"Lipstick on a Bulldog"

As I dove into my reading from The Principal as Technology Leader, I flipped open my book and landed on this heading: Lipstick on a Bulldog.  I was instantly intrigued and, honestly, holding back from laughing out loud by the mental image in my head.  Initially, this metaphor (used by Rosebeth Moss Kanter) was used to point out that not all businesses are using technology as effectively and productively as they could be, but this metaphor transitions nicely into the Instructional Technology world as well.  Nowadays, schools think they are technology-advanced if they have a couple of computers in each classroom and wireless internet.  Sure, these things might look and sound great (hence the referene to the lipstick), but schools need more than the appropriate tools to be technology advanced.   So,  the lipstick doesn't really help the bulldog, because the problems are deeper than surface level.  For technology to be effective, educational leaders needs to be able to implement and plan technology effectively while remaining focused on standards-based instruction.  A good quote that really sums it up is "...effective integration of technology has more to do with teaching pedagogy, and very little to do with technology itself" (Creighton 1).  Technology is not just wires and computers!  It is about effective implementation.

In a school, where does effective technology implementation start...the leadership!  The principal in a school building must rally around the staff to determine how to use technology that will focus on the needs of the students and the teachers.  Principals need to look beyond the basic skills and needs that technology is used for.  Yes, Excel and Word are great tools for teacher, but there is so many more useful resources available and these programs should also be used as tools for the students.  For a principal to lead a successful technology program, they need to look at what's available in the school and combine that with effective instruction strategies.  They also need to be well-versed in the programs and tools they are buying or endorsing to be used by their staff.  The common theme in schools is that the principal has forgotten what it is truly like to be a classroom teacher.  The principal needs to work with their teachers to develop a plan that is realistic and focused on the actual needs of students.  Technology specialists can be brought in to schools to further supplement and answer questions where needed.  While principals might still be learning, technology specialists can often be considered the experts.

When developing a successful technology program, principals need to think about the "digital divide."  When I think about the "digital divide," I immediately think about the Matthew Effect (the rich get richer, the poor get poorer).  Initially when people think about the "digital divide," they probably think about the difference in the actual access to technology tools and materials.  Some kids have it and some kids don't.  While it might seem that all students have access to technology at school, if you look closer, it is clear that the type of technology use provided is dependent on several factors: gender, race, socioeconomic status are just a few.  Often, students at low-performing schools use the computers to remediate.  While, students at high-performing schools use the computers to create authentic technological products.  Is it fair that students at low-performing schools are not creating web sites or blogs as their opposites in high-performing schools are?  For students to be truly engaged, they should be using higher-order thinking skills, but students in low-performing schools are not getting that opportunity.  I currently teach at a Title I school with mainly minority students, and, as I think about the computer use in our classrooms, I am ashamed.  I might be contributing to this "digital divide."  We often use computers to drill students or teach remedial lessons.  I also feel like technology use is really implemented in math and science, but the literacy and fine arts areas do not use technology to develop higher-order thinking skills as often.  Is this also contributing to the "digital divide"?  Students interested in the fine arts and literacy areas might develop stronger technology skills in the long run if the technology was implemented in all areas of the classroom.

More often than not, technology programs fail.  Technology is often too much, too soon.  Just a few weeks ago, I was sitting in a staff meeting and we were discussing purchasing a new software program to better service our students.  While I was excited to be discussing technology as a staff, I was frustrated with the fact that we were considering the purchase of more software when we still haven't been appropriately trained how to use the other 20 or so programs that we are suppose to be using with our students on a daily basis.  As an Instructional Technology student, I whole-heartedly enjoy using technology in my classroom and learning about new ways to effectively implement technology, but, if I'm stressing out about another new technology program, then I know that other teachers are stressing too.  Not only do teachers need adequate time and support to fully understand how to implement new technology, but the principal needs to use the appropriate balance of leadership.  While the principal should not sit back and do nothing, he or she should also not take over completely without the support and input of the teachers and staff.  Outside experts can be used to supplement the principal's ideas and plans, but they should not be taking the place of the principal in developing an effective technology plan in a school.

While thinking about the school where I am currently employed, I am unaware of a technology plan that is currently in place.  Our school does currently have a school strategic plan and I am curious to know if technology is included on that plan.  I look forward to having conversations with my principal about the technology plan and where technology should be headed at our school.  Technology should be apart of school improvement and implemented cohesively with pedagogy and content as the TPACK model shows; therefore, technology, pedagogy, and content should be looked at in one piece versus separately when developing school improvement plans.  Strong technology plans should be simple and easy to read (avoiding technical jargon).  This is a huge relief to me as a future instructional technology facilitator as I am often frustrated by the confusing language or wording used when developing a school wide plan of action.

How can I use all of this new knowledge to develop a technology plan for my school?  "Digital divide." Staff Support.  Pedagogy.  Realistic.  Simple.  Cohesive.  It all seems a little complicated right now, but I firmly believe technology needs to be a part of school improvement and the first step is coming up with a game plan!