While the CBAM is not technology-specific, it can certainly be
applied to schools' efforts to integrate technology into their
curricula. There are several elements common to both the CBAM
and the ACOT™ studies that are of particular importance to
those undertaking an innovation. These similarities are listed
below for your review.
- Individual focus. Both ACOT™ studies and CBAM
emphasize the importance of the individual in the success of
any innovation. While many innovations are described in impersonal,
global terms, the change that is required is individual. Without
the growth of individuals no innovation will succeed.
- Developmental stages. Both describe a series of stages
in which the user first applies an innovation by replicating
known methods and materials. Successful progression through
the innovation arrives a stage in which participants have thoroughly
incorporated aspects of the innovation to the point that a new
synthesis of ideas, methods, and materials becomes the starting
point for a new generation of innovation. This is the innovation
stage in the ACOT™ studies.
- Ownership. Both emphasize the importance of the participants'
sense of ownership in the integration of the innovation. Participants
will be challenged to grow and may be forced to rethink beliefs
and philosophies. Without buy-in from the participants, the
innovation will not be implemented as desired.
- Time. Innovation takes time. Schools and districts
that yield to pressures to implement innovation and expect results
for their stakeholders within a year will be disappointed. Both
the ACOT™ studies and CBAM note that innovations take years
to show impact. The average time for teachers in the ACOT™
studies to reach the appropriation stage is two years, while
teachers who reach the invention stage may take at least five
years to progress this far.
- Focus for evaluation. To truely demonstrate the impact
of an innovation the evaluation must first consider the stage
of adoption of the individual participants and the innovation
as a whole. Evaluations that do not consider how the innovation
is being used will yield to misleading results.
 |
In a school, the most important change facilitator—whether
officially designated or not—is the building principal.
Often, the success of an innovation will be determined by
the climate created and the support offered by the principal. |
Review these key similarities in the ACOT™ studies and the
CBAM. Log on to the class discussion area to relate a story of
technology innovation. Whether you were the principal at the time
or not, describe the innovation and the degree to which it did
or did not succeed. Were there key elements described in these
two research-based models that led to the innovation's success?
Were elements ignored or not considered completely? For example,
did the school or district allow enough time for the innovation
to develop to demonstrate true impact? Were the participants given
an opportunity for shared decision making and feedback that led
to ownership? Did evaluation efforts consider the stage of development?
Share your story with the class.
|
