The use of technologies is known to facilitate teaching and learning, thereby enabling students to develop 21st-century skills and knowledge necessary for entering modern workplaces (Lowther, Inan, Ross, & Strahl, 2012). Therefore, the rate of the initiation of one-to-one laptop programs has substantially increased during recent years both in the US and abroad (Hatakka, Andersson, & Gronlund, 2013). The aim of this paper is to provide a communication plan for the implementation of the program at Page Middle School. The paper will also outline possible risks associated with the project and provide a strategy for their management.
Communication Plan and Issue Resolution
Effective communication of the change initiative hinges on the proper identification of stakeholders who will be directly affected by the implementation of the program (Ding, 2015). The communication will be conducted on a two-way basis and will involve the following stakeholders: a head of the school, academic staff, IT department, and students. After analyzing the degree of influence of the project on each group of stakeholders, the involvement approach has been chosen. Head of the schools will receive an email followed by a face-to-face meeting, and academic staff and IT department will be approached during a staff meeting.
A group meeting is a channel of the change communication that will allow effectively delivering a message to students of Page Middle School. The key messages that will be delivered during the communication will be tailored to each group of stakeholders in order to resolve issues that they might have with the program. The head of the school will be convinced that the implementation of the initiative will help to substantially improve education experiences of the students. The academic staff will be informed that they will receive necessary training and resources. Table 1 shows the communication plan for the change.
Table 1. Communication plan.
Risks
During the implementation stage of the project, it is necessary to address key concerns of the stakeholders in order to reduce the risk of project failure. The negative perception of the one-to-one laptop programs poses a major threat to the successful implementation of the change (Topper & Lancaster, 2013). In order to reduce their anxieties about the computerization, it is necessary to reassure them that Page Middle School has necessary funding for teacher training. The staff will also be notified that a high level of parent involvement will help to reduce the amount of time necessary for the instructional practices. The head of the school will be reassured that the program will help to increase students’ achievement and provide them with 21st-century skills (Howard, Chan, & Caputi, 2014).
Conclusion
The communication plan outlined the key elements of the strategy for persuading the stakeholders to adopt the change that will improve the student’s academic attainment (Howard et al., 2014). Communication activities will be conducted with the help of electronic media and face-to-face meetings (Ding, 2015).
References
Ding, R. (2015). Key project management based on effective project thinking. New York, NY: Springer.
Hatakka, M., Andersson, A., & Gronlund, A. (2013). Students’ use of one to one laptops: A capability approach analysis. Information Technology & People, 26(1), 94-112.
Howard, S., Chan, A., & Caputi, P. (2014). More than beliefs: Subject areas and teachers’ integration of laptops in secondary teaching. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(2), 360-369.
Lowther, D., Inan, F., Ross, S., & Strahl, J. (2012). Do one-to-one initiatives bridge the way to 21st century knowledge and skills? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 46(1), 1-30.
Topper, A., & Lancaster, S. (2013). Common challenges and experiences of school districts that are implementing one-to-one computing initiatives. Computers in the Schools, 30(4), 346-358.
Zheng, B., Warschauer, M., Lin, C., & Chang, C. (2016). Learning in one-to-one laptop environments: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 1052-1084.