1. Policiesslcsd Educational Technology Resources Technology
2. Policiesslcsd Educational Technology Resources Internships

Chapter 1: Technology Planning and Policies, Technology in Schools: Suggestions, Tools, and Guidelines for Assessing Technology in Elementary and Secondary Education

'Build a technology plan around teachers' needs, and they will come.'

Education; Top 5 Benefits of Technology in the Classroom; Resource Articles // Top 5 Benefits of Technology in the Classroom How you can make educational technology work for you. Technology has transformed life as we know it, and the classroom looks much different than it did 50—or even 10—years ago. With technology and access to resources beyond classroom walls, students are inspired to become problem-solvers, critical thinkers, collaborators, and creators. Where technology has been successfully integrated into classrooms, students develop a lifelong love of learning. Educators are always striving to personalize learning for students. Find a Masters Learning Resources and Educational Technology Postgraduate Degree, using the UK's most comprehensive search engine for postgrads. We use cookies to ensure the best user experience and to serve tailored advertising. The last few months have created opportunities for educators and developers of education technology to innovate. Students are learning to use digital tools to create things that would otherwise be done by hand, exploring the world virtually through maps and videos, and even inventing ways to stage group musical performances from a dozen tiny.

Ken Eastwood, assistant superintendent for curriculum, instruction, and technology, Oswego City School District, New York, and Computerworld Smithsonian laureate

• Key Questions and Indicators
• Sidebar Topics

What to Expect from This Chapter

• Suggestions for what the phases of a technology plan may involve
• Resources and ideas for evaluating technology plan implementation
• Resources and ideas to make technology plans comprehensive
• Suggestions for policy development processes

Key Questions for this Chapter

1. Are there technology policies?
2. Is there a technology plan?
3. Is the plan being implemented?
4. Is the plan being evaluated?

Overview

This chapter addresses the assessment of documented strategies that direct the acquisition, use, maintenance, and expansion of technology in the educational enterprise. These strategies are expressed in policies or as a school or district's technology plan. The overall goal of technology policies and plans is the successful integration of technology to support student learning and school management.

In content terms, technology planning and policies should address three major areas: vision, access, and integration. Vision pertains to what is expected from the technology overall. Access refers to the acquisition, deployment, and availability of technology to the target audiences. Integration of technology is the development and implementation of strategies that make technology useful and capable of accomplishing the vision. More detailed content lists are given in what follows.

In terms of process, policies represent relative end states that begin with the adoption of a technology plan. This in turn involves a series of steps, ranging from the determination of needs, the involvement of stakeholders, and the ratification of a document, to the implementation, evaluation, and revision of the plan.

Assessing plans and policies involves evaluating the content of plans and documenting the existence of policies, as well as assessing the process of plan development and implementation.

The key questions in this section, and the indicators that point to their answers, will be useful to the persons who most likely already know (or can easily find out) their answers: the school or district technology coordinator, or (in larger districts) the Chief Information Officer (CIO) or administrator functioning in the CIO role. They will also provide reporting information to these persons' superiors: superintendents and school board members. That the person closest to the information might find it useful to respond to these questions might seem paradoxical, but the purpose of responding to these questions is precisely to record the state of technology planning and implementation for the local education agency (LEA). Thus, answering these questions provides a snapshot in time, a point of reference and reporting from which comparisons can be made.

Usage Tip: If you are in the process of composing a technology plan or assessing an existing plan, you can compare it to the sample major components of a technology plan listed in Key Question 2, Is there a technology plan? See 'Term categories' for Key Question 2 for this chapter.

Defining Technology Plans and Policies

Policies are guidelines for activity, put into writing and officially decreed or accepted by the organization. In a sense, technology plans represent end points for which technology policies are a beginning and a road map.

There is perhaps no better definition of a technology plan than that described by the Regional Technology Education Consortia's (RTEC) Technology Plan Task Force: 'A technology plan serves as a bridge between traditional established standards and classroom practice. It articulates, organizes, and integrates the content and processes of education in a particular discipline with appropriate technologies. It facilitates multiple levels of policy and curriculum decision-making, especially in school districts, schools, and educational organizations that allow for supportive resource allocations.' (See Resources for reference.)

As RTEC also points out, planning in general is a continuous, organizational process that provides 'a road map.' A plan for technology can maximize the potential of technological innovations while helping to overcome the challenges of implementation. Ultimately, it should result in more efficient expenditures and improved student achievement.

Questions about planning and policies interact with the content of all of the other chapters in this handbook. For example, security policies lead to firewall applications choices, covered in Chapter 4, Technology Applications; hardware aging leads to replacement policies, covered in Chapter 5, Maintenance and Support, as well as in Chapter 3, Equipment and Infrastructure. Issues of financial resources for technology are covered in Chapter 2, Finance, and so forth.

Key Questions and Indicators

The initial key question refers to the environment that allows for a technology plan to be developed in the first place. It points to the broad policy-making efforts of a school or district, which will ultimately affect a technology plan's implementation. The remaining three questions refer to the plan itself and are very straightforward: is there a plan, what does it consist of, and how well is it being followed?

Perhaps the most critical component of planning is evaluation of the plan, addressed in Key Question 4; only through assessment is it possible to ascertain whether or not the plan is accomplishing the job its originators set out to do. Assessments may also be helpful in giving insight into what is most important in a technology plan, and it may therefore be useful to refer to this key question in composing a plan in the first place. Ultimately, evaluation will point to plan revisions and reveal the need for adaptability through periodic review cycles.

Are there technology policies?

Existing, implemented technology policies can be a background against which a technology plan is carried out, or they can be one desired end goal of the implementation of a technology plan. Examples of such policies might be acceptable use policies (AUPs) or policies related to the privacy of student data records. A school or district may also have broader policies in place that will influence a technology plan, such as business policies that could include requirements for impact analyses, financial contingencies, or security safeguards.

Policies with local impact can be adopted at any level, from the school to the district or region, or to the state as a whole. An example of district-level policy can be found at the Bellingham (WA) web site, http://www.bham.wednet.edu/policies.htm. A framework for state technology policies developed by Chris Dede can be found at http://www.neirtec.org/statepolicy/forum1/default.asp.

INDICATORS

TERM CATEGORIES

Types of technology-related policies: acceptable-use (or appropriate-use) policies (AUPs); restrictions on access to student records; technology security policies; policies regarding acceptance of commercial advertising on school web sites; policies regarding acquisition, maintenance or disposal of school equipment or applications; policies regarding acceptance of donated equipment and software; policies regarding community or after-school access to school or district technology resources.

Is there a technology plan?

As stated in the Overview to this chapter, technology plans are central to technology deployment. They can be tools of reform and guidance, and as such they can impact every aspect of technology infusion in the school or district from dialogue to professional development.

Technology plans undergo review and approval by many outside groups. Some are reviewed and approved at the state or even federal levels. The requirement for outside review imposes structure on a plan. Plans not requiring outside review can be much simpler and can depend on the initiative of local proponents, such as a superintendent, principal, or teacher technophile. However, all planning efforts can benefit from considering the components listed in this chapter. All technology plans should take into account long-range funding issues; focus on instructional and administrative enhancements and goals; identify an implementation phase; coordinate all aspects of technology integration, including professional development or staff training; and evaluate outcomes.

The first indicator deals with the pre-planning phase, which must be given careful thought in order to ensure the success of a technology plan. The stages of a pre-planning phase include a current-status assessment of technology, including equipment, skills, and use. Additionally, a current and future needs assessment provides the plan with direction and credibility. Finally, the make-up of the planning team needs to be determined, and participants identified and recruited. The members of the planning team are the ones who will bring the plan to life, including solidifying district and community 'buy-in' of the plan and finding the funds to make it happen.

INDICATORS

TERM CATEGORIES

Major plan components can include:

• review of technology status, needs assessment, and other pre-planning products
• vision/goal statements
• equity issues
• instructional uses of technology
• student technology standards
• staff technology standards
• integration into core curriculum
• pilot program and action research
• management uses of technology
• student information systems
• infrastructure and support for infrastructure, including such facilities-related needs as air conditioning/cooling and asbestos abatement
• review of current 'state of the art' for options in design of infrastructure
• capabilities of hardware and software, projections of 'next generation' capabilities and features
• acceptance and management of donated computing resources
long-range goals
• inventory control issues, such as maintenance and replacement cycle
• budget projections and funding sources for initial installation, hardware, and software
• staff training programs
• benchmarking standards
• quality control components
• security planning

There are potential components of a technology plan that can overlap with a school or district's facilities plan, such as network installation costs, including electrical wiring, maintenance and expansion. Technology planners and administrators will most likely want to decide in the pre-planning phase where to deal with facilities issues and related budgeting.

Is the plan being implemented?

Creating a technology plan and getting it approved and funded are only the beginning. Implementation has its own timeline and benchmarks, including purchasing equipment and installing, training, and evaluating each new technology introduced. The technology plan should account for each of these components, as well as implementers or teams responsible. The indicators below point to broad categories of implementation components. Technology planners will want to adapt their implementation efforts to the details of the overall plan and/or revisions to the plan.

INDICATORS

Is the plan being evaluated?

Perhaps the most important aspect of the technology plan process is evaluating its results and impact. Provisions for revising the plan should be a part of its creation, in the form of a review cycle that includes timelines and reporting. Possible components of the review cycle are listed below. If records from the pre-planning phase have been kept, the evaluation phase will be able to provide greater insight into the plan's progress and impacts. Possible means to obtain measures used to determine progress include customer feedback, plan audits, focus groups, and surveys.

It is important to remember that technology or parts of the plan that are not implemented should not be considered failures. Implementing new technology can be a daunting undertaking and flexibility is needed for any change process. For this reason, evaluation in a variety of formats is critical in objectively determining what is working and what needs more attention.

INDICATORS

TERM DEFINITIONS AND CATEGORIES

Review cycle components include accountability measures, such as identification of indicators during pre-planning to maintain records of progress; technical performance; student performance; community support; implementation benchmarks; budget analyses; utilization records; evaluation components; and progress measures.

Unit Record Structure

Many of the indicators presented in this chapter can only be measured through specific data collection efforts, with surveys conducted or questions asked by the local technology coordinator or the CIO or acting administrator. The unit record structure presented in other chapters, in which administrative data routinely collected for a variety of purposes can be converted into indicators that provide responses to key questions on the presence of technology, is not really appropriate for data on the status of technology planning.

Sidebar Topics

The story of Jane Neussup continues…

Planning and Policies

John Techno has been asked by the superintendent, Dr. Neussup, to report on last school year's expenditures for technology. The next day he shows up in her office with the most recent report on the implementation of the Freshlook County technology plan, and shows her where the financial summary tables are to be found.

Dr. Neussup thanks him, and reminds him she had also wanted him to find out how students are using technology to learn science. While he's scratching his head over this request, Dr. Neussup adds 'While you're at it, what does our technology plan say about integrating technology for all of the content areas?'

John replies, 'I am on the technology planning committee. One of the goals of the plan was to Integrate Technology Into the Core Curriculum. At the time, I wasn't sure what that meant, but after talking with you I'm beginning to have a better understanding of why that's included in the plan. I was planning to check with the science teachers; let me also do some research in the other content areas to find out how close we are to achieving this goal.'

[To be continued...]

'Evaluating the Implementation of Your Technology Plan'

Technology implementation is a continuous process that adapts to the organization's changing circumstances and includes ongoing evaluation. Effective evaluation will force planners to rethink and adapt objectives, priorities, and strategies as implementation proceeds. Continuous evaluation also facilitates making changes if aspects of the plan are not working.

Evaluating the implementation of a technology plan can be conducted by various means. Simple observations, both negative and positive, that have been made by students and teachers using the technology are the most helpful. Interviews and informal meetings with both instructors and students can draw out the lessons that both groups have learned from using the technology. A simple written survey can assist in measuring the extent to which the plan has met its original objectives and expected outcomes. The following questions may be addressed annually when planning the evaluation of the implementation of your technology plan:

• How and when will you evaluate the impact your technology plan implementation has on student performance?
• Who will be responsible for collecting ongoing data to assess the effectiveness of the plan and its implementation?
• What windows of opportunity exist for reviewing the technology plan? (For example, the plan might be reviewed during curriculum review cycles.)
• How will accountability for implementation be assessed?
• How will you assess the level of technological proficiency gained by students, teachers, and staff?
• How will you use technology to evaluate teaching and learning?
• What is the key indicator of success for each component of the plan?
• How will you analyze the effectiveness of disbursement decisions in light of implementation priorities?
• How will you analyze implementation decisions to accommodate for changes as a result of new information and technologies?
• What organizational mechanism will you create that allows changes in the implementation of the technology plan and in the plan itself?

Reprinted with permission from North Central Regional Technology in Education Consortium (ncrtec@ncrel.org).

Copyright © North Central Regional Educational Laboratory. All Rights Reserved.

Resources

Eastwood, K., Harmony, D., and Chamberlain, C. (1998). 'Integrating Technology into Instruction, How We Became One of the Best by Simply Listening.' Curriculum Technology Quarterly, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Search archives at http://www.ascd.org/readingroom/ctq/framemain.html

'Evaluating the Implementation of Your Technology Plan,' North Central Regional Technology in Education Consortium. See http://www.ncrtec.org/capacity/guidewww/eval.htm

Levinson, E., and Surratt, J. (1999). 'Five Components of an Effective Technology Plan,' abstracted from 'Taking Control of Technology Planning.' eSchool News. See http://www.eschoolnews.org/news/showStory.cfm?ArticleID=1349

Planning tools

Guiding Questions for Technology Planning, Version 1.0, Regional Technology Education Consortia (RTEC). See http://www.ncrtec.org/capacity/guidewww/basic.htm and http://www.ncrtec.org/capacity/guidewww/gqhome.htm

Learning through Technology, A Planning and Implementation Guide, North Central Regional Educational Laboratory. See http://www.ncrel.org/tandl/homepg.htm

Technology plans

'Teaching and Learning for Tomorrow: A Learning Technology Plan for Maine's Future,' State of Maine, 119th Legislature, January 2001. See http://www.state.me.us/governor/news/previous_articles/PressReleases/MLTE.pdf

Michigan Department of Education, State Technology Plan. See http://www.michigan.gov/documents/miplan2000_40662_7.pdf

In-depth resources

From Now On, the Education Technology Journal. See http://www.fno.org/fnoindex.html#Technology

National Center for Technology Planning. See http://www.nctp.com/

When you’re making predictions about technology—even education technology—a great place to start is science fiction. Authors don’t necessarily have any second sight into what’s beyond the horizon, but engineers and designers invariably end up using the work of authors as inspiration for creating the future. ¹

One of the most foundational authors in science fiction, Isaac Asimov, was also professor of biochemistry at Boston University. In a 1983 article for the Toronto Star, Asimov wrote that one of the main differences between 1983 and the world of 2019 would be near-universal “computerization.”

He writes, with uncanny accuracy: “The mobile computerized object, or robot, is already flooding into industry and will, in the course of the next generation, penetrate the home… There is bound to be resistance to the march of the computers, but barring a successful Luddite revolution, which does not seem in the cards, the march will continue.” ²

But predictions of future technology fail when they suggest that technology replaces, rather than reforms and reorients, human relationships. So, when it comes to education technology in 2019, Asimov sees some of the demographic changes—but little of the practical, human adaptation of technology for the classroom.

While “the next generation will be one of difficult transition as untrained millions find themselves helpless to do the jobs that most need doing,” he only saw classroom education as a supplement to learning online, rather than the basic keystone of the learning relationship: “A good schoolteacher can do no better than to inspire curiosity which an interested student can then satisfy at home at the console of his computer outlet.”

Massive online open courses (MOOCs) are one aspect of education technology that arguably fulfill his prediction that there will be an “opportunity finally for every youngster, and indeed, every person, to learn what he or she wants to learn, in his or her own time, at his or her own speed.” But in-person classes are still valuable, and “mobile computerized object” technology has irreversibly changed the way that instructors and students interact.

With this in mind, our technology in education 2019 predictions are less about exactly what emerging technologies will be—most of them exist already—but how they will be applied. Here are our top five education technology predictions for the coming 12 months; no time-travel required.

Learn how to make teaching fun and effective

Subscribe to Top Hat’s weekly blog recap

Technology in Education 2019: Augmented reality

Photograph: Knight Center for Journalism, CC BY 2.0

Let’s start with the most sci-fi prediction of all: augmented reality (AR). What should we look forward to in education technology for this much-hyped and buzzworthy technology that always appears to be on the point of breaking through?

Last year, the startup Magic Leap released a prototype of their mass-market AR glasses, which was received warmly if not enthusiastically.³ According to Adi Robertson of Vox, augmented reality is established in industrial and medicine contexts, but has yet to really hit wider mainstream appeal—in fact, many AR hardware companies are scaling down their plans for 2019.

Students in a learning environment for medicine and manufacturing-focused skill sets can expect to see AR being increasingly used in context for training, as a learning technology. Some examples of this are AR in use in surgery planning and practice, as described by the Harvard Business Review⁴, and Lampix, an interactive and collaborative tool that changes any flat surface into a multimedia whiteboard that can visualize data and workflow processes.⁵

However, in other fields AR is an edtech solution looking for a problem, as Top Hat CEO Mike Silagadze explains: “AR is not the disruptor it’s being made out to be. In the higher education sector, AR applications will be the next MOOCs: the initially vaunted technology expected to shake the American college system to its foundations that ended up as a quaint teaching aid for vocational training.”⁶ For our technology in education 2019 predictions, there are more important things to consider.

Technology in Education 2019: 5G

On the other hand one thing we do know is coming over the course of 2019 is the U.S.-wide rollout of 5G technology.⁷ This is great news if your campus Wi-Fi network is starting to groan under the strain of hundreds of connected phones, tablets, laptops, and now (thanks to the Internet of Things) watches, vending machines, toasters and so on.

5G, which is in the early stages of implementation, is a new mobile spectrum meant to replace 4G/LTE, and it has two aims relevant to technology in education: it will be more robust for connecting large numbers of devices, and work equally well inside and outside of buildings. It’s about 40 times as fast as the average home Wi-Fi network; in fact, as of 2019, you can now even buy home routers that use 5G instead of Wi-Fi.⁸

Some companies are looking at ways of taking fuller advantage of the speed and bandwidth to investigate new technological applications in the education sector—Verizon, for instance, has set up a 5G EdTech Challenge to “to solve for challenges including lack of student engagement, lack of teacher’s STEM expertise and the need for more immersive personalized support for students with special needs.”⁹

But for now, this increase in bandwidth and connectivity will open the door to more reliable use of existing education technology, and fewer spinning beach balls waiting for your learning management system to update.

Technology in Education 2019: Generation Z in class

While bandwidth increases, bandwidth-connected students increase too. If you haven’t already started seeing the generation after Millennials in class—Generation Z—2019 is the year they’ll start appearing in earnest.

Generation Z has been steeped in technology for their entire lives, which have only taken place within the 21st century. Why should they expect higher education to be any different? As education expert Philip Preville explains, the postsecondary post-Millennial generation’s social lives are almost entirely online; they expect to have the content they need on demand (not out of entitlement, but because that’s how it’s always been for them); and they prefer watching videos over reading text.¹⁰

As one Generation Z graduate, Christen Palange, tells The Chronicle of Higher Education, college is a place where new students can take responsibility for their technology use and put it to their advantage. Furthermore, she adds: “I don’t know of any job that my class will go into where we won’t be using a computer and have access to the internet.”¹¹

For teachers and for universities, this means a shift in technology usage to meet the new generational cohort where they are. For instance, instead of holding regular in-person office hours, an educator could make him- or herself available on instant messaging apps such as WhatsApp or Signal. And group projects could take advantage of online collaboration tools such as Google Docs or Slack—the same ones they will be using in their career. Yes, education technology can be that simple.

Technology in Education 2019: Inclusion

Technology can be either inclusive or exclusive. 2019 will be a year where increasingly large numbers of higher education institutions will have to work to meet accessibility guidelines—and to make sure that their students can reap the benefits that technology in education can bring.

Changes are already happening at simple levels. In November 2018, a Brooklyn-based man filed a lawsuit under the Americans With Disabilities Act against 50 colleges saying that their sites were not accessible to prospective students who need screen readers to navigate the web.

Policiesslcsd Educational Technology Resources Technology

Peter Blanck, professor of law at Syracuse University, spoke to Inside Higher Ed about the lawsuits. “It’s beside the point whether there are 50 or 1,000 lawsuits,” he said. “These cases are reflective of a larger systemic problem—that there is a lack of a strong commitment by many institutions to try to be as inclusive as possible.”¹²

The misfit between technology and teaching goes both ways as well—when a learner brings or asks for adaptive technologies in order to access education, his or her needs are often not being met. The EDUCAUSE Center for Analysis and Research Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology 2018 found the following:

“A plurality of students who self-identify as having a physical and/or learning disability requiring accessible or adaptive technologies for their coursework rated their institution’s awareness of their needs as poor. According to students, larger and DR [doctorate-granting] public institutions tend to have poorer awareness of disabled students’ needs than do smaller and AA [associate of arts granting] institutions.

In addition to institutional limitations, students’ fears of being stigmatized or penalized for disclosing their disabilities and engaging disability services to receive the aid they need may be contributing to low rates of awareness.”

There are consequences to this. A study by The Hechinger Report found that the majority of students with disabilities don’t get a college degree—in fact, only a third of students who enroll in a four-year course graduate within eight years.¹³ But as well as personalized education, study skill training, and using an adapted curriculum, many organizations are finding a helpful way to bridge the gap is through flipped classrooms, blended learning and ultimately, online courses.

For students whose disabilities prevent them from physically attending a full course load, a more seamless option would be to pursue or complete a degree through an established online program. But some are finding that these are being considered inferior to face-to-face courses.

In an article for Inside Higher Ed, Brittany R. Collins argues that equity through online education is a rights issue. “Is it reasonable for students whose disabilities impede campus attendance to request technological accommodations that would catalyze their remote participation in an otherwise in-person program?” she asks. “Could these alterations be framed differently—not as an institutional programmatic restructuring, but as a case-by-case option, since the technology already exists?”¹⁴

It’s likely that in 2019, employers and higher education institutions alike will be increasingly asked to offer equity between in-person and online-only courses, and adapt any online courses to be pedagogically equivalent.

Technology in Education 2019: Digital security and ransomware

A typical screen generated by WannaCry ransomware.

As education technology becomes fully realized and devices become more widespread, there are more and more ways in which data and important information can leak or be held to ransom. According to EDUCAUSE’s 2018 white paper, Why Cybersecurity Matters: and What Registrars, Enrollment Managers and Higher Education Should Do About It¹⁵, the biggest mistake an individual professor could make is to assume that digital security in education technology is solely the purview of the IT department.

The main reason that everybody who uses education technology in 2019 should be aware of security holes is the increasing threat of ransomware—because it targets individuals as a way of crippling institutions.

Ransomware is when malicious code causes you to lose access to important data and files but offers to restore them for a fee, often in Bitcoin (the transfer of which can be made untraceable). The EDUCAUSE white paper adds that 91 percent of cyberattacks started with a malicious e-mail, and that healthcare, higher education and government organizations are most at risk.

Ransomware has hit academia before. In 2016, the University of Calgary announced that they had paid a ransom of $16,000 to retrieve “critical research data” after such an attack. “We are a research institution, we are conducting world-class research daily and we don’t know what we don’t know in terms of who’s been impacted. The last thing we want to do is lose someone’s life’s work,” said Linda Dalgetty, the university’s vice-president of finance.¹⁶

The best thing that an individual can do to prevent these risks is by keeping regular backups of important work, such as research¹⁷, to avoid clicking on even-mildly suspicious e-mails, and to be scrupulous about upgrading and keeping devices clean of unknown software and hardware. (There have even been rare reports of students themselves installing malicious software through keyloggers installed on USB keys.¹⁸)

Technology in education 2019: The conclusion

Policiesslcsd Educational Technology Resources Internships

Looking back to Asimov, his collection of short stories I, Robot was among the first examples of literature that humanized and assigned personalities to robots and to technology. Barring Alexa and Siri, we’re not there yet in 2019; the only personalities affixed to our “mobile computerized robots” are our own. Responsible, relationship-based usage of the technology already in our hands is the best way we can achieve a future we can all be happy with.

References

1. Maddox, T. (2017, September 22). Tech leaders share how Star Trek inspired them to pursue a career in technology. Retrieved from https://www.techrepublic.com/article/tech-leaders-share-how-star-trek-inspired-them-to-pursue-a-career-in-technology/
2. Asimov, I. (2018, December 27). 35 years ago, Isaac Asimov was asked by the Star to predict the world of 2019. Here is what he wrote. Retrieved from https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2018/12/27/35-years-ago-isaac-asimov-was-asked-by-the-star-to-predict-the-world-of-2019-here-is-what-he-wrote.html
3. Robertson, A. (2018, August 08). I tried Magic Leap and saw a flawed glimpse of mixed reality’s amazing potential. Retrieved from https://www.theverge.com/2018/8/8/17662040/magic-leap-one-creator-edition-preview-mixed-reality-glasses-launch
4. Murthi, S. (2018, April 05). How Augmented Reality Will Make Surgery Safer. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2018/03/how-augmented-reality-will-make-surgery-safer
5. Hendrix, J. (2018, December 27). 4 Augmented and Virtual Reality Projects That Point to the Future of Education – EdSurge News. Retrieved from https://www.edsurge.com/news/2018-01-03-4-augmented-and-virtual-reality-projects-that-point-to-the-future-of-education
6. Silagadze, M. (2018, January 16). Virtual And Augmented Reality In College Classrooms: More Hype Than Help. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2018/01/16/virtual-and-augmented-reality-in-college-classrooms-more-hype-than-help/
7. Zimmerman, E. (2018, September 26). 5G Set to Open New Doors for Education Technology in Higher Ed. Retrieved from https://edtechmagazine.com/higher/article/2018/09/5g-set-open-new-doors-education-technology-higher-ed
8. Dent, S. (2019, January 04). D-Link’s latest router uses 5G for super fast home broadband. Retrieved from https://www.engadget.com/2019/01/04/d-link-dwr-2010-5g-router/
9. Verizon Innovative Learning launches first ever 5G EdTech Challenge calling for solutions to challenges in under-resourced classrooms. (2018, September 18). Retrieved from https://www.verizon.com/about/news/verizon-innovative-learning-launches-first-ever-5g-edtech-challenge-calling-solutions
10. Preville, P. (2018, October 16). How to Teach Generation Z in the Classroom. Retrieved from https://tophat.com/blog/generation-z-teach-classroom/
11. Gose, B. (2017, September 17). Gen Z Changes the Debate About Devices in the Classroom. Retrieved from https://www.chronicle.com/article/Gen-Z-Changes-the-Debate-About/241163
12. Mackenzie, L. (2018, December 10). 50 Colleges Hit With ADA Lawsuits. Retrieved from http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/12/10/fifty-colleges-sued-barrage-ada-lawsuits-over-web-accessibility
13. Mader, J., & Butrymowicz, S. (2017, November 22). The vast majority of students with disabilities don’t get a college degree. Retrieved from https://hechingerreport.org/vast-majority-students-disabilities-dont-get-college-degree//
14. Collins, B. R. (2018, August 29). Online Education Is a Disability Rights Issue. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/digital-learning/views/2018/08/29/online-education-disability-rights-issue-lets-treat-it-way-opinion
15. Why Cybersecurity Matters: and What Registrars, Enrollment Managers and Higher Education Should Do About It. [White Paper]. (October 2018). Retrieved from https://library.educause.edu/~/media/files/library/2018/10/cyberseconestop.pdf
16. University of Calgary pays ransom after attack on computer systems. (2018, May 16). Retrieved from https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/university-of-calgary-pays-ransom-after-attack-on-computer-systems/article30346543/
17. Backing Up Your Data. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.rit.edu/security/content/backing-your-data
18. Himmelsbach, V. (2018, November 15). Keylogging is the Latest Way of Cheating in College. Retrieved from https://tophat.com/blog/cheating-in-college-keyloggers-security/

Related stories

Ed tech expert Phil Hill’s technology trends in higher education predictions
Pros and cons of technology in the classroom

Related pages

Learn why Top Hat is the best learning management system