6.1 Evaluation of an online technology leadership master's program  (Page 6/16)

Lemke, Coughlin, Garcia, Reifsneider, and Baas (2009) defined Web 2.0 as “an online application that uses the World Wide Web (www) as a platform and allows for participatory involvement, collaboration, and interaction among users” (p. 5). Johnson, Levine, Smith, and Smythe (2009) identified four technology trends that were predicted to enter the classroom within the next year: “collaborative environments, communication tools, personally-owned devices, one-to-one laptop initiative” (p. 4). The authors stated online collaboration environments and virtual spaces for information sharing, gave students an opportunity to connect with a global community, present ideas to an authentic audience, and learn outside the traditional classroom. Furthermore, the authors noted that these collaborative environments provided opportunities for students to work on group projects outside the geographic barrier of the classroom or to work individually to develop 21st century skills.

Prensky (2001) acknowledged an imperative need for the invention of digital native methodologies for all subjects, at all levels, using students to guide us. There was no doubt that with the amazing advances in technology and design schemes for creating social and participatory networks, we should begin to acknowledge the needs of these digital natives that have grown up in the midst of these technological innovations. He reported that these technologies have been altered as well as affected the wiring of neural networks in digital natives. Furthermore, he advanced the case that in order for our education system to continue to flourish, educators must invent new ways of engaging these learners with the newest technologies that best match their learning styles.

Technology professional development in pk-12 schools

Supporting teachers as they acquired the skills and ability to integrate teaching, learning, and technology required time and professional development based on the stages of technology adoption (Dwyer, Ringstaff,&Sandholtz, 1990; Martin, Hupert, Culp, Kanaya,&Light, 2003; O’Dwyer, Russell,&Bebell, 2004). As teachers advanced through these stages, they began to use technology more frequently and in a more sophisticated, creative manner (Ertmer, Addison, Lane, Ross, and Woods, 1999). Ertmer, Ottenbreit-Leftwich, and York (2005) reported that teachers ranked professional development as one of the most powerful external factors for changing their professional practices of integrating teaching, learning, and technology in the classroom.

Technology professional development must be more than exposure to short-term topics by a motivational speaker or a series of experts transferring knowledge. This type of professional development was an ineffective method for an ongoing and substantive change in behavior (Brown, 2011). Anderson and Dexter (2005) in one of the most comprehensive literature reviews in the area of school technology leadership determined that all of the literature on leadership and technology “acknowledges either explicitly or implicitly that school leaders should provide administrative oversight for educational technology” (p.51). There was no doubt that technology leaders must be engaged in not only investigating and evaluating new technologies, but they should keep teaching and learning at the heart of all technology decisions (Creighton, 2011).