I ever feel like you're drowning in tech workshops
that just don't quite get like your classroom challenges.
Today's deep dive is going straight to the source.
Academic research, real world solutions
to help you navigate those kind of choppy waters
of educational technology.
And what's really intriguing is that this research
comes from a rural school district,
proving that you don't need a big budget
to make a big impact.
OK, so like set the scene for us.
What was the problem they were facing?
They had the tech.
OK.
They had passionate teachers.
But their professional development,
it was stuck in a rut.
Oh, no.
And this quote from the curriculum coordinator
really sums it up.
OK.
We end up frustrating faculty who make the effort
to attend workshops, but they leave feeling
it was a waste of their time.
Ouch.
You can practically feel the wasted energy there.
Right.
And it's not like anyone was intentionally
like sabotaging the process.
Right.
The school leaders genuinely wanted
to empower their teachers with technology,
but they were stuck in this cycle
of offering generic one size fits all training
that just wasn't hitting the mark.
So what did they do?
I imagine throwing more money at the problem
wasn't really an option, especially in a rural district.
They could have easily gone down that road of we just
need the latest gadget or another workshop will solve it.
Instead, they hit pause.
OK.
And took a hard look at what was and wasn't working.
OK.
They used this fascinating method called the Delphi Method.
The Delphi Method.
Which sounds way fancier than it is.
OK.
You know I love a good demystifying moment.
Break down the Delphi Method for us.
Imagine a group of people, in this case, the school leaders,
acting as their own expert panel.
OK.
They go through rounds of structured feedback,
kind of like an academic brainstorming session,
until they reach a shared understanding of the problem.
So it's like a reality check, but with a method to the madness.
What came out of that process?
A major light bulb moment.
Ooh.
They realized that in all their planning and focus
on the tech itself, they'd completely overlooked a key
voice.
And that was.
The students.
Whoa.
They were designing tech training for teachers,
like without factoring in how students would use or react to it.
It seems obvious in hindsight, right?
Right.
But it's a trap that's easy to fall into.
You get so focused on the tools themselves
that you forget the human element.
It's like meticulously planning this elaborate road trip.
Yes.
But you completely forget to, like,
consider what your travel companions actually enjoy doing.
Exactly.
That's such a good analogy.
Yeah.
And that realization, forgetting the passengers
in this tech integration journey,
that's what sparked the entire shift in their approach.
They knew they needed a framework.
OK.
Something to guide their professional development.
And that's where this typology comes in.
And that's exactly what we're here to unpack.
What are the building blocks of this typology
that revolutionize their approach to professional development?
They realized that effective tech integration hinges
on three key dimensions.
We'll dive into each of these.
But first, imagine these dimensions as the legs of a stool.
OK.
Each one equally important in creating
a stable and supportive structure
for professional development.
OK.
I'm intrigued.
What's the first leg of this kind
of professional development stool?
The first dimension, and perhaps the most straightforward,
is the focus on technology.
OK.
It's more nuanced than you might think.
OK.
It's not just about knowing how to use a specific software.
It's about understanding how that technology fits
into the bigger picture of your curriculum, your teaching
style, and your students' needs.
It's about moving beyond the how to and into the why
and the how effectively.
You got it.
Yeah.
And to illustrate this point, the chapter
dives into an example.
I do it.
I'm sure we'll resonate with you.
OK, great.
Training on a new student information system.
OK.
Or SIS.
Oh, I can already sense the story is going
to involve some tech-induced frustration.
You're probably picturing it perfectly.
OK.
The school had been using an outdated system.
Right.
And everyone was excited about the new SIS.
OK.
But they made a critical error in the rollout.
Uh-oh.
What happened?
They lumped all teachers.
Oh, no.
Regardless of their experience with technology
into the same training sessions.
Ah, the classic one-size-fits-all approach
that so rarely fits anyone perfectly.
Right.
I can imagine the seasoned teachers were probably
rolling their eyes during they had a double-click portion
of the training.
Exactly.
And the newer teachers.
Yeah, those who might still be kind of finding their way
around basic digital tools were completely overwhelmed
by the sheer volume of information.
Right.
Training ended up being a frustrating and unproductive
experience for everyone involved.
So how did they remedy this training train wreck?
Yeah.
They had to have realized that the one-size-fits-all approach
was doing more harm than good.
They did.
OK.
And this is where that first dimension focus on technology
really comes into play.
OK.
They recognized that they needed to tailor training sessions
to specific levels of expertise.
Right.
They needed to meet teachers where they were
in their technological journeys.
It's about recognizing that learning how to use technology
effectively for teaching is a journey, not a destination.
Right?
Yes.
And everyone is at a different point on that journey.
Precisely.
Yeah.
And that brings us to the second crucial dimension
they identified in their research.
OK.
Which is the source of expertise.
Intriguing.
This feels like it goes hand in hand with that previous aha
moment of realizing who the experts actually
are in a school setting.
Yes.
Let's dive in.
Who are these all-important sources of expertise?
This is where it gets really interesting for me,
because I feel like when we talk about experts in education,
we don't always acknowledge all the different forms
that expertise can take.
It's true.
And this research doesn't shy away from that complexity.
OK.
They identified three distinct but interconnected roles
when it comes to educational technology expertise.
OK.
I'm ready to hear about this trifecta of tech wisdom.
Who are these key players?
First up, you've got your classic tech gurus,
your IT specialists, your software trainers,
the folks who can troubleshoot a glitching laptop faster
than you can say, bandwidth.
Right.
They're the foundation ensuring that the technology itself
is running smoothly.
Essential.
But I'm guessing their expertise might not always
translate directly to the classroom context?
You're catching on quickly.
OK.
Knowing how to fix a printer jam doesn't necessarily
mean you know how to use an interactive whiteboard
to teach fractions.
Right.
That's where our second expert group comes in.
OK.
The teachers themselves.
Ah, yes.
The real MVPs of the classroom.
Exactly.
Teachers are the subject matter experts.
They know their curriculum insight and out.
They understand their students' learning styles.
And they're on the front lines of putting theory
into practice.
So they're the ones who can take those shiny tech tools
and figure out how to actually use them
to create engaging and effective learning experiences.
But something tells me there's a third group that
acts as a bridge between these two.
Yeah.
Someone who speaks both tech and teacher.
You hit the nail in the head.
OK.
They call this third group technology specialists.
OK.
And I like to think of them as tech whispers.
Oh.
Or even tech translators.
I love that tech whispers.
So these are teachers who have a passion for technology
and maybe some extra training.
I'm picturing that one colleague who everyone goes to for help
with their smart boards or educational apps.
Close?
Spot on.
OK.
They're the ones who can demystify tech jargon,
guide their colleagues through the digital maze,
and help them find creative ways to integrate technology
into their lessons.
And here's where that term technology steward comes in.
OK.
They understand not only the technology itself,
but how it aligns with the school's overall mission
and vision for teaching and learning.
So they're not just showing teachers
how to use a cool new app.
They're helping them figure out if and how that app can help
them achieve their specific learning objectives.
You've got it.
And this emphasis on aligning technology
with pedagogical goals brings us to the third.
And some might argue the most crucial dimension
of this professional development model,
the role of students.
Now, this is where I think things
get really interesting.
Because for far too long, students
have been seen as passive recipients of technology
in the classroom, not active participants
in shaping how it's used.
You're absolutely right.
And this typology flips that script.
It emphasizes the importance of student voice and feedback
in creating truly effective technology integrated
learning experiences.
So it's not enough to just throw a fancy new app at students
and hope for the best.
Yeah.
We need to be more intentional than that.
Absolutely.
We need to bring students into the process,
ask for their input, and be open to adapting our approaches
based on their feedback.
Remember that anecdote from the chapter
about the school district's new student information system?
Oh, yes.
The one where they realized that cramming all the teachers
into the same training session was a recipe for disaster?
What about it?
Well, they had a similar aha moment
when they started looking at technology integration
through the lens of student experience.
They realized that some of the lessons they thought
were super engaging and innovative
were actually falling flat for the students.
That's so fascinating because it highlights that blind spot
we can sometimes have as educators.
We get excited about a new tool or approach,
but we don't always take the time to see it
through the students' eyes.
Exactly.
And what are the examples they gave really stuck with me?
It involved a group of teachers who
were using an interactive platform
for a collaborative history project.
OK.
They thought they'd carefully designed the activity
to promote student-led learning and collaboration.
OK.
Sounds promising so far what happened.
Well, after a few weeks, they decided
to do some informal check-ins with the students
just to see how things were going.
And to their surprise, they discovered
that many of the students found the platform clunky
and confusing to use.
Oh, no.
They also felt like the project was overly structured, which
stifled their creativity and made
it feel more like busy work than a true collaborative learning
experience.
So even with the best of intentions
and a cool new platform, things didn't quite
go as planned because they hadn't factored in the student
perspective early enough in the process.
Exactly.
And this is where that third dimension, the role of students,
becomes so critical.
Right.
The teachers in this example learned a valuable lesson.
What's that?
They needed to create a feedback loop, a space
for ongoing dialogue with their students about what was working,
what wasn't, and how they could use the technology more
effectively.
It's about shifting from a mindset of,
I'm the expert.
I'm delivering this lesson to, we're in this together.
Let's figure out how to make this learning experience
meaningful and engaging for everyone involved.
Beautifully put.
And this brings us back to the heart of this deep dive.
OK.
The typology itself, remember those three dimensions
we talked about?
Focus on technology, source of expertise,
and the role of students.
Yes.
It's all starting to come together.
Now you're saying they use these three dimensions
as the foundation for building a new approach
to professional development.
Exactly.
They created a typology consisting of three distinct
but interconnected types of professional development
activities.
Training, planning, and design.
Each of these types aligns with one or more
of the key dimensions we've been discussing.
OK, you've got me hooked.
Let's break these down one by one, starting with training.
What does that look like in this typology?
All right, so training, back to basics.
It's all about equipping teachers with the technical know-how,
right?
Exactly.
Think of it as laying the foundation
before you start building a house.
OK.
Teachers need to feel comfortable with the tools themselves
before they can start thinking about the pedagogy.
So this is where those tech gurus you mentioned earlier
come in handy.
Absolutely.
Training sessions should be led by those who
live and breathe technology.
They can provide clear, concise instruction
on how to use specific software or hardware,
how to troubleshoot common issues,
and how to access support when needed.
It's about building that baseline confidence
so that teachers don't feel intimidated by the technology
itself.
Right.
But I imagine training is just the first step
in this process, right?
Right.
Once teachers have a handle on the mechanics,
that's where planning comes into play.
OK.
And this is where the typology really
emphasizes that teacher as expert role we talked about
earlier.
Because no one knows the curriculum and the students
better than the teachers themselves.
Exactly.
Planning sessions in this model are collaborative and teacher
driven.
Teachers come together, perhaps in grade level teams
or subject matter groups, and they brainstorm
how they can integrate technology to achieve specific learning
objectives.
So instead of being told how to use a particular tool,
they're empowered to figure out how that tool can best serve
their unique needs and their students' needs.
Precisely.
And while teachers take the lead in planning,
remember those tech whispers we talked about?
They play a crucial role here as facilitators and thought
partners.
So they're there to offer suggestions,
troubleshoot any technical hiccups,
and help teachers push the boundaries of what's
possible with technology.
You've got it.
It's a beautiful blend of pedagogical expertise
and technical support.
But as we all know, even the best laid plans
can go astray when you introduce the unpredictable element
of dot students.
And that brings us to the third piece of the puzzle, design.
Which, if I'm remembering correctly,
is all about embracing that student voice and feedback.
You're right on track.
Design is where the rubber meets the road,
where theory gets translated into practice,
and where we see whether those carefully crafted
technology-integrated lessons are actually hitting the mark.
So it's not just about planning a lesson.
It's about implementing it, reflecting on it,
and perhaps even going back to the drawing board
based on student feedback.
Exactly.
This is where that iterative process comes into play.
Teachers are encouraged to view their initial technology
integrated lessons as prototypes.
They try things out.
They gather feedback from their students,
and then they work collaboratively
with their colleagues and those tech specialists
to make adjustments and improvements.
I love that idea of viewing lessons as prototypes.
It really highlights that this isn't about perfection.
It's about continuous improvement.
And that's where the real magic happens.
When teachers feel empowered to experiment, to take risks,
and to learn from their mistakes,
that's when we start to see truly innovative and engaging
uses of technology in the classroom.
It's about shifting the mindset from technology
as a threat or technology as a burden
to technology as a tool for empowerment
and technology as a catalyst for creativity and collaboration.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
This deep dive has been incredibly insightful.
It's given us a new framework for thinking
about professional development, one that's grounded
in collaboration, student-centered learning,
and a deep respect for the expertise
that both teachers and technology specialists
bring to the table.
And remember, this typology isn't just a theoretical model.
It was born out of the real-world experiences
of a school district that was struggling
to make technology integration work for them.
If they can do it, anyone can.
That's such an important point.
This isn't about having the latest gadgets
or the biggest budget.
It's about having a clear vision, a collaborative spirit,
and a willingness to embrace the messiness of innovation.
Beautifully said.
Well, this has been a fantastic conversation.
Thank you so much for joining me today
and sharing these incredible insights.
This is a topic that's close to my heart,
and I know it is for so many of our listeners as well.
It's been my pleasure.
It's so important to keep having this conversation.
And to our listeners, thank you for joining us
on this deep dive.
We hope you found it as thought-provoking and inspiring
as we did.
Remember, technology's always evolving,
and so is the way we learn to use it effectively.
So keep exploring, keep experimenting,
and keep those innovative ideas flowing.
Until next time, happy teaching.