From “No” to “Know”
Foreword
Like nearly every other aspect of our world, K-12 school systems run on connected technology. They rely on this technology to collect the data that they report to state and federal officials, communicate and share resources with staff and families, manage day-to-day work flows, and support educators in instructional delivery to students. This reliance on technology did not happen overnight, but it did happen relatively quickly. While many district leaders have made gradual transitions toward more-connected systems since the 2010s, COVID-19 turned those incremental steps into an all-out sprint. As the pandemic led to widespread school closures, districts that had been largely self-contained found themselves rapidly adopting new devices and applications to ensure students could continue to learn remotely. What began as an emergency response has since become a permanent transformation of how schools operate.
School systems’ shift from analog to digital is visible in the things they buy, and importantly, in the ways they are organized. Senior-level education technology positions — often chief technology officers (CTOs) or chief information officers (CIOs) — have proliferated in school systems across the country over the past decade. Unlike their predecessors, these new leaders — and the teams they lead — are devoted solely to addressing issues of educational and instructional technology, tasked with keeping the technology our schools run on safe and functioning.
The demands placed on these leaders are unprecedented; the burden of responsibility is massive; and the threats are relentless. Some students may spend more than half of their time in a digital environment, engaging with multiple applications each day and building up extensive profiles online in the process. Every interaction with an application represents a piece of potentially sensitive data that schools need to protect. Every application and every device presents a potential point of entry for a cyberattack. And the stakes are incredibly high: A single data breach or ransomware attack can lead to the release of thousands of sensitive records, which may include both student and staff social security numbers. Cyberattacks like these can cost districts millions, if not billions, of dollars. The magnitude of these risks cannot be overstated.
District technology leaders are now expected to not only manage and maintain existing systems but also stay abreast of emerging technologies, all while navigating the complexities of cybersecurity threats and budgetary constraints. This has resulted in a situation where CTOs often find themselves in the unenviable position of having to say “no” to new initiatives, projects and systems — not because they don’t want to support innovation, but because they don’t have the time or resources to do so.
The challenge lies in finding a way to balance the need for progress with the practical realities of limited resources and competing priorities. Technology leaders are often problem-solvers who think in binary terms: A problem is either solved or it’s not. This can lead to a tendency to view decisions about new technologies in a similar way: They are either adopted or rejected. This approach can be counterproductive, however, because it can stifle innovation and create an environment where new ideas are met with resistance rather than enthusiasm. Peer end users, like teachers and other staff members, may not be aware of the myriad challenges CTOs and their teams are facing. Instead, they only know that leaders have rejected their request to use their favorite app in the classroom or on campus. In their minds, the IT Department has become the “Department of No.”
But it doesn’t have to be that way. District technology leaders — some of whom are spotlighted in this report — have taken steps to transform their offices from the “Department of No” into the “Department of Know” by navigating the many tensions CTOs face in context. A more effective approach to choosing new apps, for example, is to shift the focus from a binary yes-orno decision to a more open-ended “how?” Instead of simply rejecting a new technology because it doesn’t meet all the requirements, tech leaders can explore ways to make it work. This might involve finding creative solutions to technical challenges, negotiating with vendors to get a better deal, or reallocating resources to free up time for implementation.
By adopting a “how” mindset, technology leaders can foster a culture of innovation and collaboration, where they welcome and explore new ideas rather than dismissing them out of hand. They can build bridges and relationships with other leaders in the district, giving every department a window into the challenges that IT faces and a reason to buy in. This approach fosters trust and respect between technology leaders and other stakeholders, because it demonstrates a willingness to listen and find solutions that work for everyone.
Ultimately, the goal is not to say “yes” to every new technology or to avoid conflict at all costs. Rather, it’s to negotiate a way through the complexities of the educational technology landscape in a way that supports innovation, promotes collaboration and ensures that all students can safely benefit. This requires a willingness to think creatively, to be open to new ideas and to work collaboratively with others to find solutions that meet all stakeholders’ needs.
