Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Steven M. Bradbury
Introduction
“There can be infinite uses of the computer and of new age technology, but if teachers
themselves are not able to bring it into the classroom and make it work, then it fails.” These
words uttered by Nancy Kassebaum, a former US Senator from Kansas, convey the heart of the
message and reasoning behind a technology innovation I would like to implement at my current
school, Armistead Gardens (AG). With a myriad of amazing tools at our fingertips, we ought to
be doing equally amazing things. However, my experience is that these tools are not used
properly, or even at all, thus rendering them ineffective. In Baltimore City Schools, we have
many underutilized tools. One of them is the Google for Education (G-Edu) set of applications.
Specifically, I want to focus on Google Classroom (G-Class) and the set of productivity tools
(Google Docs, Slides, Sheets, and Forms) associated with it. To lay out the plan for my Google
innovation at AG, I will discuss several key factors. First, I will analyze the current situation at
AG using several conditions and models to help elaborate. Next, I will discuss the stakeholders
who will be integral to my plan. Finally, I will detail my plan of action. It will not be an
overnight process, but will take time and the effort of a strategically formulated team. In the end,
I hope to equip teachers with the knowledge of, and confidence in, utilizing digital tools such as
Google Classroom so that we can open the doors to many of the “infinite uses of the computer.”
Overview
Armistead Gardens (AG) School is a Title I school in Baltimore City. The diverse
population is consistently growing. The growth has been such that we now house two additional
TECHNOLOGY PLANNING PAPER 3
modular units to help keep up with the expanding numbers. The Hispanic population is the
largest demographic on the rise. The neighbor attracts many families with limited English
language proficiency which leads to a high ESOL population. Due to the high ESOL population,
we have extra supports, particularly surrounding translation. With the large numbers, we have
some funding, particularly to invest in technology. We are not a one-to-one device school, but
we currently have a cart of devices for each grade level. Few teachers maximize the use of the
computers. In many cases, they act as an extra activity or game as opposed to enhancing the
teaching and learning. They are used as a tool of consumption as opposed to a tool for creation.
There are a couple teachers who started exploring more creation-oriented and collaborative tools,
such as G-Class and G-Edu. These teachers will be key contributors to the innovation described
below because they already have experience with it. Let us take a look at the G-Class innovation
Any new idea, or innovation, will have its own unique rate of acceptance. Rogers (2003)
different rates of adoption” (p. 14) As mentioned above, the G-Class innovation will take time,
and a lot of effort from a specific team of individuals. I will examine why time will be needed
others with more uneasiness about utilizing technology will ask questions like, “How is this
better than what I am already doing?” The answer to that question is multi-faceted, but cannot
TECHNOLOGY PLANNING PAPER 4
start with G-Class itself. Rather, we must start with instilling confidence in simply using
computers efficiently and regularly. To many, this is the hurdle or barrier that “wastes”
instruction time. A solution is not simple, but will take time, scheduling, and influence from
colleagues and students who meet success using technology regularly. Once the comfort and
offers teachers the opportunity to send out messages, templates, assignments, or other tasks at the
click of a button. Students respond by digitally submitting their assignment or task. Students
can message the teacher to ask for more information. Students can also share documents with
one another to collaborate. All parties can track changes made to the tasks. If a teacher wants to
differentiate the assignment, different or modified tasks can be sent to any individual of his or
her choosing by selecting a check box. All of this is done paperlessly and can be accessed
anywhere the internet is available. G-Class offers a classroom environment in the cloud. Once
the barrier of using computers efficiently and regularly is removed, the advantages of a Google
Classroom environment are apparent and attractive. However, it will take time to get some
individuals up to speed with using computers regularly, so the relative advantage will be slower
to develop.
The compatibility of implementing G-Class is high due to the influx of technology. With
the bulk of testing online, providing a platform to practice some of those digital skills fits in with
the needs of preparation for those assessments. More importantly, practicing the digital skills is
TECHNOLOGY PLANNING PAPER 5
vital because they are life skills. There are opportunities to teach appropriate online presence, or
digital citizenship, through posting and commenting using the tools within G-Class and other
collaboration in a real-world sense. Google tools are becoming more widely used, and using
them in school is preparation for life outside of school. Adopting a G-Class environment will
offer skills that today’s world uses regularly. Once again, a barrier is the regular use of
computers. If a teacher does not use computers regularly for instruction, implementing G-Class
The complexity of a G-Class implementation also depends on the relative comfort and
experience of the teacher. If the teacher is well-versed in using Google, the complexity level
drops. If the teacher is unfamiliar with Google, the complexity level increases. The complexity
level increases further if the teacher does not regularly use computers during instruction. For
these reasons, not every teacher will be targeted to implement G-Class. My goal is to identify
tech-ready staff throughout different grade levels that would implement G-Class with his or her
aforementioned relative advantage and compatibility. With these in place, it allows the teacher
and students to have more time for exploration. As these teachers use it with their students,
students become more versed in G-Class and G-Edu tools. In turn, it can help influence teachers
in the long-term who are not currently ready. Strategically selecting teachers across different
grade levels will help spread the knowledge and comfortability of G-Class, thus reducing
complexity.
TECHNOLOGY PLANNING PAPER 6
The trialability of the G-Class implementation is also relative to the level of comfort in
using technology during instruction. In other words, those comfortable using technology,
particularly Google tools, will find great trialability in this implementation. There are many
different tools and actions to explore. Teachers will have the chance to find what tools work best
for them, and what kind of management works well. I do not expect each teacher to implement
the exact same way. For example, one teacher may post a daily assignment. Another teacher
may use G-Class more as a forum to facilitate discussion. Both options are great uses of the tool.
Teachers should have the opportunity to try what works best for their style and their content.
G-Class offers several different functions and integration with other Google tools that give
teachers these opportunities. The common piece is the actual integration of G-Class to help
facilitate teaching and learning. Specific uses are open to interpretation and highly adaptable.
more aspects developing over time. A classroom run utilizing G-Class will look and sound
different. The teacher will become more of a facilitator, and the students will take on roles of
creator. Overtime work will spill out of the classroom when students and teachers realize they
can utilize G-Class and G-Edu tools anywhere they have the internet. Learning to navigate this
platform will open doors, particularly in comfortability, to using other digital tools. Many
productivity skills transfer to other platforms, such as Office 365. Perseverance will start to
develop as students learn troubleshooting techniques. Using technology more regularly will help
shape practical digital citizenship skills. Teachers and students will start seeing some changes
The rate at which the G-Class innovation takes place hinges on the perceived attributes
mentioned above. To tech-ready teachers, their perception will lead to quicker implementation.
To staff that are not as comfortable with technology, the rate will be significantly slower. For
this reason, I plan to start with a few staff members across different grade levels who have
exhibited tech-readiness. By starting with these teachers, I hope to develop G-Class advocates
that will in turn be able to model it to their colleagues. Students across grade levels will be
impacted, and they can also help influence the teachers who are uncomfortable with technology.
This second hand implementation will take time, and it may not reach every individual, but that
is acceptable. G-Class should not be mandated, but I believe all should be aware, exposed, and
educated about it to better inform teachers who could potentially adopt G-Class in their own
class. As teachers become more tech-ready, I believe more will be enthusiastic about
implementing G-Class.
Donald Ely (1990) developed a series of eight conditions that facilitate technological
change (p. 299). By exploring the presence of these conditions at AG, I will determine how
ready AG is to accept change, particularly as it relates to the G-Class innovation. The conditions
are dissatisfaction with the status quo, existence of knowledge and skills, availability of
resources and time, rewards or incentives, expected participation, commitment, and evident
leadership. Change can happen without all of these present. Ely (1990) concedes, “We may
strive to attain all the conditions, but realistically all of them will seldom be present for all
innovations in all environments” (p. 302). Ely (1990) continued by discussing how missing
TECHNOLOGY PLANNING PAPER 8
some may diminish the effectiveness of the innovation, but the list can be utilized as a
“checklist” to help target conditions that need more support (p. 302). I will use Ely’s conditions
Is there dissatisfaction with the current digital skill level of students at AG? Yes, there is
great dissatisfaction, particularly regarding word processing and digital citizenship. These two
terms may not be the ones chosen by the majority of the staff, but they are at the heart of the
dissatisfaction. I have many teachers and administrators talk to me as the technology teacher
about how poorly students type. I hear how unfair an online assessment is when students
struggle to type one sentence with appropriate capitalization and punctuation, let alone an essay
in a timed session. They are not exaggerated complaints, these are facts. I see it first hand and
live the frustration when I attempt to incorporate typing practice in my once a week, forty-five
minute classes. There is also dissatisfaction with how students are misusing and abusing their
digital presence, especially on social media. It is a real problem, and not only at AG. The
dissatisfaction with our student’s digital skills is extremely evident. The staff at AG wants a
change.
Many of the staff do possess the knowledge and skills to help start the change. However,
to fully implement the G-Class innovation, I will rely on a smaller cohort of individuals who
possess the necessary digital skills. Not everyone is ready to use G-Class and the G-Edu tools as
a regular part of their classroom. Possessing the digital skills is one thing, but a willingness to
try a new technology tool is another. There is a level of patience and know-how to troubleshoot
common problems that arise. I work with a gifted staff, but a smaller subset are the ones who
TECHNOLOGY PLANNING PAPER 9
currently have the ability to facilitate a digital environment for learning such as G-Class. This
subset is the team I will target and support to roll out the G-Class innovation.
Are the resources available to implement G-Class? Yes, but they are not available to
every student all the time. Google accounts are already created at the district level for every
student and teacher. We do not have one-to-one devices, however. We have shared carts at each
grade level. Because of this, specific teachers will be selected to implement G-Class.
Realistically, it may not be everyday, all day due to the device limitations. We are fortunate to
have as much technology as we do, but we still have to share. Teachers will be strategically
selected to maximize the amount of time they can use carts in order to implement G-Class.
Time is an invaluable resource that always seems to be lacking. In the case of the
G-Class innovation, time must never be cut short. It will take careful, strategic planning to select
the appropriate individuals. Time will be afforded to meet with and train these individuals. I am
fortunate to have two staff members, not including myself, who started using G-Class last year.
They will be the core of a G-Class Professional Learning Community (PLC) I will create at AG.
We will create our own Google Classroom to communicate, share best practices, and help
troubleshoot. In addition to the online forum, we will meet once a quarter to check-in, reflect
and adapt as needed. Vertical planning was put into our schedules for next year which will help
create built-in common meeting times. While time always seems to be waning, it is the
Another condition that needs a lot of attention is the presence of rewards and incentives.
The AG staff is extremely motivated intrinsically, but over the last few years, it started to
TECHNOLOGY PLANNING PAPER 10
diminish due to an apparent lack of recognition. I hear this a lot from staff, many of whom
typically go out of their way to support the work at AG. To some, it feels like the hard work and
extra effort are overlooked because it is now the norm. It helps a lot to be encouraged and
recognized for the hard work. With the implementation of G-Class, it must be evident that the
additional work, particularly upfront, will truly pay off. Ely (1990) discussed how the reward
will be different for different people (p. 301), and this is extremely true at AG. Some will feel
rewarded by seeing positive changes in their teaching and learning. Others will be motivated by
being recognized as an instructional leader using G-Class. Still others will be motivated by a
positive note in their mailbox. Differentiated incentives will happen over the next year to
Tied directly to motivation is expected and encouraged participation. It is vital that each
member of the PLC feel valued as an important contributor to the work, and the school as a
whole. While some of the PLC had previous experience with G-Class, everyone must be seen as
a contributor. This condition is present at AG, but sometimes lacks the previous condition of
relevant rewards and incentives. I hope to capitalize on this understanding by not neglecting the
Fostering the value of participation for each PLC member will strengthen the
commitment. Commitment is another condition that is very strong at AG. We have dedicated
staff that will faithfully carry out programs and activities they believe in. I must emphasize the
concept of believing in the innovation. Building this belief within the PLC will hopefully spill
out to others in the school. It will start with the two staff members who have already started
TECHNOLOGY PLANNING PAPER 11
using G-Class. Their feedback and encouragement will strengthen that of the members of the
PLC, who will in time impact others that may want to start using G-Class. With quarterly
check-ins throughout the year and the online Google Classroom for the PLC, I will be able to
gauge the level of commitment and participation during the school year.
Commitment is not only needed by the members of the PLC, but also from school
leadership. They are an integral part of this implementation. In the AG community, leadership
falls into a couple different groups of people. It is the administration, but also the instructional
leadership team (ILT). Specific to the G-Class implementation, I would also include our
classroom support team with ITD who helps manage the Google accounts, as well as the two
teachers who started using G-Class during last school year. Having all these leaders on board
and active in the process of our implementation will be the extremely important. Strong
leadership, which is evident at AG, will help ensure that the conditions for technological change
ACOT model
Apple Computers and several districts collaborated to research the impact technology had
on teaching and learning. A research project conducted in part by Dwyer, Ringstaff and
implementation. The phases are Entry, Adoption, Adaptation, Appropriation, and Invention.
What the researchers noticed was that “...new patterns of teaching and learning emerged at all
sites” (Dwyer, Ringstaff & Sandholtz, 1990, p. 4). AG is no different. As I already mentioned,
AG has been enriched by a lot of technology. I will use the ACOT model to help identify where
TECHNOLOGY PLANNING PAPER 12
the school and individuals are currently placed within this series of stages. As innovations such
characterize an entire school because it is made up of individuals with a wide range of abilities
and access to technology and technological knowledge. I arrived at this stage distinction due to
the fact that technology is not something new and foreign. All classrooms use some type of
whiteboards, or both. The ACOT research summarizes it this way: “...the balance of [the
teachers’] concerns began to tilt towards using computers rather than connecting them” (Dwyer,
Ringstaff & Sandholtz, 1990, p. 4). I added that AG was approaching adaptation because we do
have a healthy group that are operating at this stage. It is evidenced by the frequent use of
computers to complete assignments and tasks with tools such as word processing and
presentation tools. These type of assignments are starting to become commonplace among
classrooms that regularly utilize computers. It is beginning to spread as teachers become more
comfortable. They become local experts, then their knowledge begins to spread to other
classrooms and impact positive change in computer use. This is my hope for the G-Class
innovation. As several teachers meet success and become local experts, their experience will
influence colleagues and cause positive change in the implementation of G-Class and the G-Edu
tools. Because many are already using word processing and presentation tools, the assimilation
Adaptation stage. As a group, these teachers are at Adaption and approaching Appropriation.
ACOT characterizes this as “...the point at which an individual comes to understand technology
and use it effortlessly as a tool to accomplish real work” (Dwyer, Ringstaff & Sandholtz, 1990,
p. 5). Individuals in this groups have flashes of this effortless integration. In their classroom, the
computer is starting to become as ubiquitous as a pencil. It is starting, and that is why I still say
they are approaching Appropriation. I would put myself in this group. As the technology
teacher and tech liaison, I have the luxury of using devices everyday. It is easier for me to use
the computers “effortlessly.” I believe others would experience the same thing given daily,
regular access to computers. Still, I falter at the “real work” part of the ACOT description.
Many tasks I deliver are contrived assignments and projects to help teach students how to use
tools such as Google Docs and Slides. I long to challenge students with real work that shows a
deeper understanding of word processing. I want move beyond teaching how to center text and
bold key terms. I know some students are ready, and acknowledge that the reason we sometimes
hold back is because we may not feel ready. This is why I place the subgroup at approaching
Appropriation.
I long to move into the Appropriation stage, then start seeking the Invention stage. We
have some work to do to get there. One of the biggest barriers is the consistent access to
technology that is necessary to move through these higher stages. I am afforded this access, but
most others are not. For now, the implication is that we need to strategically develop a plan to
maximize the use of the technology we do have. Specifically this means creating dependable
TECHNOLOGY PLANNING PAPER 14
schedules to share the resources we have so that the appropriate staff have regular, scheduled use
of technology. It is not appropriate to create a schedule that excludes less tech-ready individuals
if the goal is to slowly get everyone up to speed. If we want to move the school through the
phases, and not just a subgroup, we need to incorporate each stakeholder. Currently, it may not
be equal time, but we cannot exclude access from some individuals. In order to help alleviate the
strain of sharing, I will also begin looking for grants and other opportunities to acquire more
technology. With the acquisition of more technology comes the delivering of professional
development. The answer is not just to throw computers at the problem. Teachers need to know
how to incorporate these within their instruction more than just making students consumers of
technology. Through innovations like G-Class and the G-Edu tools, we desire to make them
Stakeholders
To accomplish these goals, it will take the work of many dedicated individuals. It starts
with the leadership of the school including the administration (admin) team and the ILT. The
admin is a sub-group of the ILT, a group of twelve individuals with varying roles and
responsibilities among the staff at AG. All have been identified as leaders in a particular content
or role within the building. These members have direct influence over the staff and are vital to
rolling out the G-Class innovation. Their support and encouragement will help fuel the
motivation of those implementing the innovation, as mentioned during the discussion of Ely’s
The most obvious set of stakeholders are the teachers who will be implementing the
innovation itself. These will be selected teachers representing a variety of grades and noted for
TECHNOLOGY PLANNING PAPER 15
their current use of technology. My goal is to work with these individuals to become experts in
using G-Class and G-Edu tools so they will not only impact their students, but their colleagues
over time. In addition to me, there are two teachers currently using G-Class: a third grade
teacher and a sixth grade teacher. Joining us will be a fourth grade teacher, an eighth grade
teacher, and an ESOL teacher. Given our large ESOL population, I felt it was extremely
important to have this group represented. Though three of us have already started using G-Class,
we have not had any time to collaborate and share successes and needs. In convening this
proposed group, I hope to create a PLC that will encourage, troubleshoot, and share best
practices. The G-Class PLC will do the bulk of the work during the initial implementation.
Another group is a small team at headquarters called the Office of Media and
Instructional Technology (OMIT). They have been extremely valuable as I learned my new
position as technology teacher. This team helps manage the Google accounts and will be great
for troubleshooting, training, and further connecting us to others in the district. Their expertise
and experience will be a valuable resource. OMIT also has a dedicated website to offer tips,
ideas and training for Google users. This site will be a great resource as we get started. In time,
Plan of Action
Vision: Classrooms will be transformed as teachers become facilitators and students become
responsible digital citizens through the integration of Google for Education tools, such as Google
Classroom.
TECHNOLOGY PLANNING PAPER 16
Purpose: Teachers will better utilize the technology that is available by facilitating learning
through the use of Google Classroom, influencing their colleagues through collaboration, and
Resources:
● Google accounts
Timeline:
Summer PD ILT and PLC -The Leadership team will be presented with the plan to
members implement G-Class in a few selected classrooms.
-Schedules will be consulted to find the best way to share
computers.
-PLC members will be identified and formally contacted.
-Links to G-Class overviews and training will be shared
(OMIT website).
August PD G-Class PLC -PLC members will gather to formally lay out the plan.
-A PLC Google Classroom will be established and PLC
members will join to begin exploring G-Class.
-A schedule to share devices will be completed.
Fall 2018 PLC and -Teachers will set up G-Classrooms for their class(es).
OMIT -OMIT will help troubleshoot any account issues.
-PLC will begin sharing best practices on the PLC
G-Classroom.
Ongoing Tech liaison -Tech liaison will visit classes implementing G-Class to
and PLC help provide feedback and learn best practices that can be
TECHNOLOGY PLANNING PAPER 17
shared.
-PLC will use their G-Classroom to communicate ongoing
progress.
-Tech liaison will help prompt discussion with posts on the
Google Classroom Stream page.
Quarterly PLC -PLC will meet each quarter to check-in face-to face (this
could be adjusted if we find that online check-ins are more
efficient).
Winter 2018 PLC and -OMIT will help connect the AG PLC with other groups
OMIT within the district, or neighboring districts who are
committed to using G-Class.
-PLC members will begin peer observations.
Summer 2019 ILT, PLC, and -PLC will debrief with ILT on year one of implementation.
influenced -PLC will host mini-PDs for colleagues interested in
colleagues learning more about G-Class. A new cohort will start
forming for school year 2019-2020.
-PLC and ILT will start developing formal PD sessions for
next school year.
Fall 2019 PLC and new -PLC will deliver PD for staff who want to start using
Cohort G-Class and G-Edu tools.
Expected Outcomes:
● Six selected staff members will implement G-Class with their class(es).
● Students will regularly utilize computers in these identified classes to access and
● Students will develop digital citizenship skills through collaboration of tasks, posting,
● Staff and students will positively influence others to begin adopting G-Edu tools and
● A climate of collaboration and shared practice will grow among staff and students.
Evaluation: Quarterly check-ins will help determine the progress of implementation as a whole.
Student progress will be monitored through the tracking of student work/tasks. Peer
observations and debriefs will be valuable points of data to further track the implementation.
Conclusion
Through this technology plan, I desire to educate and encourage teachers to use digital
tools such as Google Classroom as part of their daily teaching and learning. I hope to inspire
confidence in taking risks. Through daily use of computers, I hope to develop a culture of digital
citizenship that impacts the lives of students beyond the school walls. The implementation of
G-Class will be a gradual, but strategic plan that will equip individuals to become local experts
and in turn pass on their learning to others. Through consistent feedback and frequent dialogue,
best practices will be learned and shared. A culture of collaboration will become more evident
among staff and students. Ultimately, Senator Kassebaum’s challenge of an infinite number of
uses for the computer will no longer be hypothetical, but the reality.
TECHNOLOGY PLANNING PAPER 19
References
Dwyer, D. C., Ringstaff, C., & Haymore Sandholtz, J. (1990). Apple Classrooms of Tomorrow