Sara Dexter

This study analyzed 826 written self‑debriefings from 59 graduate students in educational leadership who each completed 14 online simulations in a fully online, asynchronous program. Content analysis revealed five themes that map onto Kolb’s experiential learning cycle, indicating that virtual simulations can serve as grounding experiences that prompt reflection, conceptual integration, and planning for action. Findings suggest self‑debriefing in asynchronous simulations can propel learners through the experiential learning cycle and provide a valuable avenue for professional development in higher education.

The paper proposes a three‑level framework (micro/meso/macro) that synthesizes learning theories to explain how AI can promote learning processes. It articulates a causal learning mechanism and describes how information is aggregated and dissipated across levels. Fourteen roles for AI are outlined: four at the individual level, four for teams/knowledge communities, and six at the macro level of cultural‑historical activity, with implications for research, practice, and evaluation.

This cross-sectional survey of U.S. educational leadership preparation programs examined emphasis on 12 evidence-based leadership competencies and related pedagogies. Findings show programs heavily emphasize instructional leadership and data use, with readings and classwork most prevalent; practice- and rehearsal-oriented tools like simulations were least common. Results highlight gaps between optimal practices suggested in the literature and actual program approaches, offering impetus to strengthen leader preparation methods.

A national cross‑sectional survey of U.S. educational leadership preparation programs assessed emphasis on 12 evidence‑based school leadership competencies and related pedagogies. Programs most emphasized instructional leadership and data use, with readings and class‑based activities as predominant methods; practice/rehearsal tools such as simulations were least prevalent. Results highlight gaps between optimal performance suggested by the literature and reported practice, motivating shifts in leader preparation pedagogy.

A multi‑site case study examined how five innovation‑leading districts selected and deployed instructional edtech tools. Decision processes involved teachers, district leaders, and technical specialists weighing usability, alignment with learning, and interoperability. Districts varied in expectations for outcome data: content‑access tools were often judged via usage/log data, whereas skill‑development tools prompted plans for student‑level outcome evaluation. The study illuminates how evidence is considered in edtech purchasing.

Using a quasi‑experimental design with five treatment and five matched comparison middle schools, the study tested a team‑based instructional leadership intervention to increase science and math teachers’ technology integration for multiple representations of content. Treatment schools showed significantly greater leader activities, broader teacher learning modes and technology use, and higher student science achievement (but not mathematics), demonstrating efficacy of a replicable team‑based leadership approach.

A quasi-experimental study in 10 middle schools tested a team-based instructional leadership intervention designed to increase teachers’ educational technology use for multiple representations of content. Compared to matched controls, treatment schools’ leaders engaged in more frequent and varied leadership activities; teachers experienced more diverse learning modes and integrated technology more often; students outperformed peers in science (but not mathematics). Findings establish the efficacy of a replicable, team-based approach to technology leadership.

A multisite case study of five districts investigated how leaders reason about, select, and deploy classroom-oriented digital products and what evidence informs decisions. Teams of teachers, district leaders, and technical staff weighed usability, usage data, alignment with learning, and interoperability. Plans to assess student outcomes varied by tool type; access/content tools often relied on usage metrics while skill-development tools prompted plans for outcome data. Results illuminate how evidence figures into edtech adoption.

A systematic review (1998–2018) examined empirical studies at the intersection of K–12 leaders, teachers, and technology. Synthesizing 34 articles against a conceptual framework of effective leadership practices, the review highlights leadership for building professional capacity: offering learning opportunities, cultivating communities of practice, attending to teachers’ individualized needs, and ensuring access and support. Recommendations are made to connect currently siloed leadership, teacher, and technology literatures.

A qualitative study of math and science teachers in two middle schools identified a holistic system for learning to integrate technology that includes (a) district‑initiated formal PD and PLCs, (b) teacher‑initiated informal collaborations, and (c) independent learning. Overemphasis on formal PD can overlook valuable informal and independent learning that helps transfer training into classroom practice; implications are offered for designing integrated supports, often technology‑enabled, across all three modes.

Qualitative cases in two middle schools documented typical 1:1 computing configurations and uses, the potential added value, and management challenges. Frequent uses included online research, productivity tools, drill/practice, and e‑communications. A 1:1 environment can enable transformative practices but does not guarantee added value; substantial professional development is essential to realize benefits and address classroom management demands.

Using 1998 Teaching, Learning, and Computing data from 800+ schools, the study operationalized technology leadership via NETS-A standards and examined effects on technology outcomes. Results confirm infrastructure matters but leadership—especially by principals—is even more critical to effective technology utilization in schools.

Drawing on the 1998 national Teaching, Learning, and Computing survey (800+ schools), the study operationalized technology leadership using the NETS‑A standards and tested associations with technology outcomes. Results confirmed that while infrastructure matters, technology leadership is a stronger predictor of effective technology use in schools. The article integrates prescriptive leadership literature with NETS‑A to measure leadership prevalence and impact.

From data on 47 teachers across 20 schools, the study explored how teachers perceive computers’ impact on their practice. Teachers who had adopted more progressive practices felt computers supported change, but rarely as the primary catalyst; instead, reflection, coursework, and school culture were cited. For constructivist integration, teachers need opportunities to build pedagogical knowledge within supportive climates.

From 47 teachers across 20 schools, questionnaires, interviews, and classroom observations were analyzed to explore computers’ role in instructional change. Teachers who had adopted more progressive practices perceived computers as supportive of change but not as the primary catalyst; reflection, coursework, and school culture were cited instead. The study argues that constructivist edtech integration requires opportunities for teachers to build pedagogical knowledge within supportive climates.