Successfully Implementing Technology Metropolitan Educational Research Consortium

What activities are related to successful technology implementation?

The following activities appear to be related to successful implementation of technology plans.

• Orientation/awareness, especially for administrators.
• Strong support from principals and site coordinators (Herman et al., 1992).
• Attitudes of teachers/administrators toward computer innovation, which are the key to varying rate adoption and diffusion (Washington, 1990).
• Importance of research, especially research which is conducted in other school districts and focuses on potential uses of technology.
• Communication which is conducted between administrators and communication in planning for implementation.
• An existing product evaluation strategy. This helps to predict proper effectiveness and improvements for teachers, administration, students.
• Allowing sufficient time for consensus to develop. Support for project decisions appears to be an important aspect of the planning process. Adoption requires more understanding of user perception.
• Site coordinators who are vital to implementation success.
• Teachers, site coordinators and project directors who are willing to invest time in becoming sophisticated technology users (Herman et al., 1992).

Are there any prerequisites to success?

The major prerequisite is a preexisting core of enthusiastic computer expert teachers and a dynamic supportive administration that together provide the leadership necessary to design and implement a computer-based program (Woodrow, 1989). In addition, it is thought that the technology implementation process is improved when administrators use technology.

The National School Board Association's Institute for the Transfer of Technology to Education (ITTE) specified the following ten requirements for successful implementation of technology in the classroom in 1985.

1. A top down commitment to bring technology into the classroom.
2. A tangible financial commitment to provide a technological program in the annual capital and operating budget-building, decision-making process by the school board.
3. The establishment of a training program for teachers and administrators, with appropriate financial incentives included.
4. The development of a knowledgeable computer technology teacher or facilitator within a school, prior to the allocation of computers to that school.
5. The establishment and operation of an adequate capability of computer maintenance and repair.
6. The appointment of an administrator to lead the district-wide technology instructional initiative who is an expert in computer technology.
7. The district must participate in state, regional and national networks and coalitions to press for the development of high quality software.
8. The district must devise a comprehensive strategy on technology in the instructional program, with sound articulation between and among all grade levels and active participation by teachers and administrators.
9. There must be bottom-to-top sensitivity to the twin issues of equity and access in the technology instructional program.
10. A pervasive evaluation component, working at all levels, must be established on a district wide and individual school basis. (Shannon, 1985).

What barriers to implementation have been noted?

A significant barrier to the implementation of technology is institutional in nature. That barrier is the absence of systematic models for school systems to follow in determining their educational needs, in evaluating the effectiveness of the technologies in meeting those needs, in incorporating the technologies into the curriculum, and in training teachers to use the technologies effectively.

Secondly, there is an absence of incentives for individual teachers to assume the additional burden of incorporating technology into the curriculum (Marshall et al., 1989).

Thirdly, there is the apparent need for quick fixes. School administrators, faced with a barrage of advertising promising improved skills acquisition and higher test scores, lean towards drill and practice, and tutorial software (Budin, 1991).

Fourthly, the limited amount of computer equipment in the schools, the relatively brief experience provided to individual students, and the genuinely unsystematic use of software at the lower grades have led to a limited impact.

Fifthly, plans are based on "wants" assessment rather than "needs" assessment.

Sixthly, technology implementation is costly and threatening. For teachers it threatens to change working conditions and to take funds that could be used for textbooks and pay, for administrators it is a costly initiative with unclear payoffs that may require major reorganizations of schooling to be used effectively.

Seventhly, failure has often been assured by the methods used to "sell" computers to schools. Teachers with limited knowledge, and often conflicting priorities, influence how, when, or even if needed innovations are to be implemented. Instead of promoting change, they often stonewall due to territorial, personal and political threats posed by the innovation. The individual autonomy that has evolved affords the teacher extraordinary control over both content and method. Finally, many teachers and administrators persist in the belief that the computer is simply another educational fad that will run its course in due time.

John Pisapia

Answers to questions found in this research brief have been synthesized from the following MERC publications. Copies can be purchased using the online order form on the publications page.

Pisapia, J. (1993, April). Learning technologies in the classroom: Case studies of technology intensive schools.

Pisapia, J., Schlesinger, J., & Parks, A. (1993, February). Learning technologies in the classroom: Review of the literature.

Pisapia, J. & Perlman, S. (1992, December). Learning technologies in the classroom: A study of results.

top of page | return to research list

Top of page

Lift Assistive is a UsableNet product. Lift Assistive Main Page.