Implementation is part of the program
In an effort to increase test scores in math and reading in so-called “struggling” schools, numerous intervention programs are purchased on our behalf. So many programs are layered on top of each other that it becomes nearly impossible to carefully consider them all.
Although relatively expensive, the cheapest and most efficient interventions tend to be school licenses for personalized learning software. Use of these programs make leadership think they’re actually doing something. Additionally, usage and performance data, accessible from any computer, can give central office personal an easy way to track schools, and something on which to hold them accountable when they fail.
When my students’ usage for a particular software program is not up to snuff, I hear about it. Then, if my students do not meet certain benchmarks, it can be easily attributed to the low number of minutes using the software. If only I could use the program with “fidelity,” we’d be much better off.
Companies don’t understand, however, that implementation is also part of their program. Don’t always blame the teacher for infidelity. Maybe it’s also that the program sucks. Seriously. If my usage is low, what I’m typically told to do is use it more. Why can’t you use it more, what’s the problem? But my feelings about the program are not considered. Just use it more, all right?
My Kindergarten students don’t enjoy using personalized learning software, and I don’t enjoy having them Implementation is part of the program | @ THE CHALKFACE:
