5 1/2 years ago:

1. We had an earmarked sum of money in the budget that needed to be used.

2. We had a superintendent with a goal to go 1:1.

3. We had a decision that was made very quickly(within 5 months)--elem. went ipads, MS/HS went laptops.

As progressive and forward-thinking as this was, some challenges came up right away, and still others developed as we moved further into the initiative:

1. We were one of the very first schools in the area to take on such an initiative:
-This initiative became a reality for our staff and students at the same time. Staff had no prior practice or experience before students received devices.
-Because we were first, we did not have a strong support network --by default, we had to make our own way.
- Again, because this was such a new idea for schools at the time, best practices had not yet been developed.

2. Additionally, the initiative made many of our staff members uncomfortable. They had no prior experience teaching with these tools in this manner.

3. To further complicate things, early in the initiative, we also had some significant administrative changes take place.

From the beginning, our staff was given much latitude to experiment and build. We very quickly ended up with vast amounts of tools and resources. As time passed, we began to notice a few things:

1. Students had a lack of tool fluency--little time was available to develop the comfort and ease needed to navigate the tools well.

2. Many of the tools purchased were being used very little or not at all.

3. A lot of time was spent teaching the technology rather than teaching the content.

4. We were curating a large library of content specific tools with notably fewer creativity tools that promoted critical thinking and problem-solving.

5. We were becoming increasingly aware that our resource choices were often not backed by research.

6. Our tech department had too many tools to support--they dealt with challenges such as timely updates, education for staff and students and adequate device storage.

It was at this point that we began to make some significant changes to our program (end of year two).

We began this presentation with an overview of our district specifics related to our 1:1 initiative and also some of the challenges that we faced early on.

Because of these experiences and learning curves, we began to see a need for having a technology integration framework in place to better facilitate classroom integration.

Throughout the remainder of our presentation this morning, we will be sharing our strategies and suggestions for:

1. Curating a very small core collection of high-quality tools

2. Using an established technology integration model to help guide decisions

and...

3. How we have introduced and now utilize this model with our own staff and students

Two and 1/2 years ago, our district saw an opportunity to create my position.

With a declining enrollment, they were able to move me from a traditional classroom role into a coaching role.

One of the first tasks that I took on in that role was an attempt to streamline our tools and resources.

I began curating a collection of resources for our building. This list was developed through:

-suggestions from our tech integrators team--this was a team of classroom teachers who were put together at the start of our 1:1 program to be first adopters and classroom innovators

-my own classroom experiences- -prior to coaching, I had been a classroom teacher for 18 years

- research taken from other districts/social media/blogging educators- the coaching position allows time in my schedule for valuable research that is otherwise unavailable to a traditional classroom teacher.

The core tools from this collection were purchased and provided for all students and staff for the following school year(2015/2016).

My focus during that school year became teaching and supporting those tools to both our staff and students.

The purpose of this foundational collection of tools was:

First, to provide a small number of high-quality tools that can be utilized across every grade level and every discipline-- allowing students to attain technology fluency. This allows the primary focus to remain on the learning goals rather than on learning the technology.

Additionally,to provide a balanced menu of tools--tools to address:
-creativity/problem solving
-classroom management
-utility tools
-assessment

*We did not focus on providing tools for specific content. The reason for that will be addressed in my next slide.

And finally, the tools on this list are able to be effectively supported by the district, coach and tech department. Some of the ways I am able to support these tools is through:
-app of the month
-blog posts

Having foundational tools was a definite step forward for us but the problem was that it had been a largely top-down decision with minimal teacher input.

It was important to us that our staff also have a voice. We realize that our teachers are experts in their content areas. Beyond the provided foundational tools, it was necessary for them to be able to add additional tools that would support their unique curriculum.

This is when we began looking for a way to support intentional discussions and decisions around technology to help our teachers choose quality tools for their own programs.

Once we began looking, we soon realized that there are many good models available to educators to assist them in making strong decisions based around technology integration.

All have some strengths and weaknesses. We could have gone in several directions.

We chose the SAMR model for a few reasons:

First, it has a strong connection to Bloom's taxonomy. Our teachers understand and regularly use Bloom's taxonomy when challenging students to reach higher levels of thinking. Because they are similar models, it was easy to bridge the two. The SAMR model challenges teachers to use technology as a way to have students reach those higher levels of learning, such as global collaboration and critical thinking.

This model also gave our staff a common vocabulary and a common set of expectations to use when looking at technology--it allowed us a common starting point.

It is important to note that moving ahead with our plan needed full administrative support. We would not be where we are without that support.

Last spring, we began to introduce our staff to the SAMR model of technology integration. This initial introduction included 3 parts:

First, the staff was emailed two short overview videos about SAMR to watch prior to attending their first face-to-face session. They were challenged to bring questions about the model to their face-to-face session.

The second part of the introduction was a face-to-face guided practice session...

and...

We completed the introduction with an independent practice/reflection session.

Our next few slides will address each of these parts of the introduction in more detail.

Our staff came into the first training session on SAMR having watched two introductory videos. During our face-to-face time:

1. We met in small grade level teams during planning time.

2. We tried to deepen staff understanding of the purpose of SAMR and how it worked by:

-demonstrating several classroom lessons worked through the SAMR model

-providing detailed examples for how each one of our foundational tools could be used with the SAMR model to promote higher levels of thinking in students.

*if you are interested in the foundational collection that we use and some examples of how each of these resources can be worked through the SAMR model, we have provided a detailed guide for you in our resources.

3. To close this face-to-face session, we challenged our staff to either work in groups or independently to take one of their own classroom activities, blend it with technology and the SAMR model to increase it's academic rigor.

After two weeks and just about one month prior to the end of the school year, our small groups reconvened. During this time:

1. We shared and reflected upon the independent practice activity assigned in the previous session.

2. We tried to clarify any misconceptions about the SAMR model and how it should be used to integrate technology that supports higher level thinking.

3. After we felt our staff had a good understanding of the framework, they were asked to choose five content specific tools that they would like to have installed on devices for the upcoming school year. They were challenged to take these five tools through the SAMR framework. These choices needed to be turned in prior to leaving for the summer break. These tools would be the only tools besides our foundational collection that would be available at the start of the school year.

This was a challenging development for our staff. We did receive some push-back. We had experienced five years of almost complete freedom with tool choices. We had never been asked to defend our choices and this was a difficult transition to make.

This framework that was introduced last spring ushered in our brand new process for choosing and requesting technology resources. Beginning this school year:

-Beyond the foundational collection installed on all devices, classrooms started the school year with up to five teacher-chosen resources. Please note that not all grade levels chose this many tools because of what the foundational resources already provided for them.

-Moving forward, teachers can now request up to five new tools each month worked through the SAMR framework.

Let's look a little closer at our new requesting process. In order to request new tools or resources:


1. Staff assesses their tool and fills out this resource evaluation form-- they then turn it into the coach.

2. The coach researches and fills out the same form.

3. Members from admin and the tech team meet to discuss and ultimately accept or deny the request using these two forms. Some items considered during this meeting are:

-budget
-device space
-tool/resource overlap
-Cippa compliance


If a tool is denied, the coach will work with the requesting staff member to provide an alternative solution if possible.

Most of our foundational collection at this time is iPad based. Moving forward from here, we will soon be curating a foundational collection for our laptops as well.

Included in our attached resources, we have a link to a shared virtual idea wall. Please take a moment to share any ideas you may have for a quality web-based tool that we or other session attendees may use in our collections.

Does anyone have a web based tool to share right now?