By Dr. David Freitas,  Dr. Janet Buckenmeyer, and  Dr. Emily Hixon

There's a dark little joke exchanged by educators with a dissident streak: Rip Van Winkle awakens in the 21st century after a hundred-year snooze and is, of course, utterly bewildered by what he sees. Men and women dash about, talking to small metal devices pinned to their ears. Young people sit at home on sofas, moving miniature athletes around on electronic screens. Older folk defy death and disability with metronomes in their chests and with hips made of metal and plastic. Airports, hospitals, shopping malls--every place Rip goes just baffles him. But when he finally walks into a schoolroom, the old man knows exactly where he is. "This is a school," he declares. "We used to have these back in 1906. Only now the blackboards are green." (TIME)

Leadership in catapulting schools from slates, to green boards, to innovative digital environments falls squarely on technology directors. The Technology Director’s Guide to Leadership is a blueprint for navigating dead-ends, flat tires, U-turns, detours, speed traps, construction zones, toll booths, potholes, and other obstacles and hazards.

The author begins this book with “A Modern Leadership Fable”. (Ironically, the definition of “fable” in the free online dictionary is: 1. A usually short narrative making an edifying or cautionary point and often employing as characters animals that speak and act like humans; 2. A story about legendary persons and exploits; or 3. A falsehood; a lie.) This fable, by the way, omits any anthropomorphic animals, well-known celebrities, or overt deception.

The parable eventually leads to the exploration of three leadership styles – the sage, the sensei, and the oracle. (The sage represents the authoritarian style, the oracle epitomizes the global and abstract philosopher, and the sensei symbolizes the dual role of mentor and facilitator.) Each leadership style, according to the author, is distinct and equally worthy. They conceptually undergird the remaining concepts presented in the book.

Each succeeding chapter follows the same format - Theory, Application, and Practical Activities. Moving from abstract concepts to concrete application naturally facilitates deep comprehension of key principles. “Power Questions” further stimulate thought and reflection.

The application and practical activities sections, in particular, are relevant and extraordinarily practical. The following are illustrative examples of activities included: Situational Gap Analysis; The Attitude Barometer; Active Reflection; Student Artifact Analysis Method (SAAM) of Assessment; Management Quality Survey; Quadrant Mapping Staff Performance; Communications Audit; and Shaping Goals for Results.

The author characterizes Chapter 4, How Will This Improve Teaching and Learning?, as “the most important chapter in this entire book.” We totally agree.

It directly addresses several unresolved, festering questions. What’s the ultimate objective of technology integration in schools – having the technology integrated or improving student academic performance? Is technology just a tool for achieving enhanced student achievement or something much more? Are technology directors and their staff essentially support personnel for faculty, or should they have the authority to overrule faculty and school administrators when conflicts arise?

In this era of political correctness, meaningful collaboration is a common mantra. (“Can’t we all just get along?”) Debates sometimes erupt, however, when reasonable faculty needs butt up against technocrats.

There are several glaring examples. Here’s one from our personal experience.

Although Apple computers are viewed by many educators as superior to PC computers in the teaching and learning process, some technocrats dismiss the dual platform request for various reasons. (Apple computers are more expensive than PCs. No one on our staff knows Apples. Maintenance and software updates are easier on PCs.)

How should competing perspectives, such as this, be resolved when an impasse is reached? Who should make the final decision? If you believe that technology is a viable tool to improve student academic achievement, the answer is clear – academic administrators representing school faculty.

Affirming that improved student achievement is the highest priority, the author appears to support our conclusion. In fact, in his “ten minute master’s degree in education” treatise (Chapter 4), he warns, “No matter where you fall in the spectrum, my advice to you is to read this chapter if you want to keep your job.” If your background and experience is in a field other than teaching, you must carefully study this section.

Remaining chapters also offer sage advice worthy of your attention. Favorites are What Kind of Leader Am I? (Chapter 2), What Makes a Great Team? (Chapter 5), and How Am I Doing? (Chapter 6).

The Technology Director’s Guide to Leadership is an ISTE’s “Top 15” primer for new and aspiring administrators. It successfully captures the most salient and essential aspects of this position.
Understanding the differences between leadership and management is paramount for all school administrators. Since many current technology directors are unfortunately solely resource and support services managers, the transformation from manger to leader is critical for all successful technology directors.
The following excerpt from the classic Warren Bennis’ book, On Becoming a Leader, cleverly illuminates important distinctions.

•    The manager administers; the leader innovates.
•    The manager is a copy; the leader is an original.
•    The manager maintains; the leader develops.
•    The manager focuses on systems and structure; the leader focuses on people.
•    The manager relies on control; the leader inspires trust.
•    The manager accepts reality; the leader investigates it.
•    The manager has a short-range view; the leader has a long-range perspective.
•    The manager asks how and when; the leader asks what and why.
•    The manager has his or her eye always on the bottom line; the leader has his or her eye on the horizon.
•    The manager imitates; the leader originates.
•    The manager accepts the status quo; the leader challenges it.
•    The manager is the classic good soldier; the leader is his or her own person.
•    The manager does things right; the leader does the right thing.

Technology managers basically survive in their jobs by making the “trains” run well, on time, and with acceptable customer service. Dynamic technology leaders, on the other hand, create long-term, significant differences in diverse ways, including constructing and nurturing technologically enriched environments to support improved student achievement - places where Rip would easily be confused and baffled.

David Freitas' email is dfreitas@iusb.edu

Dr. David Freitas has served in a number of leadership positions throughout his career including College Dean at three Universities, University Professor, University Vice Provost, Public School Teacher/Administrator, State of Illinois Teacher Certification Board Member, State Department of Education Official, and Elected City School Board Member.
 
Janet Buckenmeyer, Ph.D., a former elementary school teacher, is currently Chair of the Masters of Instructional Technology Program at Purdue University Calumet. She has published and presented nationally and internationally about various topics, with a primary focus on instructional technology and design.
 
Dr. Emily Hixon is an Assistant Professor of Educational Psychology and Instructional Technology at Purdue University Calumet. Her research projects have focused on the effective integration of technology at both the K-12 and higher education levels.