Advertisement

Technology, Knowledge and Learning

, Volume 23, Issue 3, pp 507–523 | Cite as

Sustainability and Scalability in Educational Technology Initiatives: Research-Informed Practice

  • Dale S. Niederhauser
  • Sarah K. Howard
  • Joke Voogt
  • Douglas D. Agyei
  • Therese Laferriere
  • Jo Tondeur
  • Margaret J. Cox
Original research
First Online:

Abstract

Although a positive impact of technology interventions on educational practice and student outcomes has been shown in many previous research settings, the use of technology in classrooms and schools is still often superficial and not meeting the potential of technology as envisioned by education reformers and researchers in the field. However, when technology projects have been implemented successfully in educational practice and shown valuable impacts, sustainability within similar contexts is not guaranteed—let alone scaling the initiative to other broader contexts. This article builds on the discussions of the EDUsummIT 2017 Thematic Working Group 9 (TWG9) and the summary report that captured the outcome of those discussions. The goal of TWG9 was to help inform policy and practice by providing insights into key factors that contribute to scalability and sustainability of educational technology integration and impact.

Keywords

Technology integration Sustainability Scalability Cases 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the organizers of EDUsummIT 17 and acknowledge the contributions of EDUsummIT 2017 Thematic Working Group 9 members Punya Mishra and Lynn Schrum during the EDUsummIT discussions in Borovets, Bulgaria.

References

  1. Agyei, D. (2012). Preparation of pre-service teachers in Ghana to integrate Information and communication technology in teaching mathematics. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  2. Agyei, D., & Voogt, J. (2011). ICT use in the teaching of mathematics: Implications for professional development of pre-service teachers in Ghana. Education and Information Technologies, 16, 423–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Albion, P. R., Tondeur, J., Forkosh-Baruch, A., & Peeraer, J. (2015). Teachers’ professional development for ICT integration: Towards a reciprocal relationship between research and practice. Education and Information Technologies, 20(4), 655–673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Allaire, S., & Lusignan, G. (2011). Enseigner et apprendre en réseau: Collaborer entre écoles distantes à l’aide des TIC. Anjou: Éditions CEC.Google Scholar
  5. Baldwin, T. T., & Ford, J. K. (1988). Transfer of training: A review and directions for future research. Personnel Psychology, 41, 63–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bebell, D., & O’Dwyer, L. M. (2010). Educational outcomes and research from 1:1 computing settings. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 9(1), 4–14.Google Scholar
  7. Buabeng-Andoh, C. (2012). Factors influencing teachers’ adoption and integration of information and communication technology into teaching: A review of the literature. International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology, 8(1), 136–155.Google Scholar
  8. Clarke, J., & Dede, C. (2009). Design for scalability: A case study of the River City curriculum. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(4), 353–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Coburn, C. E. (2003). Rethinking scale: Moving beyond numbers to deep and lasting change. Educational Researcher, 32(6), 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Collis, B., & Moonen, J. (2001). Flexible learning in a digital world: Experiences and expectations. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  11. Cuban, L. (2002). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Darling-Hammond, L., Wei, R. C., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the United States and abroad. Oxford, OH: National Staff Development Council.Google Scholar
  13. Dede, C. (2006). Scaling up: Evolving innovations beyond ideal settings to challenging contexts of practice. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 551–566). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Department of Education Employment and Workplace Relations. (2012). Digital education revolution—Overview. Retrieved September 20, 2013, from http://www.deewr.gov.au/Schooling/DigitalEducationRevolution/Pages/default.aspx
  15. Dickard, N. (Ed.) (2003). The sustainability challenge: Taking EdTech to the next level. Chicago: Joyce Foundation. http://www2.edc.org/CCT/admin/. Accessed 14 Feb 2018.
  16. Dunleavy, M., Dexter, S., & Heinecke, W. (2007). What added value does a 1:1 student to laptop ratio bring to technology-supported teaching and learning? Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 23(5), 440–452.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00227.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Eickelmann, B. (2011). Supportive and hindering factors to a sustainable implementation of ICT in schools. Journal of Educational Research Online, 3(1), 75–103.Google Scholar
  18. Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first- and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255–284.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fishman, B., Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (2004). Creating a framework for research on systemic technology innovations. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 43–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fleener, M. J. (2016). Re-searching methods in educational research: A transdisciplinary approach. In M. Koopmans & D. Stamovlasis (Eds.), Complex dynamical systems in education: Concepts, methods and applications (pp. 9–21). Cham: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27577-2_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fullan, M. (2009). Large-scale reform comes of age. Journal of Educational Change, 10(2–3), 101–113.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-009-9108-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fullan, M. (2015). The new meaning of educational change (5th ed.). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  24. Gao, N., & Murphy, P. (2016). Upgrading technology infrastructure in California’s schools. Sacramento, CA: Public Policy Institute of California.Google Scholar
  25. Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J. E. (2009). Learning, teaching, and scholarship in a digital age. Educational Researcher, 38(4), 246–259.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09336671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hargreaves, A., & Fink, D. (2000). The three dimensions of reform. Educational Leadership, 57(7), 30–33.Google Scholar
  27. Hargreaves, A., Boyle, A., & Harris, A. (2014). Uplifting leadership: How organizations, teams, and communities raise performance. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.Google Scholar
  28. Harvey, G., & Hurworth, R. (2006). Exploring programme sustainability: Identifying factors in two educational initiatives in Victoria. Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 6(1), 36–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Howard, S. K. (2011). Affect and acceptability: Exploring teachers’ technology-related risk perceptions. Educational Media International, 48(4), 261–273.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2011.632275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Howard, S. K., & Gigliotti, A. (2016). Having a go: Looking at teachers’ experience of risk-taking in technology integration. Education and Information Technologies, 21(5), 1351–1366.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9386-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Howard, S. K., & Thompson, K. (2016). Seeing the system: Dynamics and complexity of technology integration in secondary schools. Education and Information Technologies, 21(6), 1877–1894.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9424-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Janssen, F., Westbroek, H., & Doyle, W. (2015). Practicality studies: How to move from what works in principle to what works in practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 24(1), 176–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jonassen, D. H. (1995). Supporting communities of learners with technology: A vision for integrating technology with learning in schools. Educational Technology, 35(4), 60–63.Google Scholar
  34. Kafyulilo, A., Fisser, P., & Voogt, J. (2016). Factors affecting teachers’ continuation of technology use in teaching. Education and Information Technologies, 21, 535–1554.Google Scholar
  35. Kirkwood, A., & Price, L. (2013). Examining some assumptions and limitations of research on the effects of emerging technologies for teaching and learning in higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(4), 536–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Koba, M. (2015). Education tech funding soars—But is it working in the classroom? Retrieved from http://fortune.com/2015/04/28/education-tech-funding-soars-but-is-it-working-in-the-classroom/. Accessed 20 Feb 2018.
  37. Livingstone, S. (2012). Critical reflections on the benefits of ICT in education. Oxford Review of Education, 38(1), 9–24.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2011.577938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. McCandless, J. (2015). U.S. education institutions spend $6.6 Billion on IT in 2015. Retrieved from http://www.centerdigitaled.com/higher-ed/US-Education-Institutions-Spend-66-Billion-on-IT-in-2015.html. Accessed 14 Feb 2018.
  39. Niederhauser, D. S., & Lindstrom, D. L. (2018). Instructional technology integration models and frameworks: Diffusion, competencies, attitudes, and dispositions. In J. Voogt, G. Knezek, R. Christensen, & K. W. Lai (Eds.), Handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education. Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  40. Niederhauser, D. S., Mishra, P., Agyei, D., Cox, M., Howard, S., Laferriere, T., et al. (2017). Supporting sustainability and scalability in educational technology initiatives: Research informed practice. In K. Lai, J. Voogt, & G. Knezek (Eds.), Rethinking learning in a digital age: Edusummit 2017 Summary Reports (pp. 71–76). Borovets: UNESCO. ISBN 978-0-473-42542-5.Google Scholar
  41. Owston, R. D. (2003). School context, sustainability, and transferability of innovation. In R. Kozma (Ed.), Technology, innovation and educational change: A global perspective. Eugene, OR: ISTE.Google Scholar
  42. Penuel, W. R., Fishman, B. J., Haugan Cheng, B., & Sabelli, N. (2011). Organizing research and development at the intersection of learning, implementation, and design. Educational Researcher, 40(7), 331–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Purcell, K., Heaps, A., Buchanan, J., & Friedrich, L. (2013). How teachers are using technology at home and in their classrooms. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/02/28/how-teachers-are-using-technology-at-home-and-in-their-classrooms/. Accessed 14 Feb 2018.
  44. Reeves, T. C., & Reeves, P. M. (2015). Educational technology research in a VUCA world. Educational Technology, 55(2), 26–30.Google Scholar
  45. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovation. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  46. Sandholtz, J. H., & Ringstaff, C. (1996). Teacher change in technology-rich classrooms. In C. Fisher, D. Dwyer & K. Yocam (Eds.), Education and technology: Reflections on computing in classrooms. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  47. Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In B. Smith (Ed.), Liberal education in a knowledge society (pp. 67–98). Chicago: Open Court.Google Scholar
  48. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 97–118). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Sherry, L. (1998). An integrated technology adoption and diffusion model. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 4(2), 113–145.Google Scholar
  50. Stringfield, S., & Datnow, A. (1998). Scaling up school restructuring designs in urban schools. Education and Urban Society, 30(3), 269–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Teo, T., & Noyes, J. (2008). Computers in human behavior development and validation of a computer attitude measure for young students (CAMYS), 24, 2659–2667.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.03.006.Google Scholar
  52. Todorova, A., & Osburg, T. (2009). Factors for the sustainability of a teacher professional development programme for technology integration. Paper presented at the London international conference on education, London.Google Scholar
  53. Van Veen, K., & Sleegers, P. (2006). How does it feel? Teachers’ emotions in a context of change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38(1), 85–111.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270500109304References.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Voogt, J., Laferrière, T., Breuleux, A., Itow, R., Hickey, D., & McKenney, S. (2015). Collaborative design as a form of professional development. Instructional Science, 43, 259–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wiske, M. S., & Perkins, D. (2005). Dewey goes digital: Scaling up constructivist pedagogies and the promise of new technologies. In C. Dede, J. Honan, & L. Peters (Eds.), Scaling up success: Lessons learned from technology-based educational improvement. New York: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dale S. Niederhauser
    • 1
  • Sarah K. Howard
    • 2
  • Joke Voogt
    • 3
  • Douglas D. Agyei
    • 4
  • Therese Laferriere
    • 5
  • Jo Tondeur
    • 6
  • Margaret J. Cox
    • 7
  1. 1.College of Education and Human ServicesWest Virginia UniversityMorgantownUSA
  2. 2.University of WollongongWollongongAustralia
  3. 3.Universiteit van AmsterdamAmsterdamNetherlands
  4. 4.University of Cape CoastCape CoastGhana
  5. 5.Universite LavalQuebecCanada
  6. 6.Vrije Universiteit BrusselBrusselsBelgium
  7. 7.King’s College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options