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)
Artifact: ITEC 7410 Current Reality Report / SWOT analysis
Reflection
This artifact (SWOT Analysis for Technology Planning Needs Assessment) was created to align with an overview with the Atlanta International School (AIS) Technology Strategic Plan, published in 2011 and to give an overview of where the school was at this present time. The SWOT Analysis took into consideration International Standards in Technology Education (ISTE) Eight Essential Conditions that need to be considered when implementing technology in an educational environment:
1. Effective instructional uses of technology embedded in standards based student centered learning
2. Shared vision
3. Planning for technology
4. Equitable access
5. Skilled personnel
6. Ongoing professional learning
7. Technical support
8. Curriculum framework
I created this SWOT analysis from conversations with colleagues, interviews with the Director of 21st Century Teaching and Learning and from personal observations. This gives the school the holistic opportunity to review their digital equity through the 1:1 laptop programme in the Middle and Upper School and reflect on achieving equitable access that might be sustained beyond this point. This programme has been rolled out over since 2011.
The development of this artifact demanded the synthesis of many different pieces of information from many different stakeholders in order to look holistically at digital equity in AIS. It could be perceived that access to the a 1:1 laptop for both faculty and students in 6th – 11th Grade until 2014-15 school year means that the equality has been achieved. However, from the analysis, especially in the 12th Grade in subsequent years from the introduction of the 1:1 programme in 2001, there has not been a consistent achievement of equitable access. Not all students in the senior years had their own devices; many would share or use aging technology that would not support some of the applications used for teaching and learning. As the programme has grown and established, condition five and six became bigger conversations, especially in the opportunities and threats part of the analysis. At the time of writing, there was no dedicated, full-time technology integrationist for the school and professional learning was not focused on technology. While modeling and promotion of best practice for achieving equitable access to technology is certainly articulated in the Technology Strategic Plan, and modeled in this academic year personally as I moved into the full-time role of Instructional Technologist for 6th – 12th Grade, there has been a lack of focus around technology as a plethora of other foci seem to invade the educational conversation on campus. However, in pockets, the pioneering teachers and many of the students continue to forge forward in their use of technology and many of the opportunities that are alluded to in the analysis have become a reality, for example a student that wished to create a television station as part of her 10th Grade Personal Project has continued with this project with several students during her Junior Year in International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme. I have been able to facilitate her needs in terms of time and technology to do this, although access to the digital tools for this kind of specialized broadcast has been somewhat difficult (as the school does not yet own a tri-caster and other video equipment to facilitate a high quality broadcast). However, this has promoted discussions for budgeting and discussion to promote strategies to fund this initiative (for example, crowd sourcing) in order to secure equitable access to the digital equipment required to sustain this kind of project.
While completing this SWOT analysis, I learned that there are many facets to how technology is viewed in an educational environment. Many of the teachers with whom I talked with did not see technology as a distinct focus to their instruction for student learning; a mindset perhaps underpinned with the lack of cohesive ongoing professional learning in technology for faculty or skilled personnel for support. While there were skilled personnel, one was dedicated to the elementary school and the other was scheduled for five classes, curtailing the real integrationist time that could be spent with faculty.
One thing that I would improve on when completing this kind of essential conditions analysis again is to spend a little more time talking to or surveying the students about their experience. This document, while useful to underpin some of the aspirations of the 2011 Technology Strategic Plan and while helpful in scoping the next iteration, did not really take into account the student experience. If there is to be authentic conversations concerning the curriculum framework for teaching and learning, then there needs to be inclusion of student feedback to achieving equitable access to digital tools and resources and technology-related best practices for all students. This would also have to include the elementary school in this K3-12 environment.
This artifact has helped to start the conversation and has been a useful point of informational synthesis about what will happen next year when 6th – 12th Grade will all have aligned technology access through students bringing their own devices to classes that are prescribed by the school. The existing technology integration team has already started to work with the parents and students of the rising 5th Grade to inform them of this transition in learning technology from in classroom carts of school owned computers to the student owning their own device and bringing it to school for teaching and learning. Measurement of this will be ongoing in terms of the skills that are embedded into the 6th Grade Middle Years Programme (MYP) Approaches to Learning (ATL) skills embedded into their written discipline curriculum and social communication curriculum through their pastoral advisory programme. This is currently under review by the incoming Head of Instructional Technology K3-12 for next year.
This artifact (SWOT Analysis for Technology Planning Needs Assessment) was created to align with an overview with the Atlanta International School (AIS) Technology Strategic Plan, published in 2011 and to give an overview of where the school was at this present time. The SWOT Analysis took into consideration International Standards in Technology Education (ISTE) Eight Essential Conditions that need to be considered when implementing technology in an educational environment:
1. Effective instructional uses of technology embedded in standards based student centered learning
2. Shared vision
3. Planning for technology
4. Equitable access
5. Skilled personnel
6. Ongoing professional learning
7. Technical support
8. Curriculum framework
I created this SWOT analysis from conversations with colleagues, interviews with the Director of 21st Century Teaching and Learning and from personal observations. This gives the school the holistic opportunity to review their digital equity through the 1:1 laptop programme in the Middle and Upper School and reflect on achieving equitable access that might be sustained beyond this point. This programme has been rolled out over since 2011.
The development of this artifact demanded the synthesis of many different pieces of information from many different stakeholders in order to look holistically at digital equity in AIS. It could be perceived that access to the a 1:1 laptop for both faculty and students in 6th – 11th Grade until 2014-15 school year means that the equality has been achieved. However, from the analysis, especially in the 12th Grade in subsequent years from the introduction of the 1:1 programme in 2001, there has not been a consistent achievement of equitable access. Not all students in the senior years had their own devices; many would share or use aging technology that would not support some of the applications used for teaching and learning. As the programme has grown and established, condition five and six became bigger conversations, especially in the opportunities and threats part of the analysis. At the time of writing, there was no dedicated, full-time technology integrationist for the school and professional learning was not focused on technology. While modeling and promotion of best practice for achieving equitable access to technology is certainly articulated in the Technology Strategic Plan, and modeled in this academic year personally as I moved into the full-time role of Instructional Technologist for 6th – 12th Grade, there has been a lack of focus around technology as a plethora of other foci seem to invade the educational conversation on campus. However, in pockets, the pioneering teachers and many of the students continue to forge forward in their use of technology and many of the opportunities that are alluded to in the analysis have become a reality, for example a student that wished to create a television station as part of her 10th Grade Personal Project has continued with this project with several students during her Junior Year in International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme. I have been able to facilitate her needs in terms of time and technology to do this, although access to the digital tools for this kind of specialized broadcast has been somewhat difficult (as the school does not yet own a tri-caster and other video equipment to facilitate a high quality broadcast). However, this has promoted discussions for budgeting and discussion to promote strategies to fund this initiative (for example, crowd sourcing) in order to secure equitable access to the digital equipment required to sustain this kind of project.
While completing this SWOT analysis, I learned that there are many facets to how technology is viewed in an educational environment. Many of the teachers with whom I talked with did not see technology as a distinct focus to their instruction for student learning; a mindset perhaps underpinned with the lack of cohesive ongoing professional learning in technology for faculty or skilled personnel for support. While there were skilled personnel, one was dedicated to the elementary school and the other was scheduled for five classes, curtailing the real integrationist time that could be spent with faculty.
One thing that I would improve on when completing this kind of essential conditions analysis again is to spend a little more time talking to or surveying the students about their experience. This document, while useful to underpin some of the aspirations of the 2011 Technology Strategic Plan and while helpful in scoping the next iteration, did not really take into account the student experience. If there is to be authentic conversations concerning the curriculum framework for teaching and learning, then there needs to be inclusion of student feedback to achieving equitable access to digital tools and resources and technology-related best practices for all students. This would also have to include the elementary school in this K3-12 environment.
This artifact has helped to start the conversation and has been a useful point of informational synthesis about what will happen next year when 6th – 12th Grade will all have aligned technology access through students bringing their own devices to classes that are prescribed by the school. The existing technology integration team has already started to work with the parents and students of the rising 5th Grade to inform them of this transition in learning technology from in classroom carts of school owned computers to the student owning their own device and bringing it to school for teaching and learning. Measurement of this will be ongoing in terms of the skills that are embedded into the 6th Grade Middle Years Programme (MYP) Approaches to Learning (ATL) skills embedded into their written discipline curriculum and social communication curriculum through their pastoral advisory programme. This is currently under review by the incoming Head of Instructional Technology K3-12 for next year.