Principals' Perceptions of the Importance of Technology in Schools

Abstract

A sample of 311 principals from a large metropolitan area in the southwest region of the U. S. responded to a questionnaire that addressed public school principals’ perceptions related to the major functions of technology in their schools. Principals reported that the major functions of technology were: (a) communication, (b) instruction, (c) data sharing and management, (d) a resource, (e) administrative tasks, and (f) student learning. Male principals felt that technology was used as a resource and for administrative tasks more than female principals. Furthermore, principals with 12 or more years of experience perceived that technology was used for instruction, data sharing and management, and administrative tasks more than principals with less than 12 years of experience. These results indicate that both gender and years of experience influence how principals perceive the functions of technology in their schools. This could affect the technology leadership of principals, which may influence the success of technology implementation in schools.

Keywords

• Technology use, Principals’ use of technology, Educational technology, ICT in schools, Technology integration

References

1. Anderson, R. E. & Dexter, S. (2005). School technology leadership: An empirical investigation of
2. prevalence and effect. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41, 49-82.
3. Atkins, N. E. & Vasu, E. S. (2000). Measuring knowledge of technology usage and stages of concern about computing: A study of middle school teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 8, 279-302.
4. Baylor, A. L. & Ritchie, D. (2002). What factors facilitate teacher skill, teacher morale, and perceived student learning in technology-using classrooms? Computers & Education, 39, 395-414.
5. Brockmeier, L. L., Sermon, J. M., & Hope, W. C. (2005). Principals' relationship with computer technology. NASSP Bulletin, 89(643), 45-63.
6. Chang, I-H. (2012). The effect of principals' technological leadership on teachers' technological literacy and teaching effectiveness in Taiwanese elementary schools. Educational Technology & Society, 15, 328-340.
7. Coffland, D. A. & Strickland, A. W. (2004). Factors related to teacher use of technology in secondary geometry instruction. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 23, 347-365.
8. Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

9. Day, C. & Leithwood, K. (Eds.). (2007). Successful principal leadership in times of change: An International perspective. New York: Springer.
10. Desimonte, L. M. & LeFloch, K. C. (2004). Are we asking the right questions? Using cognitive interviews to improve surveys in education research. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26, 1-22.
11. Ertmer, P. A. , Bai, H., Dong, C., Khalil, M., Park, S. H., & Wang, L. (2002). Online professional development: Building administrators’ capacity for technology leadership. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 19(1), 5-11.
12. Garland, V. E. (2010). Emerging technology trends and ethical practices for the school principal. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 38(1), 39-50.
13. Hines, C., Edmonson, S., & Moore, G. W. (2008). The impact of technology on high school principals. NASSP Bulletin, 92(4), 276-291.
14. International Society for Technology in Education. (2009). National Education Technology Standards for Administrators. Retrieved on 10 March 2013 from http://www.iste.org/ docs/pdfs/nets-a-standards.pdf
15. IsaBelle, C. & Lapointe, C. (2003). Start at the top: Successfully integrating information and communication technologies in schools by training principals. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 49, 123-137.
16. Leithwood, K. & Riehl, C. (2005). What we know about successful school leadership. In W. Firestone & C. Riehl (Eds.), A new agenda: Directions for research on educational leadership (pp. 12-27). New York: Teachers College Press.
17. Leonard, L. J. & Leonard, P. E. (2006). Leadership for technology integration: Computing the reality. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 52(4), 212-224.
18. MacNeil, A. J. & Delafield, D. P. (1998). Principal leadership for successful school technology implementation. In S. McNeil, J. D. Price, S. B. Mehall, B. Robin, & J. Willis (Eds.), Technology and teacher education annual 1998 (pp. 296-300). Norfolk, VA: AACE.
19. Paben, S. (2002). What’s in it for the busy leader? Show administrators how technology works toward their vision. Journal of Staff Development, 23(1), 24-27.
20. Padrón, Y. N., Waxman, H. C., Lee, Y. H., Linn, M. F., & Michko, G. (2012). Classroom observations of teaching and learning with technology in urban elementary school mathematics classrooms serving English language learners. International Journal of Instructional Media, 39(1), 45-54.
21. Peck, C., Mullen, C. A., Lashley, C., & Eldridge, J. A. (2011). School leadership and technology challenges: Lessons from a new American high school. AASA Journal of Scholarship and Practice, 7(4), 39-51.
22. Ritchie, D. C. (1996). The administrative role in the integration of technology. NASSP Bulletin, 80(582), 42-52.
23. Schargel, F. P., Thacker, T., & Bell, J. (2007). From at-risk to academic excellence: What successful leaders do. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
24. Schmeltzer, T. (2001). Training administrators to be technology leaders. Technology and Learning, 21(11), 16-24.
25. Serhan, D. (2009). The influence of gender and experience on school principals’ computer use. International Journal of Instructional Media, 38(2), 153-162.
26. Sharratt, L. (1999). Technology implementation: Lessons for school and district leaders. Orbit, 30, 36-39.
27. Shen, J. (Ed.). (2005). School principals. New York: Peter Lang.
28. Waxman, H. C., MacNeil, A., & Lee, Y. H. (2006, November). Principals’ perceptions of successful school leadership. Paper presented at the annual convention of the University Council of Educational Administration, San Antonio, TX.
29. Yu, C. & Durrington, V. A. (2006). Technology standards for school administrators: An analysis of practicing and aspiring administrators’ perceived ability to perform the standards. NASSP Bulletin, 90, 301-317.
30. Correspondence: Hersh Waxman, Director of the Education Research Center, College of Education
31. and Human Development, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, United States