Effective Site Level Planning for Technology Integration

John Cradler and Elizabeth Bridgforth, WestEd


What does experience and research have to suggest about planning for effective integration of telecommunications into curriculum and instruction?


A. National Perspective

It has been repeatedly found that careful planning is a prerequisite for the effective application of teaching and telecommunications in education and training. Lessons about planning for technology have made their way to national guidelines and programs. For example, national education reform agendas encourage states to have incentives and direction for developing technology and NII application plans. Plans should 1) involve education stakeholders in their design; 2) be guided by education and training needs of learners; 3) specify clear objectives related to national and local education goals; and 4) incorporate technology applications and practices that have been tested for their educational benefits (NCC-TET, 1994).

Some educators think access, training, and onsite assistance are the primary supports necessary to facilitate widespread technology use among teachers. While these factors are important, OTA (1995) finds they are not sufficient to assure that technology will be explored and used by the majority of teachers in a school or district. Other factors that affect whether teachers use technology resources include policies that encourage teacher experimentation and collaboration, the presence of incentives for teacher use of technology, administrative leadership about technology, and public understanding and endorsement of the importance of technology as a learning and teaching tool. Three of the most critical among these are: Many school systems have not begun to explore the ways that technology can help them function better or differently as institutions and workplaces. Few teachers have been encouraged to view new technologies as professional tools that can help them do their jobs better, more efficiently, or in new ways. For many teachers, the technology that has most revolutionized their working life has been the photo-copying machine. Yet, some teachers report that access to and use of copying machines is restricted or cumbersome in their school buildings. When so many schools do not encourage teachers to use even the most basic labor-saving tools, it is not surprising to find that teachers are not supported in using more advanced technologies.


B. A Research-based Approach to Effective Planning for Technology Integration

Technology is rapidly emerging as an important component of teaching and learning and reform in American schools. However, technology is often promoted as the solution for improving learning before teaching and learning needs are even identified. In fact, research consistently shows that technology per se does not make school reform happen (Means, 1993). In order to effectively target technology to support teaching and learning, it is necessary to engage in careful planning at the state, school district, school, and classroom level. Technology is often promoted as the solution for improving learning before teaching and learning needs are even identified.

District and school-level planning

A study of the initial implementation of California's state funded technology programs found that technology was not becoming institutionalized because it was often treated as a separate component within the state's education infrastructure. It was initially funded as an "add-on" rather than being integrated into the curriculum and incorporated into the mainstream of instructional programs.

For example, technology applications initially did not appear in state or local district curriculum framework guidelines, were not part of the school improvement initiatives, and often were not considered in school level program evaluations. At the school level teachers were often not involved in decisions about technology applications. Even so, the study showed that technology had a positive impact on teaching and learning when teachers and principals worked together to plan how to focus technology use in the classroom on regular curriculum activities.

The effects were even greater when the development and implementation of a school plan were actively supported by the district (Cradler, 1991). A recent study compared the comparative impact of technology implementation between schools that used varied levels of planning and staff involvement. The results clearly supported the need for careful planning with teacher involvement to produce commitment to sustained integration of technology into teaching. It went on to recommend the State continue to fund technology programs that require local planning rather than distribution of funds on an 'entitlement' basis (Ford, 1993). Reports from recipients of the California School-Based Grants consistently indicate that the strong emphasis on planning for these grants is a positive feature of the program:
Because we planned the project, we felt direct responsibility for implementation. . . it was sometimes hard to plan activities but the planning process made it easy to implement the project . . . now it has become the main focus . . . the grant proposal and the plan acted as a real good blueprint.
These comments are typical of the many positive reports validated in the surveys, interviews, and site visits in a comprehensive study of 321 recipients of School-Based Grants that was conducted by Far West Laboratory (Cradler, 1992). Most of the quantitative and qualitative data collected from the grant recipients showed the planning process was an important factor leading to the successful completion of educational technology projects. The study further showed the planned application of technology helped to ensure the needs of students and teachers are clearly addressed in ways that support the California Curriculum Frameworks.

Classroom level technology planning

More recently, a major study on the teacher-applications of telecommunications and Internet resources (the Telemation Project) showed that the systematic approach to implementation was the key to success of the project (Far West Laboratory, 1995). Borrowing upon the findings of the Monterey and Cupertino Model Technology Schools Projects, the Telemation Project took the approach that teachers would only find telecommunications relevant if theyhad an opportunity to conceptualize and implement a classroom level project or plan for telecommunication use. This approach provided each teacher with a framework that defined the instructional strategies, curriculum objectives, student needs, and assessment strategies that could be supported by telecommunications. The result was that each teacher devised a Classroom Telecommunications Intervention Plan (C-TIP). Over 100 C-TIPs have been developed, implemented, and are being updated and shared with other teachers online.


C. Developing a School and Classroom-level Plan

The comprehensive studies of technology application over the past five years on the California Model Technology Schools Projects yielded findings which identified the critical components in school and classroom level technology use planning (Cradler, 1992). The remainder of this article describes the minimum components for an effective Technology Use Plan (TUP) followed by specific steps for developing and implementing the plan. The planning process described in the following pages should be considered when developing a school-based educational technology project. The planning steps illustrated below and explained in the following pages are advised for planning, implementing, and evaluating a school-based technology plan.





1. Convene a school or departmental planning committee. Identify the planning partners to include the teachers, a district office representative, parents, the principal, possible business and community partners, and a representative from the county office, regional agency, or department of education as appropriate. Most middle schools and high schools are organized by departments and develop technology plans by department rather than school-wide. The decision to develop a school-wide vs. a departmental plan is a function of the size and organization of the particular school. Effective projects continue to involve advisory groups in the planning, as well as for ongoing support, monitoring of the project, and revision of the plan when needed. Technology use planning should be part of existing local school planning procedures. This will help to ensure that technology will become integrated into the existing educational program. Staff from a school that implemented this approach commented:
. . .Most of our planning for technology is now done through our existing planning committee, and our project was included in our local program evaluation.
2. Coordinate with existing school and district plans and guidelines. Identify and review the existing school plans and guidelines for amending such plans. The TUP should become an integral part of the existing school plan already required by some programs such as School Improvement Plans (SIP). It has been found that technology plans are short lived if they are not integral to the overall plan and consequently considered a part of the overall school program. This suggests that educators should update the overall school plan to describe the use and coordination of existing as well as planned technology to support or expand the educational objectives of the plan.

The TUP must be consistent with existing or anticipated district level educational and technology planning. Successful technology projects usually implement activities that support the district-wide mission and goals. District support is necessary for the support needed to implement and continue with district resources after state funding is terminated (Cradler, 1993).

3. Identify student and school program needs. Review local needs assessment information, resource inventories, school performance and school accreditation reports, and other relevant information, to determine needs for restructuring or expansion with consideration of the application of technology. If time and resources permit, a needs survey should be conducted. The TUP should identify the student and staff needs to be addressed by the plan. Needs should be documented by the school staff and be focused on discrepancies between existing and desired conditions for teaching and learning.

4. Identify available technology-based and support resources. Review the existing uses of technology and media resources at the school and their relationship to the goals and objectives of the existing or emerging school site plan. Existing and planned school and district resources to support the TUP should be considered and described in the plan. Often plans are developed without consideration for the technology that already exists in the school or district. Also, plans sometimes budget for staff services that could be provided by the existing regional agencies or even the school district office. One grant recipient commented:
We found that the technology use planning process provided us with a structure that helped to define and organize better use of our existing school and district technology resources for the project.
In addition to local resources, become familiar with the existing state, regional, and national resources, such as those provided by regional support agencies and demonstration programs. It is critical that educators are aware of the resources and possible uses of technology before they engage in intensive planning.

5. Integrate the school-wide technology planning with the curriculum. The TUP should describe how the use of technology will align with and expand district and state curriculum and instructional objectives. Technology should be viewed as a tool to expand opportunities for learning beyond what can already be provided. A technology using educator stated that:
The use of technology can greatly enhance traditional curriculum by expanding opportunities for student-initiated learning and problem solving and provide simulations of experiences not possible in the classroom.
A recent study to determine effective technology applications concluded that "any technology integration requires that teachers engage in rethinking, reshifting, and reshaping their curriculum" (Means, 1993). The planning process should provide the opportunity for educators to become aware of and discuss the possibilities for current and emerging technologies to expand and enhance teaching Ð it should allow teachers the opportunity to collaboratively construct new visions for teaching and learning.

6. Objectives and activities. A plan should describe school-wide objectives with related activities that describe how technology applications directly relate to instruction, curriculum enhancement, and the school program. The objectives should be directly linked to the documented learner and teacher needs. Studies consistently show that plans which include clearly stated activities were more often used by staff as a guide for implementing technology. Clearly stated objectives make it possible to assess the level of implementation of the plan. After careful review of the instructional needs that can be met by the addition of technology, revise the objectives for the existing school plan, or add new objectives to incorporate the intended use of technology at the school site and in the targeted classrooms. Make sure that the objectives for technology applications are aligned with the district priorities or that the district supports the objectives.

7. Classroom level intervention. In addition to school or departmental objectives and activities, the TUP should describe activities planned for each classroom. Research shows that planning is most effective when it is extended to the classroom and describes what teachers should do to implement their part of the plan. Linking planning to the classroom level ensures that teachers will have a clear vision of their role in implementing the school-wide TUP.

The Monterey Model Technology Schools Project devised a school-and classroom-based planning model known as the Classroom Intervention Plan (CIP) to ensure classroom linkage to the school plan (Cradler, 1989). The CIP was written and is currently a working plan developed by teachers to target the use of technology toward the attainment of clearly defined classroom-based student and staff objectives. The CIP addresses:

1. Student needs and related instructional priorities and needs

2. Classroom-specific instructional activities to meet the needs

3. Technology-based applications to support the instructional activities

4. Individualized staff development for the teacher

5. Classroom-specific performance-based assessment methods

6. Hardware, connectivity, software, and other resources needed

7. School management commitment to ensure that the time and resources needed to successfully implement the CIP are provided for the teacher

The evaluation study showed the CIP planning process:

The ideal and effective school plan should be a composite of classroom plans designed to accomplish school-wide objectives. School planning that does not engage and produce classroom plans often results in school plans that are filed away and not used. Part of the school planning process must involve assisting teachers to conceptualize and develop their classroom technology plans. For details on how to design and implement school planning readers are encouraged to obtain Destination Tomorrow: An Atlas of Technology Use in Education, produced by the Monterey Model Technology Schools Project.

8. Staff Development. The TUP should describe the staff development and follow-up assistance necessary for successful implementation of planned activities. As teachers develop their classroom level plans the school-level staff development program can be designed. It must directly support the activities indicated in the classroom plans. The available staff development days made possible by School Improvement and School Development Plans should be allocated to support the implementation of the TUP. Research continues to show that staff development matched to the needs of the teacher is a critical factor for the success of any project. The importance of staff development was cited in the FWL study and illustrated by the comment:

. . ..now our teachers want more training in the use of computer programs. . .
the staff development was the most beneficial and productive component of the project.

9. Prepare an Evaluation Plan. The TUP should provide a general description of the process for evaluating the project. The process should include procedures for monitoring, implementing, collecting information of student outcomes, and assessing the effects on teaching and instructional practices. Every effort should be made to incorporate evaluation methods that are consistent with the assessment program already utilized in the school, department, and district. Most schools are adapting and devising performance-based assessment methods that mirror the instructional tasks. Many schools are adapting and devising performance-based assessment methods that mirror instructional tasks. For additional information on performance-based assessments, contact the California Assessment Collaborative (CAC) and consult the Educator's Guide for Evaluating Educational Technology Programs (see the Resources Section). Evaluation provides the necessary information to help convince a future funding agency that the project or plan is worth additional funding. Ongoing evaluation fine-tuned our program and guided the 'midcourse' corrections to keep us on target with our objectives.

10. Develop a TUP budget and funding strategy. Identify adequate funding for the plan and involve the school and district administration developing the TUP budget. The TUP should provide a budget that includes sufficient funding to provide release time for teachers to implement the plan and participate in needed inservice training. The budget should describe all sources of funding ranging from the general school budget to any special grants or donations. The study showed that the least effective plans were those that did not allow enough funding for staff development and release time. Decide whether the potential technology use justifies the development of a grant application for outside funding. If the plan and its needs are clearly documented, and local resources are lacking, applying for private or public grant funding may be an option. Many sources of funding often are often overlooked. For example, many businesses are interested in forming partnerships with schools and districts to support their application of technology in the classroom. Such business should be identified early in the planning process when resources are being identified.

11. Implement, monitor, and revise the plan. If it is clear that there is sufficient interest and commitment from the school staff and the principal to provide the time, resources, monitoring, and funding needed for the proposed plan, then work with the planning committee to implement the plan. When the plan is implemented, the school site council or planning committee should provide support and monitoring of the project as it is implemented. The TUP should be viewed and treated as a part of the overall school plan and be implemented, monitored, and evaluated within the context of the existing school-based program or plan. Use the evaluation and assessment information for making mid-course corrections and to report progress to the committee, school and district staff, and other stakeholders for the project.

Within the context of the school plan, work with the committee to make necessary adjustments to the TUP that are suggested by the evaluation. Planning should be an active and ongoing process. The planning committee must provide the support and advocacy needed to maintain the interest and enthusiasm of those involved in implementing the plan. Progress of the school and classroom-level technology plans should be documented and systematically reported to the board and used as justification for requesting funding from the district, the state, or other sources.


D. Summary

Effective integration and sustained use of technology must focus on comprehensive planning that involves all of the stakeholders. Critical factors include establishing a vision for the plan, utilizing existing and emerging resources, basing technology decisions on curriculum and instructional needs, focusing on student needs, and providing for local staff development and follow-up assistance. This article provides a detailed and research-based model for technology use planning that should be considered. The Model emphasizes a series of operational steps for integrating technology which include: 1) establishing a stakeholder planning committee, 2) coordinating with existing plans, 3) identification of student and program needs, 4) identification of available resources to support the plan, 5) curriculum integration, 6) establishing goals and objectives, 7) developing related classroom-based plans, 8) staff development, 9) evaluation, 10) budget and funding strategies, and 11) implementation strategies.


Return to Education Resources Table of Contents

Return to WestEd/Far West Laboratory CAETI Homepage