Change Agents, Opinion Leaders, and Technology Integration

Successful technology integration depends on successfully identifying and using technology opinion leaders. These leaders may not necessarily be the formal leaders with titles and, in this, lays the problem. When we overlook or misidentify potential technology leaders, we fail to integrate technology effectively.Closing the gaps between what teachers are presenting and what students already know suggests the need to increase technology leadership knowledge and skills that go beyond the basics (Schrum, Galizio, & Ledesma, 2011). United States schools have invested billions of dollars on computer hardware and software (Compass Intelligence, 2010) due to the potential of technology to improve classroom instruction and student performance (Collins & Halverson, 2009).When it comes to how best to use these technologies to enhance learning and improve student performance, teachers look to an instructional leader to guide them in the implementation of these programs. Anderson and Dexter (2005) concluded that although technology infrastructure is important, in order for educational technology to become an integral part of a school, technology leadership is even more so. This is because technology leadership has greater impact on outcomes.Schools are implementing virtual classrooms, robotics, one-to-one mobile devices, and adopting digital versions of textbooks. There is also a surge in the assimilation of science, technology, engineering, and math lesson planning. Teachers of technology have the responsibilities of meeting the Common Core Standards and preparing their students for state testing. With the addition of these technologies come great responsibilities and the need for leadership (Jamie, 2006).Administrators, particularly principals or directors of curriculum, have the title and responsibility of being the leader of instruction for schools. But, these leaders are not in the classroom. They do not have as close a connection with the classroom teacher as does the technology teacher. Principals and directors are not always aware of the challenges faced by teachers. They do not always know of all the available technologies and how best to use them. Mundy and Kupczynski (2013) noted,Most states and institutions do not require any formal preparation concerning technology education or training for educators unless that is their area of certification, nor do states require school leaders to demonstrate knowledge or skills that encourage technology preparation for today’s classroom teachers. Graduates in the education field are most likely ill-prepared to implement technology in their school districts (Schrum et al., 2011).It is for these reasons it is critical for the technology coordinators/facilitators working in school districts to act as agents of change. As change agents, they can recognize and engage classroom teachers who serve as opinion leaders for their colleagues.This study examined the role of the technology educator as a change agent with regards to the choice and implementation of technology in a public elementary school setting. The opinions of technology coordinators, facilitators, and classroom teachers were examined for similarities and differences as to who they perceived as the technology opinion leader. It explored the factors that contributed to the classroom teacher being an effective opinion leader with regards to technology usage and implementation. The focus of the study was to identify the technology coordinator as a change agent and how he or she identified a classroom teacher as an opinion leader for the implementation of technology in the teaching/learning process. This study explored the process by which the technology coordinator selected classroom teacher-opinion leaders to diffuse technology education and whether these selections agreed with who the survey instruments identified as opinion leaders according to Rogers’ (2003) definition.According to Puckett (2014), “A leader must expect excellence; however, (s)he must also display excellence” (p. 1). There are many leadership types and some leaders possess qualities that fit scenarios better. Studies suggested school and district policies, practices, and leadership can have an impact on the scope and manner in which teachers use technology (O’Dwyer, Russell, & Bebell, 2004).The opinion leader teachers who use technology are beneficial for assisting their fellow teacher. They guide others by demonstrating the different ways technology can be infused into the classroom learning environment. They are the teachers other staff members look to for support and ideas.The influence of the technology coordinator is also critical. The school’s technology infrastructure, teacher skill and confidence level, and provisions of professional development are responsibilities normally assigned to the coordinator; however, little research existed that explored this role (McGarr & McDonagh, 2014).When the technology coordinator is perceived as a change agent, he or she will be able to promote the types of technology and the way these technologies are used in the lessons. Many teachers rely on their colleagues for technology support because they are on site and have knowledge of the curriculum and classroom (Dexter, Anderson, & Ronnkvist, 2002). Rogers (2003) said these technology teachers may not be in administrative positions but still promote technology integration at the classroom level because they are similar to the people they are helping.Despite the efforts of schools, their technology integration is limited by their inability to individualize teachers’ learning about how to integrate technology effectively into their teaching. Also, schools typically fail to provide feedback to teachers on their technology integration efforts in the form of peer coaching (Dexter, 2011). According to Ng’ambi and Bozalek (2013), “For emerging technologies to be diffused in institutional social systems, more transformational and less transactional leadership is required…. Leveraging informal leadership is particularly critical in accelerating the uptake of emerging technologies practices” (p. 940).The technology coordinator position is described as a “position with a protocol” (Frazier & Bailey, 2004, p. 1). The responsibilities of the technology coordinator extend to include instructing teachers about technology, solving technical problems for teachers, providing access to technological resources, and collaborating with teachers to develop curriculum and materials to be used in the classroom (Sugar, 2005). Technology coordinators explore the best ways to identify the opinion leaders who will set the example of how to incorporate technology into their students’ education. They are the workers in most direct contact with their colleagues and students.Formal leaders like principals tend to have an internal institutional focus as their main directive, while change agents and opinion leaders use technologies external to the institution to improve practices (Ng’ambi & Bozalek, 2013). Thus, formal leaders need to work with opinion leaders to ensure management of institutions has heightened awareness of changes and innovations (Williams, Karousou, & Mackness, 2011). In effect, there needs to be a top-down, bottom-up, or distributed approach for the diffusion of technological ideas to occur and thus opinion leaders are beneficial to the process of communication and influencing innovative practices in education (Ng’ambi & Bozalek, 2013).A change agent is a person who influences a client’s decisions to adopt innovations. The technology supervisor, technology coordinator, and or technology teacher, acting as a change agent, comes equipped with the degree and experience in the technology field. These change agents have solutions and ideas for improving classroom management and instruction using technology that may appeal to the teachers. In order to promote the infusion of these ideas and overcome obstacles of teacher fears and uncertainties, the technology change agent may further distribute leadership responsibilities by employing the use of opinion leaders. Rogers (2003) noted,Change agents can track the following steps to promote an innovation, create awareness of the innovation, strategically identify one faculty member believed to be particularly influential, provide incentives like extra time or reduced workload to allow for the implementation of new practices, encourage faculty to share their experiences at meetings and workshops, and assess results of and record data to show the resulting outcomes and benefits of learning (Larson & Meyer, 2006).Technology resource teachers have been able to act as change agents in schools. The technology resource teacher can inspire other teachers with a vision of how to implement technology effectively by demonstrating activities the classroom teacher can use. Technology resource teachers also can relate to classroom teachers as a fellow professional who understands their situation (Frazier & Bailey, 2004). Technology resource teachers can be leaders based on their position or the knowledge they possess (Leithwood & Riehl, 2003).Opinion leadership is the degree to which an individual is able to influence the attitudes and behaviors of others. Opinion leadership is not attached to the individual’s status or formal position. Opinion leadership is qualified by the individual’s technical proficiency and social accessibility and they serve as a model for their followers (Rogers, 2003). Rogers (2003) acknowledged, “The success or failure of diffusion programs rest in part on the role of opinion leaders” (p. 99).Opinion leaders are informal leaders. They are members of the social system and earn the respect of others and serve as models. In the case of this study, opinion leaders are probably elementary teachers located in the school district in close contact with the technology-coordinator change agent. According to Rogers (2003), a diffusion campaign is more likely to be successful if the change agent is able to identify and properly use the opinion leader. Rogers (2003) said, “Change agents’ success in securing the adoption of innovations by clients is positively related to the extent that he or she works through opinion leaders” (p. 388). By harnessing the potential influence of these teacher opinion leaders, the technology change agent can increase the rate at which innovations can be diffused throughout the elementary school. Rogers (2003) set forth several adopter categories. The “early adopters” are more integrated into the local social system than innovators and have the highest degree of leadership. The effective use of opinion leaders will accelerate and increase adoption as well as use interpersonal communication to reduce potential adopter’s uncertainty associated with innovations.According to Larson and Meyer (2006), faculty may learn about new pedagogies from websites, journals, and workshops but are more likely to be persuaded to try these pedagogies through interpersonal communication with an opinion leader. The ability to reduce the perceived risk and uncertainty associated with adopting new innovations is through the interpersonal communication and influence of the opinion leader (Rogers, 2003).Riveros, Newton, and da Costa (2013) identified emerging themes shared by teacher-leaders. They generally arise from informal processes in their schools. Teacher-leaders develop a broader understanding of educational leadership as they begin to work outside their own classroom and are recruited into broader leadership roles. Teacher-leaders require structures that allow them to facilitate trust and collegiality with their peers.As mentors and leaders, teachers of technology can help other teachers overcome barriers to technology integration (Kopcha, 2010). Twomey et al. (2006) offered the following:In some instances, faculty members have reported that they would not have taken risks or attempted new technology projects had it not been for the technology leader. The faculty preferred to receive assistance from the teacher-leader (Lundeberg, Tikoo, Willers, & Donley, 2004).The technology coordinators/facilitators involved in this study were asked to name the teachers they saw as the technology opinion leaders in their schools. The local expert profile was then used to identify elementary classroom teachers as opinion leaders. This self-reporting instrument was designed to identify those individuals who served as local experts. In the case of this study, the local experts were the classroom teachers using the technologies in their regular teaching. The local expert profile consisted of a series of survey questions issued to the teachers who were in contact with the technology coordinator. The local experts shared the same characteristics (perception of the innovation, venturesomeness, cosmopoliteness, connection to the social system, and experience with an innovation) as the early adopters/opinion leaders.When the 10 districts from which classroom teachers responded are analyzed, an average error of about 37% can be seen with regards to the technology coordinator/facilitator either incorrectly identifying an opinion leader or overlooking an opinion leader altogether.Many times, the people given the title of administrator of the district or school are not prepared or qualified to be leaders in technology. The technology coordinators and classroom teachers are in a position to have direct knowledge of the available technology. They are most often the ones keeping up to date with the ever-evolving devices and software. These technology teachers are in close contact with students and fellow teachers. They know firsthand the challenges faced by their colleagues.When asked how the opinion leaders assisted with classroom technology infusion, technology coordinators/facilitators responded that classroom teacher-opinion leaders were those willing to share their lessons. These technology opinion leaders were also the ones who lent their insights on how best to use the hardware and software in the classroom. These teachers piloted programs and trained others.When asked how the technology opinion leaders influenced others in the use of classroom technology, technology coordinators/facilitators responded that classroom teacher-opinion leaders were those who volunteered to do lessons in other classrooms. Their willingness to try new things made it easier for others to follow suit. Other teachers valued the expertise of these opinion leader teachers who set the example for others to follow.When the selections made by the technology coordinators/facilitators were examined as to who they identified as opinion leaders, they selected a classroom teacher who scored as an opinion leader on the local expert profile, the innovativeness scale, or both a number of times. They were also incorrect a number of times when they chose a teacher who did not score as an opinion leader or overlooked one who did. All school respondents considered, the technology coordinators were correct on average about 70% of the time in the selection of a classroom teacher technology-opinion leader.When all teacher respondents are considered by district, the classroom teachers surveyed selected the technology coordinator/facilitator as a technology opinion leader on average about 60% of the time. Also, the classroom teachers chose the same teacher opinion leaders as the technology coordinator/facilitator on average about 47% of the time.Based on the research, there is a clear discrepancy between those teachers identified by the survey as being the technology opinion leaders and those identified by the staff. Although technology coordinators/facilitators are able to identify the teachers who qualify as opinion leaders an average of 63% of the time, they still overlooked some potential leaders at their respective schools.When technology coordinators/facilitators were asked their most important responsibilities as change agents, some responded as follows:When technology coordinators/facilitators were asked how the opinion leaders assisted them in classroom technology infusion, some responded as follows:Technology coordinators/facilitators were asked how the opinion leaders in their schools influenced other teachers and how they used classroom technology. The following are some of the responses:Technology coordinators/facilitators should periodically use opinion leadership surveys to better identify opinion leaders formally as those leaders might change. It is recommended that school district technology coordinators and leaders research ways to best promote the classroom opinion leaders in an effort to make them more recognizable as valuable sources for other teaching staff.Technology coordinators/facilitators should choose to promote classroom opinion leaders by distributing leadership responsibilities to these teachers. Teacher opinion leaders could be asked to share ideas at faculty meetings and be given the opportunity to conduct workshops for other staff members. Classroom technology is ever-evolving and expanding. There will always be a need for the technology coordinator/facilitator change agent to be able to identify classroom-teacher opinion leaders.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.