starters, Ellwood (2007) suggests leasing expensive hardware. The life span of high priced technology is not that long, “lease terms can be matched to the useful lifespan of the equipment, [the district] can pay the lease until the technology becomes outdated” (Ellwood, 2007, p. 36). This process ensures that a district will have new technology for their teachers and students and also ensures that no server or computer is more than a few years old. Districts can sell the used technology to used-computer vendors, usually making a profit (Ellwood, 2007). Finding companies to lease from is not too difficult, as many companies, such as Apple, Dell, IBM, Hewlett Packard, and Microsoft, see leasing as beneficial. They see leasing as an opportunity for students and teachers to develop brand loyalty (Ellwood, 2007).

Another suggestion Ellwood (2007) offers is utilizing open technology resources. Open technology resources are “fully functional, free or lowcost alternative to much of the expensive, proprietary software available for desktop computers…It refers to applications such as productivity suites, graphic tools, and Internet and networking software that users can modify to suit their needs” (Ellwood, 2007, p. 36). This open technology does have its problems. Sometimes the software is very complicated in its programming and needs advanced programmers for support. Hiring this type of personnel is another expense for a school district to think about (Ellwood, 2007).

Stretching available budgets can only go so far in getting a school or district fully immersed in technology, grants are a way to obtain more funding for technology. Writing grants can be difficult and time consuming (Ellwood, 2007). Diane Curtis (2007) offers suggestions on how to get grant money. One way to get started in the grant process is to get to know the foundations that offer grants. Knowing the goals, interests, and objectives of a foundation allows a district to know whether or not they should apply for grant money from them. Often, reaching out to a grant foundation early is a way to find out whether a school’s direction will fit with what the grant foundation is looking for.

When applying for grant money, it is important to be “clear, concise, and specific” (Curtis, 2007, p. 25). Hiring a grant writer or editor may be helpful in order to ensure that your needs and wants are clearly expressed. Grant foundations want to know what a program is all about, especially how the students are going to benefit from the program to be funded. The grant application should include a little bit of heart (Curtis, 2007). They “are looking to fund something that makes them feel good and something they know is special…” (Curtis, 2007, p. 25).

In addition to choosing the appropriate technology and receiving funding for a technology project, it is important to make sure that the teachers in the school are on board with the project. Technology programs are meant both to support and train teachers (Lomberg, 2006). One way to get teachers excited about the technology is through mentoring, especially peer mentoring. Through peer mentoring, inexperienced teachers are able to learn the latest technological advances from other, more technologically experienced teachers and adjust teaching strategies in order to implement the new advancements (Milner, 2006). These types of programs only work if they are supported by the administration and the teachers. In most mentoring programs, mentors volunteer for their position and recruit members to be the protégés. Both mentors and protégés have busy teaching schedules and are required to meet a certain number of times per month. Because of the amount of commitment these mentor programs require, mentors and protégés are usually compensated for their participation in this program (Milner, 2006).

Educational technology benefits entire districts, the administration, the faculty, and, most importantly, the students. However, starting and keeping an educational technology program takes a lot of work and effort. Educational technology programs need to meet the needs of a district, meaning the right technology needs to be selected, such as Smartboards. Funding needs to be found and stretched to buy and maintain the technologies and teachers need to be taught about how to use technology. It is not easy to do, but having a good educational technology program in a school district will be beneficial to all involved.

References

Curtis, Diane. (2007). Choose the Right Technology. i.e.: Interactive Educator. 3 (2). 23-27.

Curtis, Diane. (2007). Need Finding? Grant Providers and Winners Share Tips for Getting Grant Applications Approved. i.e.: Interactive Educator. 3 (1). 23-26.

Ellwood, Heather (2007). Stretching Technology Funding Dollars. i.e.: Interactive Educator. 3 (1). 35-38.

Harris, Judi. (2005). Is It Worth It? Deciding if Technology is Worth the Time, Effort, and Money. i.e.: Interactive Educator. 1 (2). 35-37.

Lomberg, Michelle. Initiating a Technological Evolution. i.e.: Interactive Educator. 2 (1). 31-33.

Milner, Jacob. (2007). Tap into Your School’s Technology Mentors. i.e.: Interactive Educator. 2 (2). 35-37.

Steele, Poppy. (2008). Technologies Such as Wikis in the Classroom. Online Submission - Paper presented at the Annual Instructional Technology Conference at Middle Tennessee State University. Retrieved May 28, 2008, from ERIC database.