A description and analysis of the Sacramento Model Technology Schools: The first four years
Page: 248
1993
- 46Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage46
- Abstract Views46
Artifact Description
The purpose of this study was to identify the strategies necessary and the problems encountered in integrating technology into the educational environment on a large scale basis. Using the methods of qualitative research, specifically an adaptation of educational criticism, the study described and analyzed the first four years of implementation of the Sacramento Model Technology Schools (MTS). Data used in this study came from historical documents, the memories of the Project Director, and the information gathered in guided interviews with 33 representatives of the key stakeholders in the project. The Sacramento MTS, one of six projects funded by the State of California at $500,000 per year for five years to study the integration of technology into schools on a systems level, was used for this study. The Sacramento project called for school-wide computer and video networks with a variety of technologies available to students, staff, and the community in a variety of configurations. Hoping to weave communication and critical thinking skills throughout the curriculum, the project staff planned to disseminate technology-enriched curriculum units in the latter years of the project. The major components of the implementation process included planning and leadership, facility retrofitting and hardware installation, staff development, curriculum development, and research and evaluation. The findings in this study focused on (1) the need for strong leadership at all levels, (2) the negative effects of staff turnover, (3) the need for clear and effective communication with in-district participants as well as those outside, (4) the need for flexibility in project plans as well as facilities, (5) the use of a wide variety of staff development strategies in response to school culture and staff needs, (6) the provision of adequate time, (7) the need for planning beyond the project years, (8) the difficulties encountered in doing research in a changing environment, and (9) the personal growth achieved by many participants. Based on the findings, the study offered several implications for similar projects and concluded by sharing some suggestions for future study.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know