This article presents findings from a three-year qualitative research study of the implementation of networked technology in a K–12 cluster of four schools. The authors found that truly networked schools possess a unique virtual geography requiring substantive reorganization across schools' practices, culture and structure. The questions they explore here are: How do teachers develop a notion of the networked school and its components? How does it affect their practice to teach in such schools? How are the changes that come about as a result of learning to work in a networked school related to systemic reform goals? What are the implications of the development of networked schools for technology integration and systemic education reform?
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BromleyH. (1994). The social chicken and the technological egg. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, April 1994.
2.
BruceB. (1999, September). Educational reform: How does technology affect educational change?Reading Online. Available: www.readingonline.org. Published simultaneously in the Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy.
FullanM. (1991). The new meaning of educational change (2nd ed.), New York: Teachers College Press.
7.
FullanM., & HargreavesA. (1992). Teacher development and educational change. London: Falmer Press.
8.
GiddensA. (1984). The constitution of society. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
9.
GlennanT. K., & MelmedA. (1996). Fostering the use of educational technology: Elements of a national strategy. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.
10.
LiebermanA., (Ed.) (1988). Building a professional culture in schools. New York: Teachers College Press.
11.
McGillivrayK. (1999). The tool kit: An innovative approach to technology integration in networked schools. Learning and leading with technology, 26: 5, 18–21.
12.
McNamaraL.GrantC., & WasserJ. (1998). Using technology to support systemic educational reform: The Hanau Model Schools Partnership. Hands-On. Spring, 1998. Cambridge, MA: TERC.
13.
NewmannF., & WehlageG. (1995). Successful school restructuring: A report to the public and educators by the Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools, Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison, Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools.
14.
OakesJ. (1985). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
15.
President's Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology, Panel on Educational Technology (March, 1997). Report to the President on the use of technology to strengthen K-12 education in the United States.
16.
SergiovanniT. (1994). Building community in schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
17.
SizerT. (1992). Horace's school: Redesigning the American high school. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
18.
United States Department of Education, (1996). Getting America's students ready for the 21st century: Meeting the technology literacy challenge. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.
WasserJ. (1996). Reform, restructuring, and technology infusion. In Technology Infusion and School Change: Perspectives and Practices. TERC Research Monograph, 1–33. Cambridge, MA: TERC.
21.
WasserJ. (1998). Technology infusion: A systemic proposition—Learning from the Hanau Model School Partnership. Hanau Model Schools Partnership Research Report, #3. February, 1998.
22.
WasserJ.McGillivrayK., & McNamaraE. (1998). Diary of an educational technologist. Hands On, 21: 2, 19–23.
23.
WasserJ., & McNamara, (1998). Professional development and full-school technology integration: A description of the professional development model of the Hanau Model Schools Partnership. Hanau Model Schools Partnership Research Report #5, TERC: Cambridge, MA.
24.
Authors Note: Copies of the Hanau Model Schools Partnership Reports can be found at http://204.218.168.30/hmsp.
