BAGWELL COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
Ed.S./Ed.D. Program
EDL 8500 Technology & School Improvement
Kennesaw State University
Bagwell College of Education
Department: Educational Leadership
Department phone number:
Semester: XXXX
Credit Hours: 3
INSTRUCTOR:
e-mail:
Web page:
Office Phone:
TEXTS:
Zmuda, A., Kuklis, R., & Everett, E. (2004). Transforming schools: Creating a culture of
continuous improvement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
COURSE CATALOG DESCRIPTION:
Prerequisites:
Admission to the Ed.S. or Ed.D. program in Educational Leadership or approval of the
Educational Leadership Department to enroll in this course as an elective course.
Candidates enrolled in this course will explore how technology can support contemporary school
improvement initiatives through: (1) research-based, standards-based instruction; (2) parent and
community involvement in student learning; (3) frequent and high-quality student assessment of
learning (4) individualized instruction; and (5) the management of student data for improved
instructional decision-making. The course also explores how technology can meet the needs and
interests of ESOL students, culturally-diverse populations, and at-risk learners.
PURPOSE/RATIONALE:
Technology programs and school improvement initiatives are often developing in isolation from
one another. Yet, educational technologies can make great contributions toward increased student
achievement and accountability—especially in the areas of data-management and decisionmaking. This course is designed to help technology directors understand the critical roles they can
play in the important educational arena of school improvement. This course is also designed to
help educational leaders understand the importance of cross-program collaboration.
KSU CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK SUMMARY
Collaborative Development of Expertise in Teaching and Learning
The Professional Teacher Education Unit (PTEU) at Kennesaw State University is committed to
developing expertise among candidates in initial and advanced programs as teachers and leaders
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 1
of 13
who possess the capability, intent and expertise to facilitate high levels of learning in all of their
students through effective, research-based practices in classroom instruction, and who enhance
the structures that support all learning. To that end, the PTEU fosters the development of
candidates as they progress through stages of growth from novice to proficient to expert and
leader. Within the PTEU conceptual framework, expertise is viewed as a process of continued
development, not an end-state. To be effective, teachers and educational leaders must embrace
the notion that teaching and learning are entwined and that only through the implementation of
validated practices can all students construct meaning and reach high levels of learning. In that
way, candidates at the doctoral level develop into leaders for learning and facilitators of the
teaching and learning process. Finally, the PTEU recognizes, values, and demonstrates
collaborative practices across the college and university and extends collaboration to the
community-at-large. Through this collaboration with professionals in the university, the public
and private schools, parents and other professional partners, the PTEU meets the ultimate goal of
assisting Georgia schools in bringing all students to high levels of learning.
Knowledge Base:
Teacher development is generally recognized as a continuum that includes four phases:
preservice, induction, in-service, renewal (Odell, Huling, and Sweeny, 2000). Just as Sternberg
(1996) believes that the concept of expertise is central to analyzing the teaching-learning process,
the teacher education faculty at KSU believe that the concept of expertise is central to preparing
effective classroom teachers and teacher leaders. Researchers describe how during the continuum
phases teachers progress from being Novices learning to survive in classrooms toward becoming
Experts who have achieved elegance in their teaching. We, like Sternberg (1998), believe that
expertise is not an end-state but a process of continued development.
Use of Technology:
Technology Standards for Educators are required by the Professional Standards Commission.
Telecommunication and information technologies will be integrated throughout the master
teacher preparation program, and all candidates must be able to use technology to improve
student learning and meet Georgia Technology Standards for Educators. During the courses,
candidates will be provided with opportunities to explore and use instructional media. They will
master use of productivity tools, such as multimedia facilities, local-net and Internet, and feel
confident to design multimedia instructional materials, and create WWW resources.
Field Experience:
While participating in all field experiences, you are encouraged to be involved in a variety of
school-based activities directed at the improvement of teaching and learning. Activities may
include, but are not limited to, attending and presenting at professional conferences, participating
in leadership activities, attending PTA/school board meetings, and participating in educationrelated community events. As you continue your field experiences, you are encouraged to explore
every opportunity to learn by doing.
Diversity:
A variety of materials and instructional strategies will be employed to meet the needs of the
different learning styles of diverse learners in class. Candidates will gain knowledge as well as an
understanding of differentiated strategies and curricula for providing effective instruction and
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 2
of 13
assessment within multicultural classrooms. One element of course work is raising candidate
awareness of critical multicultural issues. A second element is to cause candidates to explore
how multiple attributes of multicultural populations influence decisions in employing specific
methods and materials for every student. Among these attributes are ethnicity, race,
socioeconomic status, gender, giftedness, disability, language, religion, family structure,
sexual orientation, and geographic region. An emphasis on cognitive style differences
provides a background for the consideration of cultural context.
Kennesaw State University provides program accessibility and accommodations for persons
defined as disabled under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 or the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990. A number of services are available to support students with disabilities
within their academic program. In order to make arrangements for special services, students
must visit the Office of Disabled Student Support Services (770-423- 6443) and develop an
individual assistance plan. In some cases, certification of disability is required.
Please be aware that there are other support/mentor groups on the campus of Kennesaw State
University that address each of the multicultural variables outlined above. For more information
contact the Student Life Center at 770-423-6280.
Doctorate of Education (EdD)
The knowledge, skills and dispositions (KSD’s) of the graduates of the The Kennesaw
State University Doctorate of Education program of the Bagwell College of Education reflect the
unique aspects of this degree. Collaboratively developed by faculty from across the university
and in consultation with community/school partners, these outcomes and proficiencies delineate
the high expectations we have for graduates who will be Leaders for Learning. Clearly, the
proficiencies reflect the complex nature of student learning in advanced degree programs leading
to a terminal degree. Consequently, many of the proficiencies listed below incorporate aspects
of knowledge, skills and dispositions within a single proficiency. These proficiencies are clearly
linked to our conceptual framework, The Collaborative Development of Expertise in Teaching,
Learning and Leadership.
Graduates from the Doctorate of Education Program at Kennesaw State University
1. Demonstrate leadership as advocates for students and education. Candidates
a. synthesize and apply the latest research on learning, leadership, developmental theory
advocating the implementation of best practices and assist colleagues to do the same to
ensure all students learn.
b. are knowledgeable, articulate and think critically about educational practice, policy and
issues on national and international arenas.
c. understand, respond to , and influence the larger political, social, economic, legal, and
cultural context in matters related to education.
d. are knowledgeable about the factors contributing to safe physical environments for
education.
e. develop, articulate, implement, and steward a vision of learning supported by the
school community
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 3
of 13
2. Demonstrate leadership as agents for change, collaboration and collegiality. Candidates
a. understand the complexity of schools and the ambiguous nature of educational issues.
b. act in concert with and/or on behalf of colleagues to improve teaching and learning in
the classroom as supported by effective school, district, state level policies and
operations.
c. facilitate shared-decision making and teamwork.
d. improve teaching and learning by intentionally and systematically building networks of
influence at local, state, national and international arenas.
e. impact student learning for all and mentor other educators to do the same by effectively
working within the structures and culture of schools, families and communities.
f. support the teaching and learning process by soliciting all sources of funding and
educational resources.
3. Demonstrate leadership as mentors. Candidates
a. support and guide teachers to improve teaching and learning for all.
b. are committed to improving student learning by improving teaching and the learning
environment.
c. model routine, intentional, and effective use of technology while mentori8ng and
encouraging others to do the same.
4. Demonstrate leadership as expert teachers and instructional leaders. Candidates
a. are creative and flexible in their thinking and in seeking solutions to educational
challenges.
b. are knowledgeable of assessment, evaluation and accountability practices and critically
synthesize and utilize the data to improve student learning.
c. are master-teachers and instructional leaders possessing and demonstrating content and
pedagogical expertise who are able to make international comparisons in both areas.
d. develop and/or support appropriate, meaningful curricula that positively impact student
learning for all and assist others to do the same.
e. facilitate and support curricular design, instructional strategies, and learning
environments that integrate appropriate technologies to maximize teaching and
learning.
f. use technology to collect and analyze data, interpret results, and communicate findings
to improve instructional practice and student learning.
5. Demonstrate leadership as models of professionalism. Candidates
a. effectively design and conduct educational research which positively influences
educational practice or policy.
b. exhibit ethical behavior in all professional and personal interactions.
c. respect others, value differences and are open to feedback.
d. believe that for every problem there is a solution and actualize that belief when
engaging colleagues, students, families and community partners.
e. seek out responsibility and are accountable for their actions.
f. maintain current knowledge and best practices through continued professional
development.
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 4
of 13
6. Demonstrate leadership in meeting the needs of diverse constituents. Candidates
a. value and recognize the strength and power of diversity.
b. incorporate global perspectives and cultural richness in curriculum planning and
decision making.
c. address exceptionalities in planning, teaching, and assessment and respond to diverse
community interests and needs by mobilizing community resources.
d. proactively and intentionally advocate for and work to build educational environments
that are inclusive and supportive of diverse students, families and colleagues
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES: (Aligned to Content Standards)
Candidates will be equipped to support local school improvement initiatives with technology
solutions. (ELCC Standards 1, 2, 3; NETS-A Standard III; ISTE/NCATE TL Standards I, II, III,
V, VI, VII, and VIII).
In pursuit of these goals, the learning objectives of this course include:
1. Implementing instructional technologies to support research-based, standards-based
instruction (ELCC 1, 2; NETS-A III; TL II)
2. Using current technology resources and strategies to support the diverse needs of
learners.
3. Identifying technology resources and evaluate them for accuracy and suitability based on
the content standards (ELCC 1, 2; NETS-A III; TL II)
4. Evaluating a variety of strategies to manage student learning in a technology-enhanced
environment (ELCC 1, 2; NETS-A III; TL II)
5. Facilitating technology-enhanced experiences that address content standards and student
technology standards. (ELCC 1, 2; NETS-A III; TL III)
6. Using technology to support learner-centered strategies that address the diverse needs of
students (ELCC 1, 2; NETS-A III; TL III)
7. Designing methods and model strategies for teaching hypermedia development, scripting,
and/or computer programming, in a problem-solving context in the school environment
(ELCC 1, 2; NETS-A III; TLIII)
8. Disseminating curricular methods and strategies that are aligned with district/region/state
/national content and technology standards (ELCC 1, 2; NETS-A III; TLIII)
9. Facilitating the development of a variety of techniques to use technology to assess
student learning of subject matter (ELCC 1, 2; NETS-A III; TL IV)
10. Providing technology resources for assessment and evaluation of artifacts and data.
(ELCC 1, 2; NETS-A III; TLIV)
11. Using technology resources to collect and analyze data, interpret results, and
communicate findings to improve instructional practice and maximize student learning
(ELCC 1, 2; NETS-A III; TLIV)
12. Identifying and procuring technology resources to aid in analysis and interpretation of
data (ELCC 3; NETS-A III; TLIV)
13. Modeling the integration of data from multiple software applications using advanced
features of applications such as word processing, database, spreadsheet, communication,
and other tools into a product (ELCC 3; NETS-A III; TLIV)
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 5
of 13
14. Documenting and Assessing field-based experiences and observations using specificpurpose electronic devices (ELCC 1, 2, 3; NETS-A III; TLIV)
15. Designing and Practicing strategies for testing functions and evaluating technology use
effectiveness of instructional products that were developed using multiple technology
tools.
16. Modeling and implementing the use of telecommunications tools and resources to foster
and support information sharing, remote information access, and communication between
students, school staff, parents, and local community (ELCC 1, 2; NETS-A III; TLIV)
17. Organize, coordinate, and participate in an online learning community related to the use
of technology to support learning (ELCC 1, 2; NETS-A III; TLIV)
18. Designing, modifying, maintaining, and facilitating the development of web pages and
sites that support communication and information access between the entire school
district and local/state/national/ international communities (ELCC 1, 2; NETS-A III; TL
IV)
19. Communicating research on best practices related to applying appropriate technology
resources to enable and empower learners with diverse backgrounds, characteristics, and
abilities (ELCC 1, 2; NETS-A III; TLVI)
20. Communicating research on best practices related to applying appropriate technology
resources to affirm diversity and address cultural and language differences (ELCC 1, 2;
NETS-A III; TLVI)
21. Communicating and Applying principles and practices of educational research in
educational technology (ELCC 1, 2; NETS-A III; TLVIIII)
22. Discussing issues relating to building collaborations, alliances, and partnerships
involving educational technology initiatives. (ELCC 1, 2; NETS-A III; TLVIII)
23. Using national, state, and local standards to develop curriculum plans for integrating
technology in the school environment (ELCC 1, 2; NETS-A III; TLVIII)
24. Using evaluation findings to recommend modifications in technology implementations.
25. Developing curriculum activities or performances that meet national, state, and local
technology standards (ELCC 1, 2; NETS-A III; TLVIII)
26. Comparing and Evaluating district-level technology plans in order to determine the
technology plan’s relationship and alignment to the school improvement plan (ELCC 1,
2; NETS-A III; TL-VIII)
27. Using strategic planning principles to lead and assist in the acquisition, implementation,
and maintenance of technology resources (ELCC 1, 2; NETS-A III; TL-VIII)
28. Planning, developing, and implementing strategies and procedures for resource
acquisition and management of technology-based systems including hardware and
software (ELCC 1, 2; NETS-A III; TL-VIII)
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES – aligned to Program Standards
The Professional Teacher Education Unit prepares learning facilitators who understand their
disciplines and principles of pedagogy, who reflect on their practice, and who apply these
understandings to making instructional decisions that foster the success of all learners. As a
result of the satisfactory fulfillment of the requirements of these courses, the candidate will
demonstrate the following outcomes:
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 6
of 13
Course objective
Doctoral
KSDs
1. Implementing instructional
technologies to support research-based,
standards-based instruction
4e
2. Using current technology resources and
strategies to support the diverse needs of
learners.
4e, 6a, 6c,
6d
3. Identifying technology resources and
evaluate them for accuracy and suitability
based on the content standards
4b
4. Evaluating a variety of strategies to
manage student learning in a technologyenhanced environment
4e
5. Facilitating technology-enhanced
experiences that address content standards
and student technology standards.
6. Using technology to support learnercentered strategies that address the diverse
needs of students
4e
7. Designing methods and model
strategies for teaching hypermedia
development, scripting, and/or computer
programming, in a problem-solving
context in the school environment
8. Disseminating curricular methods and
strategies that are aligned with
district/region/state /national content and
technology standards
4d
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
4e, 6a, 6c,
6d
1a
Distributed
School
Leadership
Roles*
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
PSC/NCATE
Standard
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
Learning &
Development
Leader
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
Learning &
Development
Leader
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
Learning &
Development
Leader
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
Learning &
Development
Leader
1.2, 1.5
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
1.2, 1.5
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
1.2, 1.5
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
Page 7
of 13
9. Facilitating the development of a
variety of techniques to use technology to
assess student learning of subject matter
10. Providing technology resources for
assessment and evaluation of artifacts and
data.
4b
Learning &
Development
Leader
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
4b
Learning &
Development
Leader
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
1.8
11. Using technology resources to collect
and analyze data, interpret results, and
communicate findings to improve
instructional practice and maximize
student learning
12. Identifying and procuring technology
resources to aid in analysis and
interpretation of data
13. Modeling the integration of data from
multiple software applications using
advanced features of applications such as
word processing, database, spreadsheet,
communication, and other tools into a
product
14. Documenting and Assessing fieldbased experiences and observations using
specific-purpose electronic devices
15. Designing and Practicing strategies for
testing functions and evaluating
technology use effectiveness of
instructional products that were developed
using multiple technology tools.
4f
16. Modeling and implementing the use of
telecommunications tools and resources to
foster and support information sharing,
3c
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Data Analysis
Leader
Data Analysis
Leader
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
4b, 4f
Data Analysis
Leader
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
3c
Data Analysis
Leader
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
3c
4b
Learning &
Development
Leader
Learning &
Development
Leader
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
1.2, 1.5
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
Learning &
Development
Leader
Relationship
Leader
1.2, 1.5
Page 8
of 13
remote information access, and
communication between students, school
staff, parents, and local community
17. Organize, coordinate, and participate
in an online learning community related to
the use of technology to support learning
18. Designing, modifying, maintaining,
and facilitating the development of web
pages and sites that support
communication and information access
between the entire school district and
local/state/national/ international
communities
19. Communicating research on best
practices related to applying appropriate
technology resources to enable and
empower learners with diverse
backgrounds, characteristics, and abilities
20. Communicating research on best
practices related to applying appropriate
technology resources to affirm diversity
and address cultural and language
differences
21. Communicating and Applying
principles and practices of educational
research in educational technology
22. Discussing issues relating to building
collaborations, alliances, and partnerships
involving educational technology
initiatives.
23. Using national, state, and local
standards to develop curriculum plans for
integrating technology in the school
environment
24. Using evaluation findings to
recommend modifications in technology
implementations.
3b, 3d, 3e
3e
1a
1a
1a
2a, 2b, 2d,
2e
4d
4a
25. Developing curriculum activities or
4d
performances that meet national, state, and
local technology standards
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Learning &
Development
Leader
Learning &
Development
Leader
Relationship
Leader
1.2, 1.5
1.2, 1.6
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
Learning &
Development
Leader
Learning &
Development
Leader
1.2, 1.5
Learning &
Development
Leader
Relationship
Development
Leader
1.2, 1.5
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
1.2, 1.5, 1.6
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
Operations Leader
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Page 9
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
of 13
26. Comparing and Evaluating districtlevel technology plans in order to
determine the technology plan’s
relationship and alignment to the school
improvement plan
27. Using strategic planning principles to
lead and assist in the acquisition,
implementation, and maintenance of
technology resources
28. Planning, developing, and
implementing strategies and procedures
for resource acquisition and management
of technology-based systems including
hardware and software
4e
Leader
Operations Leader
1.5
Performance
Leader
1b
Operations Leader
1.5
1b
Operations Leader
1.5
*Georgia’s Leadership Institute for School Improvement & Georgia Committee on Educational
Leadership Preparation’s Distributed School Leadership Roles
COURSE OUTLINE:
1. Overview AYP elements
2. Review of research in school improvement
3. Role of technology in aligning instructional resources to standards
a. Managed Learning Systems
b. Tagging instructional resources
4. Technology-assisted evaluation in the classroom
a. Online Assessment Systems
b. Student Response Systems
c. Adaptive testing
5. Online testing
6. Student information systems/Data management
7. Technology, motivation, authenticity for low-performing students
8. Best practices in technology-assisted English language learning
9. Best practices in parent-school communication systems
10. Relationship of technology planning to school improvement planning
COURSE REQUIREMENTS/ASSIGNMENTS:
1. Candidates will participate in a series of online discussion forums and in-class activities
responding to assigned readings, recommended websites, and critical issues related to the
professional learning and instructional technology. Candidate responses should relate not
only to the question(s), but also to the comments made by classmates and/or instructor.
These responses should clearly demonstrate that candidates have read the required
articles, thoroughly examined recommended websites, and participated fully in course
assignments and exercises. Responses should be relevant to the topic and should serve to
move the discussion forward—not simply agree or disagree with what has already been
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 10
of 13
stated. Candidates should interact with classmates constructively and respectively,
allowing for everyone to participate. Candidates should follow the rules of netiquette to
be provided in class.
2. In a paper not to exceed 20 pages, candidates will describe what types of standards-based
student achievement data are currently being collected at the classroom, school, and
system level in their district. The paper should also explain (1) when this data is
collected; (2) how it is analyzed and by whom; (3) how, when, and to whom it is
reported; and (4) how the data is being used to inform instruction. Finally, the paper
should offer proposals of how data collection, analysis and reporting cycles in the school
system could be improved. In their proposals, candidates should highlight ways that
commercial, customized, or yet-to-be-designed technology solutions might facilitate best
practices in using data for improving instruction/achievement. All proposed assessment
practices must be grounded in theory or research. Paper should be appropriately
documented with references and a bibliography.
3. In small groups, candidates will critique an assigned class of assessment products
currently on the market and suggest ways that the products might best be implemented
for school improvement.
EVALUATION AND GRADING:
Online and In-class Discussion of Readings (40% of grade)
Data for School Improvement Paper (40% of grade)
Product Assessment (20% of grade)
A:
B:
C:
F:
92% - 100%
84%-91%
75%-83%
74% or lower
Note: All written work should reflect careful organization of material and the high standards of
investigation associated with college-level studies. Papers should be typewritten, on 8 1/2 x 11 in. paper.
Action research work submitted should follow APA format. Manuscripts must be proof read to ensure
accuracy in spelling, punctuation, and grammar. Written work should be attractive and neat -ESPECIALLY WITH MATERIALS INTENDED FOR STUDENT USE.
ACADEMIC HONESTY STATEMENT:
The KSU Graduate Catalog states “KSU expects that graduate students will pursue their
academic programs in an ethical, professional manner. Any work that students present in
fulfillment of program or course requirements should reflect their own efforts, achieved without
giving or receiving any unauthorized assistance. Any student who is found to have violated these
expectations will be subject to disciplinary action.”
PROFESSIONALISM: CLASS ATTENDANCE/PARTICIPATION POLICY:
Attendance is required for each class session, and candidates are expected to be on time. Part of
your success in this class is related to your ability to provide peer reviews and feedback to your
group members regarding group projects. Furthermore, responding effectively and appropriately
to feedback from your peers and the professor is another measure of one’s professionalism. Since
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 11
of 13
each class meeting represents one week of instruction/learning, failure to attend class will impact
your performance on assignments and final exams. Class discussions, group work, and activities
require that everyone be present. There is no way to “make up” this class. Please be prepared
with all readings completed prior to class. You are expected to ask insightful and pertinent
questions.
.
REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Crosby, B. (2002). The $100,000 teacher: A teacher's solution to America's decling school
system. 1st. ed. Sterling, VA: Capitol Books.
Datnow, A., & Stringfield, S. (2000). Working together for reliable school reform. Journal of
Education for Students Placed at Risk. 5.
Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (1987). The support of autonomy and control of behavior. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology. 53.
Desimone, L. (2002). How can comprehensive school reform models be successfully
implemented? Review of Educational Research. 72 (3).
Editorial Projects in Education . (1998) Thoughtful teachers, thoughtful schools (3rd ed).
Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Gabriel, J. (2005). How to thrive as a teacher leader. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Grissmer, D. (2000). Improving student achievement: What state NAEP test scores tell us.. Santa
Monica, CA: Rand.
Jonassen, D. (2003). Learning to solve problems with technology: A constructivist perspective
(3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Lenz, B. K., & Deshler, D. D. (Eds.). (2004). Teaching content to all: Inclusive teaching in
grades 4-12. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Lenz, B.K., Bulgren, J., Kissam, B., & Taymans, J. (2004). SMARTER planning for academic
diversity. In Lenz, B. K., & Deshler (Eds), Teaching content to all: Inclusive teaching in
grades 4-12. (pp. 47-77). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Normone, A. (2005). Integrating personnel evaluation in the planning and evaluation of school
improvement initiatives. American Journal of Evaluation.26 (3).
Sheingold, K. Roberts, L. & Malcom, S., (Eds.) (1992). Technology for teaching and learning.
Washington, D. C.: American Assn. for the Advancement of Science.
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 12
of 13
Sutherland, S. (2004). Creating a culture of data use for continuous improvement: A case study
of an Edison Project school. American Journal of Evaluation. 25 (3).
Zunino, B. (2003). Changing the image of an inner-city school. Education, 123(3), 428-432.
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 13
of 13