iPad Planning for Success 2013-2014

SUHSD’s Commitment to Planning for Success in 2013-2014

SUHSD will establish a per student/per year cost based on our own data beginning with the 2012-2013 school year where iPads were distributed to all 7th graders.

Cost per year per student estimates may or may not reflect our actual implementation costs. Therefore real data must be used in order to establish realistic projections moving forward that include:

  • hardware purchases
  • refresh cycles
  • professional development
  • software and apps
  • replacement of broken/lost devices
  • in grade growth
  • recovery of stolen hardware

Click here to read the full text of the Board Item for the 2013-2014  iPad 1-1 Initiative.

2012-2013 Lessons Learned


For a first time, large scale deployment of mobile devices, there were relatively few problems. However, the anticipated scaling up of 1-1 to 44000 devices over six years means deployments will get increasingly complex and complicated. In talking with other Districts of similar deployment size or larger, the best practice(s) for deployment include the outsourcing of asset tagging, inventory management, engraving, and imaging. We also need to provide school site with enough carts and Mac-mini’s to handle twice as many devices in 2013-2014.

Bring Your Own Device (BYOD)

Many districts have a BYOD policy that allows students and faculty to use personally owned devices from home on school wireless networks. While BYOD appeals to the pocketbook, there are many areas of concern including the issue of equity. We did not allow devices from home in 2012-2013 and do not anticipate changing this for the 2013-2014 school year.

Internet Bandwidth

Bandwidth is increasingly important to consider as the number of wireless devices being used at schools increases. In July, the District will increase capacity to 2GBPS. This should accommodate the 13000 iPads at middle schools plus other Internet traffic demands in our District for the 2013-2014 school year.

Device Management

The largest challenge for IT, teachers, and administrators has been device management. iPads and devices like it are personal devices being used in a “enterprise” way. They are difficult to “lock down” and therefore control. Students have routinely removed the District image on these devices in order to apply their own settings, preferences, apps, etc. We will implement a new management strategy for the coming school year. The goal is to ensure that teachers, librarians, school administrators, and techs can focus on instructional goals, not management problems.

Parent Liability for Loss/Theft/Damage

Under our current plan, parents are (in most cases) liable for damage, loss and theft. Damage is covered under Apple Care but the parent has to pay the deductible and there is a limit of 2 incidents per iPad.

The total liability to a parent if an iPad is lost or stolen is $540.

Professional Development

Teachers received 3 full days of PD. They were organized in content area cohorts. We also included training for special education teachers (1 full day) and school librarians (1 full day). Apple provided the training via a seminar model. While this was effective and received excellent feedback from teachers, we believe more elbow-to-elbow support in the classroom is needed. We also heard teachers express frustration about trying to use iPads, learn Canvas, integrate Safari Montage, etc. There were too many things to learn, implement, and master in one school year.


Planning for the 2013-14 school year has been underway since December of 2012. Several committee meetings have been held, planning documents created, and collaborations begun around developing a five year plan complete with a mission/vision statement around 21st century learning, 1-1, common core, and smarter balanced assessments. The committee consists of 80 stakeholders (teachers, administrators, and District personnel). On average, 30 individuals participate in any given meeting. Documents are created and shared to all members on Google Drive.

Teachers, Administrators and Support Personnel received regular updates via electronic newsletter(s). The Ed Tech and iPad websites were built with specific tabs for parents/teachers/students. There has been ongoing dialog and discussion with all SUHSD personnel at the site, departmental and district level to identify areas of need, develop solutions, manage issues, and inform our roadmapping process as we move into year 2.

While much of the planning has focused on iPad use, additional time has been spent focusing on the following priorities:

  • Long term planning with respect to 1-1 initiative
  • School-level technology refresh planning
  • Common Core integration
  • Use of online courseware for credit recovery at high schools
  • Use of technology in alternative programs

SUHSD’s 1-1 initiative will align to Project Red’s 11 educational success measures (ESMs).

Summary of Current Research[1]

The Project RED team analyzed over 4,000 pages of reports and evaluations from technology-rich implementations, primarily from 1:1 programs, and found little commonality in the success factors measured by schools.

Lacking a national consensus, (Project Red) chose 11 education success measures that provide a balanced view. Many appear frequently in the research literature, and a few are new to this study (primarily those related to financial impact, which is rare in the literature).

These 11 ESMs were selected in order to elicit the most valuable information for our hypotheses with the fewest number of variables. The measures were divided into two groups, those that affect students in all grades and those that affect students in high schools.

All Schools

  • Disciplinary action rate. The frequency of disciplinary actions is a strong, leading indicator of academic success or failure. Fewer disciplinary actions mean that students are more likely to be engaged in learning. Also, every disciplinary action costs time and money.
  • Dropout rate. Dropouts are an extreme indicator of the lack of academic success and lead to high personal and societal costs.
  • High-stakes test scores. Any school improvement program needs to have a focus in this area.
  • Paper and copying expenses. This factor is a proxy for other similar school expense centers. Paper and copying machine expenses are more significant than often realized, particularly when labor is included.
  • Paperwork reduction. This factor is a proxy for efficiency savings attributable to technology. When paperwork is reduced, teachers have more time to spend on educationally productive tasks, and schools save other costs (such as storage and records retention).
  • Teacher attendance. Substitute teachers cost the district money and may impact student performance.
  • AP course enrollment. This factor indicates the quality of curriculum and instruction and reduces the time required to graduate from college, saving money for the state and for families.
  • College attendance plans. This factor indicates the quality of curriculum and instruction and facilitates students’ educational planning.
  • Course completion rates. This factor indicates student engagement, achievement, and school quality. Conversely, course failure has severe negative academic and financial implications.
  • Dual/joint enrollment in college. This factor indicates a high level of student achievement and savings in future college expenses. The state saves money in subsidies for higher education and starts receiving tax revenues earlier.
  • Graduation rates. This factor indicates school quality and effective curriculum, instruction, and student planning. Multiple indicators, such as graduation and course completion rates, allow for better triangulation on a self-reported survey.

High Schools

Independent Variables of Survey

The Project RED Survey consisted of questions regarding 22 independent variables, some with subcategories, chosen for their potential to provide insight into the education success measures (ESMs). As with the education success measures, many variables could not be included due to the limitations of survey size and the effects of survey fatigue.

The number of subcategories in each variable is noted in parentheses. Project RED was designed to provide data for later analysis of the relationships between the 22 independent variables and the 11 education success measures.

1         Types of devices (6)

2         School usage patterns (7)

3         Levels of use by subject (14 subjects, 6 levels of use)

4         Primary impetus of the program (11)

5         Sources of funding (9)

6         Parental involvement—measured by face-to-face meetings or trainings (1)

7         Teachers—when issued devices, relative to students (1)

8         Technology plan quality (6)

9         Program sustainability (1)

10     Pedagogical models (4) and usage patterns (6)

11     Classification of types of classroom use (12) and frequency (7)

12     Principal training—types (6) and frequency (5)

13     Principal’s leadership role (5) and frequency (5)

14     Teacher professional learning—categories (8) and frequency (5)

15     Professional learning budget (3)

16     Technology systems reliability (5)

17     Network accessibility (3)

18     Internet connection speed (5)

19     Student-computer ratio (5)

20     Grades covered (1)

21     Year of implementation and length of implementation (1)

22     Type of institution (1)

Key Implementation Factors for 1-1 initiatives that lead to improved student outcomes are:


Finding 1: Nine key implementation factors are linked most strongly to education success.

Although educational technology best practices have a significant positive impact, they are not widely and consistently practiced. Effective technology implementation in schools is complex, with hundreds of interrelated factors playing a part. A failure of just one factor can seriously impact the success of the project. For example, one commonly reported problem is insufficient Internet bandwidth to support the substantial increase in devices in a 1:1 implementation. This leads to student and teacher frustration and reduced usage levels.


Project RED has identified the nine key implementation factors (KIFs) that are linked most strongly to the education success measures.

Key Implementation Factors

(Rank Order of Predictive Strength)

1         Intervention classes: Technology is integrated into every intervention class period.

2         Change management leadership by principal: Leaders provide time for teacher professional learning and collaboration at least monthly.

3         Online collaboration: Students use technology daily for online collaboration (games/simulations and social media).

4         Core subjects: Technology is integrated into core curriculum weekly or more frequently.

5         Online formative assessments: Assessments are done at least weekly.

6         Student-computer ratio: Lower ratios improve outcomes.

7         Virtual field trips: With more frequent use, virtual trips are more powerful. The best schools do these at least monthly.

8         Search engines: Students use daily.

9         Principal training: Principals are trained in teacher buy-in, best practices, and technology-transformed learning.

Finding 2: Properly implemented technology saves money.

Substantial evidence shows that technology has a positive financial impact, but for best results, schools need to invest in the re- engineering of schools, not just technology itself. Properly implemented educational technology can be revenue-positive at all levels—federal, state, and local. Project RED respondents report that technology contributes to cost reductions and productivity improvements—the richer the technology implementation, the more positive the impact.

 Finding 3: 1:1 schools employing key implementation factors outperform all schools and all other 1:1 schools.

A 1:1 student-computer ratio has a higher impact on student outcomes and financial benefits than other ratios, and the key implementation factors (KIFs) increase both benefits.

Evidence supporting the third Project RED hypothesis: Continuous access to a computing device for every student leads to increased academic achievement and financial benefits, especially when technology is properly implemented.

In general, respondents say that schools with a 1:1 student-computer ratio outperform non-1:1 schools on both academic and financial benefits.

 Finding 4: The principal’s ability to lead change is critical. Change must be modeled and championed at the principal level.

The impact of a good principal has been widely documented. Good principals also contribute to distributive leadership, in which team members surrounding the principal play an important role. As shown in earlier studies, strong district leadership is also essential for successful schools. All levels of leadership are important, individually and collectively, including school boards, superintendents, and assistant superintendents for curriculum, instruction, technology, finance, and operations. Project RED analysis shows that within the school the principal is one of the most important variables across the 11 education success measures, suggesting that change leadership training for principals involved in large-scale technology implementations is of paramount importance.

Finding 5: Technology-transformed intervention improves learning.

Technology-transformed intervention classes are an important component in improving student outcomes. Project RED defines technology-transformed intervention classes as those where technology plays an integral role in the class. Generally every student has a computer, and the curriculum is delivered electronically. Students move at their own pace. The teacher is heavily involved but spends most of his or her time in one-on-one or small- group mode rather than lecture mode.

Project RED found that technology-transformed interventions in ELL, Title I, special education, and reading intervention are the top-model predictor of improved high-stakes test scores, dropout rate reduction, course completion, and improved discipline. No other independent variable is the top-model predictor for more than one education success measure.

This finding also illustrates the power of the student-centric approach enabled by technology, where students typically work at their own pace. Each student can take the time required to complete the course with demonstrated achievement. A few students will take longer than the traditional semester length, but not many.

Finding 6: Online collaboration increases learning productivity and student engagement.

Online collaboration contributes to improved graduation rates and other academic improvements. Collaboration and interaction among students have long been viewed as important factors in improving student achievement, and participation in study groups is a good predictor of success in college.

Finding 7: Daily use of technology delivers the best return on investment (ROI).

Schools must incorporate technology into daily teaching to realize the benefits. The daily use of technology in core classes correlates highly to the desirable education success measures (ESMs). Daily technology use is a top-five indicator of better discipline, better attendance, and increased college attendance.


SUHSD’s 2013-2014 Priorities

1. SUHSD will communicate with all stakeholders (teachers, students, parents, community) across a variety of platforms and media.

2. SUHSD will examine the role project based learning activities play in helping students be more engaged and responsible learners.

3. SUHSD will make search engines available to all students on a daily basis. Teachers will receive the training they need to model best search practices as they pertain to learning in school.

4. SUHSD will use a learning management system (Canvas) for assignments, homework, and communication about grades and attendance.

5. SUHSD will use online summative and formative assessments.

6. SUHSD will have a clear and progressive social media policy that provides guidelines for the proper integration of social media for networking, collaboration and communication.

7. SUHSD will provide students with opportunities to use productivity tools that teach the use of spreadsheets, graphs, tables, and charts on a daily basis.

8. SUHSD teachers will use technology in the classroom with students in order to check for understanding as well as to promote collaboration.

9. SUHSD will learn about the integration of virtual field trips to build students’ understanding of the world around them and outside their communities.

10. SUHSD will emphasize effective school leadership in the area of 1-1 learning. Principals will be introduced to and learn about the following nine key measures of principal effectiveness:

  • skillful change leadership
  • conceptual and tactical understanding (of 1-1)
  • real system reform versus “tinkering around the edges”
  • communication about best practices
  • a shared and inspiring vision
  • stakeholder buy-in
  • consistent, open communication with and among stakeholders
  • planning for technology acquisition, implementation, and assessment

11. SUHSD will provide on site professional development involving teachers as learners, librarians, support staff, and administrators with a focus on the following:

  • co-planning on a weekly basis
  • coaching on a weekly basis
  • debriefing on coaching and mentoring
  • district-provided professional learning
  • faculty department training
  • in-class shoulder to shoulder mentoring
  • online professional learning
  • teacher collaboration




[1] Information from Project Red 2010 Research Report: http://projectred.org/about/research-overview.html