Deploying Laptops to Grades 8-12 at Queen

Margarets School
Central Inquiry Question (From OLTD501 and to be continued throughout my classes):
How do you manage pedagogical change, with respect to technology, in a blended learning
environment?
Technology integration is the use of technology and technology-based practices in the
classroom. This includes the integration of technology into both instruction and assessment.
(Wachira and Keengwe 2010). Technology in a classroom needs to be considered a tool, the
same as a pencil or a whiteboard. Indeed, [t]echnology tools can help students extend the
range and quality of the learning activity that they completing (Wachira and Kenngwe 2010
p18).
What technology can do is enhance already good teaching and learning. It can allow an activity
to be scaffolded and brought to a more adult level (Squire and Dikkers 2012) or it can ...change
learning practices, particularly in informal contexts through interest-driven learning.(Squire and
Dikkers 2012 p 457). Denton comments that technology is a compelling approach to
instruction where constructivism and cooperative learning serve as the theoretical backdrop
(Denton 2012 p 40). Because of these enhancements, in my role as technology coordinator at
Queen Margarets School, I have spent the last year preparing to implement a 1:1 laptop
program for all students in the school. This program began its rollout in September 2013, so
this paper will serve as an overview of the process and a roadmap for my next steps.
At our school I am part of an educational technology committee made up of myself, the deputy
head of education, the principal of the junior school and the junior school technology
coordinator. This committee is responsible for the whole-school implementation of technology.
In my role the primary planning and execution of the senior school 1:1 laptop program falls to
me.
As a committee we developed a number of rationale statements for these laptops. In brief, they
are:
1. Improved access to information
Because students will be able to quickly access information they are better able to not
only assist themselves in the understanding of material but also learn a valuable skill in an
ability to find and utilize pertinent information. Squire and Dikkers noted that [t]he primary
activity reported by participants was information seeking (Squire and Dikkers 2012, p452).
As teachers we are interested in having students not only able to find, but also to utilize,
relevant information to be used in larger discussions or learning activities.
Along the same lines, students are better able to determine what information they need to solve
problems without having to ask for teacher assistance. Squire and Dikkers found that a student
was better able to find information on their own through the use of a mobile device (Squire and
Dikkers, 2012). This is a valuable skill we would like to see developed in our students because
it better allows them to investigate and solve problems on their own.
2. Improved methods of assessment

The laptops provide an easy method of connecting with students in a class situation, in
addition to providing students with a powerful platform to demonstrate their learning. Through
the use of the laptops as clickers, teachers will be able to quickly assess understanding of
concepts during a class situation. In addition, students are able to respond to formative
questions posed by the teacher in such a way as to allow the teacher to store and refer to these
assessments. When Denton utilized Google Apps in a classroom he noted that the simultaneity
of a shared Google Doc allowed more information to flow to the teacher (Denton 2012).
3. Improve access to the advantages of technology
Our school has a single computer lab for 26 students. Because of this size, the access
to technology resources was becoming challenging to obtain because of the number of teachers
booking the lab. One of the major barriers to the proper integration of technology identified by
Wachira and Keengwe is a lack of access to reliable tools (Wachira and Keengwe 2010). The
laptop program is expected to improve access to computing power because the majority of
students will be able to utilize their own personal laptop instead of relying on a laboratory based
model.
4. Improve collaboration amongst students and staff.
Cooperative learning is very closely related to cloud technologies, which are closely
connected to laptops and access to technology (Denton 2012). With the number of
collaborative tools increasing, providing students with access to these tools on an as needed
basis was seen as a strong argument for the laptop program. Denton finds that [t]he ability to
share and publish student constructed contentwill accelerate the use of [constructivism] in
classrooms across the K-16 spectrum (Denton 2012, p 40). Students and teachers are to be
encouraged to ensure that many of their assignments, where appropriate, involved some form
of collaboration.
Pedagogical Implications
The Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework is an excellent concept
to base the pedagogical implications and goals of the laptop program on. This framework is
important not only because it provides us a pedagogical theory to base our work on but also
because of the importance of having a common language to discuss and build knowledge upon
(Koehler and Mishra 2009). The integration of technology within the curriculum should be
creatively designed or structured for particular subject matter ideas in specific classroom
contexts (Koehler and Mishra 2009, p 62). Because of this requirement, our committee will
need to work within the three components of teaching with technology: content, pedagogy and
the technology (Koehler and Mishra 2009).
Content Knowledge (CK)
This is defined as teachers knowledge about the subject matter to be learned or taught
(Koehler and Mishra 2009). At Queen Margarets School all of our teachers are subject matter
experts - they have each done a degree within the subjects that they are teaching or have
extensive experience in all aspects of the content. Because of this we on the technology
committee have little concern about the ability for teachers to understand and teach the required
content.
Pedagogical Knowledge (PK)
Pedagogical knowledge is about the basics of teaching - curriculum, assessment, reporting, and

everything that occurs within the classroom that supports learning (Koehler and Mishra 2009).
Our teachers at QMS certainly have a grounding in this area as it relates to overall teaching,
however, some teachers are concerned that implementing technology can have detrimental
effects on the overall learning of students (Wachira and Keengwe 2010). Because of this I will
need to focus on ensuring that the pedagogical knowledge of my colleagues matches what is
required to begin the integration of technology into the classroom.
Technology Knowledge (TK)
Technology knowledge is always changing, and [a]ny definition of technology knowledge is in
danger of becoming outdated quickly (Koehler and Mishra 2009, p64). At QMS our teachers
are at varying levels of technology ability and this will be a major focus of my work within their
classrooms. I will need to ensure that they are very familiar with the technology within their
rooms because to properly integrate technology will require a much deeper understanding of it
than simple literacy (Koehler and Mishra 2009).
Technology Content Knowledge (TCK)
The joining of the technology knowledge and the content knowledge creates the TCK. This is
an understanding of the manner in which technology and content influence and constrain one
another (Koehler and Mishra 2009, p 65). Fully one half of my job as technology coordinator
will be working with teachers in order to better understand the impact that technology can have
on the content they teach. This could include demonstrating technologies that can better
represent specific content or working with teachers to find a technology that will allow them to
connect with a subject matter expert.
Technological Pedagogical Knowledge (TPK)
Technological Pedagogical Knowledge is an understanding of how teaching and learning can
change when particular technologies are used in particular ways (Koehler and Mishra 2009,
p65). The other half of my job as technology coordinator will be working with teachers to
determine the best way that technology can influence their pedagogy. This may include finding
better ways to assess content or report to parents, or perhaps how to integrate the technology
into a specific learning activity such as a sharing session or test situation.
Pedagogy becomes important in taking software that is not traditionally designed for education
and putting it into an educational context (Koehler and Mishra 2009). This area is of particular
interest to me because of the ability to leverage a small number of technology tools in the aid of
multiple classes or content areas.
Technology, Pedagogy and Content Knowledge (TPACK)
The intersection of each of the major ideas is TPACK. It goes beyond the core ideas and is the
basis of effective teaching with technology (Koehler and Mishra 2009, p66). In my role as
technology coordinator I will need to ensure that teachers are able to fully integrate these
laptops into their classes. This will require me to focus on both the content and the pedagogy
together in an effort to ensure that not only are they utilizing technology to better have students
understand the material, they should also be using it for appropriate pedagogical reasons as
well.
This work will also include balancing the various specific areas (content, pedagogy and

technology) in an effort to ensure that one does not dominate the overall teaching of our
students (Koehler and Mishra 2009).
Analysis of Progress
Action research in education is not a smooth and direct development that can necessarily be
logically captured (Khoboli and OToole 2012, p139). This quotation resonates strongly with me
- our progress will not be linear, and will certainly not be logical. However, through the
application of both the Concerns Based Adoption Model (Hall and Hord 1987) and the
application of the work of Mcnish I hope that our committee will be able to successfully
implement a laptop program into Grade 8-12 at Queen Margarets School.
The concerns based adoption model (CBAM) is broken into 7 stages and at Queen Margarets
School we have a fully reached stage 3 (Personal Concerns) and some members are beginning
to enter stage 4 (management).
The awareness stage is about ensuring that participants understand what is changing and why
it should change (Koboli and OToole 2012). At QMS this stage has been largely completed
through the work I did last year in introducing a 1:1 program with management, staff and
parents. Through a number of information meetings and discussions staff and parents the
program idea was laid out for comment and critique.
The information stage is where individuals get more information about the proposed change and
make an initial decision with respect to the efficacy of this change (Koboli and OToole 2012).
This stage was completed the first two weeks of September with all individuals because the
laptops were initially introduced and all stakeholders had a chance to form opinions.
The personal concerns stage, where individuals decide how the program or change impacts
them with respect to personal change or their competency (Khoboli and OToole 2012), is still
being engaged in for many stakeholders. Teachers are exploring the capabilities of the laptops
and attempting to determine what support they need in their classrooms. As Khoboli and
OToole comment, skipping the stage of personal concern, or not giving teachers enough time
to work through [problems], makes successful change more difficult (Khoboli and OToole 2012,
p141). Because of this I am not in a rush to push teachers through this stage and will be happy
to engage in individual conversations with stakeholders through the coming months.
As we enter the management stage stakeholders will begin to work through implementing the
laptop program as laid out in the summer and the first two weeks of Septembr (Khoboli and
OToole 2012). Throughout this stage my primary responsibility will be to ensure that teachers
feel supported both in terms of their own technological knowledge as well as with respect to the
availability of technology (Wachira and Kenngwe 2011). Bi-weekly meetings will be held with
the technology committee and monthly meetings with staff in order to evaluate the progress of
the laptop program.
The consequences stage is when we will begin to refine our practice and determine what works
best for the various pieces of the program (Khoboli and OToole 2012). While ongoing, I suspect
that this stage will begin to occur mid March or early April 2014. Teachers will usually move
very quickly through the stages (Khoboli and OToole 2012) and thus I will endeavour to ensure
that the technology committee slows the process enough to allow all teachers to discuss
refinements in the program with us. This step will also include the development of a technology
plan which will outline our goals and requirements for the coming year.

The final two stages tend to go hand-in-hand with stakeholders collaborating with one another
and refocusing on the change in order to make a more effective version of it (Khoboli and
OToole 2012). This will occur in the beginning of the next school year once the technology
committee has met with all stakeholders and discussed their thoughts on the laptop program.
Mcnish (2001) used a survey approach to determine the 9 major decisions and steps required to
successfully implement a technology project in any workplace environment. These decisions
and steps are:
1. Obtain commitment from senior management
2. Seek support of a strong champion
3. Use adequately skilled people
4. The team must be committed to change
5. The successes must be widely published
6. The benefits must be widely published
7. Studies must be completed with respect to the changes actually required
8. Resources should be made available as soon as difficulties arise
9. Affected staff should be well informed about expectations
1. Obtain commitment from senior management
Sitting on our technology committee is the deputy head of education who is the senior manager
responsible for the education portion of the school. While not the top level of management, she
does have a large amount of say in how the education of students is undertaken. As noted in
Mcnishs article, IT projects are very much a systemic change that will impact multiple
departments and most staff (Mcnish 2002). A struggle that we have encountered thus far is that
because this laptop program affects so many other departments a single voice articulating the
educational benefits has not always been successful in convincing all the other managers of the
importance of this endeavour. Through a number of meetings with various department heads,
however, the program has began to gain momentum and be more accepted within the school.
2. Seek support of a strong champion
As Mcnish comments in his study the technology changes that failed each also failed to have
the support of a project champion or someone to push it along (Mcnish 2002). This area ties in
with the first area - our deputy head of education is also our strong champion on the
management side. Within the faculty side I have two colleagues who are very keen to fully
utilize these laptops in the classroom. I have encouraged these staff members to share their
successes with others and this has raised the level of engagement from other staff in the senior
school.
3. Use adequately skilled people
As a computer systems engineer myself I feel that I have the skills required to assist any
teachers or managers with the implementation of these laptops. On a faculty level, however,
the skills vary widely. Because of this I have asked for, and been given, some time to work oneon-one with colleagues at various staff professional development days or times. One of the
major barriers to integrating technology into the classroom is a lack of training on this
technology (Wachira and Keengwe 2011). While myself and the deputy head agree that in
order to be more successful this time should be increased we are, at the moment, slowly

increasing the overall knowledge of the teachers directly responsible for using the laptops in the
classroom.
4. The team must be committed to change
Teachers are generally positive with respect to learning how to utilize technology in their
classrooms (Wachira and Keengwe 2011). At Queen Margarets School this is certainly evident
- the vast majority of my colleagues are certainly interested in integrating technology into their
classes. Also on staff, however, there are some people who are against the idea of bringing
laptops to school every day. While certainly in the minority, they feel the increased technology
will be a distraction to students. Indeed, in the Squire and Dikkers study students themselves
indicated that they were concerned about the disruption to their learning if they had better
access to technology (Squire and Dikkers 2012). These concerns, while valid, can be
addressed through appropriate policies and student education (Denton 2012, Wachira and
Keengwe 2011). At this point we are moving forward with laptops in classrooms in areas where
teachers would like to utilize them. Within our handbook the official language is at the
discretion of the teacher, providing those teachers who disagree with the program to simply not
implement it.
5. The successes must be widely published
We are doing our best to publish the successes of the program. The department head team,
called the Educational Leadership Team, spends a portion of each meeting discussing
successes in their departments. At these meetings, I make a point of mentioning the excellent
laptop activities that are occurring around the school. In addition, at senior faculty meetings I
will also single out teachers who are doing excellent work integrating these into the classroom.
Our communications coordinator tries her best to send out laptop updates with photos and
stories. Overall Im pleased with the progress were making in this area.
6. The benefits must be widely published
This is more challenging than publishing the successes! Because seeing the benefits is quite
intangible attempting to describe these benefits can be difficult at times. I have delivered a
number of professional development sessions with the goal of increasing confidence and
demonstrating some of the benefits of integrating technology into the classroom. These
sessions go well, however, time is a factor in the implementation of additional tools in the
classroom.
7. Studies must be completed with respect to the changes actually required
This will be an important consideration moving forward in our laptop deployment. We are
currently investigating the best way to assess our program and its effectiveness. Because of
the concerns about the validity of testing data, real quantitative data may be hard to to obtain.
We are, however, investigating the quantification of survey data such as the number of times
students are asked to collaborate, or the number of times specific technologies dont work.
While these questions havent been developed yet we expect to have them completed within the
next two months.
8. Resources should be made available as soon as difficulties arise
A lack of resources (both human and technical) is cited as a barrier to technology integration.

Thus, knowing this, and the frustration that arises when teachers are unable to fully utilize the
technology they have practiced with (Wachira and Keengwe 2011), at Queen Margarets School
we endeavour to provide the required resources as soon as possible. While this is an excellent
idea in theory, in practice because of the size of the school and the limited resources, this is not
usually possible. I do my best to deal with any purely educational issues that arise as it falls
completely within my job description, however, the information technology department is
currently understaffed and is unable to respond immediately to technical issues. Even for
myself, because of my teaching duties I am sometimes unable to assist colleagues or create a
specific policy when a difficulty arises.
9. Affected staff should be well informed of expectations
The Grade 8 team where the laptops were initially deployed met as a group before school
started to lay out our expectations of both ourselves and the program in general. This process
was incredibly useful as it allowed everyone to express their desires, but also their concerns, for
the upcoming program. This approach ties closely with the Concerns Based Adoption Model in
that the first two stages of awareness and information gathering are being met with this initial
consultation (Khoboli and OToole 2012). As a group we decided upon behavioural and useage
expectations, storage requirements and how online access would work. These discussions are
important steps in successfully using digital technologies in the classroom (Denton 2012). Each
staff member within the team had the opportunity to contribute to a final set of staff and student
expectations surrounding the program.
Conclusion
The program is off to an excellent start and I feel that we are well on our way to fully integrating
laptops into all relevant learning activities. From the initial contact with management and
parents through to the current pilot of laptops in classrooms we have made excellent progress.
Our next steps will need to involve a number of meetings with the different stakeholders,
including our students, and the development of a thoughtful and useful technology plan. This
technology plan will be central in our analysis and modification of the laptop program at Queen
Margarets School.

References:
Denton, D. (2012). Enhancing Instruction through Constructivism, Cooperative Learning, and
Cloud Computing. 56 (4), 34-41. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11528-0120585-1 [Accessed: 3 Dec 2013].
Graham, C. 2011. Theoretical considerations for understanding technological pedagogical
content knowledge (TPACK). Computers & Education, 57 (3), pp. 1953-1960. Available at:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131511000911 [Accessed: 29 Nov
2013].
Hord SM, Rutherford WI, Huling-Austin L, Hall GE (1987) Taking charge of change.
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, VA
Khoboli, B. & OToole, J. (2012). The Concerns-Based Adoption Model: Teachers Participation
in Action Research. 25 (2), 137-148. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11213-0119214-8 [Accessed: 3 Dec 2013].
Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge?
Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1). Retrieved from
http://www.citejournal.org/vol9/iss1/general/article1.cfm
Mcnish, M. (2001). Guidelines for managing change: A study of their effects on the
implementation of new information technology projects in organisations. Journal of Change
Management, 2 (3), pp. 201-211. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1080/738552754
[Accessed: 27 Nov 2013].
Squire, K. & Dikkers, S. (2012). Amplifications of learning: Use of mobile media devices among
youth.Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies,
18 (4), 445-464. Retrieved from: http://con.sagepub.com/content/18/4/445.abstract
[Accessed: 3 Dec 2013].
Summak, M., Samanciolu, M. & Balibel, M. (2010). Technology integration and assesment in
educational settings. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2 (2), 1725-1729.
Retrieved from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187704281001013X
[Accessed: 3 Dec 2013].
Wachira, P. & Keengwe, J. (2011). Technology Integration Barriers: Urban School Mathematics
Teachers Perspectives. 20 (1), 17-25. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10956010-9230-y [Accessed: 3 Dec 2013].