When, Not If... Maybe!

When I look at all the projects that are awaiting implementation I find that we have a "when", not "if" approach to implantation. In most cases I get the "when" wrong not the "if" wrong. But I do get it wrong and that means that we in the technology department need to always make sure we have plan for when the "when" moves to "maybe.".

Most technology is "sold" as being needed for the sake of institutional productivity. In short, you can do more with less time, and therefore, becoming more productive for the institution. As is pointed out in 7.3, page 120-121

But this is not always the truth. Folks like me have pointed to email for a long time as an example of effective ICT as well as the Internet being used as a kind of "Answer Man" and giving teachers access to information on demand. However, "...there is also a considerable body of research that at least sheds doubt on such contribution of ICT." And my teachers are quick to point that out. "Gar, do you have any data to support your X, Y, Z position on using this, or that tool?" I would like to be able to say, "No, but I know it in my gut" but that ain't going to work.

So when I talk about purchasing new tools that will replace a time-tested, well-practiced process with new tools, online grades for example, there is predictable blow-back. However, as is pointed out, "'We see the computer age everywhere except in the productivity statistics." I hear this all the time and I can't help but think that it is total fecal matter. Here is why: it is always faster and easier to input data on paper, at least at the "input" stage. Teacher A writes down attendance on a piece of paper and kid B picks it up and takes it to the office. A person writes it down on a piece of paper and enters it into a book or something. Fast for the teacher, laborious and not productive for the organization, even if it is faster and more productive for the teacher. Input faster, organizationally slower and less productive.

So the problem comes in when we try to define productivity in the traditional sense. Sure, in the minds of our users (and we covered this in the last chapter -- perception is truth) it is so easy to print out a newsletter and give it to your kids to take home, as opposed to posting it on a school web page. As is pointed out (and I will adapt this to my K-12 example): "According to Brynjolfsson, the first explanation (reference to the computer age being everywhere but no statistics) is the most important, which would mean that there is no real productivity paradox - but a measuring problem with regard to the output criteria in the service sector."

As it applies to K-12, how do you measure the productivity of a teacher converting a newsletter to a school web page if the only measure is "teachers' time" being the metric? You can't because you do not take into account the impact on the consumer (that word again), the parent, being able to access that data at every turn and at every time? So the service sector in this case is our parents and their time is too something we need to consider in the productivity equation.

So to close this, it is true that there a definable challenge to determine the effect on an organizations' productivity as a result of ICT. The real struggles, as is pointed out on page 123 it is not the effectiveness versus opportunity that is important, what should be considered is that there is "(a)n important negative effect of ICT is information overload." That is the job of the Director of Technology to determine the when, not the if. Once there is a clear understanding of what will help the organization, and thus being more productive to not only the staff, but the wider K-12 community then implementation must happen. The issue becomes when and to what impact will it have on the information and data collection overload have on the workings of the district. So it is not a matter of if, but when. Well... maybe.
-G