RCA 2013 - Background Paper - Complete Paper - 03.09.13

Moving Towards an Augmented Learning Paradigm:
Using Mobile Devices to enhance Student Learning Experiences

2014 DEVICE RECOMMENDATION
BACKGROUND PAPER

Prepared for the
Combined Leadership/Executive Meeting
11 September 2013
Rebecca Carter - Director of eLearning

Mobile Devices augment each and every Learners Cognitive Capabilities anytime,
anywhere, any place. Mobile Devices are therefore the vehicle by which Marcellin
College can personalise and enrich every learners individual learning experience
which, in turn, democratises the very process of Learning.

BACKGROUND PAPER CONTENTS

I

Evidence: Current Devices
and Learning?
2013 Internal Action Research
(December 2012 August 2013)

iPad/Samsung Device Trial Information provided to Staff (December 2012)
2013 Samsung Slate/iPad Trial Survey Raw Data Initial Collation (July
2013)
Staff Survey Software Use Current Device (Laptop/Tablet/iPAD) (August
2013)
iPad Trial Users Questionnaire

II

Devices: Nuts&Bolts
Device Specfications & Costings

Acer 8GB Notebook (Supply for Year 2013 Year 7 Students)
iPad
Apple TV

III

Devices: Augmented Learning?
The Case for Mobile Devices
(Learning)

Foundations: Defining Mobile Devices to enhance Learning
Foundations: A Mobile Paradigm of Learning
Content
Interaction and Assessment
Social Learning

IV

Synergies to Enable and Sustain
Augmented Learning

I. Adopting a Systemic Change Management Model to enable ICT
Innovation
II. Building and Sustaining a Professional Learning Community
Continuously Focused on Learning


I: Evidence - Current Devices and Learning?

Action Research
(December 2012 August 2013)

4

(A) iPad/Samsung Device Trial Information
provided to Staff (December 2012)

Figure 1.1: Device Pilot Department Agreement

Figure 1.2: Device Pilot - Staff Agreement (Dec. 2012)

5

Figure 1.3: iPad APPs List Provided to Staff/Departments

6

(B): Summary - Samsung Slate/iPad Staff Usability Survey Results
(Reported to Leadership/Staff July-August 2013)

7

8

9

(C): Whole College Survey Software Use Current
Device (Laptop) (August 2013)
Staff Respondents: 87
FOCUS: Staff Use of College Provided Laptop
Q1: Please indicate the applications you currently use on
your college provided computer.
Windows Live Essentials
Microsoft Office Professional 2010
Adobe Creative Suite 5
Geogebra
ArcGIS Explorer
Trend Antivirus
Firefox
iTunes
Audacity
ClickView
DVD Flick
Google Chrome + proxy switcher
Google Sketchup
Google Earth
Picasa
OpenOffice 3.2.1
PDF Creator 1.1.0
Skype
Super
VLC Player 1.1.5 (Dec 4, 2010)
WinRAR
Adobe Reader 10.0
Adobe Flash 10.1.102.64
Adobe Shockwave Player 11.5.9.615
Microsoft Photostory
Microsoft Silverlight Player
Windows 7 Image Resizer
Malwarebytes Anti-Malware
FoxIT Reader
Daisy Digital Planner
Quickbooks Student Edition
Synergetic

10

11

Q2 - Relating to Staff:
Which device will enhance your ability to deliver optimal
student learning experiences in your classrooms?*
Windows tablet
Windows laptop
iPad

Q3 - Relating to Students:
Which device do you believe optimises student
learning experiences in your classrooms?*
Windows tablet
Windows laptop
iPad

12

Q4: (For Staff Using College Laptops) - From the Apps
supplied on the Student Laptops, which do you current
use?

13

Q4: (For Staff Using Samsung Tablets) - From the Apps
supplied on the Student Laptops, which do you current
use?

Q4: (For Staff Using Samsung Tablets) Please List the
Tablet Apps (Samsung) that you use to enhance student
learning in the classroom:
-

Triptico, Quizlet, Explain Everything, Flashcards, Google
Drive, Show Me
-

Maths300
NLVM
Irfanview
TI-Nspire CAS

14

Q4: (For Staff Using iPads) Please list the Apps you
Use to Enhance Student Learning in the Classroom:

-

The students don't have iPads so it has not been possible. Nor do
the run windows 8. I mainly use online applications from Ebooks
and web interactives.
-

SKYPE , UTUBE , VLC ,LANGUAGE PERFECT
-

Linoit, twiddla,
-

Google Drive, Docs , Pages , Quiz App (AlphaHistory) ,
Dropbox , ABC iview
{Disclaimer: still learning but not sure ipad can do everything. Is
there a descent Windows tablet?}
-

Movie maker , One note , Flash card, Pinterest
-

Lino , khan academy
-

Explain everything , ITunes U , Coach my video , Pages , Tabata
pro , Hoop stats , Prezi , Fitness meter , Google drive , Drop
box , Numbers , Scan , PDF forms , Phoster , Switch ,
ColourSplash , You tube , Twitter , IBooks , Time motion ,
Touchcast Strava , Lapse it , Camera , Clock , Garmin connect
-

General: Prezi web based presentation tool , iTunesU great
list of free courses and resources , Recorder a quick way to
record class performances and then email them to
students/parents ; Google - search (voice/goggles) ; Safari - web
browser ; Quizlet good for music glossary learning and
revision ; Reference Music History: Pandora - online radio
Art AuthorityK12 collection of over 1000 major artists from
ancient times to today ; History of Jazz interactive history of
Jazz ; MyClassicalApp a great introduction to the orchestra for
junior students ; MSO Learn another great introduction to the
orchestra for middle school students ; Orchestra one of the best
apps for introducing instruments of the orchestra and analysis of
selected works with synced notation and video/audio footage
Music Notation: Notion currently one of the best notation apps
available for iPad ; Music Theory/Aural Scales and Modes
scale and mode theory/aural app ; Wolfra-
theory/aural/definitions app ; Jazz Buddy chord theory app
Theory Calculator scales, chords and interval theory/aural app
ReadRhythm rhythm reading app

Performance: iRealbook great app for teaching form and
improvisation ; Creativity: Garageband - a multi-track audio
editing app Instrumental Music Studio; Practific practice
assistant for student musicians. It makes practicing rewarding
while helping organize and automatically keep records of what

students done. It allows students to keep teachers and parents
updated with quick email reports on practice completed.
Avid Scorch- viewer and play back of Sibelius files. Great for
backing playback. ; JotNot Pro scan and email music to
students ; SoundCloud record your students and seek feedback
from teachers and other specialist musicians. Tempo Slow - good
app for slowing down backing tracks ; Metronome -
VocalWarmUp many good apps such as this exist for various
instruments ; Ensembles - APS Music great for use in
rehearsals with bands, orchestras and choirs; Cleartune - tuner
Pitch Pro virtual pitch pipe ; Percussive good mallet
percussion app ; Percussive (Latin) good Latin percussion app
-

Grammar ; plan my run
-

Explain everything,
-

Dropbox , Good reader , Pages , Keynote , Autonote , Prezi
Typography , iBooks , Dictionary , TED , Twitter , Flipboard
And more...
-

Google Earth , Google Maps , Youtube, Quakes , Dropbox
Evernote, SOPHIA, Edmodo
-

Movie maker, audacity, jing, prezi, time motion
-

I dont use apps in the classroom as I have not accessed a tablet or
ipad.
-

You tube , DVDs , powerpoint
-

Skype , Edmodo , Inspiration , Lino, Evernote
-

I am currently working with a laptop computer so have not
trialled apps in my classroom. However I have used my own
ipad and we have looked at online newspapers (my personal
subscription) as just one example. There are many apps I would
be investigating if this is the way we go.
-

Not sure if these are 'apps' but" youtube downloader, Interactive
websites (that's about all
enjoyed using promethean software previously...)
-

dragon dictation , school notes , barefoot atlas , imovie , Khan
academy
-

metronome , itunes , tuner , diary , calendar , MSO app
- current computer does not support this

15

-

whatever is available to support the task undertaking.
-

I-Tunes, Garage Band, Sound Cloud, the History of Jazz, logic
-

On laptop use
only basic things like Microsoft Office - Word, Power-point,
Went to PD last month for iPad and saw many apps
-

Aides can share ipad - I personally haven't had the chance to use
apps as yet.
-

imovie, dragon speaking audio note, sticky board, maths magic,
simplepedia, dropbox, puppet pals, edmomdo, book creator,
imoition HD
-

- Key Note , Edmodo , Entrepreneur , Marketing Forecast
-

no apps, own material
-

N/A
-

None yet but have a few downloaded and ready to go.
Use a number of Web 2.0 tools.
-

Graphing Package , TI Inspire software, Excel spreadsheet
-

I have not used apps in class
-

iMovie , You Tube , Internet
-

keynote , wikipanion , edmodo , art gallery , national gallery of
victoria , 1 point perspective
-

audacity , garage band (used in past) , google earth/live cam
inspiration (used in past) , edmodo
-

nil (at this time) with an iPad but I have used it extensively
previously.
-

the age app , photos app , safari , better health, the weather
channel , you tube , abc iview , evernote , dragon dictation
calculator , google maps , google earth , dictionary . com ,
science quiz , world documentary , Khan Academy , TED ,
Quote , Kinetic Balls 2 , audio note lite
-

I was wanting to refer to Macbook/Ipad combo.

I use Total Recall at the moment (mindmapping app) - looking
forward to seeing what applications I can use in tomorrow's
meeting!

16

(A) iPad Trial User APP Questionnaire (20.08
30.08.13)
N.B: Six (6) of the Eleven (11) Required iPad Trial Users
completed this Questionnaire. One (1) additional staff member
using his own iPad voluntarily completed the Questionnaire.
This questionnaire asks you to comment on how you have used the
iPad Apps prescribed by your 'iPad User Agreement' in December
2012 (attached) and the iPAD Apps that you may have purchased
in addition to those prescribed using the $100 iTunes card provided
to you (and your own funds).
If you did not load or use the prescribed App indicated, please
write 'NIL' in the spaces provided.
There are three (3) pages of questions:
Page 1 - Prescribed Apps: For each prescribed app that you used,
briefly explain how you used this app to improve the teaching and
learning process for your Class/Students (if an APP did NOT,
please indicate why you would NOT recommend the particular
APP).
Page 2 - Personal Choice Apps using the $100 iTunes card: For
each App you chose to purchase, please indicate the cost and how
you used this App to improve the teaching and learning process for
your Class/Students/Department (if an APP did NOT, please
indicate why you would NOT recommend this particular APP)
Page 3 - Self-Funded Personal Choice Apps: These are Apps you
may have purchased using your own funds. Again, please indicate
the cost and how each App improved the teaching and learning
process for your Class/Students/Department (if an APP did NOT,
please indicate why you would NOT recommend this APP).
As outlined in the email sent to you with the link for this
questionnaire, it would be wise to first reacquaint yourself with the
Prerequisite apps and those you purchased with the $100 College
provided iTunes card prior to commencing this quiz.
NOTE: It is estimated that the questionnaire will take you between
30-60 minutes to complete.

Q1 RESPONSES:

Did not have this app. as explained in my email I was not given an
IPAD with the trial uses, I had one 6 months before this.
Have only used it a couple of times. Used it with several different
word documents. Team sheets, extras etc. Very easy to use but
haven't needed to use
NIL
Haven't used pages
I didn't - I felt believed the College was going to use the Samsung so I
put all my learning into that computer device
Have only used it a couple of times. Used it with several different
word documents. Team sheets, extras etc. Very easy to use but
haven't needed to use
Mainly to store and share files and student files and work. Pages
seems to be the predominant conversion from files that student send
me. It is useful in how I use it with my students although I do have
problems when I am on different devices and using edmodo which is
where I might access edmodo and want to store files.
I was not part of the iPad trial but I have been using my own device in
the classroom this term.i have used pages on a couple of occasions as
word processor but I have found it a bit awkward. I think it could have
other applications due its design capabilities but I haven't repent
enough time on it.I have had better success thus far using Google
Docs

Q2 RESPONSES:

Haven't used Keynote
Have not used it yet really. Have played with it a little but prefer
PREZI. Might be different if we had Apple TV
I haven't bought keynote yet but should have bought this app instead
of pages I feel.
Did have some keynote presentations but need more time to practice
and use this presentation app.
A couple of small presentations as a trial. Not really all that useful as
I used the laptop's Powerpoint in preference, as it's easier to connect
to projector.
Did not have this app on my IPAD

Q3 RESPONSES:

Have only used it to open excel documents sent to me. Haven't had
the need to do more than that.
Haven't used numbers
Don't have it.
I have not used numbers in the first semester with my students. I am
on leave during second semester and hope to use this app on my
return.
NIL
Did not have this APP on my iPad

17

I didn't - I felt believed the College was going to use the Samsung so
I put all my learning into that computer deviceve this APP on my
IPAD
Q4 RESPONSES:

I have made small videos that have been placed on the Plasma screens
around the school. Great APP, very easy to use.
Haven't used imovie
Don't have it.
I have not used imovie with my students in first semester.
Trialled using iMovie to edit footage of classroom teaching taken with
iPad. Idea was sound but implementation was tricky. Edited footage
was huge, upload options limited from iPad. Could be very useful to
create vodcast style notes
Great. Used this for one of my support students who is making a
movie. Great app and engaging.
I didn't download this app

Q5 RESPONSES:

File sharing photos and videos with both students, teachers and
parents. Very simple file sharing across all devices.
Photo sharing with students- particularly taking pics of notes on the
whiteboard
I have used this to share documents with other teachers. I use the
Dropbox feature on mconline for student to pass on their work.
I have found drop box very useful for storing photos and some files. I
have found this very user friendly and amazed at how it automatically
syncrinizes from my iphone to the drop box. I am continuing to learn
more about the drop box but have particularly found it useful for my
extra curricula activity of rugby and being able to share photos.
Extensively used to transfer info such as documents, images of notes,
assignments, etc... Each class has own dropbox folder. Platform
agnostic, so kids with non-Apple phones/tablets can still easily acces
data/images
Used this to share photos

Q6 RESPONSES:

Didn't download
Didnt
Dont have it
I have not really used GoodReader and need to learn more about
it
Top-notch PDF reader, useful to view eBooks, show solutions to
problems (from solutions documents)
Do not have this APP on my iPad
I didnt download this APP

Q7 RESPONSES:

Didnt download
Didnt
Dont have it
Yes, I have often used the Dictionary. As a personal reference, in
class on the screen and as a reference
This is an excellent App

Q8 RESPONSES:

Didnt download
Didnt
A handy App for History and Politics classes. Used for geopolitical
analysis
I have not used this app but intend to use it in second semester for
Year 7s in Geography
I did not download this APP

Q9 RESPONSES:

Resource lots of educational videos relating to Excel, sporting
success, sporting techniques. This has been used in preparation for
classes.
for displaying videos in VCE class, for researching
Used quite often for short clips for History and politics. The only
issue is that the Internet speed and reliability always lets me down so I
usually download the clips.
Have used You tube many times.
In Business Managment when looking at Business Plans and episodes
of Ramsay Kitchen nightmares, which critically looks at restaurants as
business and how they can improve. Also the show "Mary Queen of
Shops" which is another program that studies unsuccessful business'.
Have accessed songs for meditations in year 11 R&S. In looking at
Ethics in R&S I have accessed presentations on good and evil. Year 7
studies have viewed documentaries on the Mass, catholicism and
Marists.
NIL
Used for Staff reflections. Students used to inform themselves on how
to do different activities. Great visual tool for hands on learners

18

Q10 RESPONSES:

Research basketball and education forums. Stay in touch with wider
Marcellin Community
just for information gathering
Just been convinced to join. Using it to get elearning ideas and sharing
them.
Have not really used twitter except to be logged into school twitter.
NIL
Did not use

Q11 RESPONSES:

View my twitter account sometimes, not too much more than that.
Didnt
Dont have it
Have not used it
Setup with IT based RSS feeds to keep informed on current info in IT
field. Allowed for interesting topical discussions in class

Q12 RESPONSES:

Didnt download, used Face time though
Didnt
Havent Used it
Have not used Skype
NIL
Used for a student who is away from school once a week due to his
medical condition. This kept him in contact with us and with his
learning.

Q13 RESPONSES:

Have not used it, prefer PTV
Didnt
Dont have it
Have not used Metlink
NIL
Do not have this APP on my iPad

Q14 RESPONSES:

Didnt download
Didnt
Dont teach RE
Year 7 Explore and Year 11 R&S in citing references, both in class on
the board and personally.
NIL

Q15 RESPONSES:

Didnt download
Watching documentaries e.g. catalyst
Current news clips for politics
Excellent reference to past programmes. Have shown many four
corners reports to year 11 R&S. Year 11 Business Management have
also seen one four corners report, many episodes of the Gruen
Transfer.Excellent reference to past programmes. Have shown four
corners report, many episodes of the Gruen Transfer.
NIL
Used this to show some interesting clips/shows for discussion with the
students.

Q16 RESPONSES:

Tried to use by finding some good resources. Jumped into a western
Australian uni PE library but it didn't really suit me too much. Need to
spend more time here, hopefully being guided by someone with good
knowledge of library's and resources.
download professional reading and music for prezi's
Have it but unsure how to use it effectively.
i have not used iTunesU.
NIL
Did not have this APP on my IPAD

19

Q17: The Pre-requisite Apps on your 'iPad Trial User Agreement'
cost approximately $50.00. Please LIST BELOW THE APPS
YOU PURCHASED FROM THE ITUNES STORE USING THE
REMAINING FUNDS from your $100 iTunes giftcard.
In so listing, please briefly indicate HOW THE APP YOU
PURCHASED ASSISTED YOUR EFFORTS TO INVIGORATE
THE TEACHING AND LEARNING PROCESSES IN YOUR
CLASSES/DEPARTMENT.
e.g. ITHOUGHTS HD ($10.49) - MINDMAPPING TOOL: Used
in all RE and History classes whenever undertaking initial
conceptual brainstorming; faciltated student ability to
collaboratively design and refine Key Inquiry Questions when APP
projected onto EWB using Apple TV or iPad VGA adaptor. Could
be used across a range of disciplines and year levels.
Teacher Response (1):
EXPLAIN EVERYTHING ($2.99)is an interactive whiteboard that
has allowed me to make small videos on topics covered in my class. I
can annotate, animate, narrate, import and export anything I like to
allow students to review material covered in class. Perfect for the
flipped classroom. AWESOME!
COACH MY VIDEO ($free) - awesome coaching APP that allows
side by side important of videos and photos. this can give immediate
visual feedback to students on technique improvements
HOOPSTATS ($5.50)- live game data collection of basketball stats.
Fantastic for analysis and improvement of training programs. has been
used for the 1st basketball program.
TIMEMOTION ($free)- Live collection of sporting performance data
for VCE PE program. Allows student to observe any game and collect
data on different movement patterns.
SKITCH ($free but think i might need to pay for better PDF features
in future) - has enable me to annotate images and documents with
ease and send these on to staff and students.
TABATTA ($2.99) -Awesome interval timer used for both PE classes
and sport training. you just set up your Work:Rest ratio and the APP
uses your music library to differentiate between the work and then the
rest intervals
SCAN ($free)QR scanner that is a bit of fun to add variety to how you
deliver your content. Have made a few Amazing Race/scavenger hunt
activities
STRAVA ($free)- has been incorporated into the VCE PE Training
programs. Fantastic run tracker APP that collects GPS data and splits
times (1km), allows groups to be formed so that everyone can monitor
progress. (data collected via any type of phone or Heart rate monitor,
analysed via APP
LAPSE IT ($1.99) -time lapse photography APP. Just a great way to
showcase some activities covered within our program.
PREZI ($free) Great interactive presenting internet based
presentation program This APP allows all PREZIs to be viewed on
an iPad
PHOSTER ($1.99) Simple program to make eye catching posters for
any part of your program.
GOOGLE DRIVE ($free) Provides simple access to google drive,
therefore great file sharing

I have mainly purchased free apps for the ipad. The only things that I
have paid for have been TED books that I have used for professional
learning and explain everything.
Explain everything is a screencast app used to create videos. It has
been used for VCE classes where short and sharp videos are useful for
introducing or summarising course material.

Teacher Response (3): I am not part of the iPad trial but Apps
I have bought and used are:
AlphaHistory French & Russian Revolution Quiz.
World Factbook
Jotnot pro.

PENULTIMATE (not sure of cost) - have been able to use this app
like I have been writing.
Used in Business Management on some business plans.
BOOK CREATOR FOR IPAD (cost not sure) - app enable user to
create a book on the topic of their choice. attempted to use this app
with a gun year 7 for the ancient civilization unit. Needed to rely on
students own resources but chose not to publish fearing uncertainty of
publishing consequences. This was confirmed following an ipad PD
that gave me the idea. I do intent to look further into this and develop
this idea.
LEGAL AND COPYRIGHT SMALL BUSINESS TOOLKIT (not
sure of cost) - a useful tool in helping Year 11 Business Management
students in working on their Business Plan assignment.
ENTREPRENEUR DAILY (not sure of cost) - very useful in
providing tips and insights into running business. Used in Year 11
Business Management in studying business success and reasons for
failure.
MONOPOLY HOTELS (not sure of cost) - a great game to get
students thinking about real estate and operating business. Used in
year 11 Business and Year 10 Prices, Money and Enterprise.
EDMODO (FREE) - I use edmodo as my chronicle and communicate
with students.
TELL IT: SUSTAINABLE BUSINESS CASE STUDY (not sure of
cost) - a useful app that looks at business' as case studies. Used once
in Year 11 Business Management.
STOCK MARKET: HOW TO INVEST (unsure of cost) -
STOCKS & STOCK MARKET NEWS (unsure of cost)
STOCK MARKET LESSONS (unsure of cost) - above apps were
used mainly by me in preparation for the stock market unit in Year 10
Prices Money and Enterprise. The stock market unit was covered
intermittently while we covered the economics unit. I need to do more
work with these apps to make them more relevant to the classroom.

20

PENULTIMATE (FREE) - NOTE TAKING TOOL
(HANDWRITING)Used to take brief notes in class (demo a solution
to a problem). Could be used across a range of disciplines and year
levels.
EVERNOTE (FREE) - NOTE TAKING TOOL Note taking app.
Allows for sync across multiple platforms. Could be used to share
data with students. Could be used across a range of disciplines and
year levels.
MYSCRIPT CALCULATOR (FREE) CALCULATOR Allows for
handwriting recognition. Useful to solve/answer simple problems
around the classroom.
TINYSCAN PRO (FREE - NORMALLY $4.99) - Scan to PDF
Useful to scan documents for storage/transfer. Could be used across a
range of disciplines and year levels.
WIFI PHOTO TRANSFER (FREE) - IMAGE TRANSFER APP
Allows access to iPad photo libraries via w-ifi from any computer
with a web browser. Easy way to get photos/videos off iPad onto
computer. Could be used across a range of disciplines and year levels.
CALENDARS+ (FREE - NORMALLY $7.49) - CALENDAR
APPKeep track of assignments etc. Nicer than the standard calendar.
Could be used across a range of disciplines and year levels.
VOICE RECORD PRO (FREE) - AUDIO RECORDER Trialed as
podcast style recorder... I now know my voice sounds lousy! Could be
used across a range of disciplines and year levels.
OUTLINE+ (FREE - NORMALLY $15.99) - ONENOTE
REPLACEMENT FOR IOS Note-taking, list making & outline tool.
Used to take meeting notes. Very powerful, lots of export options and
fully compatible with OneNote on PC
WISE (FREE 100 SCAN DEMO - OTHERWISE US$20 PER
YEAR) - AUTOMATIC GRADING APP Very_ useful marking tool
for multiple choice and true/false type quizzes & tests. Still can't
export raw data though, it's custom formatted as a .pdf report. Could
be used across a range of disciplines and year levels. _NOTE - All of
these paid apps acquired for free, were obtained as "App of the day"
type specials Woo hoo!
I did not get the voucher.I did have $50 I tunes that was refunded for.
Apps I have used....
Dragon Dictation- used for myself to take notes and jot down
ideas.USed for a number of students, where they could talk their
knowledge without written constraints and the app would write it for
them. they could then edit and send/email it to their teachers, or
themselves. This has been a great tool for dyslexic students
STICKY BOARD 2 Sticky notes- used for memos and students used
for homework
Khan Academy. Brilliant APP. Used this to teach myself some maths
so I could then support a student with their work. Also did the same
for a science unit. Also student used this app themselves to help them
with revision and understanding of their science concepts. Great for a
student who is often absent due to illness and they could use this app
to teach them the concept they missed out on.
BAREFOOT ATLAS- used with students as a tool for understanding
the world and countries. Great engaging and interactive.
MY HOMEWORK - showed this app to 2 students who were
struggling with organizing their homework. Set up for them so they
could use on their phone . It was simple and easy to use to help record
and organize their homework support.
AUSLAN tutor - USed this to support hearing impaired students in
communicating more effectively
HANGMAN- used as a tool for low spellers to motiviate and engage
them and to improve spelling techniques.
School NOTES app- used this for older secondary students ( can be
used for any student) .. THey could use this to enter notes form their
lesson, use as a calendar reminder, develop their presentations in,
develop their notes /flash cards, for presentations, or for information
recording. Great APP.
MATHS PAD- used for weak maths students. It was a great
supportive app to practice their basic maths operations. kept records
of their progress.
ASK 3- Only starting to use this and want to develop this more.
Record what we know or want to find out and share with the class and
reply with video comments,
BOOK Creator- used with 2 students . Enhanced engagement with
reading and literacy. Supported their Spelling and sentence structure .
The AGE app- able to use this to develop critical thinking from news
breaking articles /stories /editorials. Developed conversational skills
and developing oral communication and inferential comprehension .
FORMATIVE Feedback - Brilliant. USed heaps with ASD students
Being able to give visual reinforcement or feedback on how to do a
task, or read a situation. Excellent app.
JOTNOT- used to scan students work to keep electronic records
I downloaded the required apps and then some other grammar, text
related apps whcih I didn't use because:I felt believed the College was
going to use the Samsung so I put all my learning into that computer
device
Q18: Use this space to list any additional APPs that you may have
purchased (in addition to those purchased using the College
provided $100 iTunes Card). Please ensure you indicate how you
used these Apps to facilitate student/class learning as per the
previous question.
Haven't spent all my $100 dollars therefore all my apps are on the
previous page.
Paper- used to create mini documents for sharing
Quizlet- to create quizzes
TED Books- for professional reading
Keeper- to store passwords
Readability- document sharing and storing
Flashcards- to make concept cards
Google drive- for online sharing
Slo pro- for recording students and sharing
NIL
Nothing to add to this section.
NIL
Still going to try out some other new apps in the near future, such as
iAnnotate (mentioned above)
Generally though, there are not many genuinely useful apps in the
field of Maths education at VCE level, that would replace the
dedicated programs on the PC that I use daily (TI-Nspire CAS,
Graphmatica, TiCalc, Excel - Numbers just doesn't quite stack up,
Classpad, various Flash apps & Java applets)
Record them all in the above.
Twelve Angry Men quiz
How Grammar works
The Age
Not sure about the others

21


II: Devices Nuts & Bolts
Device Specifications & Costings

22

ACER 8GB Travelmate Notebook (Current Supply to 2013 Year 7 Students)

23

iPad (Retina Display WiFi 32GB, 64GB, APP) + Apple Care + Case/Keyboard Options

24

(I) Apple TV (with AppleCare Protection Plan):

25

26


III: DEVICES AUGMENTED LEARNING?
USING MOBILE DEVICES TO ENHANCE STUDENT LEARNING

27

III: USING MOBILE DEVICES TO ENHANCE STUDENT LEARNING
(A) Foundations: Defining Mobile Devices to Support Learning
A fundamental, global revolution on learning in primary, secondary and higher education is being sparked by the
ubiquity of mobile devices. As such, the opportunity is ripe for students, teachers and leaders to take advantage of
mobile technology to meaningfully enhance the learning experiences of all stakeholders within their learning
communities.
(a) Foundations - Understanding How Convergent Models of Mobile Devices support Learning:
Since the 1970s, the possibilities of using Mobile devices (Portable Phones, PDAs, Digital Media Players, Apple
iPods, Nintendo DS/Game Boy, Playstation Portable (PSP), Smartphones) to support Learning has been
converging as devices have begun increasingly integrating a rich set of capabilities. Today, tablets although
considered by many to be a divergence as they typically do not have cell phone voice technologies but can get data
through wireless phone networks or through Wi Fi in other cases are also converging due their form being
roughly book sized, the greater screen area allowing tablets to support rich media consumption and therefore deep
engagement for learners.
Moreover, Tablet touch screens and more intimate viewing positions makes the experience on a tablet
fundamentally different from that on a laptop at arms length, but the tablets size is less mobile and less likely to
be always with the individual, changing the nature of the interaction. For this reason, Tablets make sense for
formal learning; particularly as more cross-platform solutions become available that go beyond just media playing
to support rich interaction; both programmatic and social. Thus, the potential of Tablets to support learning is
extremely high.
At the core of Mobile Devices are platforms that use a processor coupled with memory running an operating
system in a mobile form. There have to be sensors and input devices that allow the device to communicate with
the user, and connection capabilities that allow the processor to connect to the rest of the digital world, whether
continuously or intermittently. The convergent model of Mobile Devices best suited to support learning is a
device that:
1. Has a processor and a memory on board
2. Has an operating system
3. Supports a suite of supplied or customised applications (apps) to run
4. Provides a way for the device to communicate to the user, whether audio, screen, or vibration
5. Enables the user to communicate to the device, whether audio, touchscreen, physical inputs, or a
combination
6. Possesses a way for the device to communicate to the digital world, whether though mobile phone
networks, wi-fi or occasional synchronisation via cables
7. Has ways for the device to sense the ambient environment such as with camera, microphone, or GPS
8. Has quick access, meets the requirement for instant on, and high reliability.
9. Is able to share information between devices

28

(a) Mobile Device Capabilities that enhance Learning
(i) Communication - Output
The first way Mobile devices differ from Laptop, Netbook or Desktop technologies is in the way they
communicate with the user. Main mechanisms are visual, auditory, and haptic (physical feedback). In all cases,
the goal is to communicate to the user information that they are looking for. This information may be analogue,
semantic and continual or discrete.
Screens are a common way devices communicate with users. From limited black and white screens, we have
moved to screen resolutions that begin to approach those first seen on desktops, with colour and screen sizes
capable of showing movies. Screens tap into our powerful visual processing systems.
Projection is a new capability wherein devices not only present on a screen but also beam the image onto a nearby
surface, which, in turn, facilitates sharing the output. While generally known as personal devices, mobile devices
shift learners away from 1:1 learning by sharing what is being learnt amongst many.
Lights are another way devices can communicate. They can change colour, can flash, or simple toggle between on
and off status. While not a rich media, lights can provide status information.
Earphones are essentially the same as speakers but are private rather than shared.
Haptic communication is a tactile category, wherein the output comes from physical movement. A familiar
mechanism is vibration. Though it may seem inconsequential, the physical feedback (the touch of a keyboard) is
important to many learners.
(ii) Input:
By being able to communicate with (and through) Mobile Devices, we are able to deliver both mobile processing
and augmentation possibilities. There are a variety of ways we can provide input to a device, mostly centred on
Figure 1:
The Mobile Device

29

digital, which means via fingers not binary data. Input typically must communicate a selection between options,
indicate a changing state, or specify a point along one dimension or two (such as screen location). A variety of
Mobile Devices have evolved to variously support these needs:
Touch Screens: Advances in sensing and user interface (UI) have allowed fingers to be effectively accurate
pointers and represent many familiar hardware devices, notably buttons, keypads, and keyboards, but use touch
sensitivity rather than dedicated mechanics.
Buttons: a simple form of input that signal a state change, or, when held according to a time function usually with
visual feedback, can indicate a point in a continuum. Coupled with visual cues, soft buttons can also convey
different meaning in different contexts, unlike fixed buttons which have a specific purpose (e.g. on-off buttons).
Keypads: an array of buttons for specialised functions. They can be specialised or have a familiar layouts (the 10
key arrangement for phone numbers or numeric data)
Keyboards: Keypads specifically for textual input, though they often support other buttons and keypads.
Track wheels or jog dials: input devices with a round wheel (iPod) that uses rotary motion to map to a continuum
of values (e.g. rolling left turns down volume). They often work in other dedicated roles as well, e.g. buttons for
up, down, forward and back.
Accelerometers: small instruments that can detect movement, providing a new way for users to communicate to
their devices. By shaking or turning a device, users can signal an action.
Voice: Sometimes a control option, voice recognition works for both direct commands and text-entry mechanism.
(iii) Sensors:
Mobile devices do not have to be totally dependent on user input to understand what context they are in.
Microcircuits have been developed that can take a wider variety of information from their environment.
o GPS: Is a geolocation approach that triangulates position using a set of orbiting satellites in known locations.
o Camera: Capable of still or video capture, they can also stream the camera image to the screen, with
additional information laid on.
o Microphones: allow devices to hear what is available in the environment as ambient information and to record
audio. A second microphone can be present, to detect and be used to cancel out ambient noise.
o Compass: capabilities allow devices to know which direction they are facing. This information can be
productively coupled with GPS systems to provide more location data and to support augmented reality.
o Accelerometers: Can be used for input from the user and can provide information about the users movements
in the broader context.
(iv) Apps
Input, output, sensing and connecting are coordinated via software running on the underlying platform via
application programming interfaces (APIs). APIs are interfaces to various features of the operating system,
including available hardware. Different platforms have different operating systems and therefore software, but
they share the fact that they have applications, can connect to and through various networks.

30

Applications are needed to run on the mobile processor to support various tasks. Some are built in and are viewed
as meeting core needs. App stores have provided a broad variety of personalisation and customisation.This means
that it is through Apps that users can augment chosen capabilities by purchasing additional software from a suite
of developed software. Users might choose tools to access information in a variety of ways or perform custom
tasks. Users, such as reasonably skilled web designers, can also create their own applications.
Personal information management (PIM) involves the suite of core applications that include: notes or memos;
contacts or addresses; calendar or events; tasks or to-do-lists. These personal productivity tools support user
goals. Calculators and alarms are other examples of PIMs.
Media Viewers such as Media Players are core to most Mobile devices. They start with audio and video playback
but can also include viewing documents in few or a variety of document formats.
Media Capture whether audio or video is used for recording or text input; this includes drawing graphics on
devices.
Web browsing is a ubiquitous capability in most Mobile Devices although not all users have independent data
plans that enable 24/7 use independent of location (e.g WiFi hotspots or School WiFi networks)
Communication is the most common capability that Apps provide. While phones provide voice and text
messaging, other devices can also accommodate email and IM (instant messaging). Connections to social
networking sites are also enabled (Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter) which crosses the categories of IM and social
networking. Video chat, which uses additional cameras on the same side of the screen to support video
conferencing, is also increasingly available (Apples FaceTime, Skype ).
Custom Applications are the new opportunity. As developers identify niches and create applications, it is becomes
possible for users to create new forms of augmentation and customise a quiver of tools.
(v) Networking
Once upon a time, synching with a desktop was a critical step for Mobile Devices to really succeed by creating a
unified information environment via a physical cable. This meant updates were only available when the device
was set next to the computer. However, this has now changed due to networking technologies broadening the
reach and allowing more complex and useful connections between the mobile device and the world. With the
ready availability of the internet and the ability to pair almost any piece of hardware with a Mobile Device, the
opportunities now almost have now bounds.
Cloud Data Transfer and Storage: One significant example is storing information not locally on a device or
synching it to a personal computer or an organisations network but instead to servers hosted on the Cloud. As a
results, Apps are increasingly being developed that are coupled with Cloud based storage. The key advantage here
is that a user can access the same information from any device, anywhere, rather than only synched devices, and
they dont have to worry about having sufficient storage. This is not to say there are not risks (e.g. problems with
data providers losing data and privacy); however, despite such risks, many users are increasingly choosing to keep
all data in the Cloud.
Hardware Options: a variety of hardware devices exist to bring one machine to another. USB devices hold data
and transfer between machines with appropriate ports; SD and MicroSD cards can also carry data from one device
to another. Increasingly, however, the trend is to link machines without physical connections.

31

Wireless Networking Technologies range from PANs (Personal Area Networks) which cover short distances (1-2
meters), LANs (Local Area networks) which are medium area networks (100-200 meters) and WANs (wide area
networks) which are essentially ubiquitous.
Personal Area Networks (Bluetooth) is another network standard that allows two devices to communicate or for
users to use peripherals such as hand-free headsets and other devices such as keyboards and other forms of input,
output and sensors.
(vi) Platforms and Processing Power
One issue that has dogged the use of Mobile Devices in education is Adobes Flash Technology. At the moment,
the mechanism to deliver rich interactions (Flash Technology or HTML 5) is largely in the hands of custom
development rather than a single cross-platform format.
Flash has been the lingua franca for web delivery of interactions based on rich graphics and flexibility of input, as
it is available in every browser. The problem has therefore existed for the performance of Flash on the weaker
processes in Mobile Devices. Battery power is the big issue, and the trade-off of performance for battery life has
meant that most Mobile Devices have not supported Falsh which, in turn, has meant much eLearning content has
not automatically been available for mobile delivery.
However, this is changing due to HTML 5 which hosts the same capabilities of Flash but without the high end
power drainage caused by Flash. As such, many Apps now used in Mobile Devices already use or export HTML
5. Moreover, mobile processors are getting more powerful that are claiming to support Flash.
(vii) Four Cs and thinking Differently to Learn
Quinn (2011) characterises Four Cs (capabilities) of Mobile Learning that hold the potential to positively
transform the way learning is experienced by all members of a learning community: Content, Compute, Capture
and Communicate.
Content deals with the ability to store, or access, content on a device. The word here means media: documents
(text or graphics); audio; and video. According to Quinn (2011), much can be accomplished by making content
available to individuals when or where they are. This content includes: Audio files or video files of direct
teaching (lectures), interviews, and documentaries, documents of a variety of types, including ePub textbooks,
chapters, and articles.

Capture deals with the individual producing content rather than simply accessing it. Individuals can capture
pictures, audio, video and create images and texts. Mobile Devices can also record location, capture images of
contexts and videos of performances and take notes on the field. All captured data can then be saved to the Cloud
or shared.

32

Computedescribes learners using tools such as calculators or purchased or custom Apps to compute outcomes that
humans have neither the working memory nor knowledge to calculate. This typically involves the learner entering
observed parameters such as a quantity and area and calculating a density or something more complicated.

Communicate describes the sharing of data. Mobile devices allow learners to fulfil their natural tendency to
communicate, and they support synchronous or asynchronous interaction. Increasingly the world is moving from
voice and text to live video chat and sharing the photos and videos we capture. Communications can occur with
fellow learners, teachers, experts, family, friends or anyone else internal or external to the primary learning
environment.

A significant point of departure from the learners use of a Laptop, Netbook or Desktop Computer is that a Mobile
Device makes possible a learners ability to enact the four aforementioned 4 Cs either in isolation or in
combination through a single Mobile Device. For example, communicating a captured image for collaborative
support or capturing location as a basis of customising content.

33

In all cases, what is paramount in understanding the power of Mobile Devices to enhance Learning is the fact that
these Mobile Devices work to Augment our Cognitive Capabilities. That is, they provide capabilities that our
brains do not do well and vice versa.
As such, a learner who is provided with an opportunity to use a Mobile Device in their Learning journey,
irrespective of starting or endpoint, becomes a more powerful problem solver than without the portable
capabilities of Mobile Devices.
(viii) Local Context
Mobile Device capabilities are available wherever we need them and whenever we need them. In many ways,
they are no different from what we achieve with desktops or laptops or netbooks but with one significant caveat:
Mobile Devices have the unique property of being aware of the local context, via, for example, the capture of GPS
and local signals, and of doing things specific to context. This is an extremely important distinction which posits
exciting possibilities for the future of learning and the learner in the 21
st
century.
Context sensitivity therefore becomes an important opportunity that teachers and learners can exploit. Our
students (learners) are mobile and mobility takes them to different places. Through Mobile Devices, opportunistic
conjunctions of location and learning goals can be capitalised on. For example, a history student on his/her way to
school can capture an image of an historic building, share with his/her teacher/class which, in turn, can become an
impetus for future discussions/learning.
The other form of context which has largely been ignored is the when context, rather than the where. Mobile
Devices make it possible for us to know what our learners are doing, regardless of where they are, by their
calendar or by the application they are using. This enable teachers and peers to provide context-specific
information appropriate to the task, not the location. Moreover, if the when context is considered in terms of
application, teachers, families and peers can also provide support to a learner before, during and after a learning
experience to improve performance and personalise the learning experience via scaffolding.
****************
(ix) A Working Definition of Mobile Learning
In 2007, the eLearning Guild defined Mobile Learning in its 360 degree Mobile Learning Research Report
(Wexler et al., 2007):
Any activity that allows individuals to be more productive when consuming, interacting with, or creating
information, mediated through compact digital portable devices that an individual carries on a regular basis, has
reliable connectivity and fits easily into a pocket or purse.
This definition focuses on being more productive. However, this does not mean learners completing all their
learning on their device. This is because most Mobile Learning Apps are NOT about full courses but are instead
are about performance support and helping each individual learner in their own individual moment.
Significantly, the quick access that characterises a Mobile Device use is very much about support in the moment
rather than a one stop shop to replace more formal learning experiences. In other words, because Mobile
Devices Augment a Learners Cognitive Capabilities anytime, anywhere, any place, they provide a means to not
only enrich each learners learning experience but also personalise and democratise the very process of
Learning.

34

(B) Towards A New Paradigm of Learning
To take advantage of Mobile Device Capabilities, we need to build a shared vocabulary to describe learning so
that we can most fully capitalise on the potential made possible by Mobile Devices. In addition, we also need to
recognise that what has been (and is) the status quo in many Marcellin College classrooms (and schools
everywhere around the world) was designed for industrial age efficiency rather than natural effectiveness.
Quinn (2007c) describes seven Cs of learning that complement the four Cs of Mobile Learning (Quinn, 2011).
Starting with the way we naturally learn, before schooling, consider that learning involves:
1. Choosing what is important to t us
2. Committing to this choice, with persistence
3. Creating, whether product or performance
4. Occasionally Crashing
5. Conversing with others to help us (and others) understand
6. Copying by looking at others works and performance and modelling our own on it
7. Collaborating by working with others
In this model of learning, failure plays an important role and social learning is not only accepted but encouraged:
Copying isnt bad, talking together isnt wrong, and collaborating is desired. Moreover, this social constructionist
viewpoint is neither new nor revolutionary to educators as it involves integrating the thinking of Bruner (1961)
and Vygotsky (1978) as well as many others.
Thus, future efforts to design learning are premised on the need for us to help learners understand why its
important so they choose to participate and to set expectations so they are willing to commit. In other words,
learners need to be actively creating and constructing their own learning experiences which are supported by
teachers who ensure their learners receive feedback about their success and failure, and support mechanisms
that ensure each and every learner is resources with the support they need to ultimately succeed and finally share
tasks and learning with one another.
Current /Traditional Paradigms of Learning:
In many classrooms around the globe, teachers plan for the learning of their students by referring to the Learning
Design processes described Dick, Carey & Careys (2004) systematic design of instruction and the ADDIE model
of Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation and Evaluation . In simple terms, this involves identifying the
learning objective and the audience by undertaking a process that:
1. Characterises the desired performance and developing the final assessment
2. Develops the learning experience that is aligned to success on that assessment
3. Evaluates and refines the learning process to ensure it achieves the proscribed learning objective
The Learning elements that underpin such paradigms of learning are described by Collins, Brown and Holum
(1991), Reigeluth and Steins (1983) elaboration theory; Kellers (1983) ARCS (attention, relevance, confidence,
satisfaction) model; Spiro, Feltovich, Jacobsen and Coulsons (1989) cognitivie flexibility theory; and Van

35

Merrienboers (1997) four component instructional design model. This translates to the following learning
elements:
o An introduction that helps learners to understand:
Why this is important emotionally and societally
What theyll be doing and able to do
Relevant Knowledge
o A concept presentation of the model that guides performance
o Examples that demonstrate how that concept is applied in a context. This includes:
An explication of underlying thinking that guides performance
A demonstration of backtracking and repair
o Practice opportunities in applying the concept to con texts:
With examples and practice contexts
With alternatives that address reliable misconceptions that learners demonstrate, and individualised
feedback
With Feedback that relates to their performance to the concept
Starting with tasks within the learners grasp and gradually progressing to the full performance
o A summary that closes the experience that:
Cognitively indicates what learners are capable of, what they are subsequently ready to explore and where
learners might find more information
Emotionally celebrating their effort and ultimate success
Central to this traditional paradigm of learning is an emphasis on cognitive skills rather than attitudinal shift or
motor performance. Other popular pedagogies reorder the aforementioned elements, so a problem based learning
approach of Barrows (1986) puts the practice first. It is also a paradigm that calls upon designed instruction
which, in turn, must recognise that the environment and resources need to be planned to succeed. This means
Learning Design (such as Backward Design or Understanding by Design) is ultimately problematic as real world,
real time learning endeavours.
However, all is not lost precisely because the aforementioned traditional Learning Framework is useful to the
future planning educator who seeks to use Mobile Devices to achieve learning in a form that goes beyond simple
knowledge retention and cognitive skills. Central to this futures-orientated project is the need for teachers to
decouple different content development efforts from the learning event to rather think about how each can be used
discretely to serve a more distributed learning model.
***************

36

Towards a Future Realisation of Learning Goals
Objectives
Good learning starts with good objectives, from which we can align the practice tasks (the assessments) and then
the concepts and examples to support success. According to Quinn (2012), one of the major failures of formal
education is having objectives that are pure knowledge and not applied.
There is a distinction between knowledge and application of knowledge. As Alfred North Whitehead (1929) said,
Theoretical ideas should always find important applications within the pupils curriculum .. The problem of
keeping knowledge alive, of preventing it from becoming inert, is the central problem of all education.
Practice
In a linear order, the learners experience would start with an introduction, which suggests that this would be the
first element we would design. However, in a focused design process, we define the assessment after we specify
the objective, because we want the actual task the learner performs to be tightly coupled to the learning objective.
This increases the likelihood that the overall learning is aligned to achieve the desired outcome. The term practice
therefore is used to keep the focus on the learner developing practical and applied skills, the real key to achieving
meaningful otucomes.
In Engaging Learning: Designing eLearning Simulation Games (Quinn, 2005), the principle of aligning engaging
experiences with effective practice is explored. Next to mentored real practice, simulation games are the best
form of practice. This alignment highlighted the following elements are required to sustain student learning:
o Clear (or emerging) goals: the ultimate desired outcome of the activity should become apparent
o Appropriate Challenge: the task should be hard enough to avoid boredom but not so challenging as to be frustrating
o An integrating Story: the action should be set in a thematically coherent world
o Mearningful Link between Action and Story: what the learner does impacts the storyline
o Meaningful Link between Learner and Story: The learner has to care about the problem embodied in the world
o Active Exploration: The learner must make choices and discover the consequences, not just see the question and then
the answer
o Direct Manipulation: the learner must act on the represented world of the problem in a method as close to the real
mechanism as possible
o Appropriate feedback: the consequences of choices should be conveyed in ways that reflect how the world would
react (and ultimate should communicate via the concept of why the choice was right or wrong)
o Novelty: ideally, there is unpredictability in the outcome, or at least some unexpected components rather than linear
and deterministic outcomes.
Whilst this framework is an ideal for simulation games, it also affords us the possibility of creating better learning
practice with elements that are familiar to our students in other more familiar forms. For example: Branching
scenarios or better written multiple-choice questions can embody these principles. Irrespective, this framework
affords us to set a goal of creating a setting where learners have to make a decision that applies the concepts they
are learning in ways that solve contextualised problems and in ways that mimic how that knowledge gets applied
in the world outside the classroom.

37

Alternative Pedagogies
While the traditional model of learning is introduction concept example practice summary, using Mobile
Devices make other models of learning possible. These include problem based, navigable and adaptive.

In Barrows (1986) problem-based learning, an overarching practice task is presented first, and the rest of the
elements are arranged around this task. In this situation, the problem provides much of the motivation that the
introduction normally serves and drives interest in the associated concept, examples, and relevant practices then
lead to the ability to ultimately complete the practice.
Rather than prescript the approach, an alternative in asynchronous and independent learning is to make the content
navigable so that learners can choose what aspect they wish to accomplish. While progression may be blocked to
further learning units until completion is signalled by successful execution of whatever final practice is deemed
the necessary evaluation, learners are free to choose to explore concepts and examples and to attempt practices
under their own initiative. A default sequence may also be included for those who are less confident or capable in
self-directed learning.
Another alternative is to deliver an adaptive experience, which recommends examples, concepts, or more based on
a variety of factors including knowledge of the domain, learner preferences, or even learner characteristics.
Social Learning
Learning is not (and indeed some argue cannot be) individual but instead is social. Learner-mentor interactions
are one thing, but learner-learner interactions also have valuable outcomes. Quinn (2011) argues that social
interaction leads to tighter cycles of content engagement: Negotiation of shared understanding requires revisting
the content topic under alternate possibilities to converge upon an interpretation. This can occur just by hearing
other viewpoints but also can be assigned to teams to determine a joint response to an issue, or even more
rigorously, producing a shared solution to a problem. Designing social interactions requires greater consideration
of the abilities of learners to coordinate activities, but the learning outcomes can be more beneficial. Moreover, the
ability to see other performances and internalise not only the performances but also their monitoring is a second
important opportunity. This means the most valuable role a teacher can play in an ideal learning situation is not
to present content but rather to design activity and facilitate reflection. This is because although teachers can

38

present valuable information, this should not be to the exclusion of assessing individual comprehension and
guiding acquisition of the requisite thinking skills.
Learning to Learn
A final consideration for learning is the learners meta-learning, or learning to learn skills. Much is made both
principally and pragmatically of the 21
st
century skills: the necessary learning, thinking, and problem-solving
skills in the information era. These typically are dealt with not on an individual basis but within the context of
meaningful activity within a domain. Consequently, they serve as a layer on top of regular activity.
Performance Support
Considerations of the ways that learner performance can be supported should not be ignored. Rosett (2006)
categorises support as planners (pre or post event support) or side kicks (support for performance in the moment).
Documents can support both these needs well but performance support can also come in the form of the compute,
where calculations that are helpful in the moment but that are beyond the learners capabilities without digital
support.
*****************
All of the aforementioned provide educators with an enlightened view of learning. Understanding both the
capabilities of mobile devices and learning are of paramount importance if we are to take full advantage of mobile
opportunities to augment the student learning experience.
*****************
(B) Mobile Opportunities and Learning: Smaller Chunks, more frequently
In moving from mobile opportunities in administration to learning, we need to look at the elements of
learning: introduction, concept, example, practice. From a cognitive perspective, the primary distinction
between individuals are content consumption versus interactive knowledge and skill application.
The first C of the Four Cs of mobile capabilities of learning is content this is defined as the ability to drive
(or pull) content onto a mobile device and is THE major opportunity to improve Learning.
Content can serve several instructional purposes Introductions, concept presentations, examples and
summaries.
Content is associated with practice activities such as learning aids and performance support.
MEDIA:
Content here is defined as prepared digital materials stored as files.
These files can be documents, audio,or video in all cases, they are navigable and consumable content. These
files may be preloaded on the device, accessed via the mobile web, or downloaded or streamed on demand.
Irrespective, they are controlled only by presentation other than this, they offer no other form of interaction.
MATCHING MEDIA TO MESSAGE:
Ideally we need to match the choice of communication media to the learning goal.

39

If we need to present context, we can use images (photos) or videos.
If we want to restrict ourselves to the conceptual, we employ graphics or animation.
For linguistic communication, we use text, speech or audio.
For capturing the dynamics of relationships, contextual or conceptual, video or animation, respectively, would
be applicable, whereas for static relationships we can use images or graphics.
Diagrams and videos are both communication mechanisms that work particularly well for learning. The
conceptual relationships captured in a diagram, video or audio can be expressed in a concise way.
LECTURES:
Capturing direct teaching or lectures as delivered via audio or combined with video led to iTunes University
(Apples site for educational media files).
Individual schools can handle this within its own LMS or via its own portal equally well.
If the performance is already happening, whether in the classroom or via a webinar or virtual classroom, it can
be captured, saved and made available.
Similarly, if a textbook or relevant readings or media materials (e.g. films or interviews) are already being
used, they can then be made available for mobile access.
Teams of teachers can make narrated presentations and then make them available via audio, video or via
narrated presentations.
Direct Teaching, lectures and textbooks typically contain introductions, concepts and examples these are
easily made communicable via smartphones, laptops, tablets or ipads.
CUSTOM:
Custom mobile specific development and delivery needs to take into account the delivery environment and,
more importantly, going beyond simple convenience of access.
Any development investment should be focused on supplementing a course of study with small materials that
may reactivate or elaborate relevant materials such as additional representations of the concept.
Neilsen (2011) argues that the best learning on Mobile devices occurs because of the brevity of content.
MOBILE LEARNING COMPONENTS:
From a learning perspective, content is about the learning components of introductions, concepts, examples
and summaries. Each has unique properties.
Mobile Learning Introductions:
These open the learner emotionally as well as activate relevant cognitive components. Emotions are brought in
by drama or humour and can exaggerate the consequences positively for having the knowledge or skills or
negatively for the lack thereof. Comics, Videos, Photographs, Images and Short Prose serves this purpose.

40

Mobile Learning Concepts:
Presenting concepts is about communicating the underlying idea. This may mean diagrams to capture the
relationships inherent in a core model or use animations to capture these relationships in a dynamic sense.
Prose can be paired with diagrams and/or voice overs with animations. These become rich representational
opportunities for the mobile delivery of learning.
Mobile Learning Examples:
Presenting examples is about capturing a story, telling the event starting with the initial situation, and then
unfolding how the concept was applied, step by step (including backtracking and repair when appropriate), to
yield a solution. This can be done with prose, comic book, graphic novel, comic strip, narrated slide show or
video, voice recitation on a podcast; particularly if students commute.
Mobile Learning Summaries:
Summaries ideally should be customised; but generally can recap what has been seen and point to a new
direction. An additional element to close the emotional experience could also be explored.
Mobile Learning Brevity for Content is Key:
Smaller pieces of information more frequently provides the ideal scenario not only for developing content but
also in assisting and/or improving the learners ability to learn.
CONTEXT:
Contextual opportunities for mobile learning devices include tagging the environment via
posting a weblink when at a particular location, taking a photograph or video, using GPS.
META-LEARNING:
One of the main advantages of mobile learning is the ability to access information whenever and wherever.
This can be powerful but also comes with some consequences. Teachers and learners need to remain mindful
of the sources of content and the quality of results and the ability to process information on a mobile form
factor.
Typically, mobile learning access is contextualised in the moment which may preclude reflection. Learners,
despite being more familiar with technology, cannot be assumed to possess astute information literacy (Open
Education, 2008). Providing support therefore for comprehending good information access and information
validation is therefore particularly valuable.
We also need to ensure that students are capable users of their devices and this is not left to chance.
Considering and supporting meta-learning skills is paramount to learner success both in school and beyond.
MEDIA SPECIFICS
Documents the Low Hanging Fruit for Learning
Documents are the most pervasive form of content: static text with graphics or images. From a learning
perspective, documents serve as introductions, concepts, examples, or summaries. Most online learning
content is document driven: ePubs including textbooks, readings, diagrams and more. The mobile advantage
of these is that they can be accessed anytime anywhere when other activities may be precluded.

41

An important principle for creating content, specifically documents for mobile learning devices, is to separate
out how the content from how it is displayed. Well-designed web pages resize smoothly if we adjust the size
of the browser window. This principle of design for delivery on a variety of mobile devices is not only good
practice but is critically important.
Teachers should not specify fonts or sizes but allow the device to determine the bet for output.
Teachers should also consider the delivery representation in terms of the level of granularity at which content
is broken up. For Flexible, adaptive delivery, the goal is to separate individual examples from practice and
concepts (Quinn, 2000).
A rigorous tagging system should also be used so that the descriptors for the content teachers develop is
chosen pragmatically.
Developing and describing a few extra concept representations, examples, and practice at development time
initially supports reactivation over time with delivery at spaced intervals, whether mobile or desktop.
The ability to access different learning objects by description will support not only the PULL approaches by
learners who want to choose what to review or have short term need, but going forward, will also support
smart PUSH or system generated content.
An important consideration, specifically for images, is compression.
High quality images work great in print but are highly problematic on mobile devices. Overall memory of
devices is limited which impacts downloading content of large file sizes. Although mobile devices can
manage the viewing of large images via scrolling, consideration of the necessity of high quality images versus
lower quality better suited to mobile viewing is a worthwhile investment in teacher preparation time.
Documents are the proverbial low hanging fruit with little work, a teachers suite of PDFs and slide
presentations can be made available for viewing on a range of mobile devices.
Most tools that teachers use on laptop or desktop computers have output or export functions to create file
types that can be viewed on mobile devices.
Audio and Video
Audio and video is dynamic content because it can present a continual stream of content.
Both can be used to present introductions and examples.
Audio can convey concepts, but the lack of visual accompaniment may limit applicability to content with
multiple relationships; therefore, video is more likely to work for all purposes.
Examples, in particular, are highly suited to the use of dynamic media. Stories are powerful ways to
communicate the flow of problem solving, showing the application of concepts to context. The dynamic media
can be compelling whether it is a storyteller telling the story or a visual narration of the situation.
The ability to access additional examples conveniently is a powerful mobile adjunct to formal learning.
Video is a particularly powerful media, capturing our highly developed visual system, particularly when
coupled with an audio track it becomes extremely engaging. However, when done poorly, the same can
become aversive.

42

Audio and Video are dynamic content, content that a learner must pay attention to so as to not lost his/her
place. A good principle of design, therefore, is providing a way to replay and give the learner access to
playback, including pause and play, moving within,
Dynamic content, like document images, however, also has trade-offs in size and quality. Mobile formats err
on the side of small size to minimise download times and costs.
ACCESSING:
Making content available for mobile device access is a two part process: 1. Create the media in a mobile
deliverable form; 2. Making the mobile content available.
Documents can be served as PDF files, web pages or raw text, via ebooks and/or e-readers.
Common Audio and Video can exist as MP3 or MP4.
Educationally speaking, Apples iTunes University is another delivery mechanism that teachers can consider.
For years to date it has been a way for schools both secondary and tertiary to archive and make accessible
audio and video recordings of lectures.
In general, conversion of documents into a variety of formats is now built into most content creation tools. In
addition, a variety of free and open-source conversion tools is available for many formats on the main
Windows and iOS platforms.
LMS:
Hosting content is the second component of mobile delivery.
The devices need a way to access content.
Accessing through the Web, via a portal, and having it downloaded is one option.
Synching it onto a device is a second.
More common is the use of a mobile interface to content and Learning Management Systems to make hosting
more automatic.
Moodle is the premier open-source LMS in Higher Education whilst other paid options are available.
FIRST STEPS:
Developing appropriate Content is the FIRST step to transform learning in education.
Step 1: To begin, teachers can start with doing an audit of their current resources to determine which can be easily
made mobile accessible.
Step 2: Thereafter, consideration of the changes that need to be made to build learning objects that suit mobile
formats so these become an automatic outcome of teacher/department/school curriculum planning for learning
needs to become second nature.

43

CONTENT TYPE

INTRODUCTION

CONCEPT

EXAMPLE

SUMMARY

Document

Comic that exaggerates the
consequences of X not being
able to do Y

A diagram

A Graphic Novel version of
someone solving the
problem using the concept,
with annotation

A short reconnection of the
learning content back to the
larger context;
acknowledgement of the
learners effort and new
accomplishments and
pointers for what is next

Audio

Character X doesnt know
how to do Y, and ends up in
trouble as a direct
consequence

An eloquent presentation of
the concept

A well told story of a
problem, applying the
concept (ideally starting
with some false starts)
ending in triumph

A congratulations message
from the teacher
acknowledging effort and
the new capabilities of the
learner

Video

An introduction to the topic
by a well known expert in
the field

An animation of the
underlying concept

A documentary style story
of how the concept was
applied in a particular
situation

A video capturing the
learners new capabilities as
they play out in the real
world and connecting the
learner to the topic.

************
LEARNING INTERACTION AND ASSESSMENT
We Need to Design Opportunities for Students to make Meaningful Decisions
Practice is the core to making learning effective: that is, both retained and transferable to appropriate
situations. This requires ensuring that there are meaningful objectives and provides a very real opportunity to
impact the learning of our students.
Mobile Device Learning brings about not only convenience but also the ability to practice a particular
situation in the classroom.
For this reason, the Compute capability of the 4 Cs is critical wherein the Capture capability also plays a
crucial role
DESIGN:
The core of meaningful practice is application.
Making the choices that need to be made after the learning experience is the best preparation, and preparatory
practice is part of this path.
Whilst recitation of knowledge has its place, it is meaningful application and a focus on enabling the
possibility of decision making and therefore applying cognitive skills that characterises real performance.

44

The issue for teachers has long been the balance between the knowledge that learners need to know and
application of that knowledge to solve problems. And, as all teachers know, it is easy to test the former but
much more difficult to assess the latter.
However, it is the application of knowledge that is the more important ultimate outcome and is the task that
most engages the learner.
Thus the ideal search for knowledge is driven by a realised need that develops while trying to achieve
meaningful goals. As such, the need develops for meaningful tasks.
This is where our Mobile Devices come to the fore as they provide teachers with the tools to make more
meaningful tasks and, more importantly, the ability to more flexibly deliver knowledge, meaningful tasks and
a degree of engagement otherwise hard to sustain.
Formative and Summative Assessment therefore collide in the Mobile Learning world. Learners who get
feedback on how they did and what it does (or should) mean, receive formative assessment. If a score is
recorded, it is summative. But mobile devices naturally lend themselves to making all assessment formative
and summative assessment the reserve of the penultimate task designed to indicate performance at a particular
level or standard.
PROCESSING:
Teachers need to plan for the Processing of Content that they want their students to undertake. Elements that
contribute to meaningful processing include Personalisation, Extension and Application.
Personalisation
Personalisation in this instance refers to students relating a concept to their own past or intended experience.
By applying a concept to explain things in the past or to think about the future, students begin to exercise their
individual relationship to the concept.
As such, Journal Keeping (or blogging) is a particularly valuable adjunct for teachers to consider in any
learning scenario.
Extension
The second form of processing the relationships students have to their learning is providing opportunities for
them to extend the concept by considering how other concepts can affect the current content focus.
This allows students to both further consolidate their understanding of a particular concept and reprocess it in
a variety of contexts from a variety of perspectives and therefore develop empathy.
Application
Application is the ultimate form of processing to achieve the purposes of retention and the ability for student
to apply learnt concepts to a context.
In this instance, the context is the story and the learning occurs as a situation is created that requires a decision
that requires an application of knowledge (Quinn, 2005).

45

ASSESSMENT:
All teachers know that the principle of assessment is to align the task to the desired outcome wherein objective
criteria are used to determine the final performance. That is, a criterion-referenced model is preferred.
Assessment using Mobile Devices provides a number of additional options and benefits:
It enables evaluation on the fly, or while teaching is occurring, which allows the learning experience of
students to be instantly customised (think Twitter).
It provides regular checks during a larger learning experience which, in turn, helps students keep track on how
they are doing and teachers assess progress so as to personalise each learners experience.
Knowledge tests to measure whether students have the requisite preparation and application can be designed
using a range of Apps which can then be used to assure students ability to perform.
Students (and teachers) can reactivate their performances (via replay buttons!) which helps assure students,
guarantee retention over time (through repetition), and over a variety of contexts and situations.
DESIGNING INTERACTIONS - CONSIDERATIONS:
The number one priority in planning Learning interactions is to keep design Simple, Navigable and
Accessible.
Interactions are, at the core, the presentation of a choice to the learner, the learners response, and ideally
feedback to the learner all of these can be built into Content housed on LMS systems, such as Moodle,
which provide learning interfaces that can generate very specific data specific to the total learner experience;
from the point of logging on to using any one of the myriad of tools such as multiple-choice quizzes etc.
An important issue of interactive content is navigation. Therefore, teachers need to ensure they pay careful
attention to designing clues and keep consistent the interface design and actions.
Consistency on the LMS is particularly important as it is in itself a form of support for students familiarity in
platform consistencies particularly in navigation minimise confusion for students and instil confidence.
Providing location clues such as a breadcrumb trail (simple list that tells users the pages they have navigated
through) is a simple, familiar but very powerful mechanism that teachers can use to leverage learning.
Information architecture also needs to be simply and consistently defined.
Good information architecture makes certain that information is located where users expect and that the user
can make easy inferences about how to proceed such interactions should be made in small and simple steps
so that navigation itself does not become an issue and that response options are clear.
INTERACTIONS:
There chronological variations in how interactions can proceed that teachers should bear in mind:
Asynchronous interactions are ones that learners access at their convenience or as Timed interactions
(simulations or games)

46

Synchronous interactions are accessed live during either a face-to-face (F2F) classroom learning experience or
as an online course. These include:
Audience response system tools that collect data from audiences using Apps; particularly when opinion is
sought or questions are asked and possible solutions posed.
Quizzes composed of true/false, multiple choice and short answer questions are now built in features of
LMS systems such as Moodle; such quizzes can generate a range of data forms.
Quizzes typically assess knowledge but also can capture more meaningful situated performance
The ancillary or companion materials that publishers provide to supplement their textbooks are increasingly
available for student interaction in a mobile form.
In all cases ,feedback on performance is needed; particularly contextualised feedback which links the learners
performance in context back to the concept being explored.
CONTEXT:
Context specific practice provides learners with location specific or context specific challenges to work on,
and these can be delivered and captured via mobile devices.
This is particularly important because professionals working in the real world do not do so in a vacuum.
CAPTURE:
A unique capability of mobile devices is their ability to capture.
Learners can go out and capture instances of a concept or context, whether with audio, images or video. This
can be an assignment in and of itself or merely a learners way to illustrate points in their assignments. E.g. a
learner could capture a picture of a particular plant or building, a recording of an interview, or a video of a
performance for discussion with other learners or a teacher.
An important way for learners to capture their understanding is by representing them.
Students can write, speak or visually represent their thoughts.
Students could then annotate their products and performances which makes their thinking visible.
Microblogging, blogging, discussion lists, cloud based document suites all make this possible.
Software that transforms voice to text or record audio; including voice memo software or audio recording that
chronicle thoughts for later transcription enable students to capture their thoughts as they occur and then make
them available for later processing.
Learners can also capture their own performances whether directly as per audio, video including first
language attempt etc. or by measuring or inputting outputs of their performance as observed by others.
This provides students with an opportunity to learn the power of self-evaluation and comment or provide
feedback.

47

Stored performances can also serve as components of a portfolio that can be coupled with other learning
products or to be used as evidence for parent-teacher information sessions wherein the learning portfolio
becomes the centre of a conversation about student learning, goal setting and reflection.
This is a life-skill tool that prompts the development of literacies that go beyond the text, an important 21
st

century skill.
META-LEARNING:
The ability to take assessments where convenient and to have richer forms of capture and
representation provides for the possibility of self-monitoring.
Performing without supervision creates opportunities for teaching students an important
life skill: self-monitoring the development of their own capabilities.
************
SOCIAL LEARNING & MOBILE DEVICES
Recap: Content delivers learning resources such as textbooks and media files; Capture and Compute play a role in
practice activities to apply the knowledge. Now the Fourth C Communicate in the form of Socialising
Learning needs to be added to the frame.
Mobile Devices facilitate interaction, supporting not only convenient access but also coordination and
communication regardless of location.
Tools for communication are increasing and are increasingly embedded in LMSs because they provide rich
learning experiences:
Email and Mobile Phones
Microblogging started with Twitter
Wiki and Google Docs are now mainstream
Facebook now have corporate equivalents
In all of the above, the dimension of synchrony is important. Synchronous communication allows addressing the
moment of need. Asynchronous communication, however, can be more reflective.
Significantly, each has its role e.g. clarifying questions during a presentation can keep learning on track;
taking time to reflect and contribute over time can develop deeper understanding.
LEARNING INTERACTIONS
In learning, there are two types of interactions: learner- teacher and learner-learner. Teachers can pass on
information about upcoming assignments, provide unique feedback and answer questions.
One alternative to the regular learner-teacher interaction that is unique to Mobile Devices is when connection
can happen in context. In addition to learner-initiated connection, a proactive connection can be made upon an
external trigger such as task completion or some other signal event.

48

Real power in social learning comes from learner-learner interaction.
The valuable processing that happens when reflecting personally or extending or applying a concept is
magnified in social interactions.
When students reflect publicly and read other reflections, more processing is happening.
When groups debate a response to an associated extension, the processing cycles are tighter
When groups work together to solve problems, their dialogue is richer.
Parallel conversations can occur
Ongoing dialogue - over an extended period can allow students to see their understanding being constructed
from a variety of perspectives, positions and polarities.
Forms of Social Communication can include:
Written discussion forums, blogs, micro-blogs, wikis
Images, audio and video that is shared and commented upon. This can later be assigned as a stimulus for
forward learning task/concept.
All of the above provides a unique opportunity for students to regularly be involved in deeper learning
Beyond the convenience of communicating when the mood strikes, Mobile Devices support a second benefit when
learning is conducted in situ when the learners are at appropriate locations for specific activities:
Collaborative tasks that mimic the way students may behave in the outside world can be augmented in these
situations with mobile tools:
Online role playing can occur via email, face to face, vlogging, blogging
Learners may perform social or sporting or professional tasks that they then need to revisit.
Students can use mobile tools to create shared representations whilst collocated
Collaborate to create audio or video files when presenting a view point or raising an issue
SOCIAL MEDIA
New social media capabilities that can be harnessed for learning must be:
Feedable (can be syndicated out to and followed by others)
Searchable (so others can find it)
Linkable (so others can point to it)
Taggable (so others can add value to it)
Editable (so others can improve it)
In all of the above, the focus is on ensuring that anything created can be added to, shared, followed and more.
Mobile Devices support all of these capabilities and therefore allow a cycle of learning, creating and providing
feedback to constantly circulate.

49

META-LEARNING
Interacting with others requires a suite of skills, and doing so through technology adds another set.
The ubiquity possible with mobility provides some additional considerations for:
Communication
Listening
Participation
Problems that Teachers need to remain mindful of:
Textese (text shorthand e.g. gr8) which are driven by character limitations and the size of mobile keyboards;
as such, leading a reflection with students on appropriate communication style per device is required.
Communication tools being ubiquitous (can impact listening)
What constitutes participation? (Tweeting, sharing mind maps, how are contributions to evaluated per
communication channel? Are they equal? Is there sufficient choice to cater for all learning styles?)
Mobile Learning Device etiquette (when should devices be on, off? When is it ok to participate in Twitter
when formal teaching is occurring? Should each class have its own etiquette or a school-wide policy?
For each of the above, policies can be set for the individual classroom.
However, this need also provides an excellent whole-staff discussion point if what students considered and the
decisions they made is brought into the staff forum. This is because it will do much to:
Reveal the Shifting definitions that describe what learning means to students in a mobile era.
Expose the spaces that need to be discussed to ensure each students learning experience is augmented by:
1. Sharing thoughts
2. Responding to others
3. Working together
4. Interacting more flexibly
5. Allowing students to do things unique to location, space or time
6. Capturing and sharing real-time experiences
7. Reflecting upon experiences to feed forward into future learning experiences.

50

BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Barrows, H.S. (1986). A taxonomy of problem-based learning methods. Education, 20 (6).
Bozarth, J. (2010). Social Media for Trainers. San Francisco: Pfeiffer
Clark, R.C., & Mayer, R. E. (2003). Elearning and the science of instruction. San Francisco: Pfeiffer
Cross, J., & Dublin, L. (2002). Implementing eLearning. Alexandria, VA: ASTD.
Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, D.O. (2004). The systematic design of instruction (6
th
ed). Boston: Allyn & Bacon
Keller, J. (1983). Motivational Design of Instruction. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and
models: An overview of their current status. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Kukulska-Hulme, A., and Traxler, J. (Eds.). (2005). Mobile Learning: A handbook for educators and trainers.
London: Routledge.
Laurillard, D. (1993). Rethinking University Teaching: A Framework for effective use of educational technology.
London: Routledge.
Metcalf, D. S. (2006). mLearning: Mobile Learning and performance in the palm of our hand. MA: HRD Press.
Quinn, C. N. (2000). Learning Objects and instruction components. Educational Technology & Society, 3 (2).
Quinn, C.N. (2004). Learning at large: Situating learning in the bigger picture of action in the world. Educational
Technology Magazine, 44 (4).
Quinn, C.N. (2005). Engaging Learning: Designing eLearning simulation games. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
Quinn, C.N. (2009a). Populating the LearnScape: elearning as strategy. In M. allen (ed.), Michael Allens
eLearnign annual 2009. Pfeiffer: San Francisco.
Quinn, C.N. (2011). Designing mLearning: Tapping into the mobile revolution for organisational performance.
San Francisco: Pfeiffer
Rosett, A., & Shafer, L. (2006). Job aids and performance support: Moving from knowledge in the classroom to
knowledge everywhere. Pfeifer: San Francisco
Wexler, S., Schlenker, B., Brown, J., Metcalf, D., Quinn, C., Thor, E., Van Barneveld, A., & Wagner, E. (2007).
360 research report mobile learning: What is it, why it matters and how to incorporate it into your learning
strategy. Santa Rosa, CA: eLearning Guild.
Wills, S., Leigh, E., & Ip, A. (2011). The power of role-based eLearning. NY: Routledge.
Woodill, G. (2010). The Mobile Learning Edge: Tools and technologies for developing your teams. NY: McGraw-
Hill.

51


IV: SYNERGIES REQUIRED TO ENABLE AND SUSTAIN
AUGMENTED LEARNING
I. Adopting a Systemic Change Management Model to enable ICT Innovation
A Review of Educational Research
II. Building and Sustaining a Professional Learning Community Constantly
Focused on Learning

52

(I) Adopting a Systemic Change Management Model to enable ICT Innovation
A Review of Educational Research
Rebecca Carter (2012)

ABSTRACT
This literature review identifies and outlines the key characteristics of systemic change management models as
they relate to education and the implementation of ICT innovation. Critical findings include the need to view the
change process as dynamic, complex and synergistic rather than isolative and independent and the need for
researchers to examine the interrelationships and interdependence of the key elements identified by systemic
change management theorists as necessary for the systemic change process to succeed in the 21
st
century learning
environment context.
Introduction
Teachers in Australian schools at the State and National level are increasingly expected to use technology as an
innovative tool for learning to support the deeper learning of their students. In 2009, this was made manifest by
the National Partnership Multilateral Agreement between Australian Federal and State governments which was
announced to facilitate the implementation of the Digital Education Revolution (DER). This Agreement was
designed to realise an election promise of $2.207 billion investment over six years to contribute sustainable and
meaningful change to teaching and learning in Australian schools to prepare students to live and work in a digital
world (DEEWR, 2009).

To further fuel the impetus of this digital educational revolution, the Victorian Government launched the $60.5
million Ultranet, the largest ever ICT education project to enable students and teachers to use Web 2.0 tools,
create personal learning portfolios, access digital learning resources and collaborate with their peers and
colleagues across the state (DEECD, 2010). Premised on a Vision of innovative learning whereby each student
would be immersed in a student-centred electronic learning environment that supported high quality learning and
teaching, connected students, teachers and parents and enabled efficient knowledge transfer, the Ultranet sought
to establish a schools environment for the future that would change forever the educational landscape of
Victorian public schools (DEECD, 2010 Emphasis mine).

The current view of many educational researchers is that ICT-innovations within the educational landscape need
to be conceptualised, nurtured and understood as a pedagogical solution and a means to support a shift from
traditional educational paradigms towards emerging pedagogical approaches (Forkosh, Mioduser and Nachmias,
2006). Viewed in this way, the innovation proffered by ICT (irrespective of Device) proposes a qualitative
educational shift towards a new educational paradigm that involves a complex process that evolves through many
channels, over time and involving many actors within a defined social system.

For this reason, this Device Recommendation Paper necessarily addresses not only the best-fit Device for
Marcellin College in 2014 (and beyond) but also how to optimise Systemic Change Management to enable ICT
innovation to occur irrespective of the specifications, cost or operation system of the Device finally chosen.
Indeed, the impetus to recognise that the uptake of any particular Device at Marcellin College in 2014 (and
beyond) does not occur within a vacuum (Markauskaite & Reimann, 2008) is made manifest by the Victorian

53

Governments recent admission that its $180 million dollar Ultranet failed to deliver the promised benefits
[because it was] dogged from the start by inadequate planning, cost blow-outs [and] disastrous professional
training for teachers (The Age, 28 June 2013 Emphasis mine).

******************
Research into ICT Implementation within Organisations

Research into the implementation of technological systems within organisations has tended to fall into one of two
categorical approaches: factors (or variance) research and process research (Hogarth & Dawson, 2008). Factors
research has focused on the individual critical success factors or variables that bear relationships to particular
implementation outcomes whereas process research has sought to explain how implementation unfolds over time
in terms of events and the contextual factors that prompt them (Hogarth & Dawson, 2008).
A diverse range of variables have been studied in change factors research of organisations. These include: user
characteristic variables, such as user satisfaction (Rivard, 1987); user expectations (Szajna & Scamell, 1993); and
personal innovativeness (Leonard-Barton & Deschamps, 1988). Factors research aimed at the organisational level
has documented variables such as: management support (Sharma & Yetton, 2003) and planning processes (Horner
Reich & Benbasat, 2000). Research centred at the technology level has highlighted variables such as ease of use
(Rivard, 1987). In such factors research, success has been defined predominantly in accordance with the ability to
meet outcomes such as meeting project deadlines, finishing within budget or improved productivity. In the
education organisational context, Duffy and Reigeluth (2008) state that many contemporary approaches to
improving education fail because school based improvement advocates ignore the whole system and focus only
on the parts; that is, they are premised on the erroneous assumption that if enough parts are fixed, then the
performance of the whole system will improve. Hogarth and Dawson (2008) affirm that focusing on factors is one
of the main shortcomings of factors research as it overlooks many critical and interesting aspects of change
processes.
Process research typically attempts to offer insights into how implementation unfolds over time. In so doing, it
may incorporate elements of factor research by examining changes in related variables (Prescott & Conger, 1995).
This has resulted in the distinction between factors and process research becoming somewhat blurred. As such, a
subtype of process research stage research has been widely adopted by researchers as it focuses upon how
implementation unfolds while directing particular attention to the time-ordering of events, as well as the causal or
facilitating conditions in which they occur (Hogarth & Dawson, 2008).
There are several stage models of implementation that feature notably in the literature on organisational change.
These include Rogers (1995) initial five-stage model and Cooper and Zmuds (1990) model which, according to
Hogarth & Dawson (2007), is the best known model in the context of IT research. Both models are based on a
rational planning approach to coordinating change. For instance, the model outlined in Cooper and Zmud (1990)
consists of six stages which are labelled as follows: initiation (problem or opportunity identification); adoption
(management-level decision to adopt); adaption (innovation development and installation); acceptance
(individuals induced to use innovation); routinisation (innovation becomes part of the everyday running of the
organisation); and infusion (increased organisation performance stemming from innovation use). According to
Hogarth and Dawson (2008), these stages unfold against a background of five major contextual factors. These
include: first, the characteristics of the innovation; second, the characteristics of the organisation; third, the
characteristics of the innovation; fourth, the characteristics of the task to which the innovation is applied; and last;
the characteristics of the organisational environment. Hogarth and Dawson (2008) assert that central to the stage
models detailed above is the assumption that rational decision-making processes characterise the first few
management-level stages, while organisational- change processes ensue as a consequence of the innovation

54

implementation, which are resolved when the innovation becomes accepted as a routine part of organisational life.
This means such stage models characterise the change process as linear.
In so saying, Hogarth and Dawson (2008) affirm the need to broaden the scope of stage models to explicitly
acknowledge the complexities associated with the processes of change as well as the processes of organising that
go on within enterprises. This requires a systemic view of organisation, wherein the structure of a given system is
understood as the interlocking, potentially time-delayed relationships amongst its component parts.
In this view, emergent outcomes cannot necessarily be understood by looking at the organisations individual parts
in isolation as organisations have permeable, fluid boundaries that are both changed by their interactions with the
environment, whilst also changing the environment through those interactions. This recognition that because one
part of a system is linked to other parts, and that a significant change in one part will only succeed if there are
significant complementary changes in other parts of the system, provides an invaluable means by which to
understand why many contemporary piecemeal or part approaches to school-based organisational
improvement fail. This is because if changes are made to a few parts of the system and not to others, the changed
parts become incompatible with the remaining parts of the system and are ultimately forced back to their pre-
change status (Duffy and Reigeluth, 2008).
******
Research into Systemic Change in Education
According to Duffy and Reigeluth (2008), there has been a resurgence of interest in systemic change in education,
including proposed U.S. federal legislation that recognises the importance of systemic change for helping school
districts create 21
st
Century learning environments because prior change efforts in educational organisations
have not produced desired outcomes (Banathy, 1991, 1992; Glickman, 1993; Goodlad, 1984; Perelman, 1987;
Reigeluth, 1994). Moreover, this resurgence of interest has revealed that previous efforts to implement systemic
change were problematized by three key factors: first, different people use the term systemic change to
communicate very different ideas about education; second, different people advocate very different approaches to
improving education and third, the ways that different educational reformers conceive systemic change appears to
depend largely on their differing conceptions of what constitutes an educational system (Reigeluth & Squire,
2000; Duffy & Reigeluth, 2008).
For this reason, Reigeluth and Squire (2008) propose four major meanings for systemic change in education:
statewide, districtwide, schoolwide and ecological system change. The following compendium of definitions for
systemic change were first identified by Reigeluth and Squire in 2000 and were subsequently reiterated by these
same educational theorists in 2008:
Statewide Policy Systemic Change: creating statewide changes in tests, curricular guidelines, teacher
certification requirements, text book adoptions, funding policies, and so forth that are coordinated to
support one another. This meaning is how policy makers typically think of systemic change.
Districtwide Systemic Change: producing changes in curriculum or programs throughout a school district.
This meaning is how P-12 educators typically think of systemic change.
Schoolwide Systemic Change: creating change inside individual school buildings. This is the definition
used by school based improvement advocates.
Ecological Systemic Change: making changes based upon a clear understanding of interrelationships and
interdependencies within a system and its external environment. Change leaders subscribing to this view

55

recognise that significant change is one part of their systemic requires changes in other parts of that
system.
(Duffy & Reigeluth, 2008).
According to Duffy & Reigeluth (2008), the first three definitions apply some principles of systemic change, but
they do not create systemic change. Moreover, whilst the Ecological Systemic Change definition proffered by
Reigeluth and Squire (2000) can be seen as an example of the Systemic Change process advanced by Systems
Thinkers such as Senge (1990), Ackoff (1981) and Banathy (1991, 1992, 1996), this definition does not always
create the transformational paradigm required to support organisational innovation (Eckel, Hill and Green, 1998).
Eckel, Hill and Green (1998) define systemic transformational organisational change as: first, a change that alters
the culture of the institution by changing select underlying assumptions and institutional behaviours, processes and
products; second, a change that is deep and pervasive which affects the whole institution; third, an intentional
change and last, a change that occurs over time. One decade later, Duffy & Reigeluth (2008) tailored two
educational specific requirements to the systemic transformational change definition first proffered by Eckel, Hill
and Green (1998). Premised on their belief that there is no other way to recreate school systems for success in the
21
st
Century Information Age, Duffy and Reigeluth (2008) advocate that for transformational or paradigm
systemic educational change to occur, the following two requirements need to be met in addition to those first
suggested by Eckel, Hill and Green (1998): first, the change must create a school system that continuously seeks
an idealised future for itself and second; the change must create a future system that is substantially different from
the current school system; that is, the system must be transformed to perform within a different paradigm (Duffy
& Reigeluth, 2008).
Furthermore, the literature on systemic change in organisations (Ackoff, 1974; Nevis, Lancourt & Vassallo, 1996;
Pasmore, 1988; Pava, 1983; Trist and Murray, 1993) suggests that change leaders need to consider simultaneously
three inter-connected paradigm shifts to create and sustain transformational change in educational systems. Duffy
(2002, 2003) re-labelled these three paradigm shifts as change paths when he sought to tailor them for school
system transformation:
Path 1 Transform the systems core and supporting work processes.
Path 2 Transform the systems internal social infrastructure
Path 3 Transform the systems relationship with its external environment.

According to Duffy (2002,2003), the Path 1 Paradigm shift transforms the primary work processes of teaching
and learning to a paradigm that is customised to learners individual needs, is focused on the attainment of
proficiencies, and requires continuous improvement as soon as the new paradigm is implemented. Duffys Path 2
Paradigm shift involves transforming the school systems social structure (organisational culture, communication
practices, job descriptions, reward systems) from a command-and-control organisational design to a participatory
organisation design. Finally, Duffys Path 3 Paradigm shift is premised upon transforming the relationship
between the school system and its systemic environment from being isolative and reactive to being collaborative
and proactive (Duffy, 2002, 2003).
*****

Models of Systemic Change in Education

56

Joseph and Reigeluth (2010) assert that there is a strong need to advance our knowledge about the systemic
change process and how it operates in the educational context. Toward this end, they propose a conceptual
framework of the systemic change process in education that serves as a lens through which to review important
educational change efforts and school change. In so doing, Joseph and Reigeluth (2010) provide a set of concepts
that can be used to think about the systemic change process and as tools by which to examine the educational
change literature. These concepts are: broad stakeholder ownership, learning organisation, understanding the
systemic change process, evolving mindsets about education, a systems view of education and, systems design.
As outlined in Figure 1, Joseph and Reigeluths (2010) Conceptual Framework for Systemic Educational change
presents six overlapping elements that are presented in a loop to represent the fact that the change process is an
iterative process. Significantly, there are multiple entry points that allow for education organisational
customisation in accordance to a particular schools change requirements. Moreover, in advocating this method
for understanding systemic change in education, Joseph and Reigeluth (2010) call for scholars to explore the
interrelationships and interdependencies between the six elements and for policy makers to address all of them to
ensure the transformation of educational systems into a leaner-centred paradigm of education.

Figure 1: A Conceptual Framework of the Systemic Change Process in Education
Two years earlier, Debowski (2008) asserted that on a theoretical level there are two causal models that inform
change processes. The first operates from an economic and rationalist framework in which organisational
structures, goals, processes and systems which require adaptation are identified and altered. This model
recommends a top-down strategy where strong leadership drives the reform process and people are strongly
encouraged to accept and integrate the identified change. In the case of a school, changes to the curriculum model
or assessment practices could reflect this theory. However, according to Debowski (2008), change conducted in
this manner can be rejected by the school community if there is insufficient engagement by those who will use the
systems once they are developed.
As such, Debowski (2008) outlines the concepts which would later be utilised by Joseph and Reigeluth (2010) by
declaring the efficacy of a second causal which emphasises the importance of building organisational capacity
across the whole school community. In so doing, an inclusive and innovative culture is promoted, with all
members of the community building ownership and familiarity with the change agenda and its consequences. This
means the accretive development of principles and practices is made to suit the community and the need to

57

accommodate different community members. In Debowskis (2008) model, the processes of change are
determined in consultation with stakeholders and therefore promote the recognition of the part all members of the
change community play in building sustainable change.
Debowski (2008) therein argues that within this second causal model there are both transactional and
transformative processes that need to operate in tandem. Transformational elements are those which influence
the behaviour and motivation of individuals. These may include the articulated goals and mission of the school,
the organisational culture, employee expectations and the leadership that is in place. Transactional factors are
the organisational processes which enable effective change to occur. These include management practices,
systems, policies and procedures, work and reporting structures, work group support for change and the
individuals role and capacity to undertake the new tasks or responsibilities (Debowski, 2008).
Drawing on the aforementioned conceptions of strategic change, Debowski (2008) advances a Strategic
Educational Change Model which she tested at Scotch College, a leading private boys school in Western
Australia. This model (outlined in Figure 2) emphasises three layers of organisational enhancement which operate
conjointly to encourage widespread engagement with and acceptance of the educational change programme.
These are the organisational, work group and individual elements.

Figure 2: A Model of Strategic Educational Change
Debowskis (2008) model again highlights the importance of promoting change across the various levels within
the school. In so saying, Debowski suggests there are four primary areas that play a major influencing role in
enabling systemic change in the educational context. These include effective leadership, the prevailing
organisational culture, the educational framework or platform that operates and, most importantly, how effectively
the associated systems, processes and expectations are reengineered to create an integrated and seamless
architecture for change. A key finding of Debowskis study in the context of Scotch College using the Model of
Strategic Educational Change is that the more a school creates synergistic systems and processes, the greater the
likelihood is of full adoption of all concerned (Debowski, 2008).

58

This notion of synergy is likewise advocated in the Zone of Effective Change Model advanced by McNaught
(2002). This model to implement innovative educational polices and practice in the Higher Education sector is
shown in Figure 3:

Figure 3: The Zone of Effective Change Model
Utilising polarity theory, McNaught advocates that instead of thinking of a range of problems, issues or options
that need to be considered during the implementation of an innovation within an educational institution, it is more
realistic to consider a series of polarities which are opposites which cannot function independently. Drawing on
the work of Johnson (1992), McNaught asserts that because the two sides of a polarity are interdependent, it is not
possible to choose one as a solution and neglect the other. Thus according to McNaught (2002), the solution for
affording the prospect of educational change resides within the tensions that exist between the polarity zones.
This emphasises the reasons for why change is a messy and dynamic situation, as the appropriate balance point for
one set of polarities shifts it influences all others. For example, in the Zone of Effective Change Model, instead of
thinking of change factors as: top down versus bottom up decision-making, we need to think of top down and
bottom up decision making. Similarly, instead of thinking of independent versus interdependent learning, we
should think of independent and interdependent learning. In other words, by removing all oppositional versus
thinking and replacing it with ways to consider how to gain maximum benefit by embracing both ends of the poles
of change factors, we enable the creation of a zone of most effective change which spawns the inclusion and
balancing of both ends of each change dimension (McNaught, 2002).
Like Joseph and Reigeluth (2010), Debowski (2008) and McNaught (2002), Duffy and Reigeluth (2008) affirm
that only tweaking the parts of a school system is a failed change strategy if transformational change within the
educational context is needed. As such, Duffy and Reigeluth (2008) devised a conceptual model for systemic
change especially designed to create and sustain transformational change in school districts which they called the
School System Transformation Protocol. Premised on the literature of systems thinking, systemic change,
complexity and chaos theory, organisation theory and design, organisation development and learning
organisations, the SST Protocol devised by Duffy and Reigeluth (2008) subsequently became part of the US
nationwide FutureMinds: Transforming American School Systems initiative which was launched by the
Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) in 2008. This SST Protocol is shown in
Figure 4:

59

Figure 4: The School System Transformation (SST) Protocol
Duffy and Reigeluths (2008) SST Protocol is built on the following four premises:
1. Paradigm change requires mindset change (this requires broad stakeholder ownership and participatory
leadership and consensus-based decision making).
2. Paradigm change requires invention (this requires idealised design, systems thinking, continual learning
and an emergent design process that starts with high leverage changes).
3. Paradigm change requires changing all parts of the system, including the districts core and
supporting work processes (this includes instructional system, assessment system, record-keeping
system, central office functions and internal social infrastructure which includes rules, roles and
relationships, organisational culture, organisational design, reward system and finally, its relationship with
its external environment).
4. Paradigm change requires using a substantially different approach to creating and sustaining change.
Significantly, Duffy and Reigeluths (2008) SST Protocol has both sequential elements and elements operating in
tandem that need to be addressed continuously throughout the transformation process. Moreover, each of the
sequential elements identified by Duffy and Reigeluth (2010) falls into five phases wherein each phase has several
steps and each step has multiple tasks and activities. Flowing continuously throughout the SST Protocol is a
collection of eighteen continuous processes which are described in Table 1:

60

The five phases containing these eighteen continuous processes identified by Duffy and Reigeluths (2008) SST
Protocol are as follows:
Phase 1 Prepare
Phase 2 Envision
Phase 3 Transform
Phase 4 Sustain
Phase 5 Evaluate

In proscribing these five phases, Duffy and Reigeluth (2008) confirmed the need to recognise synergy is an
important phenomenon that influences the performance of school systems. This means that Duffy and Reigeluths
(2008) SST Protocol affirms that synergy occurs when discrete parts of a system interact to create an effect greater
than the parts can create in isolation. As such, the five phases in their SST Protocol should not be thought of as a
linear lock-step sequence. Rather, they should be perceived as a set of flowing activities that converge, diverge,
and backflow from time to time and do so repeatedly until the entire system is transformed. This means that in the
SST Protocol, transformational change should not be seen as a one-time event but rather a cyclical lifelong
journey with periods of continuous improvement between periods of transformational change (Duffy and
Reigeluth, 2008).
A Systemic Change Model to enable an e Learning Culture of Innovation, Collaboration, Interconnection and
Interdependence
Drawing on the 2001 findings of the National Schools Boards Foundation Report E-Learning for Educators,
Menchaca, Bischoff and Dara-Abrams (2003) also emphasise the importance of the organisational change process
to build the foundation for the implementation of eLearning. In so doing, Menchaca et al. (2003) state that that
because change management in education is a complex matter, particularly with the adoption of eLearning,
additional tools and measures need to be developed through further analysis. To achieve this end, Menchaca et al.
(2003) developed the eLearning Adoption Systemic Change Model for Culture of Innovation, Collaboration,
Interconnection and Interdependence.
In seeking to understand the systemic change management process necessary for eLearning initiatives to succeed,
Menchaca et al. (2003) analysed the conduction of the change management process underlying the introduction of
the change management process at two different institutions: (a) ITESM, Monterrey Institute of Technology and
Higher Education in Mexico and (b), Virtuelie Fachhochschule (VFH), the Virtual University of Applied Sciences
in Germany. In their study of two initiatives to illustrate the different components of the systemic change process
that need to be managed during the adoption and implementation of eLearning in organisations, Menchaca,
Bischoff and Dara-Abrams (2003) adapted the syntax model advanced by Ross (1977) and is shown in Figure 5:

61

Figure 5: eLearning Adoption Systemic Change Model
In this model, the central box denotes an activity process, or event that is activated by the inputs that are shown
entering the box from the left, constraints that are drawn as pressing down on the box from the top, and outputs
that exit the box from the right. Inputs are what the activity uses, such as administration, technology, students,
staff, and classrooms. Constraints consist of the elements that limit the activity in some way, such as funding
program priorities, or feedback results. Outputs are the components that are produced or result from the activity,
such as students with a certain skill. Significantly, this process is again shown to be synergistic and cyclical in
nature as indicated by the outputs becoming inputs for the next eLearning cycle (Menchaca et al., 2003).
Research Studies on Systemic Change Management to Enable ICT Innovation
Debowski (2008) asserts that the challenge for schools is to make change to innovation a smooth and engaging
process which encourages widespread commitment, ready adoption and the building of a supportive community in
which the change can operate. This builds upon Rogers (2001) five stages of adoption theory. These are: the
Knowledge Stage (awareness of the innovation); the Persuasive Stage (developing interest in the innovation); the
Decision Stage: (ensuring evaluation of the innovation); the Implementation Stage: (trialling of the innovation);
and the Confirmation Stage (which leads to the decision to integrate the innovation). Debowskis (2008) work
also confirms Rogers (2003) suggestion that the social setting also requires consideration as it sets the stage in
which users of the innovation and others either take-up the innovation or reject it. Banathy (1991) likewise
confirms that individual and collective adoption of a systems perspective is required for systemic education reform
efforts to succeed. Thus with a systems perspective and a redefinition of education as a system, it is possible to
design 21
st
Century educational systems that will encourage and support learning as well as the full development
of human potential (Banathy, 1991).
However, finding instances whereby the promisory rhetoric of systemic educational reform efforts have been
realised is no easy task. Indeed, despite the fact that many notable educational theorists have been calling for such
systemic management measures for nearly two decades, there still appears to be a relative paucity of research

62

studies, both globally and in the Australian context, that focus upon how systemic change management enables
ICT innovation in the educational context. Rather, the common concern expressed in the literature from around the
globe continues to be refer to how technology-enabled educational approaches to change are generally being
implemented in a piecemeal, disjointed, incremental way which advances an approach that is a one-school-at-a-
time adjustment to the current paradigm of education (Menchaca, Bischoff and Dara-Abrams, 2003; Duffy and
Reigeluth, 2008) instead of utilising a systemic change management methodology that focuses upon transforming
the current paradigms of teaching and learning into one suited for the 21
st
Century (Banathy, 1991, 1996;
Reigeluth, 1994). This is a significant given that researchers widely accept that the adoption of ICT innovations
changes the educational system in a way that requires a transformation not only of the teaching process through a
new medium but also of the system itself (Banathy, 1991).
Perhaps the greatest irony related to this identified dearth of literature on systemic change management to enable
ICT innovation comes from the fact that there appears to be widespread agreement in the literature that
technological developments can provide the impetus and platform for the improvement of existing services on the
individual school level as well as on the overall education system level. This is especially given that there are
major advantages in promoting whole school systemic change strategies when seeking to enable ICT innovations
in education (Debowski, 2008). First, they provide an important platform for review and reformation of the
existing practices and principles. Second, they promote a widespread common culture and ethos that promotes
complementary understanding, philosophies and sharing of good practice. Third, they offer the opportunity for
teachers to test their understanding and innovate in their local work setting thereby enabling better learning
transfer (Debowski, 2008).
Such major advantages are made manifest in the few research studies that have investigated how to utilise
systemic change management methodologies to enable ICT innovation within the educational context. In
Debowskis (2008) case study of Scotch College, the major advantage of applying the systemic Model for
Strategic Educational Change was that it provided clear guidelines for leaders wishing to successfully introduce a
major change programme. These included: first, provide a clear and engaging message as to why the change is
necessary; second, offer a clear vision of the future; third build ownership across the key stakeholders; fourth,
communicate frequently and openly; fifth, plan carefully for the change process; fifth, make the presentation of the
change agenda engaging and attractive; sixth, consider the whole context in which the change will occur; seventh,
ensure there are sufficient resources to enable the change to happen and last; recognise that sustainable, embedded
change takes time (Debowski, 2008).
In their four year longitudinal study of the change processes occurring in a secondary school which aimed at
integrating ICT into its curricula, Levin and Baranga (2005) found that use of a systemic model for change
management positively invigorated a pre-change school culture that was individualistic, stale and insular. To
achieve this end, Levin and Baranga (2005) found that to transform into a technology based learning environment,
the school needed to explore and change the basic principles guiding its rationale and practices. This meant
recognising that change is an iterative rather than linear process with emphasis on continuous learning and
adaptation, involving both administrative and pedagogical components, which re-evaluates priorities as the
process evolves. Moreover, in this study, Lefin and Baranga (2005) found that the systemic nature of the change
process and its bottoms-up direction based on an evolving common vision and continuous involvement of teachers
in all the implementation phases lead to a radical transformation in the schools culture which, in turn, became
cooperative and collegial, learning oriented and technology literate.
In this respect, Levin and Barangas (2005) systemic change management research supports similar research
studies on the nature of change processes that show that the structural-functional perspective of school change
should be complemented with a cultural-individual perspective. Furthermore, Levin and Barangas (2005) study
importantly demonstrates that educational change involving the implementation of ICT is an individual process

63

that is unique to each teacher. This lead Levin and Baranga (2005) to confirm the notion that a holistic approach to
research about school change and technology implementation is vital to fully understand the process and impact of
using ICT in schools; particularly with regard to developing future capabilities to design innovative schooling
systems for the 21
st
Century (Levin and Baranga, 2005) .
The efficacy of an holistic approach toward systemic change management to enable ICT innovation also
underscores the findings of Hsu and Zembal-Sauls (2004) instrumental case study of the change process of
technology integration in an elementary science course in a large North Eastern university in the U.S. In this
instance, Hsu and Zembal-Saul (2004) drew on systems thinking in its attempt to understand the essential factors
that interactively contributed to the sustainability of the change process required to successfully integrate ICT
innovations. Although their study was limited to the perceptions of key faculty members (and advocates the need
to elicit perceptions from other participants), Hsu and Zembal-Saul (2004) found that five major themes emerged:
first, the need for a clearly-defined innovation; second, the promotion of shared and transformational leadership;
third, the ready identification and availability of resources; fourth, educating stakeholder expectations of obstacles
and finally; promoting an awareness of the consequences. Significantly, the findings of Hsu and Zembal-Sauls
(2004) study confirmed the notion that for the change process of technology integration to be sustained, each of
these aforementioned factors needed to be addressed holistically rather than in isolation. This yet again
underscores the systemic change theorist view that because the change process is complex and consists of many
interacting sub-systems, the management of the change process must be imbued with both rigour and an holistic
attitude (Hsu and Zembal-Saul, 2004).
Five major interactive themes also emerged from Fans (2007) systemic study of operational change involved in
implementing ICT innovations in a Baptist school in Macau. In this study, however, Fan (2007) found that the
five major themes that underscore systemic educational reform include: vision building, evolutionary planning and
development, initiative taking and empowerment, staff development and resource assistance and
monitoring/problem coping. In so finding, Fan affirmed Anderson and Foxs (1987) assertion that vision involves
two dimensions that operate in tandem: the first is a sharable and shared vision of what the school could look like
which provides both direction and driving power of change and the criteria for steering and choosing. The second
type is a shared vision of the change process. This provides a strategy for getting there. Here the emphasis is on
a shared sense of purpose that is concerned with both the content and purpose of change (Anderson and Fox,
1987).
Moreover, Fans study (2007) made use of the systemic change theorist notion that evolutionary planning aims at
improving the gap between the change and conditions in the school to take advantage of unexpected developments
and opportunities. This idea, premised on Fullans (1992) observation that successful reforms in schools is often
characterised by the blending of top-down initiative and bottom-up participation (to foster an atmosphere of
calculated risk-taking) advocates that once the implementation is underway, getting and supporting people who
are acting and interacting in purposeful directions is a major route to change. Taking Fullans systemic change
theories one step further, Fans (2007) study suggests that power sharing is the key to successful change
implementation to enable ICT innovation. This affirms the fact that implementation is very much a social process
which necessitates developing collaborative work cultures to reduce the professional isolation of teachers and
allowing the sharing of successful practices and the provision of support.
Significantly, the monitoring theme advocated Fans (2007) study of systemic change management goes beyond
evaluation in the narrow sense of the term. Rather, it includes information systems, resources and acting on
results through problem-coping and solving. This means monitoring serves two functions: first, it provides access
to good ideas by making information on innovative practices available; second, it exposes new ideas to scrutiny,
helping to weed out mistakes and further develop new practices. This in accordance with the findings of Menchaca
et.al (2003) who state that a complex change process requires monitoring to assess progress and difficulties in the

64

adoption of eLearning innovations because often change participants are not immersed in an evaluative culture
where assessment is performed to gauge progress and manage problems and difficulties.
This emphasis promoting a collaborative, evaluative culture is affirmed by Law (2006) whose case study of ICT
innovation in both Singapore and Hong Kong revealed that ICT is being used not so much as a catalyst of change,
but rather as a means to systemically leverage educational change. In the case of Hong Kong, this has been
achieved by promoting exemplars of success stories online to not only disseminate good practice, but also to
create a community database of pedagogical innovations using ICT, a sharing system for teachers to explore and
reflect on their own practices with other interested educational professionals and to build professional
collaboration on action-oriented school development initiatives to ensure the national well-being for younger
citizens in the 21
st
century (Law, 2006).
*****
Discussion
There is a plethora of change research studies that identify the individual factors that negatively impact upon
efforts to implement technological innovations within organisations. According to Hogarth and Dawson (2008),
such failures are typically defined by a less than optimal return on investment for IT expenditure, ineffective
diffusion of innovations within organisations, lack of user acceptance, or the inappropriate use of innovation. In
his case study investigation of an operational change at a secondary high school in Macao aimed at integrating
ICT technology into data management, Fan (2007) found that failure at implementing ICT in schools was not so
much due to implementing poor ideas; rather, due to poor implementation of good ideas. In this example, Fan
(2007) accords the failure to implement the ICT innovation as being due to: a lack of vision building, ineffective
evolutionary planning, inadequate initiative taking and empowering, insufficient internal investment into staff
professional development and the absence of problem-monitoring and coping mechanisms.
Jurgensen, Thompson and Schifter (2007) found that the essential factors required to successfully implement ICT
innovation in schools were dependent upon technology orientated leadership, a proactive and available technology
teacher leader to make normative professional learning focused on the integration of ICT innovations, a
preponderance for technology, sufficient training and teachers taking time to learn more within a supportive
environment that is open to new ideas and new processes. These findings verify and expand upon the major
factors reported by Wayman and Springfield (2006) which included: district support, principal involvement, non-
threatening use of multiple sources of data, and time to examine the data.
From a change process perspective, there also exists a number of recent research studies that demonstrate that
processes of sustained interaction and investment in internal staff professional development are crucial to systemic
change implementation (Morrison, 1997; Martin, 1999; Hargreaves, 2003). Such studies are premised on the
recognition that the more complex the change, the more interaction is required during the implementation;
particularly with those internal and external components within each change factor that were identified by Fullan
(2001) as additionally complicating the change implementation process. This is a view shared by Menchaca et al.
(2003) whom verify that contextual factors can support or block change efforts because change occurs within a
particular context.
Thus when seeking to implement systemic change to enable ICT innovation, it is essential to recognise that the
human interface plays a key role either as a facilitator or barrier to change. This is because the attitudes and
beliefs of people in the school shape the culture. In so saying, Menchaca et al. (2003) assert that ICT innovations
are often not put into practice because they conflict with deeply held internal images of how the world works.
This means that the affective components of change, such as the acceptance and fears of new technology and
adjustment to new faculty and student roles, must be recognised as being of key importance in the management of

65

change. This recognition is confirmed by the more recent research of Williams, Atkinson, Cate and OHair (2008)
which utilised a systemic change model to implement ICT innovation to improve teacher quality and student
success by reconfiguring the top-down leadership models of traditional school structures that harbour isolation and
stagnant teaching practices (Williams et al. 2008).
Thus the optimisation of systemic change management to implement ICT innovations requires a view of systemic
change management as a democratic decision-oriented approach to changing fundamental values and beliefs about
schools and education within the changing environment of an increasingly complex interconnected global society
(Menchaca et. al., 2003). Moreover, this optimal vista of systemic change management requires change in itself to
be viewed as a cyclical, holistic and synergistic process that considers the interactive impact of change on all parts
of the whole and their interactive relationships to one other. Thus, whilst the identification of factors specific to
enabling or limiting the implementation of ICT innovation is essential, it is not enough to treat these factors as
isolative.
********************
REFERENCES

Abu Hassan Shaari, N., Hando, T. & Ahern, T. (2009). Affecting Systemic Change Through Online Educational
Intervention. In I. Gibson et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education
International Conference 2009 (pp. 1675-1681). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Ackoff, R. (1974). Redesigning the future: A systems approach to societal problems, N.Y: Wiley & Sons.

Ackoff, R. (1981). Creating the corporate future. N.Y: John Wiley & Sons.

Alagic, M., Doyle, C., Gibson, K., Yeotis, C. & Kear, D. (2005). Re-defining Learning Activities: ICT-generated
Paradigm Change. In C. Crawford et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher
Education International Conference 2005 (pp. 1252-1259). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Al-Fuqaha, I. & Abu-Shanab, E. (2010). Re-Shaping Education in the Third Millennium Through Promoting the
Strategy of Systems Thinking. In Z. Abas et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Global Learn Asia Pacific 2010 (pp. 517-
522). AACE.

Anderson, B. and Fox, P. (1987). Configuring the education system for a shared future: collaborative vision,
action and reflection. Andover: Regional Laboratory for Educational improvement of the Northeast and the
Islands.

Anderson, T., Fuchs, A. & Szabo, M. (1999). REPORT ON A CHANGE SYSTEM: THE TRAINING,
INFRASTRUCTURE AND EMPOWERMENT SYSTEM (TIES). In B. Collis & R. Oliver (Eds.), Proceedings of
World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 1999 (pp. 97-102).
Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Archambault, L. & Crippen, K. (2007). The Sites Teachers Choose: A Gauge of Classroom Web Use.
Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 7(2), 59-74. AACE.

Baker, M. (1993). Promoting Success in Educational Partnerships with Technology. In Proceedings of Selected
Research and Development Presentations at the Convention of the Association for Educational Communications
and Technology Sponsored by the Research and Theory Division (New Orleans: Louisiana)

Banathy, B. (1991). A systems view of education: A journey to create the future. Englewood Cliff, N.J:
Educational Technology Publications.

66

Banathy, B. (1992). A systems view of education: Concepts and principles for effective practice. Englewood Cliff,
N.J: Educational Technology Publications.

Banathy, B. (1996). Designing social systems in a changing world. N.Y: Plenum Press.

Baron, M. & Graham, C. (2007). Identifying Key Factors in the Adoption of Innovative Practices. In R. Carlsen et
al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference
2007 (pp. 772-776). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Bever Goodvin, S. & Gibson, I. (2008). Leaders Learning to Change (L2C): Preparing School Leaders for
Diverse,Technology-Rich, Global Learning Environments. In Proceedings of World Conference on Educational
Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2008 (pp. 3379-3387). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Bever Goodvin, S. & Gibson, I.W. (2009). Student-wise, technology-savvy, collaborative, and results-based
leaders of learning: 21st century school Leaders Learning to Change (L2C). In I. Gibson et al. (Eds.), Proceedings
of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2009 (pp. 2380-2388).

Bonk, C.J., Lee, M.M. & Reynolds, T. (Eds.). 2009. A Special Passage Through Asia E-Learning. AACE.

Brown, C.A. (1999). From the What and Why to the How of Course Support SystemsThe Value of the Teachers
Perspective. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 5(4), 361-385. Charlottesville, VA:
AACE.

Checkland, P. (1981). Systems thinking, systems practice. N.Y: John Wiley & Sons.

Chen, Z., & Reigeluth, C. (2010). Communication in a Leadership Team for Systemic Change in a School District.
Contemporary Educational Technology, 1(3), 233-254.
Commonwealth Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations [DEEWR] (2009), National
Partnership Agreement on the Digital Education Revolution. Retrieved 20 April, 2010 from
http://www.deewr.gov.au/schooling/digitaleducationrevolution/Pages/default.aspx.

Cooper, R. and Zmud, R. (1990). Information technology implementation research: A technological diffusion
approach. Management Science, 36 (2: 123 139).

Crawford, C. (2003). Web-Enhancing University Coursework: An Innovative Professional Development Model to
Support a Step-by-Step Approach Towards Web-Enhancing Courses and Empowering Instructors. International
Journal on E-Learning, 2(1), 5-13. Norfolk, VA: AACE.

Dawson, K., Swain, C., Johnson, N. & Ring, G. (2004). Partnership Strategies for Systemic Integration of
Technology in Teacher Education. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 3(4), 482-495.
AACE.

Debiase, M. (2009). The future of learning objects: Digital reduction and logical classifications. In I. Gibson et al.
(Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2009
(pp. 1804-1811). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Debowski, S. (2008). Achieving sustainable systemic change: an integrated model of educational transformation,
AARE 2007 Conference Freemantle
[Viewed 27 September, 2010 on http://www.aare.edu.au/07pap/deb07328.pdf ].

Department of Education and Early Childhood Development [DEECD] (2010), How the Ultranet with
Revolutionise Education in Shine, 10 June 2010.

67

Duffy, F.M. (2002). Step-up-to Excellence: An innovative approach to managing and rewarding performance in
school systems. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Education.

Duffy, F.M. (2003). Courage, passion and Vision: A guide to leading systemic school improvement. Lanham, MD:
Scarecrow Education and the American Association of School Administrators.

Duffy, F.M. & Reigeluth, C.M. (2008) The School System Transformation (SST) Protocol in The F.M.Duffy
Reports, 13(1). (Viewed 23 October 2010 on
http://www.thefmduffygroup.com/publications/reports/Vol13_No1_TheSSTProtocol.pdf ).

Eckel, P., Hill, B. & Green, M. (1998). On Change: En Route to transformation. Washington D.C: American
Council of Education (Viewed 23 October, 2010 on http://www.acenet.edu/bookstore/pdf/on-change/on-
changeI.pdf ).

Ehrhardt-O'Leary, J. (2006). Using Scandinavian Participatory Design to Facilitate IT and Learning-Centered
Paradigm Shifts in U.S. Higher Education. In C. Crawford et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information
Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2006 (pp. 1525-1532). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Fan, C.W. (2007). An investigation of the operational change involved in implementing Information Technology
at a high school in Macao. In T. Bastiaens & S. Carliner (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning
in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2007 (pp. 787-797). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Ferguson-Pabst, D., Persichitte, K. & Caffarella, E. (2003). A Journey Focused On Systemic Change: Technology
Integration in a Preservice Teacher Education Program. In D. Lassner & C. McNaught (Eds.), Proceedings of
World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2003 (pp. 1792-1798).

Fischer, G. (2000). Lifelong LearningMore Than Training. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 11(3),
265-294. Charlottesville, VA: AACE.

Forkosh Baruch, A., Mioduser, D. & Nachmias, R. (2006). Diffusion Patterns of ICT-based Pedagogical
Innovations. In E. Pearson & P. Bohman (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia,
Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2006 (pp. 58-66). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Retrieved from

Fullan, M.G. (1991). The teacher. In M.G. Fullan, The new meaning of educational change (pp.117-143), N.Y:
Teachers College Press.

Fullan, M.G. (1993). Change forces: Probing the depths of educational reform. Bristol, PA: the Falmer Press.

Fullan, M.G. (2001). The new meaning of educational change. (3rd ed.). London: Casswell.

Glickman, C.D. (1993). Reviewing Americas Schools. San Franscisco: Jossey-Bass.

Gibson, I., Wyckoff, S. & Cook, M. (2004). School leaders, and technology-rich learning environments: A focus
on systems thinking, technology leadership, sustained change, and 21st century school improvement. In L.
Cantoni & C. McLoughlin (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and
Telecommunications 2004 (pp. 2608-2615). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Gibson, I., Wyckoff, S. & Cook, M. (2004). Technology Leadership: State level initiatives changing the
conversation about learning in Kansas through an emphasis upon leadership in a technologically rich environment.
In R. Ferdig et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International
Conference 2004 (pp. 1568-1575). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Goodlad, J.I. (1984). A place called school. N.Y: McGraw-Hill.

68

Grewal, S. (2004). E Mediated Learning in Traditional UK Universities: A Panacea for Change?. In L. Cantoni &
C. McLoughlin (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and

Hadjerrouit, S. (2008). Teacher Students Experiences in Teaching ICT in Upper Secondary Schools: A Case
Study. In K. McFerrin et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education

Hannon, V. (2009). Only Connect!: A new paradigm for learning innovation in the 21
st
century. In Centre for
Strategic Education Occasional Paper No. 112. Melb: CSE. [Viewed 27 September 2010
http://www.innovationunit.org/images/stories/files/pdf/only_connect_cse.pdf ].

Hogarth, K. & Dawson, D. (2008). Implementing E-Learning in Organisations: What E-Learning Research Can
Learn From Instructional Technology (IT) and Organisational Studies (OS) Innovation Studies. International
Journal on E-Learning, 7(1), 87-105. Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Horner Reich B. and Benbasat, I. (2000). Factors that influence the social dimension of alignment between
business and information technology objectives. MIS Quarterly, 24 (1: 81 113).

Hsu, P.S. & Zembal-Saul, C. (2004). A Case Study of the Change Process of Integrating Technology into an
Elementary Science Methods Course. In R. Ferdig et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information

Jenlink P.M., Reigeluth, C.M., Carr, A.A., & Nelson, L. M. (1996). An expedition for change: Facilitating the
systemic change process of school districts. Techtrends, 41 (1), 21-30.

Johnson, B. (1992). Polarity Management: Identifying and Managing Unsolvable Problems. Amherst Mass: HRD
Press.

Joseph, R., & Reigeluth, C. (2010). The Systemic Change Process in Education: A Conceptual Framework.
Contemporary Educational Technology, 1(2), 97-117. Retrieved from Education Research Complete database.
Jurgensen, E., Thompson, R. & Schifter, C. (2007). Teachers Using an IMS and Data Driven Decision Making:
Success Factors from Six Schools. In R. Carlsen et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology
& Teacher Education International Conference 2007 (pp. 1542-1549). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Kutay, C. & Ho, P. (2005). Designing Agents for Feedback Using the Documents Produced in Learning.
International Journal on E-Learning, 4(1), 21-38. Norfolk, VA: AACE.

Law, N. (2006). Leveraging Technology for Educational Reform and Pedagogical Innovation Policies and
Practices in Hong Kong and Singapore. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 1(2: 163-170).

Law, N. (2006). Supporting Bricolage as Leadership for Systemic Pedagogical Innovations. In C. Crawford et al.
(Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2006
(pp. 2114-2119). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Leonard-Barton, D. and Deschamps, I. (1988). Mangerial Influence in the Implementation of new Technology.
Management Science, 34 (10: 1252 1265).

Levin, T. & Baranga, C.B. (2005). Transforming school into a professional learning community via information
technology: Patterns of change in a school and among its teachers. In C. Crawford et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of

69

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2005 (pp. 1463-1470).

Lloyd, M. & Albion, P. (2005). Mistaking the Tool for the Outcome: Using Activity System Theory to understand
the Complexity of Teacher Technophobia. In C. Crawford et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information

Mallon, M., Kappe, F. & Neale, B. (2003). Towards a Restructuring of the Learning Environment in Northern
Ireland Schools. In A. Rossett (Ed.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government,
Healthcare, and Higher Education 2003 (pp. 623-630). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Markauskaite, L, Reimann, P. (2008). Enabling teacher-led research and innovation: A conceptual design of an
inquiry framework for ICT-enhanced teacher innovation. In Luca J. and Weippl, E.R., Proceedings of ED-MEDIA
2008 World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2008 (pp. 34843493).
Vienna, 30 June-4 July 2008.

Martin, E. (1999). Changing academic work: Developing the learning university. Buckingham: The Society for
Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.

McLean, A. & Alem, L. 2009. Supporting E-Learning with Technologies for Electronic Documents. Chesapeake,
VA: AACE.

McNaught, C. (2002). Change and Innovation in Post-Secondary Education Mapping the 'Zone of Effective
Change' in Your Institution. In P. Barker & S. Rebelsky (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational
Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2002 (pp. 1305-1310). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Menchaca, M., Bischoff, M. and Dara-Abrams, B. (2003). A model for Systemic change management in
education. In International Conference on Education and Information Systems: Technologies and Applications.
Orlando: Florida.

Menchaca, M., Resta, P., Gonzalez, C.E. & Porres, M. (2004). Systemic Change of the Teaching and Learning
Process. In R. Ferdig et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education

Millet, S. & Gilad, E. (2008). Change in the Education System - from a Face-to-face Course to a Virtual Course.
In J. Luca & E. Weippl (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and

Morrison, K. (1997). Management theories for Educational Change. London: Paul Chapman.

Muldoon, N., Tennent, B. & Tickle, K. (2010). Moodle implementation and the RIPPLES model: Reflections on a
sustainable approach to technology integration and renewal of educational practice. In Proceedings of World
Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2010 (pp. 345-354). Chesapeake,
VA: AACE.

Nelson, D. (2001). System-wide Planning for Technology in Teacher Education: Lessons Learned at The
University of Wisconsin System. In J. Price et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology &
Teacher Education International Conference 2001 (pp. 532-537). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Nevis, E.C., Lancourt, J. & Vassallo, H.G. (1996). Intentional revolutions: A seven point strategy for transforming
organisations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

70

Newman, D.L. (2007). Creating Support for K-12 Technology Integration: Scientific Evidence of Systems
Change. In R. Carlsen et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education

Pava, C.H.P. (1983). Managing New Office Technology. N.Y: Free Press.

Papagiannis, J.G., Easton, A.P., and Owens, J.T. (1998). The School Restructuring Movement in the USA: An
Analysis of major issues and policy implications. France: UNESCO and IIEP.

Pasmore, W.A. (1988). Designing effective organisations. N.Y: Wiley and Sons.

Perelman, L.J. (1987). Technology and transformation of schools. Alexandria, VA: National Schools Board
Associaiton.

Prescott, M. and Conger, S. (1995). Information technology innovations: A classification by IT locus of impact
and research approach. Data Base Advances, 26 (2&3: 20-41).

Reigeluth, C.M. (1994). The imperative for systemic change. In C.M. Reigluth & R.J. Garfinkel (eds.), Systemic
change in education. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Educational Technology Publications.

Reigeluth, C.M. & Garfinkel, R.J. (eds.)(1994). Systemic change in education. Englewood Cliffs, N.J:
Educational Technology Publications.

Reigeluth, C.M. & Stinson, D. (2007). The Decatur Story: Reinvention of a school corporation culture and
climate: the personality of school governance. The Indiana Schools Boards Association Journal, 53(2: 13 15).

Reigeluth, C.M. & Squire, K.D. (2000). The Many Faces of Systemic Change. Educational Horizons, 78 (3:143-
152).

Rivard, S. (1987). Successful Implementation of end user computing. Interfaces, 17 (3), 25-33.

Rogers, E.M. (1995), Diffusion of Innovations. New York: The Free Press.

Ross, D. (1977). Structured analysis (SA): A language for communicating ideas. IEEE Transactions on Software
Engineering.

Rubin, B. (2007). Managing LMS Change in a University E-Learning Program. In T. Bastiaens & S. Carliner
(Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher
Education 2007 (pp. 1248-1254). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Salter, G. & Hansen, S. (2001). The Adoption and Diffusion of Web Technologies into Mainstream Teaching.
Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 12(2), 281-299. Norfolk, VA: AACE.

Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline. N.Y: Doubleday.

Sharma, R. and Yetton, P. (2003). The contingent effects of management support and task interdependence on
successful information systems implementation. MIS Quarterly, 27 (4:533 555).

Sherry, L. (2002). Sustainability of Innovations. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 13(3), 211-238.
Norfolk, VA: AACE.

Sherry, L. (1998). An Integrated Technology Adoption and Diffusion Model. International Journal of Educational
Telecommunications, 4(2), 113-145. Charlottesville, VA: AACE.

71

Sherry, L. & Gibson, D. (2002). The Path to Teacher Leadership in Educational Technology. Contemporary Issues
in Technology and Teacher Education, 2(2), 178-203. Norfolk, VA: AACE.

Sherry, L. (2002). Sustainability of Innovations. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 13(3), 211-238.
Norfolk, VA: AACE.

St-Pierre, A. (2001). A SYSTEM APPROACH TO MANAGE EDUCATIONAL CHANGE IN A WEB-BASED
EDUCATIONAL SETTING A PROPOSED INFRASTRUCTURE. In C. Montgomerie & J. Viteli (Eds.),
Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2001 (pp.
1802-1808). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Szabo, M. (2001). Smoothing the Transition to the Instructional Technology Age: A Change Model Based on
Professional Development and Innovation. In J. Price et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information

Szajna, B., & Scarnell, R. (1993). The effects of information system user expectatations on their performance and
perceptions. MIS Quarterly, 17 (4: 493 -516).

Tanti, M. & Matekja, D. (2008). Transforming Learning Using ICT- A Time to Move Away From Integration
Models. In Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications

Trist, E.L. and Murray, H. (1993). Volume II: the Socio-Technical Prespective. In The Social Engagement of
Social Science, a Tavistock Anthology. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Wasserman, E. (2008). Systemic Model for Examination of Countrywide School Computerization. In K. McFerrin
et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference

Wayman, J.C. & Springfield, S. (2006). Technology-supported involvement of entire faculties in examination of
student data for instructional improvement. In American Journal of Education, 112 (4): 549-71.

Williams, L.A., Atkinson, L.C., Cate, J. M. and OHair, M.J. (2008). Mutual Support Between Learning
Community Development and Technology Integration: Impact on School Practices and Student Achievement. In
Theory Into Practice, 47 (294 302).

Zhao, Y. & Cziko, G.A. (2001). Teacher Adoption of Technology: A Perceptual Control Theory Perspective.
Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 5-30. Norfolk, VA: AACE.

72

(II) BUILDING AND SUSTAINING A PROFESSIONAL LEARNING
COMMUNITY CONSTANTLY FOCUSED ON LEARNING

Summary Paper: The School Leaders Guide to Professional Learning
Communities at Work (Dufour & Dufour, 2012)

Prepared by Rebecca Carter

A school cannot Enact Innovative Practice until Collaborative teams
have agreed on a guaranteed curriculum, developed frequent
formative assessments to monitor each students's learning,and
used the results of the assessments to:

1. To inform each teacher of individual students who need intervention
because they are struggling to learn or who need enrichment because they
are already proficient.

2. To inform students of the next steps they must take in their learning.

3. To inform each member of the team of his or her individual strengths and
weaknesses in teaching particular skills, so each member can provide or solicit
help from colleagues in the team.

4. To inform the team of areas in which many students are struggling so that
the team can develop and implement better strategies for teaching those
areas.

Schaffer and Thomson (1998) draw a distinction between activity centred
organisations and results oriented organisations. The former operate under the
false assumption that if they implement enough of the right programs,
improvements inevitably materialize.
Created by: R. Carter, October 2012

73

I. LAY THE FOUNDATIONS
PILLAR 1: Mission 1.
PILLAR 2: Create Shared Vision (WHAT)
PILLAR 3: Collective Commitments (HOW)
PILLAR 4: SMART Goals (WHEN)
II. CHANGE STRUCTURES.
A. Structural Changes to Support a Shift to a Culture of Collaboration rather than Isolation
1. Structural Changes to enable the seeds of a New Culture of Collaboration to take root, grow and flourish
2. Organise People into Meaningful Teams focused on Learning
3. Provide Teams with time to Collaborate
4. Ensure Physical Space supports Ongoing Collaboration and Shared Responsibility for Student Learning
III. BUILD TEACHER&COMMUNITY CAPACITY
A. Transform Groups into High Performing Teams
1. Engage Teams in Identifying Collective Commitments (Norms) to Guide Collaboration
2. Engage Teams in Working Collaboratively to achieve SMART goals
B. Focus on the Right Work
1. Create a Guaranteed and Viable Curriculum to ensure all students learn at high levels
2. Monitor Student Learning through Common Formative Assessments
3. Bring New Members into the PLC Culture
IV. MONITOR, MAINTAIN & SUSTAIN
A. Demonstrate Reciprocal Accountability
1. What Gets Monitored Gets Done- Shift from Rhetoric to Reality
2. Reciprocal Accountability
3. Team Leaders
4. Hope is NOT a StrategyWidely Distributed leadership
B. Establish a Focus on Results
1. Results Orientation
2. Change in Practice
3. Teacher Supervision and Evaluation

74

C. Intervention
1. Timely and Supportive
2. Directive not Invitational
3. Specific and Precise for Each Individual Student
4. Providing Students with Ready Access to Staff most Effective in Providing Help
5. Fluid and Flexible.
6. Systematic
7. Overcoming The Biggest Obstacle
D. Communicate Purpose and Priorities
1. Get Tight about the Right Things
2. Communicate what is Tight
3. Confront Problems
4. Give the Gift of Coherence
E. Sustaining School Improvement
1. Plan for Short Term Wins
2. Persevere
3. Build School Wide Leadership Capacity
4. Foster Collective Efficacy

75

Building a PLC involves using steps and strategies
to achieve a single purpose: higher levels of Student Learning
Summary of Key Responsibilities/Strategies
o Clarify the purpose, vision, collective commitments, and goals that define the school
o Create a culture that is simultaneously loose and tight
o Clearly communicate the purpose and priorities of the school
o Use the Collaborative team as the fundamental structure of the school
o Put systems in place to facilitate and support the collaborative team process
o Ensure students have access to a guaranteed and viable curriculum
o Monitor each student's learning through an ongoing assessment process that includes multiple team-developed
formative assessments
o Provide every teacher and every team with access to ongoing evidence of student learning
o Ensure every teacher and every team uses evidence of student learning to inform and improve their individual and
collective practice
o Provide students who struggle with additional time and support for learning in a way that is timely, directive,
precise, and systematic
o Provide students who are proficient with opportunities for enrichment
o Demonstrate reciprocal accountability by providing staff members with the time, resources, and support that
enable them to succeed at what you are asking them to do
o Persevere in the face of obstacles and setbacks
o Never lose faith that Leader efforts and the collective efforts of staff can overcome those challenges and
ultimately lead to higher levels of student achievement
o Stay the course
o Disperse leadership throughout the school
o Build a strong collaborative culture so that other leaders can continue the PLCjourney long after Leaders or other
staff have left the school
I. LAY THE FOUNDATIONS
The Fundamental Purpose of the School is to ensure All Students are Learning at High Levels
A. PILLAR 1: Mission
o The Mission Articulates the School's Purpose
o Is not a Term interchangeable with Vision
o Establishes the very reason the school exists
o When staff embrace the Mission (School's Purpose), every practice, policy, and procedure of the school is
assessed on the basis of how it will impact student learning
o Every Aspect of the PLC process flows from this fundamental premise regarding why the school exists
B. PILLAR 2: Create Shared Vision (WHAT)
o Addresses WHAT the school must become to fulfil the School's purpose
o Is the desirable and credible future for the school that vividly describes WHAT people are working for and
WHAT it will look like when they get there
o Must be Shared if it is to influence a school's ability to achieve the Mission
a. Research Evidence to Provide Common Ground

76

(a) Make Decisions Based on Evidence for the Most Promising Strategy for Meeting the Needs of those we Serve (the
Learner)
(b) Stops Appeals to Precedent and Personal Preference
(c) Stops Appeals to Precedent"This is how I've always done it" or "This is the [school name] way" or "This is the
way we have always done it"
(d) Stops Appeals to Personal Preference or Group Preference"This is how I like to to it" or "This is how we do it
here" or "This is how we like to do it"
(2) Leadership Team Builds Consensus
o Build shared knowledge regarding the knowledge of the PLC process and the Research base supporting the
benefits of the process
o Engage in dialogue with staff to identify and address concerns and questions Encourage dissent by inviting staff to
present contradictory research and evidence that suggests the PLC process is detrimental to student learning
o Seek to understand the perspective of those opposed to taking action by asking them to share their thought
processes and assumptions
o Articulate the dissenting perspectives (processes and assumptions), search for common ground and acknowledge
areas of disagreement
o Demonstrate a willingness to compromise on some specifics of implementation - providing these compromises do
not violate the 'Big Ideas' or 'Pillars' of the PLC process
(a) Two Part Standard for Implementation
o Ensure all points of view have been heard
o Ensure the will of the group is evident to those who oppose it
(b) Set the expectation that All Staff are required to act according to the will of the group
o Best case scenario: Staff members are engaged in the PLC process out of commitment
o Problem case scenario: Actions based on compliance are better than the interminable inaction of waiting for
resistant (or reluctant to change) staff members
o Use Research (Pfeffer & Sutton, 2000; Reeves, 2002) - advises people are more likely to behave their way into
new beliefs than to believe their way into new behaviors
o The Principal cannot stipulate resistant staff members change their beliefs; but can insist that resistant staff
members behave in new ways, engaging in behaviors that are essential to the PLC process because is the process
proves beneficial to students, provides resistant staff with positive experience, and leads to better results, changes
in their commitment are likely to follow.
o Personal experience remains "the great persuader" and the "mother of all cognitive map changes" (Patterson,
Grenny, Maxfield, McMillan, & Switzler, 2008, p.51)
C. PILLAR 3: Collective Commitments (HOW)
o Clarifies HOW each person must act to move the school towards a Shared Vision by describe the specific
behaviors that individuals throughout the school must demonstrate to move the school in its desired direction
o Commitments serve two purposes:
o They move the conversation from the discussion of what a staff hopes to create someday to the specific steps that
must be taken today to bring the vision to reality
o Articulated commitments help clarify how an individual can contribute to the continuous school improvement
effort
o Whilst a Shared Vision focuses on the Organisation, Collective Commitments focus on People.
o Collective commitments allow conversations to move from 'what is the school we hope to create?' to 'What must
each of us do now to move us forward?'
o Collective commitments need to be specifically aligned with the Vision Statement.
3. PILLAR 4: SMART Goals (WHEN)

77

Establishes WHEN certain benchmarks will be accomplished to mark progress on the journey towards the Vision
Requires the creation of a process for monitoring progress of Priorities (Goals) by:
1. Translating Vision statements into specific actionable steps for making prgress
2. Establishing a Timeline for when the Steps should be completed
3. Monitoring each step
4. Intervening to provide support when staff members are struggling to move forward
5. Identifying specific benchmarks staff can reference to keep track of improvement
6. Set clear schoolwide goals
Ensure that every collaborative team has translated one or more of those goals into a goal for a team that is Strategic
and Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Results Orientated and Time Bound (SMART)
o Translate Vision Statements into specific actionable steps for making progress
o Monitor Each Step
o Establish a Timeline for when Steps should be Completed
o Intervene to provide support when Staff members are struggling to move forward
o Identify Specific Benchmarks Staff can use as a Reference to keep Track of Improvement
II. CHANGE STRUCTURE
A. Structural Changes to Support a Shift to a Culture of Collaboration rather than Isolation
o To help All students learn, All members of the school community need to work Collaboratively in a Collective
Effort to meet the Needs of Each Individual Student
o Collaboration and Systematic Intervention are essential elements of the PLC Process. Structures must be created
that align with and support collaboration and intervention.
o Structures on their own are not enough to move to a PLC - Teachers also require assistance to move from working
in isolation to working as members of a collaborative team.
1. Structural Changes to enable the seeds of a New Culture of Collaboration to take root, grow and flourish
2. Organise People into Meaningful Teams focused on Learning
o The collaborative team is the fundamental block of the PLC - it is the engine that drives the cycle of Continuous
Improvement
o This means organising staff into meaningful teams is a critical step of the PLC journey
o The PLC journey requires TEAMS not GROUPS - the essential difference is that a team is a group of people
working interdependently to achieve a common goal for which each member is accountable
o " In the absence of interdependence, one or more common goals, and mutual accountability, a group cannot be a
team" (Dufour and Marzano, 2011).
o An effective team structure enables each team member to contribute to the collective inquiry into the four Focus
Questions and to the shared goal of improving student achievement.
a. Four Focus Questions
1. What is it we want our students to learn?
2. How will we know if they are learning?
3. How will we respond if individual students are not learning?
4. How will we enrich and extend the learning of students who are proficient?

78

Key Leadership Question: Do the people on each team have a shared responsibility for investigating and responding
to the four critical questions in ways that enhance their students' learning?
If Yes - a structure has been created to support an effective collaboration team
If No - members will function as a group not a team
b. Types of Teams
o Year Level Teams
o Same Course Teams
o Vertical Teams
o Electronic Teams - use available technology to support the collaborative process (Email,Twitter and
VoiceThread/Google Docs, Moodle, CLE/Skype and iChat/Mikogo (to see each other's desktops, documents and
videos)
o Interdisciplinary Teams
o District or Regional Teams
o Logical Links Teams (Resource teachers, support teachers, specialists, year-level, same course, vertical teams)
c. Optimise Collaboration to replace Isolation
o Research consistently shows that the structure that has the greatest potential to positively impact student
achievement is one in which members teach the same content (Gallimore, Ermeling, Saunders & Goldenbert,
2009; Little & Bartlett, 2010; Stigler & Hiebert, 2009). This is because this structure are well suited to the shared
goals essential to effective teams and provide members with opportunities to learn from one another in ways that
have immediate application to their classrooms.
o It is essential that structures and assignments to teams break down the walls of isolation for collaborative team
work to flourish.
o Before assigning teachers into teams, consideration should be given as to whether teacher assignments can be
altered to foster school-based collaboration rather than isolation. Teachers who have content in common can
have collective responsibility for the success of all students.
o By allowing teachers to work interdependently to achieve common learning goals - a culture of mutual
accountability is spawned.
o The creation of artificial teams - based on friendships or due to a precedent claim of ownership - does extreme
damage to the collaborative process.
o Leaders must make certain the team structure brings people together who have shared responsibility to ensure
high levels of learning for students whom they collectively serve.
3. Provide Teams with time to Collaborate
To nurture a collaborative culture, time must be given for teachers to co-labour with their teammates. Leaders
demonstrate their commitment to the Core Purpose of Learning through their allocation of resources.Time can be
provided by:
Providing Common preparation time
Parallel Scheduling
Adjusting the Start and End time of the day
Providing opportunities for Shared Classes
Providing opportunities for Group Activities, Events or Testing

79

Banking Time
Providing in-service and Faculty meeting time
4. Ensure Physical Space supports Ongoing Collaboration and Shared Responsibility for Student Learning
Space and Materials must also be provided to nurture the Core Purpose of Learning The arrangement of physical
space can either encourage or impeded interaction Patterson (2008)describes the 'power of propinquity' - the tendency
for people to form stronger relationships with those who are in close physical proximity to them.
To meet the expectation of interdependent work within a collaborative team structure, classrooms and offices should
be arranged to ensure team members work near one another.
III. BUILD TEACHER&COMMUNITY CAPACITY
A. Transform Groups into High Performing Teams
1. Engage Teams in Identifying Collective Commitments (Norms) to Guide Collaboration
PILLAR 3 - Establishing Collective Commitments is the third pillar in the foundation of a PLC at Work
o Members of the organisation agree on and clarify specific behaviours and action steps each person must take
toward realising the school's shared vision and mission.
o Establishing and honoring collective commitments - or norms - at the team level is essential to the success of each
team as that third pillar is to the stability of the PLC foundation.
o The Norms of the Group help determine whether it functions as a high-performing team or simply becomes a
loose group of people working together.
o Positive Norms only stick of the group repeatedly puts them into practice.
o Goleman, Boyatzis and Mckee (2002) found that "being explicit about Norms raises the level of effectiveness,
maximises emotional intelligence, produces a positive experience for group members and helps to socialise
newcomers into the group quickly."
a. First Question for Each Member of Collaborative Team
What commitments will we make to one another to ensure we become an effective team? Articulating commitments at
the team level allows for holding one another accountable to honouring these commitments which, in turn, helps
transform a group into a team and makes the collaborative experience more positive and productive for everyone
involved.
b. Use a Three-Part Dialogue to Generate a List of Collective Commitments/Norms
Part One - Ask each participate to turn to a partner and take thirty seconds to name a pet peeve or behavior
that, if it occurs when working in a group, makes for a negative experience e.g. Arriving late to meetings or
leaving early; members being disengaged during the meeting; complaining and negative comments; dominating the
conversation; sidebar conversations; freeloading and not contributing to the work; sabotaging the efforts of other team
members; ignoring violations of collective commitments.
Part Two - Participants work with a partner to state a desirable counter-behavior that would eliminate the
problem and make for a more effective team experience if all team members demonstrated that behaviour.
o Beginning and ending meetings on time; staying fully engaged in each meeting; maintaining a positive attitude -
no complaining allowed unless we can offer a better alternative that will improve upon the current condition;
listening respectfully to each other; contributing equally to the workload; fully supporting each other's efforts to
improve

80

o student learning; encouraging one another to honor commitments and candidly discussing concerns when the
group feels a group member is not living up to those commitments
Part Three - Entire team considers the proposed desired positive behaviors and agrees upon a protocol
c. Review/Feedback of Norms
o Begin each meeting with a review of the collective commitments (norms)
o At the end of each meeting, the team should review whether members honored their commitments
o Because team members are co-laboring (rather than just working to 'get along', it is essential to take the time to
clarify commitments about how they will work together and how they will address the situation when members do
not honor this commitment.Once or twice a year - each team member should engage in a more formal process of
personal reflection on his or her perception of the team's effectiveness.
o Do not assume that because collective commitments have been made that every team will work positively and
productively.
o Every team will inevitably experience conflict.
o Making commitments up front provides the team with the basis of dealing with conflict as it arises.
Semi-Annual Survey:
o include team names rather than names of individuals
o team members use the results to engage in a candid dialogue about what is working and what is not
o team members use the results to celebrate the positive aspects and achievements of their collective efforts and
areas for improvement
2. Engage Teams in Working Collaboratively to achieve SMART goals
o Need to shift the focus of staff from activity to results by calling upon each team member to translate school
goals into a team goal so that each member not only knows but owns the goal.
o Katzenbach and Smith (2003) found the single most important thing a leader can do to help a group become a
team with a results orientation is to call upon its members to establish specific, measurable, results-orientated
'performance goals to which the group holds itself jointly responsible'.
The SMART goal acronym provides a tool to help teams move forward on the journey of achieving a common goal
for which each member is mutually accountable.
S - Strategic and Specific
M - Measurable
A - Attainable
R - Results Oriented
T - Time Bound
a. Team members assess their effectiveness on the basis of Results rather than intentions
b. Team members use results to promote CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT
c. The SMART Goals
o Establish a team goal that is strategically aligned to the school goal of improved student achievement
o Analyse data that helps members establish the current reality regarding student achievement by collaboratively
identifying evidence of student learning that warrants celebration and the content area in greatest need of
improvement

81

o Set a Measurable improvement target that represents higher student achievement than the current reality at a level
the members consider is attainable in terms of what the team members believe they can achieve if they work
interdependently
o Clarify the results it seeks and the evidence it will monitor throughout the year to determine the progress it is
making towards those results
o Identify on its curriculum map when evidence of student learning will be gathered, including a target date when
members will examine final results to indicate whether or not the team has achieved its time-bound goal.
TEAM SMART GOALS: Current Reality +SMART goal
o Specific Activities and Action Steps: Curriculum and Assessment
o Who is Responsible? Target Dates
o Budget
o Evidence of Success
B. Focus on the Right Work
DuFour and Marzano (2011) : "Collaboration is morally neutral. It will benefit neither students nor practitioners
unless educators demonstrate the discipline to co-labor on the right work. The important question is not 'do we
collborate' but rather, 'what do we collaborate about?' ... Effective leaders at all leaders will ensure there is agreement
on the 'right work'."
1. Create a Guaranteed and Viable Curriculum to ensure all students learn at high levels
o PLC - Why should we ensure students have access to a guaranteed and viable curriculum.pdf
a. What do we want out students to learn? What knowledge, skills, and dispositions are most vital to their
success?
(1) Questions to ask
(2) How to proceed
(3) Parent Test for a Guaranteed and Viable Curriculum
o If a parent wants assurance that his or her child will have access to the same essential knowledge and skills
regardless of the teacher to whom the child is assigned, how confident are you in giving that assurance?
o Are you certain that teachers in your school have worked together to clarify and actually teach the most-
essential learnings for each unit of instruction?
2. Monitor Student Learning through Common Formative Assessments
o School's committed to helping all students learn at high levels will engage in a collective effort to monitor each
student's learning on an ongoing basis.
o This careful monitoring includes continuous monitoring in the classroom as part of the instructional process.
a. How do we collectively know that our students are learning? Using Team Based Common assessments.
b. Inter-rater Reliability and Common Assessments
o Common assessments gather information on students pursuing the same curriculum by using the same instruments
and criteria.
o Performance based assessments require teachers to practice applying the agreed upon criteria for determining the
quality of student work until members have established inter- rater reliability (that they assess the work
consistently)
o Teams must use a balanced approach to assessment.

82

o Teams should not use only one assessment tool or strategy but determine a strategy that will provide the best
evidence of student learning for a particular intended outcome.
c. Drawing distinctions between formative and summative assessments
o Researchers (Black, Harrison, Lee, Marshall & William, 2004; Popham, 2008; Stiggins & DuFour, 2009) draw a
distinction between summative and formative assessments. Summative assessments are used to determine whether
or not a student has required the intended learning by a specific deadline so that the teacher can assign a final
grade or score.
o State tests are examples of assessments that are used for summative purposes.
o Formative assessments are part of a process to inform both teachers and students of an individual student's
progress toward mastery of an essential skill.
o These assessments present the teacher and student with information on the status of student learning so that steps
can be taken to improve on that learning.
o Students are then given another opportunity to demonstrate what they have learned.
o To distinguish between summative and formative assessments it is useful to use: Summative assessment is used
for students to PROVE what they have LEARNED Formative assessments are used so students can IMPROVE
what they are LEARNING PLC
d. PLC use of Formative Assessment as Evidence in Four Ways
o In a PLC, collaborative teams of teachers gather ongoing evidence of student learning through common formative
assessments, and then use that evidence in four ways:
o To inform each teacher of individual students who need intervention because they are struggling to learn or who
need enrichment because they are already proficient.
o To inform students of the next steps they must take in their learning.
o To inform each member of the team of his or her individual strengths and weaknesses in teaching particular skills,
so each member can provide or solicit help from colleagues in the team.
To inform the team of areas in which many students are struggling so that the team can develop and implement better
strategies for teaching those areas.
o Until collaborative teams have agreed on a guaranteed curriculum, developed frequent formative assessments to
monitor each students's learning,and used the results of the assessments for each of the four aforementioned
purposes, the school will not function as a PLC.
o Using evidence of student learning to better meet the needs of individual students and to inform and improve each
team member's professional practice is the most essential work of a PLC (Priority area for Leaders)
o PLC Learning as our Fundamental Purpose - Part 1.pdf
o PLC Where do we go from here - clearly defined outcomes.pdf
o PLC Where do we go from here - worksheet - monitoring each students learning.pdf
3. Bring New Members into the PLC Culture
Provide the Collaborative Team with a Role in the Selection Process
Set Clear Expectations to Honor and Support the Past Work of the Team
o The team should present the candidate with a copy of its collective commitments and SMART goals and ask if he
or she would be comfortable honoring the commitments and feel capable of contributing to the goal.
o If the team has established a guaranteed and viable curriculum and a series of formative assessments, it should
provide the candidate with copies and ask for a raction.
o The Leadership should make it clear that if the applicant chooses to join the team, he or she will be expected to
contribute to and build upon what the team has done rather than expect the team to reinvent itself to accommodate
the new member.
Support New members

83

o Once a new member joins the team, the collaborative team process is the best structure for helping that person
have a positive experience in the school.
o A longitudinal study by Johnson and Kardos (2007) of teacher retention found that traditional school cultures with
norms that value individual autonomy over professional interaction exacerbate the loss of self-efficacy of teachers
and lead to high levels of teacher turnover.
o This study found that assigning a specific mentor to a new teacher does nothing to improve a teacher's satisfaction
or retention.
o Rather, the inclusion and support of a collaborative culture in which teachers enjoy ongoing, structured dialogue
about professional practice not only has a powerful impact on the retention, satisfaction and self-efficacy of new
teachers, but also provides a process of constant renewal for veteran teachers.
IV. MONITOR, MAINTAIN & SUSTAIN
There is an inherent tension in monitoring the work of teams
Leaders can not fulfil their responsibilities to either teams or students unless they have systems in place to identify
how effectively teams are working at the PLC process But If the teams are to become self-directed, the Leaders cannot
micromanage their work. This tension become the main source of conflict in schools as teachers and Leaders argue
about who will decide how teams will utilise the collaborative time that has been provided. The debate is typically
grounded in the question of POWER: Who will have the power to determine the work of the team?
In a PLC, however, the question is grounded in a question of EFFECTIVENESS.
If the decision is made on the basis of evidence regarding what work will have the greatest impact on student
achievement, then the answer becomes apparent.
So - rather than debating who will dictate the work of teams, members of a PLC explore which actions have the most
positive impact on student achievement and create a process to monitor and support these actions.
A. Demonstrate Reciprocal Accountability
o If you have been thus far successful in implementing each step of the PLC journey, you have:
o Established a guiding coalition
o Built shared knowledge on the current reality of the school
o Clarified the rationale for implementing the PLC
o Staff members have articulated the mission and vision of their school
o Staff members have made collective commitments (norms) to align their behaviour and practices with that vision
o Staff members have established SMART goals to monitor their progress along the PLC journey.
All of the above means a solid foundation is in place - but all of the above requires monitoring of the work,
intervention when the team struggles and the coordination of efforts of the guiding coalition to ensure teams are
provided with all the support they need to be successful in the process.
1. What Gets Monitored Gets Done- Shift from Rhetoric to Reality
o Waiting until the end of the year to review student achievement on high-stakes assessments is problematic
because:
o Effective monitoring is ongoing - it must occur throughout the year
o Effective monitoring will address only results (such as student achievement) and the processes that impact those
results.
a. Beware of Tensions
b. Establish the Indicators of Progress to be Monitored

84

The best strategy to ensure teams use their collaborative time productively is to ask them to produce - generate - the
products that naturally flow from the collective inquiry of teams who are focused on the right work.
c. Establish the process for monitoring the Indicators
d. Establish the means by which results will be shared throughout the organisation.
Critical Issues for Team Consideration 'Critical Issues for Team Consideration' helps every collaborative team clarify
the specific issues they must address in the PLC process and help Leaders monitor the progress of each team.
Templates need to be provided to teams for them to present their conclusions to the
Leaders to a specified timetable for:
o Clarifying a Team's SMART goal
o Establishing the essential outcomes for a particular unit
o Developing a Common Assessment
o Analysing the results of an Assessment
o Leaders can then review these products
o If a team proves unable to complete the task or presented a product that did not meet the required criteria of
quality of work, the Leader can then meet with the team to help its members complete the task successfully.
o Leaders should move beyond the ongoing review of team products and meet with each team on a quarterly basis
to:
1. Discuss the team's work
2. Examine Team Products
3. Help resolve issues that arise as result of this dialogue
o As teams become more adept at the PLC process, they will become more self-directed and Leaders can spend less
time monitoring the process.
o Initially, however, Leaders must have a procedure in place to monitor and support every team.
2. Reciprocal Accountability
At the same time Leaders must hold teams accountable for focusing on the right work, Leaders must be accountable to
teams and their ability to succeed by providing them with Time
o Resources
o Training
o Ongoing support
Leaders demonstrate this reciprocal accountability when they:
Organise staff into meaningful teams
Provide teams with time to collaborate
Provide supportive structures that help groups become teams
Clarify the work teams must accomplish
Monitor the work of teams and provide direction and support as needed
Celebrate short-term wins
Confront those who do not contribute to their teams

85

For each step of the PLC process, Leaders must ask: 'What must I provide my teams to help them accomplish the
important work that must be done?'
a. Questions Teams ask Leaders when asked to generate Products
Dufour (2010) provides a helpful framewok for considering 'what must i provide my teams to help them accomplish
the important work that must be done?'
Leaders must be prepared to address the following questions for every product a team is asked to generate:
o Why questions: why should we do this? Can you present a rationale as to why we should engage in this work? Is
there evidence to suggest the outcome of this work is desirable, feasible, more effective than what we have
traditionally done?
o What questions: What are the exact meanings of key terms? What resources, tools, templates, materials and
examples can you provide to assist in our work/
o How questions: How do we proceed? How do you propose we do this? Is there a preferred process?
o Guiding questions: Which questions are we attempting to answer? Which questions will help us stay focused on
the right work?
o Quality questions: What criteria will be used to judge the quality of our work? What criteria can we use to assess
our own work?
o Assurance questions: What suggestions can you offer to increase the likelihood of our success? What cautions can
you alert us to? Where do we turn when we struggle?
(1) Example: Formative Assessment
Apply a list of questions to the expectation that teams will be called on to develop and administer multiple common
formative assessments throughout the year.
Leaders need to be prepared for the following questions from team members:
o Why do we need to create team-developed formative assessments? Why cant we simply rely on state
assessments, or assessments in a textbook, or summative assessments?
o What do you mean by a common assessment?
o What do you mean by a formative assessment?
o What resources can you provide us to come to a better understanding of common formative assessments?
o What tools, templates, materials, websites, and examples can you provide that will help us complete this task
successfully?
o How do you propose we proceed?
o What process should we use to complete this task?
o When will you give us time to develop common formative assessments?
o When do you expect us to develop and administer the first of these assessments?
o What questions should we focus on as we address this task?
o What criteria will determine the quality of the assessments we create?
o How will we know that our assessments accomplish what they are intended to accomplish?
o What suggestions do you have that will increase the likelihood of our success?
o What are the common mistakes that we should avoid?
o Where do we turn for support if we struggle?
A team that is clear on the response to these questions is far more likely to work effectively in the PLC process than a
team that is simply assigned a list of tasks to accomplish


86

Team Leaders
- No one person has all the energy and expertise to effectively address all of the responsibilities of leadership in
a PLC
- Effective Leaders will disperse leadership throughout the school
- Designating Team Leaders for the Collaborative Team Process is an excellent strategy for promoting shared
leadership
- Leaderless Teams do not work well
a. Assigning Team Leaders
b. Develop the Capacity and Competence of Individuals to serve as Team Leaders
4. Hope is NOT a Strategy - Widely Distributed leadership
B. Establish a Focus on Results
The School must create a Results Orientation to provide Evidence of Student Learning and then Use that Evidence to
Drive Continuous Improvement of the PLC Process
Team developed common formative assessments is vital in terms of:
Monitoring each student's learning
Driving Continuous Improvement
Informing and Improving the Professional Practice of Teachers
1. Results Orientation
- Schaffer and Thomson (1998) draw a distinction between activity-centred organisations and results-oriented
organisations.
- The former operate under the false assumption that if they implement enough of the 'right' programs,
improvements will inevitably materialise.
- Schaffer and Thomson (1998) state that such organisations demonstrate a "fundamentally flawed logic that
confuses ends with means, process with outcomes" (p.191).
- Results-oriented organisations focus on achieving a few measurable goals that reflect the fundamental purpose of
the organisation.
- They establish a process to monitor progress towards the goals on an ongoing basis.
- People throughout these organisations use this evidence to celebrate success and to adjust their practices and
strategies when the intended outcomes are not forthcoming.
- They accept responsibility for results, and they learn from them.
- For example, consider standards that have been given to schools for state adaption throughout Australia. The
principal then distributes documents to teachers.
In a traditional school:
- the central office staff provide the principal with a copy of the standards and guide to implementing the standards
- The principal then distributes the documents to tachers
- Teachers hear presentations on the importance of the new standards.
- Individual teachers review and interpret the standards, assign higher or lower priorities to particular standards, and
attempt to teach the standards to the best of their ability. Individual teachers develop assessments based on the
standards and use the assessments to provide each student with the opportunity to prove whether or not he or she
is proficient.

87

- Individual teachers use the results from the assessments to assign grades and then move on to the next unit of
instruction.
In a PLC:
o Collaborative tams of teachers integrate the Common Core Standards into their routine team process. In a school
that functions as a PLC:
o Collaborative teams jointly study the standards and ensure members are interpreting the standards consistently
o Collaborative teams consider the priority to assign each standard and common pacing that ensures they address
each standard.
o Collaborative teams establish common assessments to gather evidence of student learning
o Each teacher teaches the standards according to the best of his or her ability
Collaborative teams use the results from common assessments to -
- identify individual students who are not yet proficient in a particular skill or concept
- identify individual students who are proficient and who could benefit from enrichment
- identify areas in which students of an individual teacher experienced difficulty in becoming proficient so that the
teacher can explore more effective strategies with his or her colleagues
- identify an area in which students in general did not perform well so that the team can address the problem and
consider what its members need to learn to improve on the current results

a. Data Analysis Protocol
o In a PLC, there is a results orientation and a commitment to ensuring the achivement of each student.
o Thus, actual evidence of student learning becomes the focal point of the work of the team and the basis of team
dialogue
o It is unlikely the collaborative team process will impact student achievement unless members are actually using
evidence of learning to respond to the needs of individual students and to inform and improve the individual and
collective practice of the team.
SAMPLE DATA ANALYSIS PROTOCOL:
The following analysis is based on our team's common assessment of the following essential learnings:
1. Which of our students need additional time and support to achieve at or above proficiency on an essential learning?
How will we provide that time and support?
2. What is our plan to enrich and extend the learning for students who are highly proficient?
3. What is an area with which my students struggled?
What strategies were used by teammates whose students perform well?
4. What is an area in which our team's student's struggled? What do we believe is the cause? What is our plan for
improving results?
b. Make common Formative Assessments the Cornerstone of the PLC Rationale for making formative assessments the
cornerstone of work in a PLC:
1.Common formative assessments foster efficient and high quality assessment.

88

o Teachers pool their efforts rather than replicating them.
o If all students are expected to demonstrate the same knowledge and skills regardless of the teacher to whom they
are assigned, it only makes sense that teachers would work together rather than in isolation when assessing student
learning.
o As teachers work together to study the elements of effective assessment and critique one another's ideas for
assessment, they improve their assessment literacy.
o An assessment that a team of teachers creates because each member of the team contributes to, analyses and
critiques each element of the proposed assessment.
2. Common Formative assessment promotes equity for students.
o When students use common assessments, they are more likely to ensure the students have access to the same
essential curriculum, teachers use common pacing, and teachers assess the quality of student work according to
the same criteria.
3. Common formative assessments provide an effective strategy for determining whether they guaranteed curriculum
is being taught and, more importantly, learned.
o According to Reeves (2004), teacher made common formative assessments are the 'best practice in assessment'
and the 'gold standard in educational accountability' because they promote consistency in expectations and provide
timely, accurate and specific feedback for both students and teachers.
4. They inform the practice of individual teachers.
o Common assessments provide teachers with a basis of comparison as they learn, skill by skill, how their students
performed similar to and different from other students who took the assessment. With this information, a teacher
can seek assistance from team mates on areas of concern and can share strategies and ideas on skills in which his
or her students struggled.
5. Common formative assessments build a team's capacity to achieve its SMART goals.
o They allow collaborative teams to track evidence of student learning in a consistent way over time. When the
evidence indicates students in all classrooms are experiencing difficulty with a particular skill or concept
6. Change in Practice
7. Teacher Supervision and Evaluation
C. Intervention
1. Timely and Supportive
2. Directive not Invitational
3. Specific and Precise for Each Individual Student
4. Providing Students with Ready Access to Staff most Effective in Providing Help
5. Fluid and Flexible
6. Systematic
7. Overcoming The Biggest Obstacle
D. Communicate Purpose and Priorities
1. Get Tight about the Right Things
2. Communicate what is Tight

89

3. Confront Problems
4. Give the Gift of Coherence
E. Sustaining School Improvement
1. Plan for Short Term Wins
2. Persevere
3. Build School Wide Leadership Capacity
F. Foster Collective Efficacy

RCA 2013 - Background Paper - Complete Paper - 03.09.13

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

RCA 2013 - Background Paper - Complete Paper - 03.09.13

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Moving Towards an Augmented Learning Paradigm:

Using Mobile Devices to enhance Student Learning Experiences

You might also like