4.1 Digital Equity
Candidates model and promote strategies for achieving equitable access to digital tools and resources and technology-related best practices for all students and teachers. (PSC 4.1/ISTE 5a)
Candidates model and promote strategies for achieving equitable access to digital tools and resources and technology-related best practices for all students and teachers. (PSC 4.1/ISTE 5a)
Reflection
When Harbins Elementary began purchasing mobile technology with local school funds, one of our goals was to provide more equitable access to supplement our BYOD (Bring Your Own Device) program. We also wanted to empower teachers to use technology purposefully without creating unnecessary administrative roadblocks. I created the first artifact to share with another group of district teachers about how we divide devices among grade levels to maximize their use. Although the document evolved over time, the basic concept is the same; teachers who are in control of their own devices (or a set of school-owned devices) are able to better allocate the devices to maximize instructional time in a way that works with their grade-level colleagues. The second artifact is a Google spreadsheet that I helped our fourth grade team develop after they decided to have sign-up slots for their Google Nexus tablets.
The discussions, decisions, and priorities behind our allocation of mobile technology reflect my ability to put digital equity at the forefront of instructional technology decisions. By advocating for allocating ICT equally among grade-levels, I demonstrated my thorough understanding of digital equity in practice. The differentiated professional learning I provided each grade level based on their instructional needs helped them achieve equitable results for their students. Also, the advice I gave to the fourth grade team resulted in the sign-up sheet, effectively allowing them to use tablets 1:1 or in small group as the need arose.
Throughout the process of device selection and allocation, I learned that there are many factors beyond instructional effectiveness that must be considered. Teachers are very passionate about advocating for technology for their students, and it showed in all of our discussions. If I had to undertake this process again, I would start with a small pilot group for each type of device before a large purchase was made. Although I was able to advise on the purchase, our school principal decided to let our school leadership team vote on specific device allocation plans. The resulting decisions with different types of devices make supporting them more difficult – additionally, no budget for repair or replacement was included, casting significant doubt on the long-term sustainability of this project.
The leadership team discussions about device type, allocation, and sharing plans was very valuable for all members of our school community. After the leadership team reached a decision, the decision was communicated to all teachers through grade-level teams, where additional feedback was also solicited. This process allowed all of our teachers to understand the careful process that went in to device selection and allocation. This impact could be assessed through a teacher survey with Likert Scale questions, such as “I felt involved in the device selection and allocation process.”
The discussions, decisions, and priorities behind our allocation of mobile technology reflect my ability to put digital equity at the forefront of instructional technology decisions. By advocating for allocating ICT equally among grade-levels, I demonstrated my thorough understanding of digital equity in practice. The differentiated professional learning I provided each grade level based on their instructional needs helped them achieve equitable results for their students. Also, the advice I gave to the fourth grade team resulted in the sign-up sheet, effectively allowing them to use tablets 1:1 or in small group as the need arose.
Throughout the process of device selection and allocation, I learned that there are many factors beyond instructional effectiveness that must be considered. Teachers are very passionate about advocating for technology for their students, and it showed in all of our discussions. If I had to undertake this process again, I would start with a small pilot group for each type of device before a large purchase was made. Although I was able to advise on the purchase, our school principal decided to let our school leadership team vote on specific device allocation plans. The resulting decisions with different types of devices make supporting them more difficult – additionally, no budget for repair or replacement was included, casting significant doubt on the long-term sustainability of this project.
The leadership team discussions about device type, allocation, and sharing plans was very valuable for all members of our school community. After the leadership team reached a decision, the decision was communicated to all teachers through grade-level teams, where additional feedback was also solicited. This process allowed all of our teachers to understand the careful process that went in to device selection and allocation. This impact could be assessed through a teacher survey with Likert Scale questions, such as “I felt involved in the device selection and allocation process.”