Week 2: Building Digital Leadership at Skyview Middle School
As I think about digital leadership at Skyview Middle School in Falcon School District 49, I keep coming back to the idea that we do not need another initiative. We need a clear, shared approach. Two frameworks feel especially useful for this work. The first is the systems thinking approach from Michael Fullan and Ben Levin, which focuses on long-term, sustainable change (Levin & Fullan, 2008). The second is the Triple E Framework developed by Liz Kolb, which helps teachers think about how technology actually supports learning (Kolb, 2020). Together, these frameworks help connect big-picture leadership with what is happening in classrooms every day.
At Skyview, the first step in building a technology integration plan would be bringing the right people to the table. This cannot be limited to administrators or a small leadership team. It needs to include teachers across content areas, the instructional coach, special education and multilingual specialists, technology staff, and district leaders. Just as important are students and families. In a community like northeastern Colorado Springs, where there is a mix of economic backgrounds, languages, and many military-connected families, those voices matter. Research shows that lasting change happens when people feel ownership of the work, not when decisions are handed down to them (Levin & Fullan, 2008).
Technology integration also has to connect to the work that is already happening. At Skyview, that includes improving instructional consistency, strengthening family support, and making sure all students have meaningful learning experiences. The Triple E Framework provides a simple but powerful way to keep that focus. It pushes us to ask whether technology is helping students stay engaged, deepen their understanding, and connect their learning beyond the classroom (Kolb, 2020). This matters because we already have strong access to devices. The real question is how those devices are being used. In some classrooms, students may be creating, collaborating, and thinking critically. In others, they may be completing more passive tasks. That inconsistency is where the work needs to focus.
Building capacity will depend on how we approach professional learning. Teachers do not need more one-time trainings. They need time to learn together, try new strategies, and reflect on what is working. Skyview already has structures like professional learning communities (PLCs) and coaching cycles that can support this. These spaces can be used for teachers to look at student work, plan lessons, and test out ways to use technology more intentionally. Research supports this kind of approach, showing that professional learning is most effective when it is ongoing, collaborative, and connected to real classroom practice (Williams et al., 2008).
When it comes to measuring success, we have to look beyond whether students have access to devices. That part is already in place. Instead, we should focus on what students are actually doing with technology. Are they engaged in meaningful tasks? Are they thinking critically and creating? Are families able to support learning at home? It is also important to pay attention to differences across groups of students, especially when it comes to home access and family confidence with technology. If we are serious about digital equity, we have to measure it in practice, not just in theory.
The systems approach from Fullan and Levin reminds us that this kind of work takes time. Change does not happen all at once, and it should not. Starting small, learning from early successes, and building momentum over time is more sustainable than trying to do everything at once. It also helps create a shared sense of purpose across the school.
At the end of the day, digital leadership at Skyview is not really about technology. It is about people. It is about helping teachers feel confident, helping families feel connected, and helping students see themselves as capable and heard. Technology is simply a tool that can support that work when it is used with intention and care.
References
Levin, B., & Fullan, M. (2008). Learning about systems renewal. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 36(2), 289–303.
Liz Kolb. (2020). About the Triple E Framework. https://www.tripleeframework.com/about.html
Williams, L. A., Atkinson, L. C., Cate, J. M., & O’Hair, M. J. (2008). Mutual support between learning community development and technology integration: Impact on school practices and student achievement. Theory Into Practice, 47, 294–302.
Hi Kelli! I really liked your point that schools don’t need another initiative, but a clear and shared approach. That really stood out to me, and I totally agree! I also like your thoughts on focusing on consistency, especially the idea that access to devices isn’t the issue, but how they’re being used. I think your emphasis on PLCs and ongoing teacher collaboration will really help support the shift toward more meaningful integration. I think you did a great job showing that this work is less about the technology itself and more about people, which is exactly what will help to make lasting change.
ReplyDeleteHi Kelli! I also focused on the same two research models in my blog post. I agree that we need to think about the technology that is already implemented in the classroom, but we begin adding more. Consistency across the board is key, and I thought the questions you posed about "what" we are doing with technology are really insightful. Instead of addressing them in theory, they need to be put in practice. Good work!
ReplyDeleteKelli,
ReplyDeleteLevin and Fullan's focus on learning in context really resonated with me as well. I think this viewpoint helps educational leaders to focus on consistently implementing student-centered approaches that support learning rather than focusing on broad promises from ed tech companies. Pairing this framework with the Triple E Framework and bringing them alongside current promising practices within the district feels like the most viable approach for implementing a strong technology integration plan.
Kelli,
ReplyDeleteWhat I appreciate most about your blog post is the inclusiveness of the stakeholders you would bring to the table while working to implement your plan. I feel that the importance of many of those parties is often minimized, overlooked, or completely forgotten. You certainly made me think about how I can go back and extend my definition of "stakeholder" in my improvement plan. Thank you for reminding me that it takes a village to make great learning happen and that all participants should be included in the conversations we have as we work to improve the education of our children.
Kelli,
ReplyDeleteI am really glad you said your school doesn’t want another initiative because I feel that same struggle at my school. It’s not that teachers don’t care, but there is definitely hesitation when it feels like one more thing or another committee. We are in a very similar situation where we have the access, but we want better outcomes from how technology is actually being used. I think teacher buy-in is going to be the biggest piece because without that, any plan will fall flat. I like the idea of using the Triple E Framework, but I also wonder if teachers will see it as helpful or just something else being pushed on them. I do agree with you that more ongoing, meaningful training is needed instead of one-time PD, and PLCs seem like the best place for that to happen. I always enjoy reading your blogs because our situations are so similar, and I appreciate your perspective. How would you introduce the Triple E Framework to teachers in a way that doesn’t feel like “one more thing”?