Page 95

Chapter 6: Technology Implementation in Schools

©2010 The Greaves Group, The Hayes Connection, One-to-One Institute

Project RED Commentary is question was designed to investigate the quality of the implementation, with the technology plan quality being a proxy for implementation quality. ere are several components to success:

Chart 6.15. For how long do you think your program is sustainable? (Q15)

Sustainability of Program N: 959 56%

• Service and support. Student and teacher laptops must be available 100% of the time. If it takes more than 30 minutes to repair or replace a device, the teacher’s ability to deliver instruction is impacted. • Instructional network. e network must be robust. It must support log-on and activity by every student at the same time.


• Teacher buy-in and training. If teachers are not engaged, they generally do not buy in. If they do not buy in, they generally do not take advantage of professional development opportunities or modify their teaching behavior to accommodate and exploit technology.

6% 3% 12% 6%

• Long-term funding. Adequate funding is required to sustain a technology initiative. When funding is in jeopardy, teachers and administrators tend to withdraw from the program and start planning for life aer technology. A large number of 1:1 implementations have failed when the hardware aged and the money ran out. • Parent training. Parent training drives parental involvement and expectations, which lead to more time on task and impact student achievement. Also, parent training can reduce the number of lost, stolen, and damaged devices.

One year or less

Three years or more

Two years

Five years or more Percentage of Respondents

Read As • 6% of respondents feel their program is sustainable for one year or less. • 56% of respondents feel their program is sustainable for five years or more. • 38 respondents did not answer this question, suggesting a lack of knowledge or communication.


Projectred thetechnolgyfactor  
Projectred thetechnolgyfactor