June 2002 — Features
Print this article | Email this articleClick here to receive your FREE subscription to T.H.E. Journal
Build It and They Will Not Necessarily Come
4. The technological update necessitated by the change in university software made a confusing situation worse for some. For these participants, the new login procedure added an undesirable layer of complexity to using the technology. The presentation of a new technology handout with time for questions, but without detailed instruction, was an inadequate response to the needs of these participants. The same may be said of the Web site administrator's response to the difficulties reported in spring 2000 by participants trying to gain access to the site. The problems of these individuals should have been handled promptly and the solutions reported to all participants.
5.The Web site administrator interpreted the unexpected low level of participant use of the Web site in the first year of the program to indicate low interest in use of the Web site. The evaluation data suggest that participant interest was high, but training and technical problems frustrated such use. Closer monitoring of participant perceptions following the first general meeting would have permitted proper corrective action to be taken.
6. The program leaders were probably unrealistic to expect the participants, especially the entry-year principals, to be able and willing to allocate substantial time to the technology once they returned to their jobs. The principalship requires complex and difficult work, and individuals new to the position face extra demands on their time, energy and psychological resources. Formal professional development activitiesfor entry-year principals certainly have a place, but much necessary professional development for entry-year principals occurs at work.
7. Given the importance assigned to the use of the Web site by the program leaders, they should have drawn from the research literature and professional advice that are available on how to implement technology, design and conduct staff development activities, and lead change efforts in general. The university affiliation of the leaders, as well as their own professional involvement in training activities, make this conclusion somewhat uncomfortable.
