Jeff Burgess 
Book Review
Internship 6062/6072
Dr. Michael Arnold
Southwest Baptist University
Spring 2004

Creighton, Theodore. (2003) The principal as technology leader. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press. 

	The role of the principal as a leader in technology includes an evaluation of the extent of which the available technology is being used to improve instruction and enhance student learning.  The mere presence of computers, hardware, and other technological devices does not serve a notable purpose unless it is used effectively to improve academic performance.  Computers should do more replace other teaching methods.  Principals must stay focused on aligning technology standards with state and local curriculum.  Many of the recent technology standards imposed on school leaders fail to emphasize that the role of the principal must include an evaluation of how well technology is utilized in schools.
	School and technology leaders need to be aware of the “digital divide” and take steps to see that it is bridged.  Surveys and studies have shown that access to technology, computers, and the Internet is widely varied depending upon geographical and socioeconomic factors, as well as ethnicity, gender, and achievement levels.  The principal should strive to provide an environment that promotes equal opportunity access to technology.
	Creighton identifies three reasons why technology programs fail.  Leadership that is inappropriately excessive or inappropriately weak will likely lead to failure.  The principal must remain visible in guiding the implementation of technology to enhance teaching and learning.  The second reason for failure of technology plans is the insufficiency of staff development.  Teachers are able to use technology for basic and important computer skills that allow them to better perform their jobs, but staff development activities are not often enough focused on creating an educational environment that will positively affect student learning.  Finally, the successful plan for technology needs program support from the school board, central administration office, building principals, and teachers and staff.  
Strategic planning for technology needs organizational direction that can be determined by asking where are we headed, why are we going there, and how do we know when we have arrived.  The direction to take must depend on the available resources and the needs and desires of the organization.  Educational research should be able  to provide a good reason why to focus on a particular direction.  Measurable goals and a continuous evaluation plan will help to determine when to proclaim arrival.  
Technology has the potential to be used as a tool to support and encourage constructivist methods of learning. In constructivism, rather than disseminators of knowledge, teachers become facilitators for an active process of construction of knowledge by the student.  
Creighton identifies five concepts (p. 46) that be used to evaluate the extent of constructivism in the use of technology in the classrooms: 

1.	Students use of creative abilities to solve real world problems.
2.	Collaboration with students on the means of instructional strategies and the content.
3.	Identification of two or three main ideas to be explored, or uncovered rather than covered.
4.	Social discourse and interaction.
5.	The teacher is a guide and presenter of problems and tasks.

	Creighton (pp. 49 – 51) promotes 12  descriptors of constructivists teachers outlined by Grennon Brooks and Martin Brooks in the ASCD book In Search of Understanding: The Case for Constructivist Classrooms.  
Constructivist teachers:
1.	encourage and accept student autonomy and initiative.
2.	use raw data, primary sources, and manipulative, interactive, and physical materials.
3.	use cognitive terminology such as classify, analyze, predict, and create.
4.	allow student responses to drive lessons, shift instructional strategies, and alter content.
5.	inquire about students’ understanding of concepts before sharing their own.
6.	encourage students to engage in dialogue with each other and the teacher.
7.	encourage student inquiry by asking open-ended questions and encouraging students to question each other.
8.	seek elaboration of initial responses of students.
9.	engage students in experiences that may foster contradictions to initial hypotheses.
10.	  allow wait time after posing questions.
11.	  provide time for students to create relationships and metaphors.
12.	  nurture students’ natural curiosity 

By moving the discovery step to the beginning, students of all abilities are given the opportunity to experiment, hypothesize, and discover, something that traditional teaching saves for last with only the brighter students  participating.  
	Creighton describes five types of actors, as they apply to technology, in change processes that Phillip Schlechty first identified in 1997: 
1. Trailblazers – those who will willingly venture in to the implementation of technology.
2.  Pioneers – need assurance that the program will be worth the effort.
3.  Settlers – need more detail and specific direction.
4. Resistors – satisfied with the status quo.
5.  Saboteurs – committed to stopping new ideas.
Common reasons for resistance and sabotage include a lack adequate skills for technology complicated by embarrassment and reluctance in admitting the perceived inadequacy.   Others may not believe that technology has any benefit or value to support teaching and learning.  Some may even fear that teaching or other staff positions may be replaced if technology programs are implemented.  
	It is important to involve as many stakeholders as possible in the implementation of technology, including resistors and saboteurs.  A collaborative effort should be made to include teachers, parents, students, board members, and area business partners.  Teachers may have the power to move a good plan forward, and may choose to do so if the plan focuses on benefits to the curriculum.  Extensive teacher education must address the aspect of using technology to improve teaching and learning. 
	Teacher evaluation as it relates to  technology should have a focal point that looks for meaningful, engaged learning.  The teacher becomes a facilitator, a guide, a co-learner, and a co-investigator, while the student becomes an explorer, a cognitive apprentice, and a producer of knowledge.  The use of technology needs to be built on the constructivist philosophy for productive, meaningful and effective learning to occur.  

Additional Resources

Additional Resources:

Constructivist Lesson Plan Form – DO take a look at this!
http://emints.org/resources/constructivistlesson-form.pdf

In Search of Understanding: The Case for Constructivist Classrooms, Revised Edition
http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/1999brooks/1999brookstoc.html

Constructivists lesson plans for Lewis and Clark
http://www.lewisandclarkexhibit.org/4_0_0/

Understanding by Design
http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/1998wiggins/1998wigginstoc.html

The National Educational Technology Standards (NETS) Project, an ongoing initiative of the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE)
http://cnets.iste.org/  

Technology Standards for School Administrators (TSSA) Collaborative
http://cnets.iste.org/tssa/