Abstract
This chapter considers how distributed leadership can describe and explain the role of K-12 school leaders in supporting technologies for teaching and learning. Distributed leadership is uniquely suited to describe how schools lead for technological innovation. Spillane et al’s. (2004) model of distributed leadership emphasizes a task-focused approach to describe how multiple actors engage in leadership work. This chapter will consider the range of tasks that define school leadership for technology. This work recognizes the considerable range of tasks in which leaders currently engage to implement new technologies within schools. However, from another perspective, schools are situated in a much broader world of technologies such as social media, video gaming media distribution, and production which are redefining what counts as teaching and learning outside of schools. Because leaders are responsible for creating environments that best advance learning opportunities for all students, the chapter describes both what currently counts as a learning technology task for leadership as well as a consideration of which tasks are on the horizon for technology work in schools.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Anderson, R. E., & Dexter, S. (2005). School technology leadership: Its incidence and impact. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41, 49–82.
Abrego, J., & Pankake, A. (2010). PK-12 Virtual schools: the challenges and roles of school leaders. Educational Considerations, 37(2). https://doi.org/10.4148/0146-9282.1150.
Barron, B., Gomez, K., Pinkard, N., & Martin, C. (2015). The digital youth network: Cultivating new media citizenship in urban communities. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Batsche, G., Elliott, J., Graden, J. L., Grimes, J., Kovaleski, J. F., Prasse, D., et al. (2006). Response to intervention: Policy considerations and implementation (5th ed.). Alexandria: National Association of State Directors of Special Education (NASDE).
Bauer, J., & Kenton, J. (2005). Toward technology integration in the schools: Why it isn’t happening. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(4), 519–546.
Bennett, N., Wise, C., Woods, P. A., & Harvey, J. A. (2003). Distributed leadership: A review of literature. http://oro.open.ac.uk/8534/1/bennett-distributed-leadership-full.pdf
Cassells, D., Gilleran, A., Morvan, C., & Scimeca, S. (2016). Growing digital citizens: Developing active citizenship through eTwinning. https://www.etwinning.net/eun-files/book2016/eTwinningBook_2016.pdf
Christensen, C. M., Baumann, H., Ruggles, R., & Sadtler, T. M. (2006, December). Disruptive innovation for social change. Harvard Business Review.
Collins, A., & Halverson, R. (2009). Rethinking education in the age of technology: The digital revolution and the schools. New York: Teachers College Press.
Dagada, R., & Mungai, P. (2013, April). Learning management system implementation framework for higher education-case of university of the Witwatersrand. International Journal of e-Education, e-Business, e-Management and e-Learning, 3(2), 151–154.
Diamond, J. B., & Spillane, J. P. (2016). School leadership and management from a distributed perspective: A 2016 retrospective and prospective. Management in Education, 30(4), 147–154.
Education Week. (2014, October 20). Personalized learning: A working definition. Accessed at http://www.edweek.org/ew/collections/personalized-learning-special-report-2014/a-working-definition.html
Espelage, D. L., Rao, M. A., & Craven, R. G. (2012). Theories of cyberbullying. In S. Bauman, D. Cross, & J. Walker (Eds.), Principles of cyberbullying research: definitions, measures, and methodology (pp. 49–67). New York: Routledge. European Commission. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203084601
European Commission. (2017). Opening up education through new technologies. http://ec.europa.eu/education/policy/strategic-framework/education-technology_en
Fletcher, G. H. (2009). A matter of principals. T.H.E. Journal, 36(5), 22–28. 2009.
Graves, K. E., & Bowers, A. J. (2017). Toward a typology of technology-using teachers in the “New Digital Divide”: A Latent Class Analysis (LCA) of the NCES teachers’ use of educational technology in U.S. Public Schools, 2009 (FRSS 95). Teachers College Record.
Halverson, E. R. (2012). Participatory media spaces: A design perspective on learning with media and technology in the 21st century. In C. Steinkuehler, K. Squire, & S. Barab (Eds.), Games, learning, & society: Learning and meaning in a digital age (pp. 244–270). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Halverson, R., & Kelley, C. E. (2017). Mapping leadership: The tasks that matter in school improvement. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Halverson, R., & Shapiro, B. (2013). Technologies for education and technologies for learning. In D. Anagnostopolous, S. Rutledge, & R. Jacobsen (Eds.), The infrastructure of accountability (pp. 163–180). Cambridge: Harvard Press.
Halverson, R., Kallio, J., Hackett, S., & Halverson, E. (2016). Participatory culture as a model for how new media technologies can change public schools (WCER Working Paper No. 2016-7). Retrieved from University of Wisconsin–Madison, Wisconsin Center for Education Research website: http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/publications/working-papers/
Herold, B. (2014, June 9) Technology tools for managing schools face stagnant market. Education Week, 33(35).
Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Boston: MIT Press.
Ito, M., Gutiérrez, K., Livingstone, S., Penuel, B., Rhodes, J., Salen, K., Schor, J., Sefton-Green, J., & Watkins, S. C. (2013). Connected learning: An agenda for research and design. Irvine: Digital Media and Learning Research Hub.
Jenkins, H., Purushotma, R., Clinton, K., Weigel, M., & Robison, A. (2007). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. MacArthur Foundation Digital Media and Learning White Paper Series. Retrieved from http://newmedialiteracies.org/files/ working/NMLWhitePaper.pdf
Johnson, S. (2011). Where good ideas come from. New York: Riverhead Books.
Means, B., Padilla, C., & Gallagher, L. (2010). Use of education data at the local level: From accountability to instructional improvement. U.S. Department of Education Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development. http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/opepd/ppss/reports.html#edtech
National School Boards Association. (2017). Data security for schools. https://cdn-files.nsba.org/s3fspublic/reports/Data_Security_Guide_5_Jan2017.pdf? G4UaLHlwi3zo6iSq94F.K.vSAaCmzb.y
Peck, C., Cuban, L., & Kirkpatrick, K. (2002). Techno-promoter dreams, student realities. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(6), 472–480.
Penuel, W. R. (2006). Implementation and effects of one-to-one computing initiatives: A research synthesis. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(3), 329–348. 2006.
Pugliese, L. (2016). Adaptive learning systems: Surviving the storm. EDUCause Review. http://er.educause.edu/articles/2016/10/adaptive-learning-systems-surviving-the-storm
Sheridan, K., Halverson, E., Litts, B., Brahms, L., Jacobs-Priebe, L., & Owens, T. (2014). Learning in the making: A comparative case study of three makerspaces. Harvard Educational Review, 84(4), 505.
Singapore Ministry of Education. (2014). ICT masterplans in the Singapore education system. http://www.unesco.org/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/ED/images/singapore.pdf
Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. B. (2004). Towards a theory of leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(1), 3–34.
Spillane, J. P. (2006). Distributed Leadership. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco.
Tan, S.-C. (2010). School technology leadership: Lessons from empirical research. Proceedings from the 2010 Annual ACSILITE Conference. Sydney. http://www.ascilite.org/conferences/sydney10/procs/Seng_chee_tan-full.pdf
Turner, H. J. (2014). Framing innovation: The role of distributed leadership in gaining acceptance of large-scale technology initiatives. Boston College Electronic Thesis or Dissertation. http://hdl.handle.net/2345/3833
U.S. Department of Education. (2017). Reimagining the role of technology in education: 2017 national education technology plan update, Washington, DC. https://tech.ed.gov/files/2017/01/NETP17.pdf
UNESCO IICBA. (2016) Teaching policies and learning outcomes in Sub-Saharan Africa issues and options. Addis Ababa. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002465/246501e.pdf
Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Pareja Roblin, N., Tondeur, J., & van Braak, J. (2013). Technological pedagogical content knowledge – A review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29, 109–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00487.
Warschauer, M., & Matuchniak, T. (2010). New technology and digital worlds: Analyzing evidence of equity in access, use, and outcomes. Review of Research in Education, 34(1), 179–225.
Zorfass, J., & Rivero, K. (2005). Collaboration is key: How a community of practice promotes technology integration. Journal of Special Education Technology, 20(3), 51–67.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Section Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this entry
Cite this entry
Halverson, R. (2018). A Distributed Leadership Perspective on Information Technologies for Teaching and Learning. In: Voogt, J., Knezek, G., Christensen, R., Lai, KW. (eds) Second Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education . Springer International Handbooks of Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71054-9_34
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71054-9_34
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-71053-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-71054-9
eBook Packages: EducationReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Education