Faculty of Education
EDUC 5205G: Leadership and Technology
Course outline for Winter, 2014 (Happy New Year!)
1. Course Details & Important Dates
Term:
Course Type:
Day Offered:
Time Offered:
Location:
CRN Number:
Classes Start:
Classes End:
Winter
Graduate
Tuesday
6 – 9 pm
http://uoit.adobeconnect.com/educ-5205g-201401-72356
72356
Jan. 7, 2013
April 1, 2013
For other important dates go to Important Dates for Graduate Studies
2. Instructor Contact Information
Professor:
Office:
Phone:
Email:
Office Hours:
Lorayne Robertson
Faculty of Education11 Simcoe St. Oshawa, Room 537
905 721 8668 x 2881
Lorayne.robertson@uoit.ca
Tues. afternoons on Skype or Adobe Connect by appointment
Students may also wish to use the Masters of Education General Room for outside of class discussions:
URL:
http://uoit.na3.acrobat.com/medgeneralroom0910/
3. Course Description
EDUC 5205G: Leadership and Technology. Within this course, significant educational leadership
principles and models in the use of technology, as well as the influence of information and
communication technology (ICT) on educational leadership are explored and applied. Course topics
include common vision, analysis of needs, development, access and security, integration into
instruction, assessment and evaluation, professional development, infrastructure of the school system
including administrative software, community relationships, ethical legal issues and other educational
policy implications. The result will be a plan of significant value to the graduate student’s educational
technology leadership role. 3 cr.
4. Learning Outcomes
On the successful completion of the course, students will be able to:
Dr. L. Robertson, EDUC 5205 G
Page 1
Learning outcomes
1. Investigate and report on ONE of
the dominant leadership
paradigms of the past century,
including critical and emancipatory
leadership, applying the leadership
paradigm to technology leadership
2. Articulate a purpose for
technology leadership that
connects learners’ needs in society
to critical and emancipatory forms
of technology leadership.
3. Demonstrate growth in identifying
the issues, barriers, affordances,
and potential of technologies in
their workplace or education
setting.
4. Review the ISTE standards for
technology leaders and apply
them to analyze policy or
leadership practice.
5. Synthesize the course readings,
discussions and presentations.
Develop and articulate a
philosophy of technology
leadership.
6. Participate in a community of
learners’ forum/blog for reflection
on metacognition. Practice self
and peer assessment.
7. Reflect on the course design, take
responsibility for your own
learning, and provide feedback to
the professor to ensure that this
course meets your learning needs.
How these can be realized in the course:
Through: a) selecting one leadership paradigm and
studying the suggested readings; b) online discussions with
a group of peers who have selected the same paradigm
(Discussion 1); c) a short group presentation on the
paradigm in Week 4 AND a short, reflective paper
(Assignment 1 - individual) due on Feb.1.
Through: a) readings; b) online postings about connected
learning and c) problem-based learning. This PBL scenario
will culminate in a group presentation in Week 8 that
identifies a problem and potential solutions (Group PBL
Assignment 2).
Through: a) studying the readings; b) leading discussions of
the readings, and c) contributing to discussions in
synchronous classes; d) posting online in the BB discussion
forum for the course, and; e) posting weekly reflections on
learning (Course learning log)
Through selecting one of the following two assignments
related to policy: Assignment 3 (Group or individual):
A Comment on a technology policy used in your place of
work or learning OR
B Apply the ISTE standards to create questions to ask a
technology leader.
Design or select a compelling metaphor or theoretical
framework that grounds your philosophy of technology
leadership.
Design and complete a reflective learning log from the
course with feedback from a peer and the professor at
least once during the course.
Through: 1) BB email, requesting clarification and
personalization of learning; and 2) through an anonymous
survey at the end of the course.
5. Course Design
This course is provided in a weekly, synchronous online format, once a week for 12 weeks with both
synchronous and a-synchronous learning activities scheduled. Graduate students undertaking this
course should plan to invest 3 hours a week in class and approximately 6 hours a week in
preparation for classes and assignments. There is no textbook for this course. All of the readings
Dr. L. Robertson, EDUC 5205 G
Page 2
are provided AND there are books on reserve in the UOIT Education library to support the
completion of assignments to the degree of depth required for personalized student learning.
Students who access the course from a distance may request to have these books sent on loan.
Students may also request alternate weighting of assignments based on personal learning needs and
a written rationale. Late assignments must be negotiated in advance with the professor.
6. Outline of Topics in the Course
Date
Topics
Week 1: Tues Jan 7
1) Introduction to Leadership
Paradigms:
2) Leadership and Management
3) 3) Introduction to the course
website and explanation of its
function compared to BlackBoard
http://robertson5205.weebly.com/sessio
ns.html
Working /Reading ahead
Assigned reading for next week:
Lemke & Coughlin (2009).The Change Agents
Review Assignment 1 in Section 9. Choose a Leadership
Paradigm group on BB and begin exchanging resources
and comments:
1)Transformational Leadership: Adults
2) Transformational Leadership: K-12
3) Learning Organizations (Senge)
4) Communities of Practice (Wenger)
5) Leadership and Change in Higher Ed.
6) Critical and Emancipatory Leadership
Do we need leadership or management to
move a technology agenda forward in
work and learning spaces?
Week 2 Tues. Jan. 14
Educational Leadership Paradigms across
the Decades
Week 3 Tues. Jan 21
ISTE standards
Week 4 Tues. Jan 28
Group presentations of leadership
paradigms and theory
Week 5 Tues. Feb. 4
Dr. L. Robertson, EDUC 5205 G
Discuss Lemke & Coughlin reading:
Contribute a half page to your discussion forum by Jan.
15. (Last day to drop course Jan 17.)
Assigned readings for next week: Whiteside (2005).
School Technology Leadership.
AND
Project North: A new pedagogy
http://www.contactnorth.ca/highlight/new-pedagogy
Discuss reading: Whiteside School Tech leadership:
Discuss Project North – A New Pedagogy
ISTE Standards activity
Based on ISTE standards, what questions would you like
to ask a leader?
Read ahead for Assignment 2: Connected learning report
http://dmlhub.net/sites/default/files/ConnectedLearnin
g_report.pdf
6 groups will relate and present a leadership paradigm
that was studied to technology leadership
Assigned reading for next week:
Shattuck (2010), Understanding School Leaders’ Role.
Discuss Shattuck: Connected learning and PBL – in-class
activity
Assigned readings for next week: Tamim et al. (2011)
What Forty Years of Research says.
Page 3
AND Smith (2012) Digital Native Debate in Higher Ed.
Week 6 Tues Feb. 11
Week 7 A- Synchronous Feb 17-21
Week 8 - Feb. 25
Week 9 - Tuesday March 4
Let’s talk policy
Week 10 – March 10 – 14
A-synchronous class
Week 11- March 18
Week 12 – March 25 Blue Sky thinking
(Also if required Tues. April 1)
Discuss What Forty Years of Research Says:
And Discuss Smith (2012) Digital Native Debate in Higher
Ed.
Connected learning PBL – in-class activity
PBL activities a-synchronous group work
Assigned Reading: Livingstone et al. (2012) Kids online
Discussion of Kids Online reading:
PBL scenario presentations
Assigned Reading for next week:
Borokhovski et al. (2011) Policies on e-learning
Discussion of Borokhovski et al. e-learning policies
reading:
In-class activity – working on either policy analysis or
conversation with a technology leader
Key tasks off line this week:
Policy analysis / leader conversations
Prepare a blue sky metaphor for the last class
Presentations/infographics from the policy analysts in
the class. Presentations on discussions with technology
leaders.
Blue sky discussions: technology leadership metaphors,
theoretical frameworks, policy approaches.
7. Required Texts/Readings
There are no formal papers assigned in this course. Citations should be in APA format as required.
There is no text book for this course.
8. Evaluation Methods
Group presentation on a leadership paradigm 15%
Criteria: synthesis of readings, higher-order
thinking, communication clarity
Due date: Week 4
PBL group presentation identifying a scenario and
technology leadership solutions 25%
Criteria: problem definition, resources identified,
collaborative learning, solutions.
See rubric below.
Due in class on Week 8
Group or individual presentation: Blue sky thinking
(use in learning log) Criteria: problem
Dr. L. Robertson, EDUC 5205 G
Individual Reflection paper on learning to date
about leadership paradigms 20%
Criteria: understanding and synthesis of leadership
paradigms, higher-order thinking, organization,
readability, theory.
See rubric below.
Due date Sat. Feb 1 at midnight.
Presentation on learning from listening to a
technology leader
OR a policy analysis 15%
Criteria: problem identification, synthesis with
leadership theory, communication
Due in class on Week 11
Individual Learning log 25%
Criteria are articulated under “learning log” below.
Page 4
identification, synthesis with leadership theory,
communication. Due in class on Week 12
Due Saturday April 12 at midnight.
9. Assignments
Assignment 1: Leadership Paradigms
In-class presentation Week 4: Jan.28. Reflection due: Sat. Feb.1(midnight)
Choose one of the following paradigms:
1. Transformational Leadership: Adult
learners
3. Learning Organizations (Senge)
2. Transformational Leadership: K-12
4. Communities of Practice (Wenger)
5. Leadership and Change in Higher
6. Critical and Emancipatory Leadership
Education
Join an online discussion group in BB. Discuss with the professor if you want to pursue an alternate
topic (e.g., assistive technology leadership) as this is possible. Select readings and/or books on this
paradigm (See below). Share your views and findings in discussion with peers. Relate this leadership
paradigm to technology leadership. Prepare a short group presentation and discussion on the
paradigm for class in Week 4. (Groups may wish to video record a presentation, or use another
format such as an info-graphic.)
Evaluation for the Presentation
1. Evidence of synthesis of readings _5
2. Evidence of higher order thinking (synthesis, analysis, critical thinking) _5
3. Communication clarity_ 5
After class on Week 4, write a short, reflective paper (2 pages double-spaced) reflecting on what you
have learned about leadership paradigms from the readings, the discussions and the other
presentations. This may be written in the first person but use APA style for citing. Please submit
through BB email as a word doc attachment. This is due: Sat. Feb.1 at midnight. It will be graded by
the following rubric:
Organization of
paragraphs, sentences,
ideas.
Readability
Knowledge: articulates a
grasp of key concepts to
date through readings,
class discussions and
presentations
HOTS: Evidence of higher
Needs
Improvement
3
Needs more work
on organization or
mechanics
Meets
Expectations
4
Focus is clear
6 Partial
understanding
evident
8 Shows
understanding
of most
concepts
5
The organization of the paper
helps the reader to understand the
main ideas and key concepts
presented.
10 Shows a strong understanding
of most of the key terms and
concepts from the course and the
readings
3
4
5
Dr. L. Robertson, EDUC 5205 G
Exceptional
Page 5
order thinking skills such
as synthesis, analysis,
and application of
concepts
Metacognition – thinking
about your thinking and
learning process
Some use of HOTS
is evident
3
Some evidence
Uses higher
order thinking
skills to attempt
to explain
4
The student is
thinking about
own thinking
and learning
Uses higher order thinking skills
effectively to help the reader
understand
5 Student is applying skills of
metacognition to aid in learning
and helping the reader to
understand this
Resources for Assignment 1
Paradigm
Resources (in readings folder in BB)
1.Transformational
Cranton & King (2003)
Leadership: Adults
King (2002) Ed Tech PD
Poutiatine (2009) Transformational Leadership
2.Transformational
*Hughes (2005) Tech-integrated pedagogy (required)
Leadership: K-12
Leithwood & Jantzi (2005)
Marks & Printy (2003)
Valdez (2004)
http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/educatrs/leadrshp/le700.htm
3.Learning
Organizations (Senge)
4. Communities of
Practice(Wenger)
http://infed.org/mobi/peter-senge-and-the-learning-organization/
Senge (1990): The Fifth Discipline (library)* can have it mailed
Stoll et al. (2006) Professional Learning Communities
Wenger & Snyder (2000) Communities of Practice
Wenger (2009) Communities of practice and social learning systems: the
career of a concept retrieved @ http://wenger-trayner.com/wpcontent/uploads/2012/01/09-10-27-CoPs-and-systems-v2.01.pdf
5.Leadership and
Change in Higher
Education
6.Critical and
Emancipatory
Leadership
Owen & Demb (2004) Change Dynamics
Brown (2005) Leadership for Social Justice
Ryan (2006) Inclusive leadership- Ch. 3
Corson (2000) Emancipatory leadership
Kincheloe (2005) A critical pedagogy primer (book)
*Please note that your professor has a collection of books of these theorists and the education library
also has a collection for loan that can be mailed out to you.
Assignment # 2: Technology Leadership – Problem-based learning 25%
This assignment begins with a connected learning report that sets the stage for thinking about problem
scenarios associated with technology leadership. Through a supported PBL activity, students working in
groups will identify a problem associated with technology leadership, identify resources to apply to the
problem, and design PBL scenarios to present to the class. We will begin this assignment in class during
Week 5, and continue working on it in class in Week 6. Week 7 is an a-synchronous work week for this
activity. Groups will present their PBL scenarios and lead discussions during week 8 in class.
Dr. L. Robertson, EDUC 5205 G
Page 6
Rubric for PBL activity
Criteria
Problem
recognition
Organization and
structure
Understanding of
the Topic
Argument
1 Approaching
Needs more work on
identifying problems
Organization needs to
be clearer or more
logical
Concept identification
and application could
be more fully
developed
At times the source of
the information for the
argument is not clear.
Solution
Solution needs to be
more complete with
evidence that it was
tested against the
problem.
Evaluation and comments:
3 At Standard
Can identify problems
with some assistance
Organized logically so
concepts are fairly clear.
5 Above Standard
Can identify the problems
and writes them clearly
Concepts are clear and logic
follows clearly
Understanding and
application for concepts
is evident with some
evidence of evaluation
and synthesis.
Information was mostly
clear, accurate and
thorough and supported
by research rather than
opinion.
Some evidence that
solutions were
considered and tested
against the problem.
Most relevant information is
identified with evidence of
synthesis and analysis to
develop concepts.
Information presented was
clear, accurate and thorough
with sources clearly distinct.
Strong evidence that
multiple solutions were
considered and tested.
Assignment # 3: Listening to a technology leader OR policy analysis 15%
Criteria: problem identification, synthesis with leadership theory, communication
Due in class on Week 11
Description of task: Listening to a leader
Using the resources provided both in class and outside of class, design some questions to guide a
discussion with a technology leader. Have a conversation with the leader to gain new insights on issues
that you have identified. Identify what you have learned through a short presentation, info graphic or
video clip, etc. to share with the class during Week 10.
OR
Examine a policy in your organization that is related to technology. Policy analysis requires a detailed,
systematic review of policy based on established criteria. In this case, you would design the criteria and
conduct a brief policy analysis (max 3 pages double spaced) OR you could chose to present your findings
to the class in the form of a a short presentation, info graphic or video clip, etc. to share with the class
during Week 10. If a written submission is preferred, it is due during class on Week 10….
Assessment criteria for the presentation: problem identification_5, synthesis with leadership theories
_5, clarity of communication_5
Learning Log of the Course: Due on April 12 midnight 25%
Dr. L. Robertson, EDUC 5205 G
Page 7
Students will maintain a learning log of the course which may be public, as through a blog, or private
Two sample formats are provided in BB. Final page length 10-15 pages. Assessment criteria are as
follows:
 The learning log is organized so that it can be followed easily.
 There is sufficient detail that the reader can see the key learning activities and not only what has
been learned but how it has been learned.
 Learning growth including struggle is evident from week to week
 Comments reflect higher-order thinking and synthesis.
 There is strong evidence that the concepts discussed in class are being applied to students’ own
work or learning places.
 The student has reflected on class participation, discussant role and class activities in a manner
that demonstrates metacognition.
 The learning log provides evidence of meeting the course outcomes.
 The learning log includes the blue sky thinking metaphor or theoretical framework with a final
posting.
Final Presentation: Blue sky thinking In-class during Week 12 Workings with a group or individually,
select a theoretical framework or a metaphor that, to you, represents a direction for technology
leadership. Present this for discussion purposes in class during Week 12. After class on Week 12,
include your group or individual metaphor into your final discussion in your learning log for the course.
Your final posting should reflect a summary and synthesis of your learning from this course. You are not
restricted to writing for this synthesis, but feel free to combine words, images, and video to
demonstrate what you have learned as your final posting.
10. Accessibility
Students with disabilities may request to be considered for formal academic accommodation in
accordance with the Ontario Human Rights Code. Students seeking accommodation must make their
requests through the disability services department in a timely manner, and provide relevant and recent
documentation to verify the effect of their disability and to allow the University to determine
appropriate accommodations.
Accommodation decisions will be made in accordance with the Ontario Human Rights Code.
Accommodations will be consistent with and supportive of the essential requirements of courses and
programs, and provided in a way that respects the dignity of students with disabilities and encourages
integration and equality of opportunity. Reasonable academic accommodation may require instructors
to exercise creativity and flexibility in responding to the needs of students with disabilities while
maintaining academic integrity.
11. Professional Conduct (if applicable)
Both synchronous and a-synchronous communication in this course will be held to the highest standards
of professionalism, respect, and accountability.
12. Academic Integrity
Students and faculty at UOIT share an important responsibility to maintain the integrity of the teaching
and learning relationship. This relationship is characterized by honesty, fairness and mutual respect for
Dr. L. Robertson, EDUC 5205 G
Page 8
the aim and principles of the pursuit of education. Academic misconduct impedes the activities of the
university community and is punishable by appropriate disciplinary action.
A single instance of plagiarism in this course will result in dismissal from the graduate program.
13. Course Evaluations:
Students will be asked to complete an online evaluation of this course at the end but it would be helpful
also if students would make suggestions to improve the course during the course also.
NOTE: All grades are subject to departmental and university review and are not final until posted by the
registrar.
14.
Books for EDUC 5205G Leadership and Technology
These books are on reserve in the Education Library for loan only to graduate students registered in this
course. If you are undertaking this course from a distance, you may make a request for a reference
book to be mailed to you.
Barth, R. S. (1990). Improving schools from within: Teachers, parents, and principals can make the
difference. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco.
Barth, R. S. (2001). Learning by heart Jossey-Bass: San Francisco
Bender, P. U., & Hellman, E. (1997). Leadership from within. Stoddart: Toronto.
Bennis, W. G., & Biederman, P. W. (1998). Organizing genius: The secrets of creative collaboration Basic
Books.
Bennis, W. G., & Nanus, B. (1986). Leaders: The strategies for taking charge; Harper & Row.
Fullan, M. (1999). Change forces: The sequel Routledge.
Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. E., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal leadership: Realizing the power of emotional
intelligence Harvard Business School Pr.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1987). The leadership challenge: How to get extraordinary things done in
organizations Jossey-Bass San Francisco.
Leithwood, K. A., Jantzi, D., & Steinbach, R. (1999). Changing leadership for changing times Open
University Press.
Schlechty, P. C. (1991). Schools for the 21st century: Leadership imperatives for educational reform.
Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization
Sergiovanni, T. J. (1992). Moral leadership: Getting to the heart of school improvement. Jossey-Bass Inc.,
San Francisco, CA
Wheatley, M. (1999). Leadership and the new science: Discovering order in a chaotic world.
References
Anderson, R. E., & Dexter, S. (2005). School technology leadership: An empirical investigation of
prevalence and effect. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41(1), 49.
Baylor, A. L., & Ritchie, D. (2002). What factors facilitate teacher skill, teacher morale, and perceived
student learning in technology-using classrooms? Computers & Education, 39(4), 395-414.
Becker, H. J., & Ravitz, J. L. (2001). Computer use by teachers: Are Cuban’s predictions correct. Paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA,
Becker, H. J., & Riel, M. M. (2000). Teacher professional engagement and constructivist-compatible
computer use. Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations, University of
California, Irvine and University of Minnesota.Report, 7
Dr. L. Robertson, EDUC 5205 G
Page 9
Bennett, C. K. (1996). Schools, technology, and educational leadership: Framework for change. NASSP
Bulletin, 80(577), 57.
Bennett, N., Wise, C., Woods, P. A., & Harvey, J. A. (2003). Distributed leadership: A review of literature.
National College of School Leadership.
Bitter, G. G., & Pierson, M. E. (2001). Using technology in the classroom Allyn & Bacon: Needham
Heights, MA, USA.
Burns, M., & Dimock, K. (2007). Technology as a catalyst for school communities: Beyond boxes and
bandwidth. Rowman & Littlefield Education.
Byrom, E., & Bingham, M. (2001). Factors influencing the effective use of technology for teaching and
learning: Lessons learned from the SEIR-TEC intensive site schools.
Clark, W. (2001). Kids and teens on the net. Canadian Social Trends,
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1992). The jasper series as an example of anchored
instruction: Theory, program description, and assessment data. Educational Psychologist, 27, 291315.
Coley, R., Cradler, J., & Engel, P. K. (1997). Computers and classrooms: The status of technology in US
schools. policy information report.
Cradler, J., Freeman, M., Cradler, R., & McNabb, M. (2002). Research implications for preparing teachers
to use technology. Learning & Leading with Technology, 30(1), 50-55.
Cradler, J., McNabb, M., Freeman, M., & Burchett, R. (2002). How does technology influence student
learning? Learning and Leading with Technology, 29(8), 46-49.
Cranton, P. and King, K. (2003). Transformative learning as a professional development goal.
New directions for adult and continuing education. 98 (Summer 2003). 31-37.
Crompton, S. (2001). Internet use on the cusp of the 21st century. Canadian Social Trends, 63, 2-3.
Duffy, T. M., & Jonassen, D. H. (1992). Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Flanagan, L., & Jacobsen, M. Technology leadership for the twenty-first century principal. JEA, 41, 2.
Flowers, C. P., & Algozzine, R. F. (2000). Development and validation of scores on the basic technology
competencies for educators inventory. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60(3), 411.
Fosnot, C. T. (1996). Constructivism. theory, perspectives, and practice. Teachers College Press, 1234
Amsterdam Avenue, New York, NY 10027.
Fullan, M. (2003). The moral imperative of school leadership Corwin Press.
Gerard, L. F. (2008). Principal leadership for technology-enhanced learning in science.(author
abstract)(report). Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(1), 1.
Guha, S. (2003). Are we all technically prepared?-teachers' perspective on the causes of comfort or
discomfort in using computers at elementary grade teaching. Information Technology in Childhood
Education Annual, , 317-349.
Hallinger, . (1992). The evolving role of American principals: From managerial to instructional to
transformational leaders. The Journal of Educational Administration, 30(3), 35.
Hallinger, P., & Leithwood, K. (1998). Unseen forces: The impact of social culture on school leadership.
Peabody Journal of Education, 73(2), 126-151.
Hedges, L.V., Konstantopoulous, S. & Thorenson, A. (2003). In Means B., Haertel G.(Eds.), Studies of
technology implementation and effects. in G. haertel& B. means (eds.) evaluating educational
technology : Effective research designs for improving learning. New York: Teachers College Press.
Honey, M., & McMillan, K. (1993). Case studies of K-12 educators use of the internet: Exploring the
relationship between metaphor and practice.
Hughes, J. (2005). The role of teacher knowledge and learning experience in forming
technology-integrated pedagogy. Journal of Technology and teacher education.
12(2), 277-302.
Dr. L. Robertson, EDUC 5205 G
Page 10
Johnson, D. L. M., & Maddux, C. D. (2003). Technology in education: A twenty-year retrospective
Haworth Press.
Jonassen, D. H., Peck, K. L., & Wilson, B. G. (1999). Learning with technology: A constructivist perspective
Merrill Columbus, OH.
Kaufman, C. C. (1997). Using technology to upgrade the principal's role as instructional leader. NASSP
Bulletin, 81(587), 98.
King,K. (2002). Educational technology professional development as transformative learning
opportunities. Computers & Education. 39 (2002). 283-297.
Kleiman, G. M. (2004). Myths and realities about technology in K-12 schools: Five years later.
Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 4(2), 248-253.
Kravitz, N. (2004). Teaching and learning with technology: Learning where to look Rowman & Littlefield.
Kulik, . C., kulik, JA (1991). effectiveness of computer-based instruction: An updated analysis. Computers
in Human Behavior, 7(1-2), 75.
Kulik, J. A. (1994). Meta-analytic studies of findings on computer-based instruction. Technology
Assessment in Education and Training, , 9-33.
Lambert, L. (1998). Building leadership capacity in schools ASCD.
Langran, E. (2006). Technology leadership: Principals and technology coordinators working together.
TECHNOLOGY AND TEACHER EDUCATION ANNUAL, 3, 2108.
Lemke, C. & Coughlin, E. (2009). The change agents. Educational Leadership, 67(1), 54-59.
http://mrborden.edublogs.org/files/2012/07/Tech_M3_Reading_The_Change_Agents-w1hzma.pdf
LeBaron, J. F., & Collier, C. (2001). Technology in its place: Successful technology infusion in schools
Jossey-Bass.
Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2005). A review of transformational school leadership research 1996–2005.
Leadership and Policy in Schools, 4(3), 177-199.
Leithwood, K. A. (1995). Effective school district leadership: Transforming politics into education State
University of New York Press.
Leithwood, K. A., Begley, P. T., & Cousins, J. B. (1992). Developing expert leadership for future schools.
Falmer Press.
Lever-Duffy, J., McDonald, J. B., & Mizell, A. P. (2003). Teaching and learning with technology Allyn and
Bacon Boston.
Levin, D., & Arafeh, S. (2002). The digital disconnect: The widening gap between internet-savvy students
and their schools.
Macaulay, L. S. (2008). Elementary principals as technology instructional leaders.
MacNeil, A. J., & Delafield, D. P. (1998). Principal leadership for successful school technology
implementation.
Maney, J. K. (1999). The role of technology in education: Reality, pitfalls, and potential. Handbook of
Educational Policy, , 387-415.
Marks, H. M., & Printy, S. M. (2003). Principal leadership and school performance: An integration of
transformational and instructional leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39(3), 370.
Mayo, N. B., Kajs, L. T., & Tanguma, J. (2005). Longitudinal study of technology training to prepare future
teachers. Educational Research Quarterly, 29(1), 3-15.
Middleton, C. A., & Sorensen, C. (2005). How connected are Canadians? Inequities in Canadian
households' internet access. Canadian Journal of Communication, 30(4), 463.
Passey, D., Goodison, R., Dept. for Education and Skills, University of Lancaster, & Britain, G. (2004). The
motivational effect of ICT on pupils DfES Publications.
Picciano, A. G. (2002). Educational leadership and planning for technology Prentice Hall, Inc.,
Dr. L. Robertson, EDUC 5205 G
Page 11
Plante, J., & Statistics Canada. (2004). Connectivity and ICT integration in Canadian elementary and
secondary schools first results from the information and communications technologies in schools
survey, 2003-2004 Statistics Canada.
Poutiatine, M. (2009). What is Transformation?: Nine Principles Toward an Understanding of the
Transformational Process for Transformational Leadership. Journal of Transformative
Education July 2009 7: 189-208, doi:10.1177/1541344610385249
Russell, M., Bebell, D., O'Dwyer, L., & O'Connor, K. (2003). Examining teacher technology use:
Implications for preservice and inservice teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(4),
297.
Ryan, J. (2006). Inclusive leadership Jossey-Bass.
Schacter, J., & Fagnano, C. (1999). Does computer technology improve student learning and
achievement? how, when, and under what conditions? Journal of Educational Computing Research,
20(4)
Schiller, J. (2003). The elementary school principal as a change facilitator in ICT integration. The
Technology Source, University of North Carolina,
Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization Currency.
Siegel, J. (1995). The state of teacher training. (includes three related articles on a technology
coordinator, a principal's role in technology buying, and methodology)(cover story)
Sivin-Kachala, J., & Bialo, E. R. (1994). Report on the effectiveness of technology in schools, 1990-1994.
Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2007). Web 2.0: New tools, new schools ISTE (Interntl Soc Tech Educ.)
Sutherland, . (2004). Transforming teaching and learning: Embedding ICT into everyday classroom
practices. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(6), 413.
Valdez, G. Critical issue: Technology leadership: Enhancing positive educational change. Retrieved,
8(005), 005.
Valdez, G. (2006). Technology leadership: Enhancing positive educational change. Retrieved August, 31
Valdez, G., McNabb, M., Foertsch, M., Anderson, M., Hawkes, M., & Raack, L. (2000). Computer-based
technology and learning: Evolving uses and expectations North Central Regional Educational
LaboratoryWeb site: http://www. ncrel. org. For full text: http://www. ncrel. org/(TRUNCATED).
Wenglinsky, H. (1998). Does it compute? The relationship between educational technology and student
achievement in mathematics.
Wenglinsky, H. (2005). Technology and achievement: The bottom line. Educational Leadership, 63(4), 2932.
Wheatley, M. J. (1999). Leadership and the new science: Discovering order in a chaotic world BerrettKoehler Pub.
Williams, B. (2004). We're getting wired, we're going mobile, what's next?: Fresh ideas for educational
technology planning International Society for Technology in Education.
Willms, J. D., & Corbett, B. A. (2003). Tech and teens: Access and use tech and teens: Access and use.
Canadian Social Trends,
Yee, D. L. (2000). Images of school principals' information and communications technology leadership.
Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 9(3), 287-302.
Zhao, . (2002). Conditions for classroom technology innovations. Teachers College Record, 104(3), 482.
Dr. L. Robertson, EDUC 5205 G
Page 12