Digital Leadership Week 5

I did not include internet access as a part of my plan because of my anecdotal experience of being here.. Unfortunately South HS is so predominantly in poverty that talking about your struggling situation is not uncommon. I have heard often of cell phone plans being cut off, but never internet in the home. I think this is because not only can you get almost all of your entertainment via wifi, but you also pay a lot of bills through internet access. I have a unique perspective on nation wide broadband. My hometown of Ponca City had “Ponca City Free Wifi” from the late 2000’s to present. You could definitely do something like pay an online bill with it, but you could not do any learning or entertainment with it. I felt like at that point, you could just go to a local hotspot like the library or Mcdonalds. The people who would need this the most would be the very last people to get it which would be the extremely rural and remote areas. This specifically is not really much of an equity issue for my school specifically because of the fact that we have no computers to send home and no homework sent home.

As an intervention specialist, accessibility is always at the forefront of my thinking. I will admit, probably think about it less when thinking about technology. One thing I really liked from Crossland et al (2018) was their thoughts on UDL and that it is for everyone and not just people with disabilities. I think this is something I did inadvertently in my technology intervention plan. One of my goals is that all class readings in core class be able to be read effectively with a screen reader (no pdfs). While this will help the students on my caseload, it will also help everyone else. Around two-thirds of the students in my school are reading below grade level, while one-third are on IEP’s. This middle third will have access, as well as anyone else who might simply do better with reading and listening. I definitely learned alot from the reading on title IV-A from ISTE (2018). I know there is no additional funds for us in Columbus City Schools as we just cut over fifty-million in budget. However, some funds could be reallocated to something that pertains to the goals of my TIP. Being budget conscious, I think reaching out to our large district and finding someone with extensive canvas skills could be paid supplementally to lead a training on improving our use of canvas at South HS.

For my situation I think our best option would be reallocating title IV-A funds from the every student succeeds act. This requires no new funds, simply removing something we might not find as helpful. To be able to do this I would need to know what these title IV-A funds are currently used on. I asked my principal, and she said she thought it was mostly used for PD of principals and coaches. We are losing all of our coaches next year, so it could be that we have extra money in this pot already next year. This would prevent having to argue that this new thing is more effective than something I already don’t really experience.

I extensively looked through our district website went through a lot to try to find this information at (CCS, 2026).  I went through our district budget, south high school, general fund, high school, general operating, and supplies. Within supplies, the general supplies were registering but technology was listed at $0. I know this isn’t accurate, but it was what was on the website. This worried me because I think having accurate numbers on budget is important to knowing what is important enough to spend money on.

Columbus City Schools. (2026). Open budget: South High School—general fund supplies (FY2026). Columbus City Schools Open Budget

Crossland, A., Gray, T., and Reynold, J. (2018). ESSA and digital learning: Closing the digital accessibility gap. American Institute for Research. ED602482.pdf 

ISTE. (2020). Using ESSA to fund Edtech: Getting the most out of the Title IV-A. [2020 UPDATES] USING ESSA TO FUND EDTECH.pdf

Digital Leadership Week 4

     One thing that I think is important to keep in mind when talking about professional development for technology in my school district is our location. Teaching in Columbus City Schools means that we are located in the same city as McGraw Hill headquarters. McGraw Hill does about 3 full days of training on their softwares per school year. This is a very specific and organized structure that CCS is currently doing. I think they do a great job with teaching math teachers how to integrate their software into the "I do". Science and Social Studies are more geared towards the "You do". While ELA training seems to be best used as more of a we do. With that being said, it is often falling on the deaf ears of teachers without student technology available to them. At the heart of these trainings, they feel like a curriculum push that just so happens is using technology as its medium.

    When looking through a few of the available readings, two seemed to be more helpful than others when planning how to incorporate PD into my plan. The first is Tan et al's (2025) paper on artificial intelligence. A lot of teachers, especially young teachers, have figured out how to use AI to make their job easier. One thing I would like to do with vision is to lean into training teachers into how use it to make them actually better at their profession. Tan et al's (2025) thoughts on how to use AI to do things like track and read analytics to increase teacher data literacy to make more informed instructional decisions. The other one I enjoyed was Shi et al's (2025) paper about how we can use technology as a means of inclusion. I enjoyed the emphasis of intentionality here and believe that would fit in well with my goals. Shi et al (2025) do a good job at emphasizing that use of assistive technology has a lot to do with teacher bandwidth and skills to implement.

    I believe both of these align extremely well with my goals and vision statement. One important part of my vision statement was leaning into strengths and growing areas of weakness. The only was to be able to do that is to first identify them. Using AI to analyze student data is a great way to be able to do this. As an intervention specialist, naturally two of my three goals had to do with differentiation. Even simply doing trainings on the importance of screen readers for class reading will wildly increase participation in a school that is over 1/3 on an IEP. This increase in teacher learning has a direct path to increasing student learning through additional supports and more zeroed in instruction.

    I think the words that would describe the changes from my TIP would be equitability, thoroughness, and inclusivity. With that being said, I am not sure if really shifts the scales in terms of PISA scores. I co-teach algebra 2 and when I looked over the math section of PISA, I didn't have a lot of confidence. Less than 10% of students in our school passed their math OST last year(Niche, 2024). However, I think data like this is what makes it that much more important to implement something like a TIP. The words I used to describe this TIP are the way crawl out of this hole whether pertaining to technology or any other systems we have.

References:

Niche. (2024). South High School. https://www.niche.com/k12/south-high-school-columbus-oh/

Shi, Y. R., Sin, K. F. K., & Wang, Y. Q. (2025). Teacher professional development of digital pedagogy for inclusive education in post-pandemic era: Effects on teacher competence, self-efficacy, and work well-beingLinks to an external site.. Teaching and Teacher Education, 168, 105230.

Tan, X., Cheng, G., & Ling, M. H. (2025). Artificial intelligence in teaching and teacher professional development: A systematic reviewLinks to an external site.. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, 100355.

Digital leadership week 3

   The first promising practice for Crompton (2023) that I think would support student learning would be data-driven instruction. In Crompton’s (2023) paper, table 4 has it listed as a high school grade level practice. I agree with this because it is important for students at this age to be able to set quantitative goals that they can progress monitor themselves. As the students self-monitor their own goals on learning platforms, Crompton (2023) tells us that this is when we can follow ISTE goal 2.7 of being an analyst. This allows us to access and read data from platforms, sometimes using AI to help us, and then update our instruction to mitigate learning gaps. The second promising practice found in table 4 of Crompton’s (2023) paper is 2.5 learner variability. This would be a huge piece of importance for me in a technology vision. Teachers putting any readings into an LMS in a form that can be digitally read to students is extremely important. Crompton (2023) tells us that this helps our education be more student centered with more independent learners.

    Gonzales (2019) tells us that the first biggest challenge with a one-to-one initiative is budget and sustainability. My school has a very limited budget and number of computers. One way they have combatted this issue is through having no computers leaving the school. We are strictly a chrome book cart school. With this being said, budget is still an issue because we have a very limited number of carts. One goal I am trying to combat this with is that every core class has access to a cart at least twice a week. Through an organized schedule these carts can be shared throughout the school. The second biggest issue that arises through Gonzales (2019) is teacher buy in. If you have never had these carts, you would not have computers built into your curriculum. One solution from the administration in Gonzales (2019) paper was the negotiating of expectations. I think this is important because it allows both teachers and administrators to say their piece and discuss what the actual goal is of chrome book use. The goal I have in my technology vision is that any non-test or quiz assignment worth points is put into canvas to be accessed.

 

   I think the ISTE standards are the perfect thing to have in front of you when bringing these three levels of stakeholders together. The reason for this is because ISTE has different versions of the same standards. On top of this, the essential conditions listed by ISTE are also a good place to start when laying out your goals. When everyone can see how to best play their part, we can be more effective in pushing in the same direction. While the ISTE helps form the general direction to move in, it also helps inform all stakeholders on how to hold up their end of the bargain.

References

• Crompton, H. (2023). Evidence of the ISTE standards for educators leading to learning gains. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 39(4), 201-219.   Evidence of the ISTE Standards for Educators Leading to Learning.pdf Download Evidence of the ISTE Standards for Educators Leading to Learning.pdf

• Gonzales, M. M. (2020). School technology leadership vision and challenges: Perspectives from American school administrators. International Journal of Educational Management, 34(4), 697-708. School_technology_leadership_vision_and.pdf 

• International Society for Technology in Education. (2020). ISTE standards. https://iste.org/standards

Digital Leadership Week 2

     In working through this weeks readings ,I really wanted to find something new and exciting as a framework. Many of them aligned with how I thought. Trying to put into the perspective of something I would want to implement, a lot of them seemed way too complicated. In the end, good ole Triple E from Kolb seemed to be the most aligned with my thoughts, as well as easily sold to a staff. The simplicity and rememberability of it makes it something that can catch and stick in the minds of teachers, as it did with myself. I really think this model would be effectively implemented as it can be the practice of a whole day PD, as well as a printout to reference for teachers when lesson planning. I find the ease of this important as the school I work at is very disorganized and hectic on a day to day basis

    If I was in a role of digital leadership, teachers and students would be my main stakeholders. I would want to try and find a wide array of people to survey this model to. You would not only want strait A students. They will complete their assignments with a scroll and quill if we needed. Technology is something should be a tool to bring up the C average student who is just getting by. The same thought can be applied to teachers. My teachers who are implementing the most technology, are probably falling into some version of this framework already. I would want to hear from the teacher who uses little to no technology, or the teacher that only breaks out the chrome book for the plop the student in front of a chrome book platforms. . 

    This framework, or really any framework, models perfectly into a qualitative goal that our principal speaks about very often. It is our goal as a school to be the premier academic school in region 3 of Columbus City Schools. The simple fact is, worksheets and packets are not premier. You can definitely be a good teacher with these tools. However, in the year 2026, technology is essential to being a premier space of academia. Kolbs triple E framework gives us a clear path to use technology to go from good to premier through enhancing, engaging, and extending the already good work we are doing.

    The first way I would try to leverage current practices is to look at the Triple E framework against the simple things we are already doing with the computers we do have. As stated earlier, a lot of the technology use is plopping students in front of Alecks, StudySync, or Achieve3000. The district tells us we have to use these, and they are used. Trying to leverage PLC time with subject area teachers together to try and see how we can modify what we are already doing to better fit into using these programs to expand, extend, or enhance would be a good entry point. I think this takes away a lot of fear from adding another thing to a packed curriculum.

    The outcome I would be looking for and providing feedback on would that the teacher could articulate what they are doing differently with technology to better answer a specific question from the triple E framework. I think to bridge the digital divide I would spend some time finding local (in-district) experts of these programs and find out how they use these things effectively. Learning myself and passing along this information will provide some much needed training to bridge that inequity gap. I think this is something that is reasonable as it only includes finding three people and learning more about 3 things. 

Reference:

Kolb, L. (2020). Framework models. Triple E Framework. https://www.tripleeframework.com/framework-models.html    

Digital Leadership Week 1.

 

       The first thing I found very interesting was that Dr. Evans started her career in tech. I think this gives her a unique perspective. I am not always fond of those who have never been in the classroom having grand ideas about what we should be doing. However, with technology being so curated to keep us addicted, I like the idea of someone knowing "how the sausage is made". After working for a tech company with many rolls, she moved into working for educational technology startups. The combination of these two roles gave her a lot of knowledge of the inner workings of both large tech companies and educational technology companies. I think this combination propelled her to be able to take on the self admitted daunting task of being the CEO of the educational technology nonprofit NETDAY.

    Dr. Evans work has aligned with ISTE standards before she ever got into a running her own company. The initial work she did in startups focused on using Howard Gardener's learning styles to evaluate the best educational technology use for parents which aligns with 3.5.a staying current on innovations in learning. Her second stop in start up had her developing technology to find specific reading differences. This aligns with standard 3.3.d which focuses on helping educators meet the needs of diverse learners. As a CEO of an educational technology nonprofit, she probably dabbled in any and all standards listed with ISTE educational leader standards. With that being said, she spoke about how she had to reinvent the company many times. To me, this close aligns with developing and sustaining a vision, but even more importantly, evaluating a plan progress. These standards 3.2.a and 3.2.c respectively, shows how she not only built a plan, but was willing to change it through her own self evaluation.

    Not only does Dr. Evans discuss professional development(PD), I think her work in the speak up research project helped inform on the types of PD needed. Throughout her work, she toured a lot schools. This allowed to see the varying types of buy in from teachers, this ranged from fully bought in, totally out, and many being somewhere in between. This led to her focus on something specific she mentions which I really appreciate, differentiated instruction. Not just for students, but for teachers. As a young and technologically savvy person, educational technology PD usually goes one of two ways for me. I am either bored or spend a lot of time helping someone next to me. Differentiated PD is honestly something I have never heard of like this, this is interesting because we as teachers are expected to constantly differentiate.

    I think the biggest real world issue she dealt with here would be the changes in our social world and world of technology from 2003(earliest date mentioned) and 2024(date of book being published). She talks about it some in the story, but these were my entire K-12 education into my own teaching career. The technology in and out of our classroom did not only 10x, but 10 to the x. This is continuing not only as children get older, but as parents get younger and have more experience with technology.

    I dont have many critiques or concerns. I would say the emotion this invoked would be appreciation. Dr. Evans has a mindset I greatly appreciate. She doesn't seem to be overstepping and telling teachers what they need to be doing, but she seems to be using her expertise in technology to help inform teachers in something that is a growing part of out jobs. One reading from this week that informed my perspective was Rashid and Asghar(2016) and how the growth discussed in the previous paragraph doesn't necesarrily mean an increase in "scores" but more in engagement and the ability for learning to self directed.

References:

International Society for Technology in Education. (n.d.). ISTE standards for education leaders. https://iste.org/standards/education-leaders

Rashid, T., & Asghar, H. M. (2016). Technology use, self-directed learning, student engagement and academic performance: Examining the interrelations. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 604–612.

Stachowiak, B., & McClay, J. (2024). Igniting your leadership with technology (J. McClay & B. Stachowiak, Eds.). Innovate Learning, LLC. https://pressbooks.pub/edd7032018f/

    

Digital Divide Week 2

 The truth is, most of my students face many if not all of the dividing factors we talked about in class. The biggest one that affects them on a day to day basis is their socioeconomic status. This can make it difficult for basic needs like shelter, nourishing food,  and proper hygeine. It also affects them needs within a technologically advancing world when you don't have wifi, a laptop, or anything with a modern operating system in your home. A lot of my students that have technology at home are working with technology that is usually over a decade old. Another dividing factor is the urban community they live in. A common misconception about digital divide is "well they can go to the library". I have been to the library nearest to them and one located in an affluent suburb. Both of these libraries are ran by the same entity "Columbus Metropolitan Library" and are within 20 minutes of one another. In the one on the south side or "inner-city"; its not as nice, has less features, and had ten times the homeless people as the one located in suburbia. All of this said, many of my students still face many large scale and systemic dividing factors like ethnicity, race, and education level. All of the students I teach fall into atleast one of these umbrellas of dividing factors, this makes it extremely difficult for this to even have the same level of exposure to modern hardware or operating systems.

Covid played a huge part in eventually widening the digital divide of the students in my community. As crazy as it sounds, the biggest way it did this was by shrinking the gap. The problem was, the gap shrunk really fast and with funds that were not sustainable. This cause two things to happen one of which is that money in really fast. Anyone in education knows that all money comes with a deadline to spend it by. A lot of money with a short deadline means inevitably in will be spent somewhat inequitably. That is money coming to our schools versus other schools and also how my school spent that money. The other problem for this is it takes a glaring problem and makes everyone think it isn't one. This is especially dangerous in schools because of the fact that that money has to be begged for over a long time. All the momentum to getting money for tech had gone away and now has to start back over at square zero.

I would say overall my school district does a bad job in terms of digital equity in comparison to other districts. The biggest way this is the case is not having one to one computers. I have heard some pretty wild numbers on why they couldn't have students carrying laptops back and forth from home and I can respect that thought process. However, that just means we need a computer for every student in every classroom. This points back pretty well to our reading this week from Jean Ayton(1980). While it doesn't necesarily talk about one to one technology, it talks about compliance over creativity, lack of freedom of choice, and extremely teacher directed environment. This is all immediately made better if not fixed with properly funded and properly used technology within the classroom.

Anyon, J. (1980). Social Class and the Hidden Curriculum of WorkLinks to an external site.. In Learning Power: Organizing for Education and Justice. (Oakes, J., Rogers, J., & Lipton, M).  Teachers College Press. 

Digital Divide Week 1

     My name is Trent Fry and I teach at South HS in Columbus, Ohio. I teach both push in and pull out 11th and 12th graders as an intervention specialist in both math and english. I have taught in Oregon, in an affluent suburb of Portland. I also have spent a year teaching online in title one, predominately hispanic, district just north of Denver, Colorado. I am originally from Ponca City, Oklahoma and got my undergraduate at the University of Oklahoma in special education. I am only in my 5th year teaching, but have got to see a lot. I have been in situations where the struggle was spending $18,000 dollars just as a special education team and have been in situations where the struggle was getting more than 10 chromebooks in a class that averages 15-20.

    A simple definition about the community I work in is that it would be considered "inner-city". I would love to apply what I learn in this class and apply it to the students that I teach. However, I am one teacher in a district of 45,000-50,000 students. On top of that, my district is in what they have described as a budget crisis. We are currently set to run out of money early in 2027 and have yet to negotiate our contract. I am unsure of the impact I could have in this setting even in my most fervent state. While the intended beneficiary of this call to action would be the students within my school and classroom, the call to action would not put the onus on them. The true call to action I struggle with. I think it could be as narrow as the district I work in, but could go as broad as the federal government and the way it funds us to be not just have our most at risk students not just survive, but thrive. 

    Whenever I was looking to accept my current job, I did a little digging around in terms of the data of the students I would be serving, but it was much more real to do so after being there. Our school serves 873 students in grades 7th-12th. The racial break down of our school is 570 students who are black, 114 students who are hispanic, 107 students who are white, 67 students who identify as two or more races, and 8 and 5 students who are Native American and asian respectively(NCES.org). The school was built in and opened in 1924 and according to people I have spoken to, became a predominately a school with a predominately black population in the late 40's. That  social culture has become very rich and deeply embedded at this point. I think the largest showing of this is in our marching band. It has a vibe and sound of that of an HBCU band as apposed to the famous marching band of Ohio State right up the street. It is my favorite part of our school. Economically the data is very interesting. The south side of Columbus is very intertwined with gentrification. Within a couple blocks you could be in very affluent to then very poor neighborhoods. The zipcode we serve the most has a median household income of around $54,000(incomebyzipcode.com). Our academic scores are troubling at best. USnews.com has us at 7% proficiency in math and 24% in reading. 

    I love the school I work at because of the students I work with. However, I would definitely say it is my most difficult job I have had. The school is putting in a lot of effort into educating our students and giving them opportunities after they leave us. However, this doesn't change the fact that they face many hardships from many of the demographics that they fall into.