Nghiên cứu vai trò của hiệu trưởng trong việc tạo dựng văn hóa sử dụng công nghệ

Lesley University DigitalCommons@Lesley Educational Studies Dissertations Graduate School of Education (GSOE) 2016 Technology Underutilized: Principal’s Role in Creating a Culture of High-Level Uses Darlene A. Foley Lesley University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.edu/education_dissertations Part of the Curriculum and Instruction Commons, and the Educational Administration and Supervision Commons Recommended Citation Foley, Darlene A., "Technology Underutilized: Principal’s Role in Creating a Culture of High-Level Uses" (2016). Educational Studies Dissertations.edu/education_dissertations/12 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School of Education (GSOE) at DigitalCommons@Lesley. It has been accepted for inclusion in Educational Studies Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Lesley.

For more information, please contact digitalcommons@lesley.edu, cvrattos@lesley. Running head: HIGH-LEVEL INTEGRATION Technology Underutilized: Principal’s Role in Creating a Culture of High-Level Uses A Dissertation Presented by Darlene Foley Submitted to the Graduate School of Education Lesley University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY December 2016 Ph. Educational Studies Educational Leadership Specialization HIGH-LEVEL INTEGRATION ii Technology Underutilized: Principal’s Role in Creating a Culture of High-Level Uses Darlene Foley Graduate School of Education Lesley University Ph. Educational Studies Educational Leadership Specialization Approvals In the judgment of the following signatories, this Dissertation meets the academic standards that have been established for the Doctor of Philosophy degree.

HIGH-LEVEL INTEGRATION iii Copyright 2016 Darlene Foley HIGH-LEVEL INTEGRATION iv Dedication This dissertation is dedicated to my husband and children, John, Matt, and Maddy, for giving me love and support throughout this journey. We all sacrificed in various ways because of my commitment to public education and my commitment to finish this program in a reasonable amount of time. It was not easy, but it was possible with the three of them. HIGH-LEVEL INTEGRATION v Abstract Teachers need to maximize technology to support student learning by drawing upon varying pedagogical orientations; however, teacher-centered, highly structured approaches that foster low-level thinking is more prevalent.

Although highly structured approaches help develop students’ foundational skills and content knowledge, student-centered, open-ended approaches foster high-level thinking aimed by the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). Literature suggests principals have an important role in the implementation of the CCSS and technology integration, but it does not capture the ways principals help teachers adopt high-level uses of technology. This research asks the overarching question, “What actions, decisions, and relationships do principals perceive contributed to a classroom culture that utilizes high-levels of technology to meet the expectations of the CCSS?” A qualitative research design with a phenomenological approach was utilized to discover the knowledge, dispositions, and actions of principals who were successful in creating a culture of high-levels of technology integration. Interviews with 12 public middle school principals in Massachusetts and Rhode Island with ample technology resources reaffirm literature and add new understandings.

Findings show that these technology-oriented principals: (a) were knowledgeable about ways real-time collaborative tools supported student learning; (b) applied their knowledge about high-levels of technology integration in organizational decisions and actions; (c) encouraged experimentation with technology; (d) supported flexible uses of technology and teacher autonomy but continuity with some resources was needed; (e) provided teachers sustained technology-related professional development but comprehensive planning was not common; (f) recognized that first-order barriers continued to persist in their school; and (g) believed that slow implementation and colleagues helped slow adopters overcome second-order barriers but peer coaching was needed. HIGH-LEVEL INTEGRATION vi The findings suggest that these principals provided most Essential Conditions of Transformational Learning and applied Professional Standards for Educational Leaders to create a culture of high-level technology use. The outcomes of this study call attention to the complexity of achieving high-levels of technology integration in schools with or without sufficient resources and technology-oriented leadership. Keywords: Common Core State Standards; essential conditions of transformational learning; middle school; principal; Professional Standards for Educational Leaders; sustained professional development; technology HIGH-LEVEL INTEGRATION vii Table of Contents List of Tables .x List of Figures.

xi CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION .1 Statement of the Problem .6 Theoretical Orientations Held by Teachers .8 Other Contributing Factors. 10 Purpose of Study. 13 Definition of Terms. 15 Significance of Study.

17 Review of the Literature. 18 Design of the Study Overview. 20 Delimitations of Study. 22 Dissertation Chapter Outline.

23 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW. 24 Educational Reform and Technology Integration. 24 No Child Left Behind. 25 Common Core State Standards (CCSS).

28 Race to the Top (RTTT). 32 The Role of Principal. 34 School Leadership Frameworks. 35 Principal’s Role in Effective Technology Integration.

37 Transformational Learning and Essential Conditions. 45 Essential Conditions for Transformational Learning. 47 Gaps in the Literature. 53 CHAPTER THREE: METHODS AND PROCEDURES.

55 HIGH-LEVEL INTEGRATION viii Design of the Study. 60 Data Collection Methods. 75 Issues of Trustworthiness. 77 CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS.

79 Guiding Question One: Can you tell me about your understanding of real-time collaborative tools and their applications for learning to meet the CCSS?. 80 Finding One: Principals Were Knowledgeable about the Ways Real-Time Collaborative Tools Supported Student Learning. 81 Finding Two: Principals’ Knowledge about High-Level Uses Influenced Organizational Actions and Decisions. 86 Guiding Question Two: How Do You See Yourself Helping Teachers Integrate Real-Time Collaborative Tools to Meet the CCSS?.

97 Finding Three: Principals Encouraged Experimenting with Technology. 98 Finding Four: Principals Supported Flexible Uses of Technology and Teacher Autonomy but Continuity of Resources Needed. 100 Finding Five: Principals Provided Teachers Sustained Technology-Related Professional Development but Comprehensive Planning Was Not Common. 104 Guiding Question Three: Can You Tell Me about Helping Teachers Overcome Barriers to Technology Integration?.

108 Finding Six: First-Order Barriers Continued to Persist in Schools with Ample Technology Resources. 109 Finding Seven: Slow Implementation and Colleagues Help Slow Adopters Overcome Second-Order Barriers but Additional Peer Coaching Was Needed. 115 CHAPTER FIVE: STUDY SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, FUTURE RESEARCH, AND FINAL REFLECTION. 117 HIGH-LEVEL INTEGRATION ix Statement of the Problem.

117 Purpose of the Study. 118 Review of the Literature. 119 Design of the Study. 121 Practical Implications to Stakeholders.

134 Guiding Question One: Can You Tell Me about Your Understanding of Real-Time Collaborative Tools and Their Applications for Learning to Meet the CCSS?. 135 Guiding Question Two: How Do You See Yourself Helping Teachers Integrate Real-Time Collaborative Tools to Meet the CCSS?. 138 Guiding Question Three: Can You Tell Me about Helping Teachers Overcome Barriers to Technology Integration?. 148 Reaffirmation of Existing Literature.

158 Limitations and Delimitations of the Study Revisited. 203 HIGH-LEVEL INTEGRATION x List of Tables Table 1: Example Approaches to Technology Integration .0 Examples that Promote Sharing and Real-Time Collaboration. 15 Table 3: PSEL and ISTE for Administrators Alignment. 36 Table 4: Participant Demographics.

62 Table 5: Primary Code List and Definition. 70 Table 6: Management of Trustworthiness by Criterion. 77 HIGH-LEVEL INTEGRATION xi List of Figures Figure 1: Perceived Benefits of Real-Time Collaborative Tools .80 Figure 2: Real-Time Collaborative Tools Used in Schools. 82 Figure 3: Principals Continual Learning Resources.

84 Figure 4: Classroom Tools Used for Modeling. 86 Figure 5: Purposes of Modeling. 87 Figure 6: School-Wide Pedagogical Shift by Principal. 89 Figure 7: Five Principals Referred to a Technology Integration Continuum Framework.91 Figure 8: District Vision and School Improvement Plan .92 Figure 9: Realignment of Courses.

93 Figure 10: Ways Principals Engaged Family and Community to Improve Technology Integration. 94 Figure 11: Principal Encouraged Experimenting with Technology. 97 Figure 12: Principals Supported Flexible Uses of Technology. 100 Figure 13: Technology-Related Professional Development Models.

104 Figure 14: Principal Perceptions of Teachers' Second-Order Barriers. 109 Figure 15: Principal Perceptions of Second-Order Barriers. 110 Figure 16: Principal Methods to Overcome Second-Order Barriers. 112 Figure 17: Principal Methods to Slow Implementation.

114 Figure 18: Principal Reported Activities that Support PSEL. 129 HIGH-LEVEL INTEGRATION xii Acknowledgements When I received my acceptance letter into the Ph. program at Lesley University, my husband’s first response was, “We can talk about it,” as if we had a choice to make. After a short discussion about the importance of this opportunity, we held on tight and never looked back.

My husband and children, John, Matt, and Maddy provided unconditional love and support that I needed to complete this journey. My mother, father, sister, grandmother, in-laws, and close friends showed never-ending love and understanding. Visits and phone calls were not as frequent, but we all did our best to make it work. Cohort 2013 is a group of dedicated individuals with diverse experiences, talents, and interests.

I learned so much about the field of education and cultural diversity through their stories and our work together. Their humor, dedication, and candor helped see me through this challenging process. They have become life-long friends. #phdproblems The professors in the Educational Studies Program at Lesley University provided me with the resources to build my knowledge and skills so that I could become confident in my educational leadership capabilities.

Each of them, especially Dr. Gould, and Dr. Naso, had an influence on my professional growth. At the start, I could not articulate what I meant by the phrase ‘curriculum delivery’ the summer of 2013 when asked to state my potential dissertation topic in the amphitheater.

At the conclusion of this journey, I fully understand the meaning and I look forward to the next chapter in my professional career when I help teachers develop a deeper understanding of pedagogy. My dissertation committee included Dr. Nancy Wolf, Dr. Brenda Matthis, and Dr.

Each of them brought something different to my dissertation journey and I appreciated all their gifts. Nancy, my senior advisor, gave me a perfect balance of autonomy and guidance that allowed me to build a study that was truly meaningful to my professional practice. Brenda HIGH-LEVEL INTEGRATION xiii brought her wealth of technology integration knowledge and positive attitude to push my thinking. She introduced new ideas and questioned my assumptions so that no stone was left unturned.

Jim’s years of experience as a leader in public education brought new thoughts and clarity in my writing. These committee members embraced this topic from the beginning and helped me develop a complex understanding of the issue. A special thank you goes to Jim Parsons who helped me clean up those annoying typos and unnecessary words. I needed a fresh set of eyes on this paper at a time when my own eyes were as weary as could be.

I learned so much from his edits and I now have a short list of words that will never appear in another academic paper. Lastly, I am incredibly grateful for the participants in this study. I learned so much from their experiences, examples, and strategies. They taught me to lead by trusting teachers and providing them with autonomy, while, at the same time, promoting new classroom approaches and providing the organizational resources to support their growth and development throughout the school year.

Each principal had an immediate impact on my thinking and professional growth. HIGH-LEVEL INTEGRATION 1 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION This chapter includes a personal statement that motivated me to pursue the topic of high- levels of technology integration, a statement of the problem, the purpose of the study, definition of terms, significance of the study, review of the literature, and design of the study overview. The delimitations of the study and my assumptions follow to acknowledge the constraints and personal influences on this study. The dissertation chapter outline concludes the chapter.

Personal Statement Teaching with technology has always been important to me because of my belief that technology can engage students in the learning process. I believe that technology can be a powerful resource for students when they are trying to contextualize abstract concepts and developing authentic, technology-related assessment products; however, in my roles as classroom teacher and technology integration specialist, I have seen technology used inconsistently across classrooms.