The study explored the implementation of a 1:1 iPad initiative with a focus on leadership. The distributed leadership model provided the framework using semistructured interviews as the primary source of data collection. Using the distributed leadership model, the researcher examined the role of school leaders. Four emerging themes were identified: time, access, technical support, and professional development. Results showed that successful implementation of a 1:1 iPad program requires advanced planning including time to obtain new skills and to research and explore the vast potential of the iPad in an environment where technical assistance is available within reasonable time constraints.
BebellD.O'DwyerL. (2010).
Educational outcomes and research from 1:1 computing settings. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment,
9(1), 5–15.
2.
BeckerleA. L. (2013). A mixed study measuring the perceptions of administrators, classroom teachers and professional staff on the use of iPads in a Midwest school district (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://pqdtopen.proquest.com/pubnum/3605242.html
3.
BentonB. (2012). The iPad as an instructional tool: An examination of teacher implementation experiences (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED547540
4.
Billig, S. H., Sherry, L., & Havelock, B. (2005). Challenge 98: Sustaining the work of a regional technology integration initiative. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(6), 987–1003.
5.
BlanksteinA. M.HoustonP. D.ColeR. W. (2010). Sustaining professional learning communities.
Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
6.
BurnsJ. M. (2003). Leadership.
New York, NY:
Harper Colophon Books.
7.
CarrJ. M. (2012).
Does math achievement “h'APP’en” when iPads and game-based learning are incorporated into fifth-grade mathematics instruction?Journal of Information Technology Education: Research,
11, 269–286.
8.
CrichtonS.PeglerK.WhiteD. (2012).
Personal devices in public settings: 78 lessons learned from an iPod Touch/iPad project. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning,
10(1), 23–31.
9.
Darling-HammondL. (2000).
Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Educational Policy Analysis,
18(1), 45.
10.
DonovanL.GreenT.HansenL. E. (2011).
One-to-one laptop teacher education: Does involvement affect candidate technology skills and dispositions?Journal of Research on Technology in Education,
44(2), 121–139.
EnsorT. (2012).
Teaming with technology: “Real” iPad applications. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy,
56(3), 193.
13.
FullanM. (2001). Leading in a culture of change.
San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
14.
FullanM. (2004). Leading in a culture of change: Personal action guide and workbook.
San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
15.
FullanM. (2007). The new meaning of educational change (4th ed.).
New York, NY:
Teachers College Press.
16.
GergerK. (2014). 1:1 Tablet technology implementation in the Manhattan Beach Unified School District: A case study (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Publishing: http://pqdtopen.proquest.com/pubnum/3647116.html
17.
GoldsboroughR. (2013).
Laptop or tablet?Tech Directions,
72(9), 12.
18.
GreavesT. (2010).
More than hardware for 1:1 computing. School Administrator,
67(11), 44.
19.
GronnP. (2010). Where to next for educational leadership? In BushT.BellL.MiddlewoodD. (Eds.), The principles of educational leadership and management.
London, England:
Sage.
20.
GronnP.Rawlings-SanaeiF. (2003).
Recruiting principals in a climate of disengagement. Australian Journal of Education,
47(2), 172–184.
21.
HarrisA. (2009).
Leading or misleading? Distributed leadership and school improvement. Journal of Curriculum Studies,
37(3), 255–265. doi: 10.1177/1741143204039297
22.
HarrisA.HopkinsD.WestM. (2000). Leadership for school improvement. In RileyK.SeashoreK. (Eds.), Seashore Louis leadership for change (pp. 371–382).
London, England:
Routledge Falmer Press.
23.
HurJ.OhJ. (2012).
Learning, engagement, and technology: Middle school students’ three year experience in pervasive technology environments in South Korea. Journal of Educational Computing Research,
46(3), 295–312.
24.
JohnsonD. (2013). Implementing a one-to-one iPad program in a secondary school (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska. Retrieved from http://gradworks.umi.com/36/04/3604540.html
25.
JonesS.HarveyM.LefoeG.RylandK. (2013).
Synthesizing theory and practice: Distributed leadership in higher education. Educational Management Administration and Leadership,
42(5), 603–619.
26.
LeiJ.ZhaoY. (2008).
One-to-one computing: What does it bring to schools?Journal of Educational Computing Research,
39(2), 97–122.
27.
LipsonM. Y.MosenthalJ. H.MekkelsenJ.RussB. (2004).
Building knowledge and fashioning success one school at a time. The Reading Teacher,
57(6), 534–545.
28.
ManingerR. M.HoldenM. E. (2009).
Put the textbooks away: Preparation and support for a middle school one-to-one laptop initiative. American Secondary Education,
38(1), 5–33.
29.
MooreA. F. (2012). Piloting the iPad: A case study evaluation in a K-12 school district (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Wilmington University, New Castle, DE. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/121680/
30.
MorganG. (2006). Images of organization.
London, England:
Sage.
31.
NagelD. (2012). 7 Recommendations for effective implementation. Retrieved from http://www.thejournal.com
32.
O'DonovanE. (2009, February 1). Are one-to-one laptop programs worth the investment? District Administration. Retrieved from www.districtadministration.com/art
33.
PrososkiC. (2015). One-to-one computing: A mixed-methods study designed to uncover the perceived effects on the overall classroom environment (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Publishing: http://pqdtopen.proquest.com/pubnum/3718859.html
34.
Sergiovanni, T. (2001). Leadership: What’s in it for schools? London, UK: Routledge Flamer Press.
35.
ShapleyK.MaloneyC.Caranikas-WalkerF. (2010).
Evaluating the implementation fidelity of technology immersion and its relationship with student learning. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment,
9(4), 7–51.
36.
SpillaneJ. (2006). Distributed leadership.
San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
37.
StevensM. (2011).
Create! Communicate! Collaborate! The 21st-century learner is here—Is your classroom ready?NEA Today Go! Summer, 59–62.
38.
SubramaniamN.KandasamyM. (2011).
The virtual classroom: A catalyst for institutional transformation. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology,
27(8), 1388–1412.
39.
U.S. Department of Education. (2010). National education technology plan 2010: Transforming American education: Learning powered by technology.
Washington, DC:
Author.
