1. SITE 2015 Conference March 04, 2015 Jeffrey A. Stone, Ph.D. Penn State University

2. What is a 1:1 Program? One personal computing device for every student The idea is not just to provide technology, but to TRANSFORM teaching and learning Competes with other priorities

3. How Can 1:1 Be Transformative? Changing Student-Teacher Roles ▫More collaborative, inquiry-based ▫Teacher = facilitator More individualized instruction Flipped classrooms Interdisciplinary, complex projects Encourages deeper investigation Increase in academic achievement Improved classroom climate

4. Desired 1:1 Outcomes Equity of access Students with 21 st century skills Teachers with greater skills Greater teacher/student communication More Assessment (formative and summative) Increased data collection Greater student collaboration Improved communication skills Greater computing skills Opportunities for “offline” work

5. 21 st Century Skills

6. Requires: Systemic/Individual Change Change must occur at the system level ▫Change in process - curricula, assessment, and teaching strategies – along with a supportive culture Teachers exercise discretion; must see the program as valuable enough to break from established practices Recognizing the understandings and perceptions of street-level implementers is essential ▫Program “meaning” created in context, based on skills, knowledge, values, biases

7. Challenges? Cost (long-term) Demonstrable Results Community Perceptions Classroom Management One plan NOT for all Stakeholder Buy-in

8. The Case: Mayberry School District* Small PA district (~1400 students, three schools) ▫High school is grades 8-12 2009: new administrative team = new initiatives “Technology Initiative” - a 1:1 Apple laptop program at the high school in 2010 ▫Purpose? Transform education in the district, provide students with 21st Century Skills. ▫Ended 2013 due to budget shortfalls, priority concerns

9. The Study: Mayberry School District 2010: Began a multi-year, non-experimental study to evaluate the 1:1 program ▫Purpose? To determine if the changes suggested by the 1:1 program were having a transformative effect An iterative program evaluation for the district This reduced report focuses on teacher attitudes, perceptions of 1:1 impacts ▫Positive attitudes, perceptions critical for success

10. Administrator Interviews Teacher Surveys Parent Surveys Student Surveys Classroom “Visits” Teacher Focus Groups Student Focus Groups IT Staff Focus Groups Data Collection Methods School Board Focus Groups

11. Reduced Study Procedures Data collection = two streams: ▫Survey data used to measure teacher attitudes and perceptions of 1:1 (Spring 2011, Spring 2012).  Survey for Spring 2013 was withheld (due to teacher discontent with budget process) ▫Focus groups with teachers (Fall 2011, Fall 2012) Analysis : SPSS (quantitative), NVivo (qualitative)

12. The Study: Survey Participants Spring 2011: 34 teachers (73.2% response rate) ▫Most were female (76.9%, N=34), White/Caucasian (95.8%, N=24) ▫Most were 18-30 years of age (47.8%, N=23), ▫Most had 0-5 years of experience (40.0%, N=20), 0-5 years in the district (61.9% N=21) Spring 2012: 17 teachers. ▫Most were female (68.8%, N=16), All White/Caucasian (100%, N=16) ▫Most were 31-40 years old (33.3%, N=15) ▫Most had 6-10 or 15 or more years of experience (both 31.3%, N=16) and 0-5 or 6-10 years of experience in the district (38.5%, N=13)

13. Survey Structure Teachers were asked to identify their level of agreement with a series of statements using a five-level scale: 1=Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Neutral (Undecided), 4=Agree, 5=Strongly Agree Teachers were asked to identify the level of impact of 1:1 on a variety of items using a five-level scale: 1=N/A, 2=Neutral (Undecided), 3=No Impact, 4=Minor Impact, 5=Major Impact

14. Spring 2011: Survey Results Majority agreed/strongly agreed that Technology is an integral part of their day-to-day classroom instruction (61.8%, N=34) and that 1:1 was an important part of their students' education (51.7%). Majority of responses disagreed that 1:1 is a better fit for their students’ learning styles than traditional education methods (44.2%, N=34) Results suggest teachers perceived themselves as technology users and had initial support for the 1:1 program, though there was some skepticism about the “fit” of the 1:1 program with their students

15. Spring 2011: Program Impacts Perceived Program Impacts ▫Measurement of teachers’ perceptions of program impacts centered around five concepts: Student Engagement, Student Effort, Academic Achievement, Discipline and Behavior, and Attendance ▫E.g. “The Technology Initiative has increased the level of student interest (engagement) within my classroom.”  Responses in the scale: 1=Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Neutral (Undecided), 4=Agree, 5=Strongly Agree Results suggested that teachers did not perceive positive impacts from the 1:1 program during the first year of implementation ▫Expected to improve over time, once tech was assimilated

16. Spring 2011: Student Impacts Teachers were asked to rate the general impact of 1:1 on their students for six outcomes - Grades, Engagement, Participation, Motivation, Discipline & Behavior, and Attendance Teachers were asked to identify the level of impact using a five-level scale (1=N/A, 2=Neutral (Undecided), 3=No Impact, 4=Minor Impact, 5=Major Impact) Teachers most often reported 1:1 as having No Impact for all outcomes ▫Only Engagement had a median of 4.0 or above (Minor Impact)

17. Spring 2011: 21 st Century Skills Teachers were asked to rate the general impact of 1:1 on their students for the 15 specific “21 st Century Skills” Teachers were asked to identify the level of impact using a five-level scale (1=N/A, 2=Neutral (Undecided), 3=No Impact, 4=Minor Impact, 5=Major Impact) Teachers most often reported the 1:1 had a Minor Impact on 10 of the 15 skills ▫No Impact for Leadership and Coordination Skills, Lifelong Learning, Interpersonal Skills

18. Spring 2012: Survey Results Majority agreed/strongly agreed that Technology is an integral part of their day-to-day classroom instruction (70.6%, N=17) and that 1:1 was an important part of their students' education (64.7%) Majority of responses disagreed that 1:1 is a better fit for their students’ learning styles than traditional education methods (47.1%, N=17) Small decline suggests that teachers continued to view the 1:1 program as perhaps not a good fit for their students, though the results must be tempered by the small sample size

19. Spring 2012: Program Impacts Perceived Program Impacts ▫Measurement of teachers’ perceptions of program impacts centered around five concepts: Student Engagement, Student Effort, Academic Achievement, Discipline and Behavior, and Attendance ▫E.g. “The Technology Initiative has increased the level of student interest (engagement) within my classroom.”  Responses in the scale: 1=Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Neutral (Undecided), 4=Agree, 5=Strongly Agree Results suggested that teachers still did not perceive positive impacts from the 1:1 program during the second year of implementation

20. Spring 2012: Student Impacts Results suggest a greater perception of impact than in 2011 Teachers most often reported 1:1 as having a Minor Impact on Motivation to Learn (50.0%, N=16), Class Participation (43.8%, N=16) and Class Engagement (43.8%, N=16) Teachers most often reported 1:1 as having either No Impact or Minor Impact on Discipline & Behavior (both 37.5%, N=16); ▫No Impact on Class Grades (37.5%, N=16) Four outcomes have a median of 4.0 (Minor Impact): Motivation to Learn, Class Grades, Class Participation, & Class Engagement

21. Spring 2012: 21 st Century Skills Results: teachers perceived more positive impacts from 1:1 during the second year, continued to see positive results in building student skills Teachers most often reported the 1:1 had a Minor Impact on all skills, but… ▫Both Time Management and Leadership and Coordination Skills tied Minor Impact and No Impact with 40.0% (N=15) All 15 skills had a median of 4.0 (Minor Impact)

22. The Study: Focus Group Participants 10 teachers in each group (20 total) Distinct sets of teachers Disciplines: Social Studies, Library Science, Family & Consumer Science, Computer Technology, Business Education, Math, Music, Language Arts, Health Education, and Foreign Language

23. Focus Group Results: Fall 2011 Perception of Goals? Prepping students for college & workplace, enriching writing skills, a good educational “fit” with tech-savvy students Perceptions of Training? Teachers felt they had adequate training and/or opportunities for training on use of 1:1 laptops

24. Focus Group Results: Fall 2011 Perceptions of Limiting Factors? ▫Time to research and plan new uses and projects for the technology was limited ▫Classroom management issues: game-playing, keeping children on task Some remarked that these issues limited their use of the 1:1 technology

25. Focus Group Results: Fall 2011 Other Benefits? ▫Kid-be-quiet machines (“babysitters”) ▫Keeping disruptive students at bay Other Challenges? ▫Technical problems (filters, connectivity) ▫Maturity level of students (roughness) ▫Desire for more student training

26. Focus Group Results: Fall 2012 More hostile than 2011, though some items similar Perception of Goals? Similar to 2011, as well as promoting creativity and alleviating the routine activities. Perceptions of Training? Teachers felt they had inadequate training and/or opportunities for training on use of 1:1 laptops ▫Exacerbated by other initiatives ▫Training was said to be not relevant, and no follow-up

27. Focus Group Results: Fall 2012 Perceptions of Limiting Factors? ▫Network congestion, connectivity; inadequate IT help ▫Time to research and plan new uses and projects for the technology was limited ▫Classroom management issues, as in 2011

28. Focus Group Results: Activities Showing & creating videos in class Using online textbooks with integrated exercises Using interactive online activities Performing research, including source assessment Senior Research Projects Developing promotional flyers Analyzing data collected with Science probes Broadcast journalism projects with iMovie Using text-to-speech tools for Special Education Using GarageBand in Music class

29. Conclusions Survey: Teacher perceptions about, commitment to 1:1 were not strong by 2013 ▫Enthusiasm remained stable or declined since 2011; tempered by lower survey response rate ▫Slight improvements in the perceived impact of 1:1 on student skills ▫Lack of 2013 limits the results Fall 2012 focus groups were noticeably more hostile towards 1:1 than in the previous year ▫Concerns about the implementation process rather than the technology itself

30. Conclusions Challenge of classroom management along with technical challenges, are said to have limited teachers’ use of technology ▫Negative experiences can have the long-term effect of dissuading teachers from integrating 1:1 ▫Limiting student access and teacher training on 1:1 classroom management would have been beneficial Perception of available time was a significant challenge ▫Time to share ideas and best practices can be critical to a successful 1:1 implementation

31. Questions?