September 1997 — Features

Print this article

Click here to receive your FREE subscription to T.H.E. Journal

The Boulder Valley Internet Project: Lessons Learned

  • "Well, with the exception of things like Netscape, I pretty much understood the impact it would have on kids. But this whole concept of the World Wide Web with Netscape and the graphics now, moving beyond Lynx and gopher, that is what has been the really, really big change. It is very possible to have full motion videoconferences, to confer with other classrooms anywhere in the world. This is going to be the tough part -- how to get teachers ready for major, major change."
    •

    Relative advantage is "the degree to which an innovation is perceived as better than the idea that it supersedes."[1] Part of the relative advantage of the Internet was its growth in popularity within the district and its acceptance within the American culture as a whole. Public awareness of the Internet in the last five years has multiplied exponentially. For the past two years, the Boulder Valley Community Network has electronically linked the community with local weather reports, theaters, restaurants, the bus terminal, and other community facilities such as hospitals and social services. One project leader commented,

  • "When we started, the goal was really to see if this technology was going to be worth our time and effort or not. Then as time evolved, more and more people got interested. It almost got to the point where there was no question about whether it would be useful, just because society had already decided it was going to be useful, if nothing else, than as a research tool. There is such a hype about research. It is harder for people than to think about it as a communication tool. My vision is that we can figure out the most creative meaningful uses of technology and how it can support the changes that we are trying to make in schools."
    •

    While information about a new innovation is usually available from outside experts and scientific evaluations, teachers usually seek it from trusted friends and colleagues whose subjective opinions of a new innovation are most convincing. Since the initial cadre of trainers were chosen from peer teachers, they were able to empathize with their trainees and see things from the new usersí perspective. This resulted in a positive attitude among the potential adopters (teachers), and crucial to the project's success.

    Iterative Design of the Training Program

    A natural outcome of the "trainer of trainers" model is iterative or participatory design. Though not actually part of the Rogers model, it has been an important aspect of performance support systems for over a decade.[3] When a staff development or training program is sensitive to the needs of its typical end users, and when it takes their feedback into account when modifying tutorials, demonstrations and hands-on exploratory sessions to meet stated needs, it tends to meet with a higher degree of success than a fixed, linear-design approach.