Innovative Digital Technologies

Selecting Digital Technologies

As part of the assessment for the Innovative Digital Technologies course, small groups are working through a practical problem in education. Through a problem-based learning (PBL) approach, small groups investigate i) a problem related to education, ii) the educational pedagogy related to the problem, and finally iii) the selection of tools that would support learning and instruction.

In our group, we have noticed that a coordinated process for analyzing and integrating technology into classrooms has not been prevalent in our professional experiences. Although conversations about tools and technology occur in schools,  there are a variety of challenges to implementing technology and there are some aspects to consider to incorporate technology successfully

Our topic has evolved to the investigation of Technology Integration through Collaborative Leadership and Faculty Engagement

The process by which tools are selected is an important question. Should the examination of tools lead the conversation to determine which tools should be incorporated into the classroom? Or should the needs of instruction and learning lead the conversation to determine which tools could play a role to support instruction and learning?

Application of Thinking

This project has practical application in education today. In conversations around technology and digital tools, the questions frequently asked are either i) What do you know about (insert tool, program or technology)? or ii) I wonder how we can resolve (insert issue or concern) in the classroom. I would suggest that both a top-down approach; examining the problem within the school, classroom, or in professional practice, in conjunction with a bottom-up approach, identifying which teaching strategies, innovations, or digital technologies could support teaching and learning, will in combination effectively guide good decision-making regarding tech integration in schools. While the problem should always lead the conversation, considerations regarding theory, pedagogy and any relevant digital tools should be revisited and part of the critical analysis of the problem. Let's look at an example and examine how this approach could facilitate critical analysis and good decision making regarding digital tools and technology.

Scenario: Recently a school board was challenged with the selection of a program for Individualized Education Plans (IEPs). The Board had just moved to a new IEP program and at the end of the previous school year Special Education teachers (SERTs) were asked to choose between two programs; IEP writer or Powerschool. Without any guidance, set parameters or opportunities for collaborative discussion, SERTs were essentially asked to vote on the program of their choice. Instead, let's use the collaborative problem-based learning approach to investigate this question. This example highlights the benefits of our investigative approach used in this course, as a means to model effective decision-making when it comes to selecting digital tools in education.

Step One: Examining the Problem

In Step One of our course project, students in the Digital Technologies class were asked to identify an issue in schools and then explore the contexts around this issue. Groups were asked to i) identify the stakeholders, ii) consider the historical context of the problem, iii) identify any challenges or barriers, and finally iv) identify considerations for success. This practice allowed students to determine the framework for their investigation which would in turn guide their research focus and help direct their search for potential digital tools. This is an integrated top down - bottom up approach to thinking. Although the groups are starting to make decisions about which pedagogy and which tools, the question or problem is leading the investigation. Let's apply Step One to a practical example.

Application of Learning

Let's use this process of inquiry and decision-making to examine a real life example; selecting an IEP program for the Board. How could this organization use this PBL approach to implement effective decision-making and solutions to their problem concerning the selection of a digital technology for the Special Education department? 

Scenario: A Board was tasked with selecting an IEP program.

Historical Context: Historically the Board has used IEP Writer and had moved to Powerschool for the past year. Many SERTs were more comfortable with the way IEP writer functioned and the nuances that supported the process of IEP writing for student needs. The move to Powerschool was challenging, time consuming, with many frustrations, leading to a negative view of Powerschool among SERTs. Many SERTs struggled with the operational procedures that come with trying to navigate a new program. Trying to adapt entrenched ways of doing tasks to a new system, although a typical response, lead to more frustrations among SERTs to get Powerschool to do what we wanted it to do. Powerschool as a company was slow to respond to school-based needs and SERTs frequently had to adopt go arounds to do the job they have been tasked with for many years.

Stakeholders: The stakeholders that would be impacted by this decision included; school administration, teachers, SERTs, Special Assignment Teachers for Special Education, IT department, students and parents, and the ED Tech companies Powerschool and IEP Writer.

Challenges: SERTs had to adjust their ways of thinking about student learning needs to adapt to the functionality features of the program. There were new ways to document learning goals into the IEP document with Powerschool that in turn changed the appearance of the document for teachers, students and parents. Teachers and Parents experienced frustrations when trying to read the new formatted document. SERTs noticed integration problems between the main student data program of Powerschool and the IEP program within Powerschool. In particular parental access recorded during the student registration process lists parent contacts in a specific order, however when this data was pulled into the IEP program, SERTs could not eliminate or reorder parental access in the IEP document in regards to agencies, foster parents, and court orders for parental access. Administration struggled to integrate Alternative report cards with Term reports. Principals were required to sign off at various points in the IEP writing process leading to increased workload and time delays for the SERTs. Teacher access to PDF versions of IEPs were not available in the beginning, and SERTs had to take an active role in providing IEP information directly to teachers. When you consider a moderate school with 190 IEP students in four courses in two different semesters, that's a lot of communication with teachers resulting in increased workload for SERTs, an inability to timely respond to IEP questions, and the inability of teachers to look up student needs and accommodations independently. The layout of the IEP document was different from IEP Writer, therefore when parents received their child's IEP it looked different, leading many parents to question the accuracy of the document.

Considerations: As an Ed Tech company, Powerschool was being adopted by many school boards in Ontario, including the Toronto District School Board (TDSB), leading the way for other school boards to adopt Powerschool as their integrated approach to student data collection. A unified system could provide a timely, smooth transfer of student data between schools and school boards for students that move during the school year. Bundling of services would make Powerschool a better fiscal choice in programs as school boards would have one bill and one company to service their needs. Please note that this was before the data breach in Powerschool. I wonder if the safety and security of student and teacher data was a consideration at the upper administration level? The main components required for a students' individual education plan were provided in both programs. Although SERTs perceived ease of use was lower for Powerschool, this was a new program and teachers would get used to using it. An IEP program is required in their professional responsibilities and even after a year, SERTs were making the necessary adjustments to the program. In fact some SERTs stated that although they still had concerns and frustrations with the program, they simply did not want to make another change in the following school year.   

Pedagogy: 

The power of EdTech companies to control decision-making regarding tools in educational technology

Teachers use a criteria of perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness to select digital tools (TAM model)

Problem-based Learning and Collaboration with peers facilitates critical analysis and decision-making

​​

Learning about and practicing critical analysis and effective decision-making processes in collaborative groups

can guide educators to make good decisions around digital tools.

​