Running Head: SHARED VISION & RATIONALE 1

Shared Vision and Rationale

Lin-Chiou Lee

Instructional Technology Leadership

Spring 2019

Dr. David Beeland

Keywords: School Improvement Plan (SIP), Digital Equity, Digital Divide, low SES, TIM-O
Matrix, Professional Learning Community (PLC)
SHARED VISION & RATIONALE 2

Shared Vision and Rationale

Vision Statement

The use of technology is intended to differentiate instruction and promote student

collaboration so that students can work both independently and interdependently while teachers

provide small group instruction to students who are in need. The vision of Chattahoochee High

School is to “prepare students with strong academic foundations and the skills needed to navigate

life beyond graduation” (2018-2022 School Improvement Plan). Within this vision and following

the county personalized learning guidelines, Chattahoochee High School has chosen to focus its

personalized instructional model with technology integration on (1) choice and voice where

students express their learning preferences as active participants; (2) varied strategies where

students learn and access the content using traditional and technology tools; and (3) just-in-time

direct instruction where direct instruction is available in various modalities based on student

needs (2016-Present Fulton County Instructional Technology Plan). Through the use of

technology, students actively “make informed educational decisions and apply different forms of

[academic] skills and knowledge” to create a personalized learning environment, focusing on

feedback and academic growth (Green, Facer, Rudd, Dillon, and Humphreys, 2005, as cited in

McLoughlin & Lee, 2010, p. 30).

Rationale

Based on the School Improvement Plan (SIP) and county personalized learning

guidelines, Chattahoochee High School is determined to utilize technology to best facilitate (1)

choice and voice where students express their learning preferences as active participants; (2)

varied strategies where students learn and access the content using traditional and technology

tools; and (3) just-in-time direct instruction where direct instruction is available in various

modalities based on student needs. Based on surveys and interviews among teachers and
SHARED VISION & RATIONALE 3

administration, it was concluded that technology should be used when appropriate to better serve

the different learning needs of the students. Daily classroom instruction should be planned with

varied strategies where students can learn and access the content in different stations with a

combination of online tutorials, online practice, and teacher-directed enrichment activities.

Students should be given plenty opportunities and choices to use technology to demonstrate

learning, collaborate with their classmates, and solve problems with a real-world connection.

Overall, teachers felt excited about implementing new technology in the classroom when they

could do this under their own volition. Since the school has set clear technology use expectations

towards teachers and students, the administration team is on board to provide support and step-

by-step timeline to teachers who are skeptical and slow to change.

The final academic destination; therefore, is to “enable self-direction, knowledge building

and autonomy by providing options and choice while still supplying the necessary structure and

scaffolding” with the support of technology (McLoughlin & Lee, 2010, p. 33). After studying

closely and comparing among seven current working personalized learning models with

technology integration in the US, UK, Australia, New Zealand, and China, McLoughlin and Lee

(2010) described how these participants found learning more engaging and meaningful. Learning

technologies motivate learners to become active participants, “accessing a vast array of

representations, ideas, and engagement in global communities” (Lee, McLoughlin & Chan,

2008; Ashton & Newman, 2006 as cited in McLoughlin & Lee, 2010, p. 29).

Diversity Considerations

Technology makes curriculum more accessible and offers flexible instructional support to

all learners no matter they are ELL, gifted, with special needs or not. Technology frees up the

instructor to provide more personalized instruction based on student needs. Research has shown

the importance and effectiveness of technology integration among students with special needs.
SHARED VISION & RATIONALE 4

Burgstahler (2003) believed that assistive technology guides students with learning disabilities

to:

(1) develop independence in academic and employment tasks (2) participate in classroom

discussion (3) gain access to peers and teachers (4) gain access to the full variety of

educational options (5) secure high levels of independent learning (6) work side-by-side

with peers (7) master academic tasks that they find difficult (8) participate in community

and recreational activities (as cited in Adebisi, Liman, & Longpoe, 2015, p. 19)

Professional learning sessions must be offered systematically to better prepare and assist all

teachers in working with students with special needs and culturally and linguistically diverse

backgrounds. The teachers at my school must be trained on the SOLO literacy suite to better

support learners with special needs in text reading, information organization, and word

processing. Other in-service trainings tailored to special education teachers and teachers with

team-taught classes must also be in place to best support every student’s academic growth.

On the other hand, many of the teachers at my school do not understand the difference

between social/conversational English (Basic Interpersonal Communicative Skills – BICS) and

academic English (Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency – CALP). Since it does take ELL

students on average five to seven years to fully develop their Cognitive Academic Language

Proficiency, teachers tend to have the misconception that ELL students cannot perform as well as

their peers whose first language are English. Roblyer (2016) discussed how to develop English

language learners’ “academic language and background knowledge” through personal and

cultural connections (p. 290). ELL students can also “see that their native languages are valued

as a resource to help them gain access” to various new content skills in English (Roblyer, 2016,

p. 290). Technology also guarantees both the teacher and ELL students fast and easy access to

“resources rich in diversity and sensitive in portrayal of individuals from different backgrounds”
SHARED VISION & RATIONALE 5

(Richards, 2007, p. 66). ELL students are focused on what they can do through technology and

empowered to build a stronger and “greater feeling of inclusion” in their mainstream classes

(Richards, 2007, p. 66). The ELL teachers at the school are expected to share best instructional

strategies that are culturally responsive and testing practices that are beneficial to students who

are learning to speak English.

At Chattahoochee High School; historically speaking, the African-American and

Hispanic student enrollment in the majority of higher-level academic and AP courses continue to

be lower comparing to their Caucasian and Asian peers. Female students who would choose to

stay on to complete the entire career pathway in computer science and engineering are also lower

comparing to their male peers. To fulfill the goal of preparing all students with strong academic

foundations and the skills needed to navigate life beyond graduation, the school must address the

digital technology equity issue by balancing the race and gender makeup in all the higher-level

mathematics and science courses, AP courses, and career path courses such as computer science,

animation, 3D modeling, engineering, and auto.

For full instructional technology integration to enhance student education through the 1:1

device initiative mandated by the county, all students’ school-issued Microsoft Surface devices

have 24-7 access to technology-rich resources and digital content on the Fulton County

Launchpad site. Moreover, students are equipped with all the educational productivity tools

under their Microsoft Office 365 (i.e., Word, PowerPoint, OneNote) and Google Apps for

Education – GAFE (i.e., Google Dos, Sheets, Slides) school accounts. To close the gap in digital

divide to fully support low SES students’ technology use at home, the school is working on a

solution to provide free WIFI access at home using wireless-providing devices like Kajeet. To

increase low SES students’ academic growth, the school also offers Extended Learning Days

after school twice a week so that students can receive additional help to make up assignments,
SHARED VISION & RATIONALE 6

quizzes, and tests. Their performance and progress are tracked every four and a half weeks

through their official electronic report cards.

Stakeholder Roles

Technology Coach

According to a National Center for Education Statistics study, only 23 percent of teachers

surveyed felt prepared to integrate technology into their instruction (Moeller & Reitzes, 2011, p.

7). To better prepare them with the skills and knowledge, the school technology coach offers

mandatory and optional school-wide training sessions every other Tuesday morning to

systematically broaden all teachers’ instructional technology pedagogy. These trainings are

intended to demonstrate how integrating technology-enhanced learning can best support student

choice and voice in content access, instruction delivery, and mastery-based assessments in their

classrooms. During the Tech Tuesday sessions, teachers are to fully explore (1) productivity

tools like Microsoft OneNote Class Notebook, Google Apps for Education, and Padlet; (2)

online assessment tools like Socrative, ZipGrade, Microsoft and Google Forms, and Quizizz; (3)

online review or gamification tools like Kahoot and Quizlet Live; (4) tools that take learning

beyond the classroom like Twitter, blogging, and Skype; (5) presentation tools like Flipgrid,

Microsoft Sway, and Podcasting.

The school technology coach also utilizes the TIM-O Matrix to track a teacher’s

instructional practice and effective technology integration. The TIM-O Matrix classifies

technology use as active, collaborative, constructive, authentic, and goal-directed in five

different levels – entry, adoption, adaptation, infusion, and transformation. Before a formal

observation, the teacher will first use the TIM-O Matrix to self-assess and get a clear picture of

which level he/she currently is in for each category of technology use. After an observation, the
SHARED VISION & RATIONALE 7

teacher and the administration will sit down to have a reflective dialogue about what went well

and what can be improved in the TIM-O categories before the next observation.

Administrators

The administrators will communicate clear expectations and monitor the entire

implementation through the collaborative professional learning teams called the Professional

Learning Community (PLC). A teacher usually works within two to three different PLCs since

he or she teaches two to three different courses. For instance, a math teacher needs to meet in his

or her Algebra 2, Geometry, and AP Calculus PLCs while a science teacher has Biology and

Honors Biology PLCs each week. Teachers are required to work in each of their PLCs for at

least 45 minutes every week, reflecting on best practices, collaborating on formative and

summative common assessments, and developing personalized learning activities. PLCs are also

expected to perform item analysis on major common assessments in order to make the best

decisions regarding remediation and acceleration. The impact of professional learning on student

learning is also discussed weekly within the different PLCs as teachers reflect upon best

practices and instructional strategies for remediation and differentiation. Meeting minutes are

recorded by the PLC head using the OneNote notebook and shared with the entire administrative

team.

The administrators also observe and evaluate the impact of professional learning on

teacher practice through at least three informal 15-minute classroom walkthroughs and at least

two formal 50-minute classroom observations. Constructive feedback is given electronically

after each informal walkthrough. Face-to-face conference is held after each formal classroom

observation with an in-depth discussion on how the observed lesson is aligned with the personal

S.M.A.R.T. and School Improvement Plan goals in the Teacher Keys Effectiveness System

(TKES).
SHARED VISION & RATIONALE 8

Teachers

Teachers are no longer the exclusive source of information since a facilitated network of

online content is just a click away. Teachers can now focus on providing just-in-time

personalized instruction to novice learners. Teachers can now design multiple learning paths and

enrichment activities for students to choose from. Students can now reflect and evaluate their

progress to further improve and strengthen their next learning experience. The teacher continues

to facilitate and gauge student content mastery through formative and summative assessments.

The teacher is determined to test students’ intellectual and academic limits by overcoming

obstacles, adjusting levels of difficulty, celebrating achievements, and recreating teachable

moments with students. With such instructional shift, educators are challenged to provide

personalized learning experiences “using suitable technologies that not only cultivate

independent learning skills but also scaffold learner reflection and the development of generic

competencies” (McLoughlin & Lee, 2010, p. 38).

In addition, the teacher promotes and supports continuous peer observations through the

Pineapple Professional Learning Module. A Pineapple PL module promotes a sense of peer

learning where teachers learn best practices they can bring back to their own classrooms through

observing one another. Once a Pineapple Teacher decides to share his/her instructional strategies,

he or she lets other teachers know by signing up a specific date on the Pineapple Calendar and

placing the pineapple signage outside the classroom. This Pineapple Calendar becomes the best

resource teachers can have when they want to see research-based strategies and principles in

action. Teachers are also welcomed to suggest what they would like to see being “pineappled”

and people who are implementing those techniques in their classrooms can then add themselves

to the calendar as examples for others. A Pineapple Teacher is a teacher who is proud of
SHARED VISION & RATIONALE 9

something either new he/she is trying or a strategy he/she has mastered and is willing to open

his/her classroom to be observed by other teachers.

Parents and Students

Under the personalized learning module with technology integration, students must be

physically, mentally, and emotionally present every single moment in the learning scene. They

are expected to co-plan their own learning and balance between teacher-selected and self-

directed tasks. Every learning experience is an authentic and contextual transformation, driving

students to identify their weaknesses, face their mistakes, and celebrate growth. Students must

take ample time to explore and establish mastery at their own pace. Students must make

connections between knowledge acquired in the classroom and what actually works in reality.

Content standards are the students’ catalog to take responsibility of their own education and

succeed in a 21st century classroom. Students are pioneers and inventors who pursue new

concepts in the digital world and contribute the fruit of their labors to the real world. To obtain

full parental support during the entire process, all the shared vision details along with the School

Improvement Plan and county personalized learning guidelines will be presented to the

community at Curriculum Night. Parents are encouraged to be more hands-off, motivating their

students to become their own advocates in their academic achievements.

SHARED VISION & RATIONALE 10

References

Adebisi, R. O., Liman, N. A., & Longpoe, P. K. (2015). Using assistive technology in teaching

children with learning disabilities in the 21st century. Journal of Education and Practice,

6(24), 14-20.

Don Johnston SOLO literacy suite (2016). Retrieved from http://donjohnston.com/solo/

McLoughlin, C. & Lee, M. J. W. (2010). Personalised and self regulated learning in the Web 2.0

era: International exemplars of innovative pedagogy using social software. Australasian

Journal of Educational Technology, 26(1), 28-43.

Moeller, B. & Reitzes, T. (2011). Integrating technology with student-centered learning.

Retrieved from http://www.nmefoundation.org/getmedia/befa9751-d8ad-47e9-

949dbd649f7c0044/integrating

Richards, H. B. (2007). Addressing diversity in schools: Culturally responsive pedagogy.

Teaching Exceptional Children, 39(3), 64-68.

Roblyer, M. D. (2016) Integrating educational technology into teaching, (7th ed.). Boston.

Pearson Education, Inc.

Vodicka, D., Gonzales, L., & Yong C. (2015). Top 15 personalized learning tools for 2015.

Leadership, 44(3), 26-29.

SHARED VISION & RATIONALE 11

Appendix

School Essential Conditions Survey

1. As an educator, I am skilled in the use of technology for teaching and learning.

1- Strongly Disagree 2- Disagree 3- Neutral 4- Agree 5- Strongly Agree
2. I have consistent access to appropriate professional development to support my use of
technology in the classroom.
1- Strongly Disagree 2- Disagree 3- Neutral 4- Agree 5- Strongly Agree
3. There are proactive leadership and support in regards to the implementation of
technology for teaching and learning.
1- Strongly Disagree 2- Disagree 3- Neutral 4- Agree 5- Strongly Agree
4. There are continuous assessment and feedback to evaluate the effectiveness of my
technology use for teaching and learning.
1- Strongly Disagree 2- Disagree 3- Neutral 4- Agree 5- Strongly Agree
5. Teachers at my school are given clear expectations in regards to the implementation of
technology for teaching and learning.
1- Strongly Disagree 2- Disagree 3- Neutral 4- Agree 5- Strongly Agree
6. Educators at my school receive timely assistance for maintaining and using the
technology when technical issues rise.
1- Strongly Disagree 2- Disagree 3- Neutral 4- Agree 5- Strongly Agree
7. Teachers at my school regularly share innovative ideas for instructional technology
resources to support standards-based instruction.
1- Strongly Disagree 2- Disagree 3- Neutral 4- Agree 5- Strongly Agree
8. Teachers and students at my school genuinely enjoy the use of technology in the
classrooms.
1- Strongly Disagree 2- Disagree 3- Neutral 4- Agree 5- Strongly Agree
9. Can you briefly describe our school's expectations regarding technology integration?
10. How do you use technology to differentiate or personalize student learning?
11. What digital tools do you rely on the most and how have those tools been beneficial to
student learning?