Phase 1 iPad Rollout Survey Results Prepared for the Board of Education Ad Hoc Common Core Technology Committee Associated Administrators of Los Angeles November 2013 School Information —  Survey dates: October 21 – October 25, 2013   —  Sent to: 38 Phase 1 school Principals and Assistant Principals   —  Not sent to: Four (4) Phase 1 schools that dropped out; five (5) Phase 1 charter schools; one (1) not sent due to change of principal (late notification)   —  Responses: 24 Responses – 18 Principals, 5 APs, 1 Instructional Specialist —  School type: Nine (9) K-5; Two (2) K-6; Five (5) 6-8; Two (2) 6-12; Six (6) 9-12 —  Enrollment: K-5 – 325 to 740; 6-8 – 659 to 900; 9-12 – 274 to 2100 Survey Highlights —  60% were slightly or moderately prepared; 40% felt very prepared to integrate iPads into the curriculum. —  92% participated in the summer training ; almost 60% participated in additional training-- an average of 14 hours per respondent. —  76% felt the rollout was very or moderately smooth. Highlights (cont.) —  100% contacted a District employee for support; 80% experienced problems with wireless connectivity and sign-on/passwords. —  Noticeable increase in student engagement mentioned several times as the best aspect of the iPad program. —  Worst aspect dealt with the security, inability to take iPads home and incomplete lessons Critical Issues to Resolve —  How teachers and administrators will get more in-depth training on classroom use of the iPads —  How to minimize the loss of instructional time for daily distribution and collection of the devices —  How the District will ensure that secure storage is available at all school sites Critical Issues (cont.) —  How the wireless connectivity issues raised by administrators will be addressed —  When complete courses will be available —  When specific, grade-appropriate goals for the use of the iPad will be determined and communicated to parents and staff Survey Details Date iPads Received: No.  of  Schools   1   16   6     (Q 4, n=23) Date  Range   08/27/13   09/11/13  –  09/27/13   10/3/13  –  10/23/13   Length ofTime Used byTeachers Averages (Q I8 n=20) Days -- I4 Weeks -- 3.9 Months - 2 OVERALL RATINGS (4 POINT SCALE) 1 = LOWEST RATNG, 4 = HIGHESRATINGT Level of preparedness to integrate iPads into the school (Q 6, n=24)   Helpfulness of District-provided training to effectively implement the iPad program (Q 11, n=23)     Comfort level overseeing the instructional program using iPads (Q 24, n=19)     Technical support provided (Q26, n=20)       Moderately prepared (3.13)     Moderately helpful (2.83)   Moderately comfortable (3.11)     Very helpful (3.50)   ROLLOUT EXPERIENCE (Q 14, n=21) Percent   Somewhat disorganized/ problematic   Very disorganized/problematic   42.9%   9   33.3%   7   14.3%   3   9.5%   Moderately smooth, with some problems   Very smooth, little to no problems   Count   2   Comments on Rollout Excellent, great; site modifications; great VLFs (8)   Relatively smooth (2)   Slow, poor support--not enough support staff (1)   Lots of planning required; many issues remain (1)   Site administrators were great (1)   Rollout okay; lots of post-rollout problems (1)   School Use of iPads For   Rating Description   Average   Increasing student engagement   Moderately helpful   3.37   Comprehension checks   Moderately helpful   3.22   Individual project-based work   Moderately helpful   3.18   Differentiated instruction   Moderately helpful   3.17   Assessment of student learning   Moderately helpful   3.13   Overall instruction   Moderately helpful   3.12   Group/team projects   Moderately helpful   3.12   Needs assessment   Moderately helpful   3.00   Assisting ELs   Moderately helpful   2.94   Increasing student attendance   Moderately helpful   2.89   Reducing behavior problems   Moderately helpful   2.84   Classroom management   Moderately helpful   2.78   Topics Missing From Training 30 responses ranked from most frequent to least —  App training (i.e., Nearpod, iMovie, other hands-on apps) —  Instructional use – Integrating Pearson Curriculum with District curriculum, group discussion sites; systematic approach to instruction) —  iPad capability – Backwards planning, paperless assignments, Common Core timeline (pacing) —  Management issues (classroom management; daily iPad deployment; responsibilities of staff, students and parents) —  Tech support —  Digital citizenship and connectivity were mentioned once Other Comments on Training (Q 13, n=12) •  Thorough; timely; continuing (4)   •  Too basic/focused on iPad operations/apps (3)   •  Poorly organized/not aligned with current curricular material (2)   •  Focus on creativity, collaboration, and technological proficiency to meet common core standards (1)   •  Need year-round training/refreshers and individualized support (1)   •  Schedule training closer to rollout (1)   COMMUNICATIONS WITH STAKEHOLDERS Quality of Information (Q 15, n=21) How would you rate the quality of the information that the District provided to the following stakeholders? 25 20 Poor 15 10 Barely acceptable Good Excellent 5 0 Clarity of Information (Q 16, n=21) How would you rate the clarity of the information that the District provided to the following stakeholders? 25 20 15 10 5 0 Not clear at all Somewhat clear Moderately clear Very clear INSTRUCTION Use of Pearson Curriculum (Q 20, n=19)   Yes - 47% No - 53%   Feedback on Pearson Curriculum (Q21, n=10) Positive Very positive NA   70% 20% 10% Apps Experience  with  Other  Pre-­‐Loaded  Applications      (Q  22,  n=20)           Very  Positive   Rating  3.61   Helpful  Applications  mentioned  more  than  twice  (Q  23,  n=13)     Edmodo Brain Pop Notability Support Requests District technical support 100% Apple technical support 47% Problems With? Yes No Response Count Wireless connectivity 16 4 20 Sign-on, passwords 16 4 20 iPad apps 8 11 19 Security of the iPads 7 12 19 Cyber-bullying 6 14 20 iPAD PORTABILITY Were students originally permitted to take iPads home? (Q 28, n=20)   Yes – 25% No – 75%   Have all the iPads sent home with students been returned to the school? (Q 29, n=8) Yes – 5 responses No – 2 responses I don’t know – 1 response Best Aspect of the iPad Program Ranked by frequency (Q 30, n=18) •  Engaging/individualized/new  way  to  learn  (7)   •  Level  playing  field/access  (6)   •  Meaningful  use  of  technology/Pearson/ educa@onal    apps  (5)   Worst Aspects •  •  •  •  •  •  •  •  •  •  •  •  •  •  •  Ranked by frequency (Q 31, n=18) Can't  take  home/fear  of  security  breach  (3)   Nothing  (2)   Need  clear  pacing  plan   Distribu@on/collec@on  too  @me  consuming   iPads  not  used  in  all  classrooms   Incomplete  Pearson  lessons   If  District  stops  deployment   Ambiguity   Teacher  use  as  punishment   Teacher  engagement  not  as  high  as  students'   Not  enough  PD  for  teachers   Lack  of  consistent  support   Lost/stolen/misuse   Addi@onal  burden  for  principal   Nega@vity/personal  agendas   RECOMMENDATIONS   Continue Program? Yes - 90% No - 0% Comments (4): —  Great idea despite setbacks —  Stopping would be an injustice —  Critical to closing the digital divide —  Technology is here to stay (Q 32, n=20) Not sure -10% Home Use of iPads Should Students Take iPads Home?   Yes – 55% No – 30% (Q 33, n=20) Not sure – 15% Comments (4): •  Program senseless if students can’t take home; •  Take home is critical •  Treat iPad like a textbook and send home, when needed •  Improve security and provide more student training on curriculum/apps before sending home     iPad Responsibility —  —  —  —  Parents Teachers Principal Central District (Q 34, n=15) 87% 0% 0% 13% Other (5) —  Both parents and central (2) —  Parents, just like textbook policy —  Apple —  Offer affordable insurance for parents/or charge on a sliding scale based on income