Tony Hampshire Galileo Educational Network University of Calgary

1. Learning and Technology Policy Framework Professional Learning Series Session 1 Grande Prairie Edmonton Calgary Lethbridge Tony Hampshire Galileo Educational Network University of Calgary #ltpf

2. Objectives for Today • Understand the rationale, structure and research foundations of the Learning and Technology Policy Framework (LTPF) • Identify areas within the LPTF that will particularly affect our school authority/school • Gain familiarity with LPTF Toolkit components to determine the status of learning and technology within our school authority/school • Clarify the expected outcomes of the LTPF • Identify resources to inform and plan for implementation.

3. AGENDA

4. Key Questions for this series: • What are the expected outcomes of this policy framework? • What is the current status of Learning and Technology within our school authority/school with respect to the outcomes of the LTPF? • To what extent does our school authority/school currently meet them? • What actions in this policy framework will particularly affect our school authority/school? • What challenges could implementation present? • What are the opportunities? • What is a reasonable initial estimate of the time and resources required for implementation?

5. #ltpf

6. Learning and Technology Policy Framework (LTPF) Overview

7. The Role of Technology in Achieving the Vision “If we are to shape the future of education and not have it shaped for us, we must become more purposeful in our approach to technology. We need to understand what may be emerging, its implications, and how it can be used for education. Ultimately, the power of technology should be harnessed to support innovation and discovery, not simply to aid teaching. We need to engage learners to use these new technologies as designers and creators of knowledge.” - Inspiring Education, 2010 • Inspiring Education is about ensuring success for all students. It calls for learning experiences that are more: • Student- centered • Personalized • Authentic • And that will result in youth becoming engaged thinkers and ethical citizens, with an entrepreneurial spirit. • This vision requires an education system that is significantly different from that of today. Critical differences will be: • the innovative use of technology to bring this vision to life in schools across Alberta. • bold, innovative leadership guided by a shared vision for learning. • Alberta Learning and Technology Policy Framework 2013

8. “One of the key roles technology can serve in K–12 education is to shift the focus from the system, school and content toward learning and the learner, building competencies and enabling the learner to create and share knowledge. Technology is recognized as playing an integral role in creating student-centered, personalized, authentic learning environments.” Alberta Learning and Technology Policy Framework 2013, p. 14

9. Five Policy Directions

10. 1. Student-Centered Learning • 2. Research and Innovation • 3. Professional Learning • 4. Leadership • 5. Access, Infrastructure and Digital Learning Environments • Table Discussion: • Which of these areas may present the greatest challenge for your jurisdiction/school?

11. PolicyDirection 1: Student-Centered Learning “Technology is used to support student-centered, personalized, authentic learning for all students.” Is it?

12. New MilleniumLearners' Experiences in Secondary School OECD 2009 Which three of the following do you do most often in class? Figure 1: Survey results from what activities students in school do most often (OECD/CERI, New Millennium Learners 2009, p.19)

13. In which three of the following ways do you prefer to learn? Figure 2: Survey results from what activities students in school do most often OECD/CERI, New Millennium Learners 2009, p.20)

14. A Rich Seam: How New Pedagogies Find Deep Learning,Fullan, M., Langworthy, M. NESTA, 2014

15. We have discovered — painfully and expensively — during the past few decades that using technology without fundamentally changing pedagogy simply fails to achieve the desired impact on learning outcomes. (Laurillard, 2012, NESTA, 2012, ITL Research, 2011)

16. Rather than the use of technology leading to more student-centered learning, it appears that the technology was being used to do the same things that teachers were already doing. (Cuban, 2006; OECD, 2010; Weston & Bain, 2010)

17. Technology in education has largely sought to deliver the same kind of content knowledge and basic skill mastery that were the predominant roles of 20th Century teachers. It is not surprising that many such investments have not significantly changed learning outcomes. (Fullan, M. ‘Stratosphere: Integrating technology, and change knowledge.’ Toronto: Pearson 2013.)

18. “The Impact of Digital Technology on Learning: A Summary for the Education Endowment Foundation” • Steven Higgins, ZhiMin Xiao and Maria Katsipataki, School of Education, Durham University, 2012 • Summarized 48 meta-analyses of the learning benefits of technology for students 5 - 18 years, 1990 – 2010 • “There is no doubt that technology engages and motivates young people. However, this benefit is only an advantage for learning if the activity is effectively aligned with what is to be learned. • It is therefore the pedagogy of the application of technology in the classroom which is important: the how rather than the what. • This is the crucial lesson emerging from the research.”

19. The shortfall between the hopes and the reality of computers in most educational settings is primarily caused by a lack of clear, focused plans for using the technology in ways that will significantly improve or transform education. • Teaching for Understanding with Technology, Martha Stone-Wiske, 2005

20. If we consider digital innovations, the field is currently characterized by either weak or undeveloped pedagogy, or strong technology and pedagogy confined to a small number of schools; that is, the best examples tend to be small–scale exceptions that are not representative of the main body of schools. ALIVE INTHE SWAMP: ASSESSING DIGITAL INNOVATIONS IN EDUCATION, Michael Fullan and Katelyn Donnelly2013

21. Barriers to Systemic, Effective, and Sustainable Technology Use in HighSchool Classrooms (2013) • Jason Scott Daniels, Faculty of Extension, University of Alberta • Michele Jacobsen, Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary • Stanley Varnhagen, Faculty of Extension, University of Alberta
Sharon Friesen, Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary • Technology and High School Success initiative • 24 school authorities  • 22,000 students, 420 teachers, over 70 schools

22. Technology that students are exposed to in school tends to be technology that is controlled by the teacher. • A majority of students (76%) revealed that when technology was used in the classroom, most often they were watching or listening to the teacher present material to the class while using technology, or that they (70%) were working alone with technology.

23. A clear picture about technology use has emerged from this study- • Most secondary educators are at the beginning in planning and teaching for the effective use of technology to support and enhance student learning. • Most schools and school districts are in the early phases of developing authentic and meaningful range of use of technology to sponsor deep learning.

24. A Rich Seam: How New Pedagogies Find Deep Learning, Fullan, M., Langworthy, M. NESTA, 2014

25. High Performing School Jurisdictions in the Application of 21st Century Learning • Sharon Friesen & Jennifer Lock, Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary (2010). • Student Learning • When students were provided with well‐designed, meaningful work to do, scaffolded with continuous feedback and opportunities to improve learning, exemplary products and performances emerged. • The most exemplary examples of student work emerged from learning environments that were student‐centered, knowledge‐ centered, assessment‐centered, and community‐centered.

26. Ponder, Reflect, Turn & Talk: • To what extent does this research fit with your experience?

27. BREAK

28. 2learn.ca

30. Tools Developed for each of the 5 LTPF Policy Directions

31. The LTPF Toolkit was developed to support implementation of the policy framework. • It is descriptive in nature rather than prescriptive. Use as you see fit. • It is designed to assist and guide jurisdictions and schools in developing a coherent alignment of learning and technology across curriculum, instruction, assessment, leadership and professional learning.

32. Toolkit Downloads: galileo.org/ltpf/ Word and pdf

33. Table Activity • Browse and Review individual sections of the Toolkit • Discuss content and ideas for use: • Matrixes • Readiness Assessment • Exemplars & Scenarios • Case studies • Sample Planning guides • Sample Agendas

34. Leadership Comparative Case Study: Toolkit pages 37 - 39

35. In light of the Leadership Policy Direction, consider the readiness of each district to successfully implement the Leadership component. • Which district is best positioned to successfully implement this policy direction? • What specific suggestions do you have for Sunnydale SD that would enable them to meet this policy direction? • What specific suggestions do you have for Enterprise SD that would enable them to meet this policy direction? • How may this case comparison apply to your district or school? • What are the implications for the other policy directions? • How would leadership capability impact the other 4 LPTF areas?

36. Lunch

38. Enterprise SD • Serves students in an Alberta city and in a variety of adjacent rural communities. • Operates 25 schools serving 11,000 students K-12 and employs 600 teaching staff. • Facilities provide computer/ media labs, wireless access in some schools, and pending support for student/staff owned devices. • Jurisdiction documents state that students and educators are “supported to sustain a digital learning environment and build technological self-reliance”.

39. With your group, review the evidence in the handout of current Enterprise SD practices. Determine where Enterprise SD falls on the readiness scale, and recommend Next Steps and Action Items that will enable achievement of each policy direction.

40. Getting Started (Toolkit p. 5)

41. Team Planning • Prepare to administer Toolkit Readiness Assessment in your jurisdiction/school • Review and select Toolkit components for local use

42. Key Questions for this series • What are the expected outcomes of this policy framework? • What is the current status of Learning and Technology within our school authority/school with respect to the outcomes of the LTPF? • To what extent does our school authority/school currently meet them? • What actions in this policy framework will particularly affect our school authority/school? • What challenges could implementation present? • What are the opportunities? • What is a reasonable initial estimate of the time and resources required for implementation?

43. MAY 9 – 10/14 University of Calgary Ewan MacIntosh Viviane Robinson Details at galileo.org

44. Summary and Next Steps • review Key Questions in your context • share possible next steps with your team/group • complete session feedback survey (check your email) • Homework for Session 2: complete Toolkit Readiness Assessment for your jurisdiction/school Session 2 dates & venues: • May 20 - Grande Prairie, Pomeroy Hotel • May 22 - Edmonton Hotel & Convention Centre • May 27 - Calgary, Carriage House Inn • May 29 - Lethbridge Lodge