diffusion of innovation: ipads and l e arn ing...

DIFFUSION OF INNOVATION: IPADS AND LEARNING 1

Diffusion of Innovation: iPads and Learning and Instruction

Caitlyn Stuart

Terri Stuart

Ashley Brockman

California State University, Long Beach

Author Note

This paper was prepared for Educational Technology 510, taught by Teresa Chen


Diffusion of iPads: Background

Throughout the United States K-12 students, deemed ‘digital natives’ by Danah Boyd

(2015), are building net literacy. They are collaborating through cloud based platforms, publishing

with Web 2.0 apps, creating, learning, and consuming. From household smart technologies, to

profession-changing automation in traditionally knowledge-based fields, technology is infused in,

or touches, nearly every aspect of Americans’ lives. But although technology has not only been

adopted by but assumed as a given by droves and masses of young people, that by no means

includes all children. The digital divide separates students without access to the internet and

technologies from those with access, thus rendering them disadvantaged. Jobs, colleges, even state

testing now demand device literacy if not ingenuity. Lack of access at an early age drives a wedge

between students and opportunities to learn, create, engage and master. Schools and districts are

therefore finding means of bridging those divides to prepare all students for meaning and

participatory lives in the ‘conceptual age’ (Pink, 2005, p.2).

Interview Summary: A Perspective on iPad Diffusion

With the intention of closing not only the formative assessment gap for state testing, but

-- and perhaps much more significantly -- also the development gap for digital citizenship and

authoring, the College and Career Readiness Team (CCRT) at Holmes Elementary School in

Long Beach, California, comprised of seven teachers, conducted research and drafted a plan to

bring iPads into the classrooms. The initiative was envisioned to prepare the fifth graders for

middle school (where the student population is much more socio-economically diverse) by

increasing their interaction time with wired technology from two hours a week in the school’s

single computer lab to an hour and a half to three hours of 1-1 iPad usage every day. 82% of


Holmes’ students are considered socio-economically disadvantaged, and many do not have

home access to technology and the Internet. In an interview (see Appendix C and D for

transcripts) conducted with Araceli Tallman, fifth grade teacher and lead of the iPad initiative,

Tallman described the introduction of 1-1 technology into instruction and student learning as a

means to accomplishing three goals at the school site: enhancing the student learning experience,

raising test scores, and providing students access to using technology who would otherwise not

have access (personal communication, October 2015).

After conducting site research on student test scores and the cost and viability of bringing

iPads in, the CCRT determined they would advocate piloting the adoption in Holmes’ two fifth

grade classrooms. The intention would be to later assess its effectiveness to determine further

adoption. If the results were deemed positive the school would introduce iPads to the fourth

grade classes the following year, and to the third grade the year after. To gain traction, Tallman

and her committee brought their research and plan to their principal Luana Wesley. She lent her

support and then brought the proposal to the School Site Council, where it was approved and

appropriated discretionary monies for funding. The CCRT’s proposal was researched, drafted,

presented and approved within the 2013-2014 school year, and by the start of the following year

the initial 70 iPads -- which are housed nightly in the library -- had arrived.

Adding the devices to the library’s inventory, syncing them to the school’s server, and the

loading of approved apps took time and raised roadblocks, pushing back the distribution of the

iPads to April. The current 2015 start of school marks the first full year Holmes fifth graders

will have iPads, and will be the year assessed measured for results. The expectation is that the

eventual roll out for the fourth grade classes will go much smoother after this two year learning


curve. While the Tallman and her cohorts did benefit from limited support from a district trainer,

Holmes is one of only three or four Long Beach elementary schools to have iPads, and much of

their procedures and policies were developed as they progressed, positioning the district to learn

from them.

Tallman does not attribute any resistance she has encountered from teachers to age, but

instead views it as a divide between those who embrace change and those who are apprehensive

of it, regardless of age. The resistance against the iPad diffusion follows the pre-existing campus

trend of a population of teachers resisting the change to both testing and gradebooks moving

online. Collectively -- though at different rates -- the faculty is moving past this reticence toward

technology as all teachers now have their own iPads, the usage of which is embedded in staff

meetings in the form of direct training and comfort-building exercises through participatory

interaction.

Having a wealth of resources at the the swipe of her students’ fingertips is a success

Tallman celebrates. Teaching students the procedures of using iPads atop of the curricular

applications of the devices is an expected temporary slow-down to implementation at the fifth

grade level. When grades three through five all have iPads, fifth and fourth graders will start

their years ready to go. Parent involvement is so low at Holmes they are in danger of losing their

Title 1 funds for lack of turning in the necessary forms. There is no PTA. Getting parent buy-in

or promoting the program to parents has not been a factor in the diffusion of this technology.

The greatest challenge ahead of them is the reallocation of their grade 4 funds if the school loses

their site funding and the management of 100 iPads which equal just over one third of the

proposed total.


Analysis of the Diffusion of Student Tablet Technology

Mrs. Tallman seemed very pro technology. She was one of the people to propose the

plan and she has been an integral part of the entire roll out. I believe she sees technology as a

tool that we can use to benefit our society. This would place her in line with the Instrumentation

Theory. She has taken a piece of technology that many use for entertainment and work, and

shaped it to foster learning and increase students educational experience. I think her viewpoint is

shaped by her own experience with technology. She calls herself a “tech savvy” person.

Someone who is comfortable with technology is going to be more inclined to integrate it into all

aspects of their lives and encourage others to follow suit. Having that sort of confidence in

yourself and your ability to manipulate it for your own gain would definitely cause you to look at

it in a positive light. I think she might have been a little value laden, assuming that all of the

teachers would catch on and be able to integrate the tech into their classroom so that it was

adding to the students learning instead of just being another paper weight. That being said, I

believe she is making great strides to assist the teachers, who are having difficulties, understand

and use their iPads more successfully. As the interviewee, Terri came into the interview with a

positive view on the iPads. They are stored in her back room so she sees them taken out at the

beginning of every day and return at the end of it. Because of this, she often hears the success

stories pertaining to the iPads. The teachers relay stories to her of those “lightbulb moments”

when something finally clicks for a student when the iPad is being used as an additional tool in

the classroom. She was more inclined to do the interview since she has seen the early success of

the iPad roll out.Although Terri is usually apprehensive to technology, she sees the benefits of it

in the classroom, making her ideas more closely aligned with the Instrumentation Theory as well.


Reflection: Ashley Brockman

Hearing anecdotal stories about my niece's first grade class spending class time watching

cartoons on their iPads, and too much learning capital being waylaid by the flash components of

edutainment (as was also the case in her kindergarten class), it is hard for me to support 1-1 iPad

programs in elementary classrooms. Like the Holmes students, my niece is a young student

living in a sort of digital divide. She probably has even less screen time than the Holmes students

do, however this is by parent choice not from lack of access; should her parents ever want her

‘caught up’ with her peers, it could be accomplished with ease and in little time. What is more,

she participates in private STEM classes for young children, focusing on engineering and the

sciences. The difference between my niece's lack of access and the students’ of Holmes

Elementary, is that her seclusion from the digital world is constructed, while theirs is a reality

symptomatic of much greater divides in learning support than the absence of technology. Take,

for instance, their nonexistent PTA. In such cases as Holmes Elementary -- especially because

the adoption was initiated by engaged and innovating site teachers -- the introduction of student

tablets into the learning environment is a praiseworthy example of technology being diffused for

effect and with purpose -- both academic and cultural.

While Ms. Tallman, the key innovator, was very gracious with her time and willing to

share her adoption experiences -- and even went so far as to extend an invitation to attend the

SCC to our group member -- she was not verbose or forthcoming in certain respects that might

have provided better insight into which technology viewpoint is being exercised. We learned

that student technology time increased by over 275%, in itself a huge step in accomplishing one

of the initiating goals, but we got little idea of how the iPads are explicitly utilized. (Although`


we crafted the interview questions as a group, there is a disadvantage to not being part of the

actual questioning process as the method prohibits follow-up questions that otherwise would

arise in the moment.) That gap in understanding -- even after the follow-up interview -- makes it

difficult to identify this diffusion as Instrumental (Feenberg, 2002) or Substantive. The question

remains: Has pedagogy changed because of the introduction of this new innovation, or has the

culture and practices of the classrooms been reshaped and forged anew by the appearance of the

iPads? The iPads are most likely neutral items set into a context already shaped by the biases of

poverty and circumstance -- the iPads themselves being neutral and introduced with purpose to

curb and close inequities in access and skills. If the field of learning -- which it seems too early

in the adoption to assess -- actually changes itself because of the iPads, that change will prove

substantive.

Following the path of the conception of the innovation of the 1-1 iPad program, to the first

day the tablets made their way into student hands, the progression of diffusion appears mostly to

align with Everett Rogers’ (2003) theory, though perhaps in regards to some elements, only on a

surface level. The program itself, by the fact that currently only the fifth grade classes are

participating, is functioning both as the adoption and the trial stage. Tallman explained that

based on the observations pulled from the trial year the adoption would expand, but the iPads at

the fifth grade level have already been adopted and are in no danger of being reviewed and then

revoked. According to Holmes’ 2015-2016 submitted and approved Supplemental Materials

Plan (see appendix F), the fourth grade purchase -- provided the school does not now lose their

Title 1 funding -- has been greenlit after only four months of trialability in fifth grade. While

Tallman speaks of collecting observable research from the pilot program, the next stage of the


adoption was approved before any substantial observations could be collected, analyzed or

shared. This seems to be in concert with the approval of the initial proposal -- no published data

or research was required; the gatekeepers trusted the innovative teachers and said yes. While

closing the informations communications technology (ICT) skills gap in Holmes’ student

population is both important and valid, the combination of the lack of published or site-collected

supporting research and the absence of specific details on the iPads’ applications for student

learning, it does seem that there may be an element of the iPads having been adopted merely by

virtue that they are iPads and are perhaps viewed by some as some sort of magic bullet. That

said, there is value in the innovation moving through the school and the diffusion process as a

bottom-up transaction, one that speaks to ownership and innovative thinking -- a significant

factor in whether the diffusion of a new technology will be successful.

Reflecting upon some of the details of Tallman’s account, certain elements of the

diffusion process stand out as noteworthy. Tallman mentioned that student use of the iPads is

not as easy to monitor as are the lab computers installed with management software; in this

respect classroom management strategies, as well as teacher positioning in the classroom, will

undoubtedly have to be readdressed. For this, and for many other reasons falling under the

‘learning curve’ she mentioned, the school, Tallman and her team would have benefitted from

reaching out to other districts and elementary schools that have already rolled out iPad programs.

Just like their campus is a trailblazer in their own district, other schools and other districts have

gone before them. Manhattan Beach Union School District (2015) started their elementary 1-1

iPad program in 2010. Karina Gerger (2015), teacher on special assignment for the MBUSD ed

tech initiative, described to a room of CSULB ETEC students the lessons the district and early


adopting teachers learned in the first years of their program. She shared classroom management

strategies in relation to elementary students and iPads, and how through experience they rebuilt

their tech and support department to shape MBUSD into a visionary district leading the way for

others.

I was surprised that as Holmes is not the first school in LBUSD to have iPads, they do

not have more support from district. As the program currently exists, Tallman, a full time

classroom teacher, is -- because of her vision and voluntary leadership -- managing 100 student

and teacher iPads, a number that will grow significantly if and when more grades are added.

That is not a sustainable model. As they move forward, Holmes Elementary needs to reshape

their infrastructure if the program is to function at its highest potential. Lack of infrastructure as

bottom-up programs grow is not a unique problem; I have seen this at my own school where

programs start small, run by enthusiastic teachers, then the programs grow, teachers get burned

out, or overwhelmed with how much their tasks have exponentially grown, or over time the

innovators leave the school, and then programs designed to better student learning and benefit

the whole student can falter, or even fail.


Reflection: Caitlyn Stuart

Through my mother, I have heard many times how disadvantaged Holmes Elementary is.

She laments that there is not much help from the community and the neighborhood is declining

in size and socioeconomic status. So when she told me that the school was rolling out a 1-1 iPad

initiative, I was surprised. I was very impressed to hear Mrs. Tallman’s initiative and drive to see

this plan through. Listening to her knowledge of the program working so hard to make it a

success shows me how dedicated she is to not just her students, but every student that walks

through the halls at Holmes. The fact that the students are already doing an hour and a half of

work on the iPads is great as well. A program like this could have serious and long lasting effects

on the students who come through Holmes Elementary School.

It does concern me though, that she is the sole tech “go to” on campus. A teacher should

not be the one maintaining 100 iPads and certainly not when the program is extended to younger

grades and that number climbs close to 250. That is too much of a burden to put on a full time

teacher. I don’t know if they have thought through what they will do when the time comes that

there are too many iPads for her. Will they hire another employee to maintain the iPads? Will

they have to train all of the teachers to become experts in troubleshooting and fixing iPads? All

of their options require further training, more money, and more support. If they lose their Title 1

standing, they could really run into some trouble.

That is the gamble you run when starting a new program though and also being one of the

first in your area to do so. You become everyone else’s guinea pig. Overall, the program has

been successful and I hope that more teachers like Mrs. Tallman step up and seize the amazing

opportunity they have in front of them.


Reflection: Terri Stuart

I was very excited to interview Mrs. Tallman as Holmes is one of two schools I am the

Librarian for. Although Holmes is only 3 miles from my other school, Burcham Elementary, the

culture is exceedingly different based on the socio-economic factors. I am happy to see Holmes

be a leader in adapting technology in the classroom. These students need any advantage the

school can offer, as they do not have a lot of those advantages at home. In general, the majority

of 5th graders at Holmes are reading at a 3rd grade level. They are not poised to move from

Holmes to middle school and be highly successful. I think the introduction of the iPads will

increase necessary skills to compete with other students once they leave Holmes.

To analyze this diffusion of this innovation in regards to Rogers article, I feel the steps

have been completed successfully. Perhaps the process has been slower than planned and

anticipated for, but given the fact that Holmes is breaking new ground, I think it is a project to be

proud of. Rogers’s talks about the initial innovation, which of course is the iPads and the

introduction to the fifth grade classes. He discusses the chain of communication to get the

innovation rolling. There was great communication between the initial committee, the Principal,

and finally the school site council who had to approve the purchase of the iPads. What was

surprising to me when I talked to Mrs. Tallman was that the committee did not present any hard

facts to the School Site Council. Really the only statistic they used was the fact that 82% of the

school population is considered socio-economically disadvantaged thus assuming the lack of use

of technology at home. The time it took to actually get the innovation up and going was as I

mentioned longer than had been anticipated, however when the iPads are rolled out to the 4th and

3rd grades the learning curve has already been established and the roll out will be much quicker.


Lastly, the social support to make sure the innovation is used is tremendous, mostly because of

Mrs. Tallman’s expertise at technology and her abundant enthusiasm for the project.

Feenberg, in his article, Transforming technology, A critical theory revisited , the

Instrumental theory looks at technology as simply a tool, technology is neutral, and ready to be

used for whatever purposes their user has. In this case I do think the iPads are just tools to be

used to bring information faster and equip Holmes students with the skills they will need to be

successful in middle school.

In an article we will be reading for our ETEC 525 class titled Differences in Student

Information and Communication Technology Literacy Based on Socio-Economic Status,

Ethnicity, and Gender: Evidence of a Digital Divide in Florida Schools, the author Albert D.

Ritzhaupt reminds us that the digital divide is multilayered. A concern is not only do individuals

not have physical access to technology, but because of that lack of access they also do not have

the necessary ICT skills. He states the digital divide is multilayered and includes several related

dimensions of computer access, usage, and skill” (p. 293). Holmes students having access to

computers 3 hours a day, at completion on the adoption of the innovation, will increase not only

academic skills but keyboarding skills, speed, understanding computer usage, so many benefits.

Lastly, one of the questions I had for Mrs. Tallman was if she was having any problems

with the usage. In the Library so many of these students are not respectful of taking care of the

books, returning their books, and not paying for lost or damaged books. When asked if she was

having any problems with respect to their use of the equipment she said there were no problems.

I was happy to hear that.


References

Boyd, D. (2014). It’s complicated: The social lives of networked teens. New Haven, CT: Yale

University Press.

Feenberg, A. (2002). Transforming technology a critical theory revisited . New York, NY:

Oxford University Press.

Gerger, K. (2015). Visiting lecture on MBUSD iPad program. Personal Collection of K Gerger for S.

Adams, California State University, Long Beach, Long Beach CA.

Manhattan Beach Unified School District. (2015, May 2). Inception to implementation:

Manhattan Beach USD iPad program, technology in education. Retrieved from

http://www.mbusd.org/ourpages/auto/2011/6/21/64126362/Tech%20in%20Education.pdf

Pink, D. (2005). A whole new mind. New York, NY: Riverhead.

Ritzhaupt, A. D. (2013). Differences in student information and communication technology

literacy based on socio-economic status, ethnicity, and gender: Evidence of a digital

divide in Florida schools. Journal of Research on Technology in Education , 45 (4).

Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations . New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.


Appendix A: Interview Guide

Araceli Tallman: teacher, Holmes Elementary, LBUSD

In order to analyze the effectiveness of the introduction of student iPads to the learning

environment, a group member will conduct a face to face interview with the classroom

teacher who piloted the Holmes program and contributed to the program’s inception.

1. How did it come about that the fifth graders at Holmes Elementary have access to iPads?

2. How is the system supported/how did you get funding?

3. How were you trained to implement the iPad program?

4. When you introduce the iPads to the 4th grades and then the third grades do you anticipate

any problems/resistance?

5. Do you think the resistance you will run into is based on the age of the teachers?

6. How are you going to deal with the resistance?

7. How quickly after you received the iPads were they up and running?

8. What do you find are the major benefits of having the iPads in the classroom?

9. What have been the drawbacks? Are there any downsides you have become aware of?


Appendix B: Follow-up Interview Guide


To seek clarification on and deeper understanding of how the innovation was diffused

throughout the Title 1 elementary school, a follow-up interview will be conducted through

email.

1. How many teachers comprised the team?

2. What was teacher/student use of technology prior to the use of the iPads?

3. There was a learning curve, is there anything you would have done differently?

4. What does the actual program look like? How are they used? Can the students take the iPads

home?

5. How were the parents brought in?


Appendix C: Interview Guide

Innovation: iPads for all fifth graders at Holmes Elementary, Lakewood, CA, LBUSD


In order to analyze the effectiveness of the introduction of student iPads to the learning

environment, a group member will conduct a face to face interview with the classroom

teacher who piloted the Holmes program and contributed to the program’s inception.

Conducted by Terri Stuart, 9 October, 2015

1. How did it come about that the fifth graders at Holmes Elementary have access to iPads?

Tallman: First a research group of teachers looked into getting iPads to enhance classroom

instruction. Holmes is a socio-economically disadvantaged school. 71.6% of the population is

considered socio-economically at a disadvantage. The teachers felt this was one reason test

scores have been historically low, and that the use of technology in the classroom would

greatly enhance the learning experience. They also felt it was important to bring more

technology into the classroom as these are not students/families who have great access to

computers outside of the school. The committee met and decided to do some research on test

scores, cost, and general viability of using/getting iPads for the classroom. The overall goal

was to introduce the iPads to the fifth grade classrooms, (there are 2) and if the results were

positive, roll out iPads to the 4th graders the following year and then the third graders the year

after that. They next went to the Principal to convince her to buy into the process, which she

did. The Principal then took the idea to her school site council which is made up of teachers


and parents at Holmes. They agreed that using iPads in the classroom would benefit the

students and that a pilot program should be introduced to only one grade level.

2. How is the system supported/how did you get funding?

Tallman: Every school has some control over its spending, it is called "local control funding",

that the Principal can utilize at their discretion. Since the school site council voted on the

proposition and agreed on it, the principal, Mrs. Wesley, went ahead and made the acquisition.

3. How were you trained to implement the iPad program?

Tallman: Because I am very technology savvy and I was one of the recommenders of this

program, I switched grade levels so i could introduce this innovation to the school. There was

some support from a district trainer, but only 3 or 4 schools in Long Beach have iPads in their

elementary schools so there was a huge learning curve for both me and the district trainer.We

are really breaking new ground here. I feel very conformable with the use of iPads, and I have

learned so much in kind of a bottom up fashion, I am the schools technical support. Right now

we only have two classrooms so it’s not a burden.

4. When you introduce the iPads to the 4th grades and then the third grades do you

anticipate any problems/resistance?

Tallman: Yes! I had some resistance from the other fifth grade teacher but he has been good at

accepting this new idea and working with me. Often we trade classrooms when I introduce a

new app and train the students since I understand the apps better.


5. Do you think the resistance you will run into is based on the age of the teachers?

Tallman: Oh no. I don't think the resistance will be age based at all. I think the resistance will

come from those teachers who are apprehensive of change. You see that already with things

like the online grade book and online testing. Teachers who will not resist are teachers who

consider themselves lifelong learners, and so accept change.

6. How are you going to deal with the resistance?

Tallman: Every teacher now has an iPad. The Principal and I have agreed that the iPads will be

a big part of every staff meeting. Not only will i train them on the apps, but just to start, a lot

of what we do in the staff meeting will force the teachers to use their iPads. For instance, in

our staff meeting yesterday Mrs. Wesley did not have a paper agenda, the teachers had to pull

it up on their iPads, and we took a survey. I am hoping that by just getting used to using the

iPad in these settings will create a comfort level with the teachers so that when we roll them

out to the next grade the learning curve will be shorter.

7. How quickly after you got the iPads were they up and running?

Tallman: We received the iPads at the beginning of the year last year. There was the initial

set-up, we had to add the iPads to inventory, get them synced with our server so that the iPads

have the same filters as the computers in the computer lab, and again the learning curve of

adding apps, so the iPads arrived at the beginning of the school year but really weren't

available to use until midway thru the year. Our server LECCO controls the filters and I


control which apps are added. Since we only have two rooms per grade level I expect the next

roll out to the 4th graders to go very smoothly.

8. What do you find are the major benefits of having the iPads in the classroom?

Tallman: Oh my gosh, the students have so many resources right at their fingertips! There is an

initial learning curve for them too, but when they get comfortable we can definitely speed up

the learning process and introduce more rigorous work. Right now I utilize the iPads about 1

1/2 hours a day, but by the end of the year I expect to be using them 3 hours a day.

9. What are the drawbacks? Are there any downsides you have become aware of?

Tallman: Again because we are rolling this out in fifth grade we are doing both process and

application at the same time so the system is not up and running as quickly as I would have

liked it to have been. When our 3rd graders have iPads..coming to 5th will be a breeze

because their experience with the iPad will already be tremendous. I have had a few problems

with students being on tube while i am teaching a lesson and since i am at the front of the

class teaching I can't always catch that. When I do I take away the iPad for the day. In the

computer lab i can monitor what sites my students are at and if i see their are wandering to

other sites i can send them an instant message to get back to work, that's not available for the

iPads. I also foresee a problem with the workload for me. I currently am in charge of 70 iPads

for the students and 30 iPads for staff, when their program rolls out to 4th and 3rd, it will be

overwhelming, I feel I will need some support.


Appendix D: Follow-up Interview Guide



To seek clarification on and deeper understanding of how the innovation was diffused

throughout the Title 1 elementary school, a follow-up interview will be conducted through

email.

Conducted by Terri Stuart, 12 October, 2015

1. How many teachers comprised the team?

Tallman: There are several school committees dedicated to improving the school culture here at

Holmes. One of the committees is the "College and Career Readiness Team." There are 7

members of the team. Holmes test scores are low and they were looking at ways to improve

the test scores. I had previously told you 72.9% of Holmes families are considered

socio-economically disadvantaged, but the Principal corrected me and told me the statistic is

actually 82%. The committee felt the students at Holmes were unprepared to go to middle

school where the socio-economic picture is different, and felt Holmes kids would be at a

disadvantage considering most of them do not have access to computers at home.

2. What was teacher/student use of technology prior to the use of the iPads?

Tallman: Prior to the introduction of iPads the students were able to use the one computer lab

here at school 2 hours a week, now they use the iPads and hour and a half a day.


3. There was a learning curve, is there anything you would have done differently?

Tallman: Mrs. Araceli Tallman: No, we are breaking new ground here at Holmes. The district is

actually learning from us. Someone had to break the ice, unfortunately that was us which

means we are working out all the kinks for the schools who will be adopting iPads in the

future. From the time we received the iPads until they were up and running it was nearly 9

months. Our intentions were for the fifth graders to have use of them all last year, but they

were only up and running from about April thru June. This will be the year we may see results

as the students have had the iPads since day 1.

4. What does the actual program look like? How are they used? Can the students take the

iPads home?

Tallman: The iPads stay at school and are locked in the Library every night in a charging cart.

No way would we allow the students to take these home. The initial investment for the 70

iPads was $80,000.00. A huge investment for a school like this.

5. How were the parents brought in?

Tallman: There are 2 parents who sit on the school site council. The parent involvement at

Holmes is discouraging. There is not a PTA as there are no volunteers or people interested in

paying the $6.00 to join.


Appendix E: SSC Meeting Summary


Terri Stuart, 13 October, 2015, Holmes Elementary

To deepen understanding of the process of approval, a group member attended the Holmes

Elementary SCC meeting.

Yesterday I sat in on the school site council. Although the local funds have been set aside for 70

more iPads for the 4th graders the Principal has put a hold on the purchase.Mrs. Wesley attended

a meeting with the Superintendent last week and was told we are likely to lose our title one

funding. If we lose that funding she wants to hold on to the money that was earmarked for the

iPads. Even though I have previously discussed how disadvantaged the families are here at

Holmes, Title 1 monies are allocated based solely on the number of families who have applied

for free lunch. There are translation problems and other issues, parents not returning the forms on

time. She asked teachers to personally call all families who have not turned their forms in and

encourage them to get them in before the deadline, otherwise title 1 money is lost for next year.


Appendix F: Supplemental Materials Plan

Holmes Elementary 2015-2016 expenditure plan for grade 4 iPads

diffusion of innovation: ipads and l e arn ing...

Documents