Technology - Two Essentials for Value Add

As a value-add, technology must not only deliver on promises made but also surpass expectations for "wow" with respect to lifting and moving teaching and learning to new levels of performance and achievement.

Challenges associated with technology are well documented - bandwidth and connectivity in schools, in homes, and in the community, initial as well as sustainable funding, human capital development (aka Professional Development), associated costs with facilities, furniture, storage, security and etc. device selection, BYOD, BYOT, digital citizenship, social media management to name several.

These challenges are even greater absent evidence, performance Return on Resource (ROR) or Return on Investment (ROI) data with respect to student achievement, teacher effect, and overall student learning improvement.

As an aside, a reason for lack of ROR and ROI is more to do with the metrics or in this case the lack of authentic measures that defend as well as justify the expense. Don't get me wrong here - technology is proving itself to be a game changer - I just caution the "hype" about impact to learning - enduring learning just yet.

One example is the constant and consistent justification for technology as a means to increase student "engagement". Yet, ask educators and especially those in positions of policy-making, governance, or decision-making leadership what are the metrics used to measure “engagement” - you are most likely to get fairly "soft" answers.

Not that engagement is not important or improved with technology, we just don't really know what it is let alone how to measure it to determine its' effect and utility with teaching and learning. Therefore, technology companies would best serve schools and school systems by defining both quantifiable and qualitative metrics clearly.

Those that know my work are aware that I am one of the biggest proponents and advocates for "how" technology is a game changer especially for high poverty populations including historically marginalized and under represented students. I have lived those benefits and witnessed firsthand the power of "empowerment" and "engagement" as we defined them.

Companies that present technology as a value-add must accompany their words with significant attention to not just defining the metrics but human capital development - not just device, product, or program training. I reference back to capacity, competence, and confidence building.

I made a leadership mistake in this area by making huge assumptions about the three "C's" with our younger teachers. Just because they were "native" to all things digital I assumed they would easily adapt to effective instructional practices. In general, that didn't happen causing many students (including my own) to be highly disappointed, frustrated and in some cases angry about the experience.

This failure caused me to rethink the whole role with front-loading the three C’s before launching with student devices. This is where the components, theory, teaming, time, training and tools bonds with technology.

You need each.

This is where thought leadership serves as the adhesive to bond technology, teaming, theory, time, training, and tools into a powerful lever. Thought leadership is the means to shifting how and what we think to change what we know to do.

Technology is just a tool albeit a powerful tool. As such, tools serve a specific, defined purpose and role. Too often, school and school system leaders have not adequately, clearly, or succinctly defined purpose and the intended or desired outcome. This is where companies and businesses serving K12 can and should assist especially if they claim to be value-add.