professional development plan for implementation of interactive technologies

1. PD for Integrating Interactive Tech at STS Ites 1
Colleen Ites
Professional Development Plan for Implementation of New Innovations
CI 511 Final #2
Dr. Niederhauser
Summer 2010
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FOR INTEGRATING USE OF INTERACTIVE
TECHNOLOGIES AT ST. THERESA SCHOOL
BACKGROUND:
Throughout his book The New Meaning of Educational Change Michael Fullan stresses two
main themes: real change occurs at the individual level and change is a social process (p. 84,
130, 2nd Ed.). Teachers typically function in isolation, so the greatest challenge in bringing about
change is to meet both of Fullan’s themes simultaneously. In the book Teaching with
Technology, Sandholtz, Ringstaff, and Dwyer (1997) propose that teachers will most likely be
successful in the change process if they are volunteers to the process and work in small groups or
teams (p. 51). Based on this research, the following professional development plan will allow
teachers to choose an interactive technology on which to focus, become part of a small group,
and meet both virtually and face-to-face.
Many teachers are hesitant to integrate technologies into their classrooms based on the unknown
results of technology implementation. Teachers typically view innovations as having high
personal costs and unpredictable benefits (Fullan p. 129, 2nd Ed.). Teachers also need to
understand the operational meaning of a new innovation before making a judgment about its use
in their room, and then need time to clarify their knowledge and to experience some change in
their own instruction (Fullan p. 129, 2nd Ed.). Based on these two items, the following plan will
utilize teachers who currently use SMART Boards and LCD projectors in their classrooms to
function as innovation champions and change agent aides in instructing their other colleagues
and administrators on the use of these technologies.
The principal is included in these sessions so she can gain a better understanding of where each
teacher’s skill lies, how best to use these technologies for each grade, and what continuing
supports will be necessary. This understanding will require active participation in the
professional development process (Fullan p. 76, 2nd Ed). The principal’s active participation will
also stress the principal’s role as a resource provider, instructional resource, communicator, and
visible presence, as based on Smith and Andrew’s (1989) research (Fullan, p. 157, 2nd Ed). Her
presence will provide stability and discipline to the staff, she will share in the learning process
with her staff, and she will represent the continuing support that will occur throughout the
process (Fullan, p. 160-161, 2nd Ed.)
After small groups learn collaboratively about implementing SMART Boards and LCD
projectors into teaching and learning, all staff will be trained on the use of ELMOs in their rooms
starting in January. Support for the process will be provided at once-monthly meetings as well
as on a GoogleSite for FAQs, blogs about use, wikis of ideas and potential lessons, and a
collaborative GoogleDoc journal for small groups. After allowing the classroom teachers to gain
greater knowledge about and become more comfortable with these technologies, each instructor

2. PD for Integrating Interactive Tech at STS Ites 2
will develop and instruct a lesson (or unit) utilizing one interactive technology with their
students. The development of a personal lesson utilizing an interactive technology will begin in
January and must be taught by April; it will be evaluated by a group mate from the instructor’s
small group. There will be a follow-up session in May to discuss evaluations and make
corrections for future instructions. In June there will be an evaluation session whole-group to
determine the best course to continue training for the following year.
The teacher-created lesson using an instructional technology will be created in small groups for
either SMART Boards, LCD projectors, or ELMOs using the face-to-face sessions and the Web
sessions. Each small group will be lead by a change agent aide specific to the instructional
technology used. When a teacher is prepared to instruct his / her created lesson, another member
of that group will be there to observe and serve as a trouble-shooter for the lesson. This
observer’s presence as both pressure (evaluating lesson) and support (technical and instructional)
should help each member experience success during the ‘implementation dip’ with their new
instructional technology (Fullan, p. 91- 92, 2nd Ed.). The process of functioning as peer mentors
to each other in smaller groups matches Little’s (1981) research on successful school
improvement where teachers frequently talk about the teaching practice, observe each other and
are observed by administration and provide useful evaluations about these observations, create a
shared language of teaching, plan, design, research, evaluate and prepare teaching materials
together, and teach each other the practice of teaching (Fullan, p. 78, 2nd Ed.)
GOAL:
Each teacher and administrator at St. Theresa School will have limited to basic proficiency in the
use of LCD projectors, SMART Boards, and ELMOs by the end of the 2010 - 2011 school year.
The technology integration will be done face-to-face and virtually via GoogleApps and with the
assistance of change agent aides from across grade bands. There will be a technology
coordinator who will work with change agent aides and who will maintain the GoogleApps
throughout the process, as well as function as an innovation champion for the process. At the
end of the 2010 – 2011 school year the entire staff will have a voice in where the training process
will lead for the 2011 – 2012 school year. All teachers will create and instruct using at least 1 of
the interactive technologies (LCD projector, SMART Board, or ELMO) while being evaluated
by another member of their small group. These evaluations will be shared out with the small
group and assessed for successful implementation and areas where improvement could be made.
(Fullan, p. 109-110, 2nd Ed.) Teachers will also have a virtual presence through GoogleApps,
creating wikis of successful lessons, an FAQ page, and blogs for reflection of their time in the
process (Sandholtz, Ringstaff, and Dwyer, p. 48-49).
FOCUS: The technologies covered in this process will be SMART Boards, ELMOs, and LCD
projectors. All teachers in the building have laptop computers capable of connecting to
interactive technologies and wireless Internet access. The technology skills of the staff cover a
wide gamut, with some never having used an LCD projector while others are using SMART
Boards daily. The ELMO is a new innovation to the school, purchased based on teacher request
and with fundraising monies. It is assumed that by working with teachers to use current
innovations as a springboard (SMART Boards and LCD projectors), the diffusion of ELMOs in
the building should move faster and experience less resistance.

3. PD for Integrating Interactive Tech at STS Ites 3
OVERALL SCHEDULE: FACE-TO-FACE:
The initial session in August will take place for 2 hours. The sessions for September, October,
and November will each be 45 minutes once a month. There will be no face-to-face meeting in
December. The January session will be 60 minutes with an off-side change agent. The sessions
for February, April, and May will be 45 minutes each, once a month. There will be no face-to-
face meeting in March. The final session will be for 1 ½ hours in June.
OVERALL SCHEDULE: WEB MEETINGS:
All teachers and administrators will be expected to post to each section of the staff GoogleSite by
the 10th of each month. After the second face-to-face meeting, each staff member is also
expected to post to his / her group journal page through GoogleDocs and give feedback to each
member between each of the face-to-face meetings. These will be reviewed whole group at the
beginning of the face-to-face meetings as a way to see what progress has been made and what
questions still remain between each of the meetings.
LOCATIONS: The face-to-face meetings will take place in a variety of classrooms based on
what interactive technology is being introduced. The August meeting will take place in the
coordinator’s room initially, and then break into the rooms that contain SMART Boards: 2 in
middle school, 1 in intermediate, and 2 in primary. Here small groups will work hands on to
experiment with different uses for the SMART Boards based on their students’ content or
developmental levels. The following face-to-face meetings will initially meet in the
coordinator’s room to revisit progress and remaining issues, and then break into other rooms for
small group work. The Web meetings can take place anytime, anywhere the teacher has access
to the Internet.
UNIT PLAN :
August (hour 1): Teachers will meet in the coordinator’s room and complete a 3-2-1 entrance
survey answering the following questions:
1. Circle which technology you would like to first learn how to work with: LCD projectors
or SMART Boards
2. Explain two concerns or fears you have using the technology you choose above in your
classroom
3. List three potential uses of your chosen technology in your classroom that you would like
to integrate into your daily teaching and learning.
Each staff member and administrator will complete their survey and return it to coordinator;
members will be grouped for the September session based on their answers. After completing
these will be collected and an overview of the process will be shown via SMART Board. The
staff GoogleSite will be brought up on the SMART Board and teacher email addresses will be
used. A GoogleCalendar will be embedded in the homepage of the GoogleSite showing due
dates for the year. Change agent aides (CA aides) will be introduced and each will explain their
role in the process (there will be 1 CA aide for the ELMO from primary, 2 CA aides from middle
school for LCD projectors, 1 CA aide from primary for the SMART Board and 1 CA aide from
intermediate for the SMART Board). A sample GoogleDoc collaborative journal will be
displayed and this part of the process explained. Initial questions will be taken.
August (hour 2): Mixed small groups (1 each from primary, intermediate, middle school, and
specials) will go to the 4 other SMART Board rooms to see an example from each of the CA

4. PD for Integrating Interactive Tech at STS Ites 4
aide. Each group member will be shown the basics on how to hook-up a SMART Board to a
laptop and to a DVD player, then share out tips on SMART Board basics (how to use the touch
component, how to use the remote). The CA aides will type up and answer any final questions
from their group members (labeling questions to identify resource needs); this group will gather
with the coordinator after the session is over and use the questions to help place each teacher into
small groups for the fall training as well as create the beginnings of the FAQ page on the
GoogleSite.
August Web: Each member is required to sign on to the GoogleSite and post their initial feelings
about the process on their individual blog pages. Each member will also be required to post to
the “Hopes and Fears” page what they hope to accomplish with this process and any concerns
they have after the first session. Each member will receive an email stating their small groups
and be required to sign into their small groups’ GoogleDoc and choose a text color for typing up
comments and answer the initial question on the document.
September face-to-face (15 min): All members will meet in the coordinator’s room to review the
August meetings and the GoogleSite. Due dates for September will be pointed out on the
GoogleCalendar. Any general questions will be taken and answered. Members of each small
group will be announced & groups will go to their designated rooms.
September face-to-face (30 min): Based on the current ability of their small groups, CA aides
will instruct a 5-10 minute mini-lesson on use of their specific technology. Each group member
will then have the remaining time to work together using the taught technology. If there is extra
time, group members are welcome to ‘bounce ideas off each other’ for potential uses in their
teaching and learning. CA aides will record any questions taken during the process that could be
used for the GoogleSite FAQ. Following the meeting the CA aides will return to the
coordinator’s room to discuss the session and post questions to the FAQ site.
September Web: Each member will post to the Hopes and Fears page again, as well as to their
own blogs. Members are expected to post to their small group GoogleDocs page and respond to
each other’s posts by the 10th of October.
October face-to-face (15 min): All members will meet in the coordinator’s room to review the
previous work and the GoogleSite. The FAQ page changes will be highlighted. Due dates for
October will be pointed out on the GoogleCalendar. Any general questions will be taken and
answered. Each small group will go to their designated rooms.
October face-to-face (30 min): CA aides will instruct another 5-10 minute lesson on their
technology building on the lesson previously taught. Each group member will then have the
remaining time to work together using the taught technologies from both sessions. If there is
extra time, group members are welcome to ‘bounce ideas off each other’ for potential uses in
their teaching and learning. CA aides will record any questions taken during the process that
could be used for the GoogleSite FAQ. Following the meeting the CA aides will return to the
coordinator’s room to discuss the session and post questions to the FAQ site.
October Web: Each member will post to the Hopes and Fears page again, as well as to their own
blogs. Members are expected to post to their small group GoogleDocs page and respond to each
other’s posts by the 10th of November.

5. PD for Integrating Interactive Tech at STS Ites 5
November face-to-face (15 min): All members will meet in the coordinator’s room to review the
previous work and the GoogleSite. Today’s session will deal with troubleshooting the specific
technology used; coordinator will show the new “Troubleshooting” page on GoogleSites. Due
dates for November will be pointed out on the GoogleCalendar. Reminder that all members need
to create a lesson plan by January will be given, and any general questions will be taken and
answered. Each small group will go to their designated rooms.
November face-to-face (30 min): CA aides will instruct a 5-10 minute lesson about
troubleshooting their specific technology. Each member will be given a scenario and then show
the rest of the group how they would troubleshoot it with the rest of the group portraying
students (this is to give a realistic portrayal of class management during a technology glitch).
Afterwards members will work together to determine what is / isn’t effective in troubleshooting
problems. Any questions will be recorded by the CA aide who will later report back to the
coordinator to add those questions to the FAQ.
November Web: Each CA aide will post their troubleshooting scenarios to the Troubleshooting
page on the GoogleSite, and each member will post their reaction to their troubleshooting
experience under their scenario by December 10th. Members will also continue to post to their
blogs and respond to each others’ posts on the groups’ GoogleDoc by Dec. 10th as well.
January face-to-face (60 min): There will be an off-side change agent who will come in to train
the staff on the variety of uses for an ELMO. Member are asked to write down any questions
they have on the use of the ELMO to be posted to a specific ELMO page on the GoogleSite; all
questions are turned in to the coordinator who will get FAQ answers from the change agent and
work with the ELMO CA aide to develop her lessons for February.
January Web: By January 10th, all members will post their lesson plan ideas (rough sketches
only) to the GoogleSites wiki, answer and respond to others on their small group pages, and post
to their blogs.
February face-to-face (45 min): All members will meet in the ELMO CA aide’s room to discuss
lesson plan posts and March 10 due dates. Group mates are shown how to schedule viewing
times for each other’s lessons to be taught by April 10th. The ELMO CA aide will then list 3-4
lessons for the ELMO and allow members to choose the top 2 which they would like to see (the
lessons will be based on questions from last month’s change agent training). The CA aide will
instruct one of the chosen lessons (no more than 7 minutes). Members may then work in small
groups or pairs to work with the ELMO for that specific lesson.
February Web: By March 10th members will post a basic lesson plan for their technology to the
GoogleSite. They will also post and respond to their group mates on the GoogleDoc and create a
schedule for observations through the GoogleDoc. They will post their reactions to the ELMO
on the Hopes and Fears page and their own blogs.
April face-to-face (45 min): All members will meet in the ELMO CA aide’s room to quickly
review observations. The ELMO CA aide will then teach the other lesson chosen in February
(no more than 7 minutes). Members may then work in small groups or pairs to work with the

6. PD for Integrating Interactive Tech at STS Ites 6
ELMO for that specific lesson, with others portraying students in a typical class. Any questions
specific to the ELMO are written out & given to the CA aide who will work with the coordinator
to place them on the ELMO GoogleSites page.
April Web: By April 10th members will post their reactions to their own observation and their
evaluation of their group mate to the GoogleDoc; there should also be feedback from the other
members of the group to these posts. Members must post to the Hopes and Fears page regarding
ELMO use with ‘students’ and their completed lesson plan to the wiki.
May face-to-face (20 min): All members will meet in the coordinator’s room to discuss the
progress so far. Specific FAQs regarding ELMO use on the GoogleSite will be reviewed. The
Hopes and Fears page will be reviewed and major changes by specific members will be
discussed. Small groups are instructed to complete a group reflection on the process using their
GoogleDoc – honest reflection is requested, as these reflections will be shared out in June to
determine the best course of action for continuing interactive technology training next year.
Small groups must also plan how to present their work for the year to the whole group in June.
Small groups break out to their assigned rooms.
May face-to-face (25 min): CA aides will lead an all group reflection and have it recorded onto
the group GoogleDoc page. Members will also determine who will present their groups’ work at
the June session and successes will be rewarded with goodies. Any remaining questions or
concerns will also be recorded and placed on the new “Where Do We Go From Here?” page on
GoogleSites.
May Web: By May 10th all members will post to their blogs on the GoogleSite. They also will
post their reflection on the overall use of the ELMO to the ELMO page on the GoogleSite.
Group mates should interact regarding personal reflections on the year’s process and where they
would each would like to see the process go next year. Any teachers willing to re-teacher their
technology lesson to the whole group in June email the coordinator by May 15th; the coordinator
would like 4-5 lessons to present to the group.
June face-to-face (90 minutes): All members will meet in the coordinator’s room. The small
groups will present based on their interactive technology: LDC projectors, SMART Boards, and
ELMOs. Breaks to cover each small group’s reflections will occur between each topic. Each
group will present their specific technology work over the course of the year, and volunteer
presenters from the groups will present their interactive technology lessons to the whole group.
After each presentation each small group’s reflections are shared and discussed with the whole
group. The coordinator collects these reflections onto the “Where Do We Go From Here?” page
on GoogleSites.
A small break for snack & share will occur (approx 10 min) while the coordinator organizes all
the discussions on the “Where Do We Go From Here?” page on GoogleSites. Members refocus
and review the reflections, then rank ideas based on time and technology availability and funding
(Sandholtz, Ringstaff, & Dwyer 154-156). The whole group proposes a plan of action for next
year, including face-to-face meeting times and Web meetings. Teachers work individually,
collaboratively, in small groups, and whole group. This allows for pressure and support to that
will lead to continued action. Active participation and changes in behavior combined with
collegial support will help all teachers get through the ‘implementation dip’ that occurs after

7. PD for Integrating Interactive Tech at STS Ites 7
initial implementation of the new technology (Fullan, p. 91, 2nd Ed.). The coordinator will
organize those ideas into a plan for the following school year on the GoogleSite.
June Web: By July 10th members needs to give feedback on the proposed plan for the 2011 –
2012 school year. Also, recommendations for ELMO use and Hopes and Fears need final
reflections on their GoogleSites pages for the 2010 – 2011 school year, as well as final
reflections for individual blogs.
SUMMARY:
This professional development plan is designed to show teachers best practices using
student-centered instruction through differentiated small groups with CA aides serving as
facilitators. Group members were placed in groups based on desire and current needs for
instruction (Sandholtz, Ringstaff, and Dwyer, p. 145). There is ample opportunity for reflection
individually, in small groups, and whole group. The schedule of mixed instructional times and
places allows for schedule changes and a lack of time in the classroom through the Google Sites.
The face-to-face sessions encourage collegial reflection and shared collaborative learning
(Sandholtz, Ringstaff, and Dwyer, p. 48-49). These same modifications in the time and place of
professional development attempted to meet the lack of time, access to information, and limited
funding as well as potential technical issues, limited tech support that typically plague
technology diffusions (Sandholtz, Ringstaff, and Dwyer, p. 154- 156).
The overarching theme of professional development must shift toward including teachers as part
of the planning and implementation process. Fullan, Rolheiser-Bennett, and Bennett’s (1989)
graphic showing the “Teacher as Learner” shows the development of vision improvement as a
constant mix of teacher as inquirer, collaboration, reflective practices and technical skills. This
process requires support in finding consistent meaning, time, resources, efficacy and training to
enhance this lifelong learning process in education (Fullan, p. 327). The small groups were
created based on member need and potential use of technology implementation. These small
groups also function as professional learning communities (PLCs) using Fullan’s ‘interactive
professionalism’ to “(work) in small groups interacting frequently in the course of planning,
testing new ideas, attempting to solve different problems and assessing effectiveness” (p. 142, 2nd
Ed.).
By the end of the 2010 – 2011 school year all members will reach a baseline competency of the
entry, adoption and adaptation stages in Sandholtz, Ringstaff, & Dwyer’s Stages of Instructional
Evolution. The expectation is that all members will have been introduced to the interactive
technologies and experienced some level of resistance to change (entry stage), received
instruction in the use of the interactive technologies (adoption stage), and begin establishing use
of interactive technologies into their current practices of teaching and learning (adaptation stage)
(p.37-42). Some teachers may reach the appropriation “milestone” stage, where they begin to
replace old habits with new ones and implement new instructional techniques into everyday
teaching and learning (p. 42-43). Those teachers who have a strong background in technology
and who are very open to change may begin to enter the final stage, intervention. At this point
the instruction becomes student-centered through constructivist approaches and differentiation
techniques, collaborative learning, and the teacher begins to serve as a facilitator encouraging
problem-solving and self-directed learning (p. 44-47).

8. PD for Integrating Interactive Tech at STS Ites 8
The guidelines presented in the Fullan and Sandholtz, Ringstaff, & Dwyer texts both use past
research to show the best ways to implement future change in schools. Fullan uses Loucks-
Horsley and associates’ research (1987) to explain the 10 characteristics of successful
professional development, including collegiality and collaboration, experimentation and risk
taking, incorporating current knowledge bases, appropriate participant involvement in the
proves, time for staff development, designs based on principles of the change process and adult
instruction methods, and integration of individual gols within the school goals (Fullan, p. 343, 2nd
Ed.). But at their heart, all professional developments must do more than change the behaviors
of educators: they must address the culture of a school and how that culture addresses teaching
and learning everyday. Much can be taken from the tradition of teaching if it is placed in the
context of student-centered learning. It is not a ‘reinventing the wheel’ so much as ‘making the
wheel stronger.’ “If the past is the soil, then we must plant it in the dreams of today to make the
future of tomorrow.” – F. A. Porsche.