While technology-based interventions enhance instruction and improve outcomes for students with disabilities, implementing and integrating technology in authentic learning environments continues to be a challenge. Based on the experiences of a variety of Stepping-Up Technology Implementation projects funded by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, this mixed-methods study explored the essential factors for the successful implementation of technology-based interventions in K-12 schools and early childhood programs. Based on the qualitative analysis of projects’ implementation reports and responses to the follow-up questionnaire, four major themes emerged. The barriers and facilitators to technology implementation were reported across such areas as (a) developing and sustaining buy-in, (b) ensuring implementation fidelity to support the intervention, (c) research-to-practice dilemmas, and (d) data serving multiple purposes. The discussion and practical implications for supporting technology implementation are provided.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BertramR. M.BlaseK. A.FixsenD. L. (2015). Improving programs and outcomes: Implementation frameworks and organization change. Research on Social Work Practice, 25(4), 477-487. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731514537687.
2.
BlaséK.FixsenD. (2013). Core intervention components: Identifying and operationalizing what makes programs work. Office of the assistant secretary for planning and evaluation. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
ChambersD. A.GlasgowR. E.StangeK. C. (2013). The dynamic sustainability framework: addressing the paradox of sustainment amid ongoing change. Implementation Science, 8, 117. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-8-117.
5.
ClarkeJ.DedeC. (2009). Design for scalability: A case study of the River City curriculum. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(4), 353-365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-009-9156-4.
6.
CoburnC. E. (2003). Rethinking scale: Moving beyond numbers to deep and lasting change. Educational Researcher, 32(6), 3-12. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X032006003.
7.
CookB. G.OdomS. L. (2013). Evidence-based practices and implementation science in special education. Exceptional Children, 79(2), 135-144. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291307900201.
8.
CreswellJ. S.Plank ClarkV. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed method research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
9.
DamschroderL. J.AronD. C.KeithR. E.KirshS. R.AlexanderJ. A.LoweryJ. C. (2009). Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: A consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implementation Science, 4, 50. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-50.
10.
DedeC.HonanJ. P.PetersL. C. (2005). Scaling up success: Lessons learned from technology-based education improvement. Jossey-Bass.
11.
DurlakJ. A. (2015). What everyone should know about implementation. In DurlakJ. A.DomitrovichC. E.WeissbergR. P.GullottaT. P. (Eds.), Handbook of social and emotional learning: Research and practice (pp. 395-405). New York: The Guilford Press.
EdyburnD. L. (2013). Critical issues in advancing the special education technology evidence base. Exceptional Children, 80(1), 7-24. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291308000107.
14.
Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015. (2015). Pub. L. No. 114-95 § 114 Stat. 1177.
15.
FeldsteinACGlasgowRE (2008). A practical, robust implementation and sustainability model (PRISM) for integrating research findings into practice. The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety, 34(4), 228-243. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1553-7250(08)34030-6.
16.
FixsenD.BlaseK.NaoomS.DudaM. (2013). Implementation drivers: Assessing best practices. National Implementation Research Network (NIRN). https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.20415.30885.
17.
FixsenD. L.BlaseK. A.NaoomS. F.WallaceF. (2009). Core implementation components. Research on Social Work Practice, 19(5), 531-540. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731509335549.
GlasgowR. E.VogtT. M.BolesS. M. (1999). Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. American Journal of Public Health, 89(9), 1322-1327. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.89.9.1322.
20.
GrahamI. D.LoganJ.HarrisonM. B.StrausS. E.TetroeJ.CaswellW.RobinsonN. (2006). Lost in knowledge translation: time for a map?Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 26(1), 13-24. https://doi.org/10.1002/chp.47.
21.
Grunwald & Associates (2010). Educators, technology, and 21st century skills: Dispelling five myths. Richard W: Walden UniversityRiley College of Education.
HarnB.ParisiD.StoolmillerM. (2013). Balancing fidelity with flexibility and fit: What do we really know about fidelity of implementation in schools. Exceptional Children, 79(3), 181-193. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291307900204.
24.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. (2004). 20 U.S.C. § 1400.
25.
International Society for Technology in Education. (2021). https://www.iste.org.
26.
IsraelM. (2019). Using assistive and instructional technologies. In McLeskeyJ.MaheadyLBillingsleyB.BrownellM.LewisT. (Eds.), High Leverage Practices for Inclusive Classrooms (pp. 264-278). Routledge Publishing.
27.
KennedyM. J.BoyleJ. R. (2017). The promise and problem with technology in special education. In KauffmanJ. M.HallahanD. P.PullenP. C. (Eds.), Handbook of special education (2nd ed.), (pp. 606-614). Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315517698-46.
28.
KnosterT. (1991). Presentation at TASH Conference. Washington DC.
29.
LooiC.-K.TehL. W. (2015a). Scaling educational innovations. Springer.
30.
LooiC.-K.TehL. W. (2015b). Towards Critical Discussions of Scaling Up Educational Innovations. In LooiC.-K.TehL. W. (Eds.), Scaling educational innovations (pp. 1-10). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-537-2_1.
31.
McLeskeyJ.BarringerM. D.BillingsleyB.BrownellM.JacksonD.KennedyM.WinnJ. (2017). High-leverage practices in special education. Council for Exceptional Children & CEEDAR Center.
32.
MeansB.PenuelW. R. (2005). Research to support scaling up technology-based educational innovations. In DedeC.HonanJ. P.PetersL. C. (Eds.), Scaling up success: Lessons from technology-based educational improvement (pp. 176-197). Jossey-Bass.
33.
OgdenT.FixsenD. L. (2014). Implementation science: a brief overview and a look ahead. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 222(1), 4-11. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000160.
34.
OngP. M. (2020). COVID-19 and the digital divide in virtual learning. fall 2020. UCLA Center for Neighborhood Knowledge.
35.
PangE. S.LimF. V.ChoeK. C.PetersC.ChuaL. C. (2015). System scaling in Singapore: The STELLAR story. In LooiC.-K.TehL. W. (Eds.), Scaling educational innovations (pp. 105-122). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-537-2.
36.
PerlmanC. L.ReddingS. (Eds.). (2011). Choosing and implementing technology wisely handbook on effective implementation of school improvement grants. Academic Development Institute. www.centerii.org/handbook.
VroomE. B.MasseyO. T.YampolskayaS.LevinB. L. (2020). The Impact of Implementation Fidelity on Student Outcomes in the Life Skills Training Program. School Mental Health, 12(1), 113-123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-019-09333-1.
39.
WangF.HannafinM. J. (2005). Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning environments. Educational Technology Research & Development, 53(1), 5-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02504682.
