The Politics of Empowering the Vision

(Chapters 7 & 8 in Technology in its place)

Chapter 7

Perry and Areglado make an important distinction in their article, “Computers are here” (LeBaron and Collier, 2001) between principals as managers and principals as leaders. This distinction prompted me to examine the principals I have known in a new light. Light was directed on whether these principals were happy with the status quo or placed a priority on technology integration.

Making technology integration a priority is key. Once the principal has promulgated this vision, and enlisted the support of key teachers who are opinion leaders among their peers, there is a snowball effect. These opinion leaders are able to mobilize the rest of the staff to embrace the principal’s vision. A review of the first post points out that VISION is the first of nine principles required for effective leadership in technology integration.

Once the vision has been promulgated by the principal, it must be embraced by opinion leaders who carry it to the rest of the staff. However, these opinion leaders must also be empowered. It is crucial that an infrastructure be put into place that will allow the teacher leaders to meet, to develop a strategy, to provide for teacher training, to eliminate the naysayers, and to celebrate each incremental change as a victory. (Naturally, these celebrations should not be so elaborate as to stop progress for all to sit on their laurels.) All of these moves will ensure that the vision becomes part of the institution.

Chapter 8

Isa Zimmerman makes the important point that the vision needs to come from the top, namely the state governor. Also, Zimmerman is the first author I have come across to give a role in the vision to students. An example is given of high schoolers sponsoring a teacher-training. How wonderful is that! Indeed, I often learn best from my own students! Zimmerman is also forward-thinking in noting that school boards must devote more energy towards bringing local businesses into the mix.

Unlike Perry and Areglado, who believe that teachers should be coaxed into the vision via opinion leaders in their ranks, Zimmerman believes that the vision for technology integration should be imposed upon them. This imposition would merely come in the form of teachers’ annual performance evaluation. It is ironic that for one advocating the use of politics by school systems for building public support, teachers are not considered part of the political equation.

In evaluating our school system’s efforts in promulgating a vision for technology integration, I found administration sorely lacking in this area. Only one school—an elementary school at that—was found to have a website on which their school technology mission statement was listed with a three-year goal for teacher training and integration of technology into the curriculum. Our state and county school administrations would benefit from this school’s example, as well as from reading Technology in its place: Successful technology infusion in schools!

Sources:

LeBaron, J. and C. Collier (Eds.). (2001). Technology in its place: Successful technology infusion in schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

(2004). School Technology Mission Statement. Retrieved September 20, 2006, from Mary F. Williams Elementary Web site: http://www.pwcs.edu/marywilliams/itideas/index.html