SFI Impact Report_2024

Impact Report
Authors
Victor Pereira, Harvard University
Terence Tan, edm8ker & Harvard University
Grace Kossia, Harvard University
Kenny Lam, Harvard University
Contents
Executive Summary...................................................................................................................................................................................1
About Intel® Skills for Innovation
Overview
Methods
Findings
Recommendations
Impact Report
Overview..............................................................................................................................................................................................................9
Introduction.......................................................................................................................................................................................................11
Purpose of Study.........................................................................................................................................................................................12
Methods Overview.....................................................................................................................................................................................13
Participant Profiles/Demographics.............................................................................................................................................14
Study Participants
Subjects & Grade Level Breakdown
Introduction to SFI
Access to Technology
Insights on Student Devices
Students Comfort and Engagement with Technology Outside of the Classroom
Type of Device Access
Level of Device Access
Additional Devices and Resources
Engagement with SFI
Professional Development
Starter Packs
Integration of Starter Packs
Digital Spectrum - Case Comparison
The Digital Pioneer: Mr. S's Story
A Champion is Born: Ms. K's Journey
Profile/Comparison
Results/Discussion...................................................................................................................................................................................26
Research Question 1: What is the impact of the SFI program on educators’ (1) confidence,
(2) behaviors, and (3) frequency in using technology for innovative learning?
Quantitative Insights
Qualitative Analysis
Additional Investigations
Conclusion - Teacher Impact
Intel® Skills for Innovation Report i

Contents
Results/Discussion (con’t)
Research Question 2: What is the impact of the SFI program on students’ (1) skills
development, (2) engagement of learning and (3) future-readiness?
Skills Development
Engagement of Learning
Future-readiness
Teacher Attribution
Research Question 3: How do educators feel the SFI program could be refined
and improved further?
Content Enhancement
Capacity Building
Infrastructure and Hardware
Recommendations...............................................................................................................................................................................50
Program Recommendations
Enhancing Content and Resources
Scaling SFI Across Education Systems
Enhance Professional Development Offerings
Policy Recommendations
Addressing Device Access and Infrastructure Challenges
Strengthening Teacher Professional Development
Conclusion..................................................................................................................................................................................................53
Summary......................................................................................................................................................................................................54
Future Exploration...............................................................................................................................................................................55
Appendix......................................................................................................................................................................................................56
Intel® Skills for Innovation Report ii

Executive Summary
Executive Summary
About Intel® Skills for Innovation

The Intel® Skills for Innovation (SFI) Program is a comprehensive professional development and classroom support
initiative designed to empower educators to integrate future-ready technologies and innovative teaching practices into
their instruction. The program aims to equip educators with the necessary mindsets, skill sets, and confidence to design
transformative learning experiences, powered by technology, for students. By supporting educators as agents of change,
the SFI program plays a key role in transforming education from a passive experience to an active, student-centered one
where technology elevates the learning process.
Overview
About the Impact Report Purpose
After four years of implementation, it is appropriate to This report was commissioned to help Intel better
consider the impact of the SFI program on teachers and understand the effectiveness of the SFI program in terms
students, and review the program for the next bound. In of preparing educators to integrate technology and
this spirit, Intel® engaged a team of researchers made up innovative teaching practices into their instruction, and
of faculty and alumni of the Harvard Graduate School of for promoting the development of key "future-ready"
Education to conduct a systematic review of the SFI skills in students.
program.
The report also serves as a demonstration of the impact
The SFI program was developed in response to a of SFI to Ministries and institutional customers of Intel,
growing need for digital literacy in today's classrooms. alongside internal and external stakeholders.
Digital literacy extends beyond mere proficiency in using
technology. It involves critical thinking, an understanding Finally, the findings of the report play a crucial role in
of online behavior standards, and awareness of the social shaping the evolution of the SFI program in meeting the
issues created by digital technologies. As technology needs of educators and students as they embrace a new
permeates every aspect of our lives, it is essential that our zeitgeist, driven by technology.
education systems evolve to equip students with the
skills needed to thrive in a digital society. However, this
evolution is not without its challenges.
Research Questions
This Impact Report focused on three crucial research questions that collectively serve as an evaluation of SFI from its
inception, and help to chart the way forward for the future bound of SFI.
1
What is the impact of the SFI program on educators’ confidence, behaviors, and frequency in using technology
for innovative learning?
2
What is the impact of the SFI program on students’ skills development, engagement of learning, and
future-readiness?
3
How do educators feel the SFI program could be refined and improved further?
Intel® Skills for Innovation Report 1

Methods
Methods
The Intel Skills for Innovation Impact Report utilized a mixed-methods approach to collect and analyze data, ensuring a
comprehensive understanding of the program's impact on educators and students. This combination of quantitative and
qualitative data collection methods provided robust insights into how the SFI program influenced both educators and
students.
1. Teacher and Student Surveys
Online surveys were administered to both teachers and students to collect quantitative data on perceptions of the
SFI program's impact. The surveys gathered demographic information, details about technology access and use,
level of engagement with SFI professional development, perceived impact on teaching practice and student
learning, and overall experience with the program. In addition Student Surveys collected students' perspectives on
technology skills, engagement in learning, and skill development through participation in SFI lessons.
2 . Focus Group and One-on-One Interviews

One focus group and multiple one-on-one interviews were conducted virtually aimed to gather more in-depth
qualitative feedback about teachers' experiences with specific SFI resources and professional development
opportunities.
Participants
A total of 627 educators and 167 students shared their perspective on how the Intel(R) Skills for Innovation Program
impacted teaching and learning in the classroom and enhanced experience through integrated technology. Participants
represented 45+ different countries, teaching in various subjects and at different grade bands, and illustrating a diverse
range of experiences engaging with technology.

Findings
Findings
Research Question 1
What is the impact of the SFI program on educators’ confidence, behaviors,
and frequency in using technology for innovative learning?
The Skills for Innovation (SFI) program has had a significant impact on teacher practice, as evidenced by the findings
from the mixed-methods study.
SFI Program Impact on Teaching and Learning

Impact of SFI program on educators
100%
85% 86% 86% 83%

75%
50%
25%
0
Confident Preparedness Effectiveness Frequency of tech use
in using tech in creating in tech use
tech-infused lessons
Favorable Neutral Unfavorable
1. Confidence in Using Technology

The SFI program has successfully increased educators' confidence in using technology. 85% of the respondents
agreed that the SFI program made them more confident in using technology in the classroom, indicating that the
program has effectively enhanced teachers' confidence in integrating technology into their teaching practices.
Average self-reported level of digital literacy, before and after engagement with SFI
+0.95 3.78
3
2 2.83
0
Before After
Overall, participants reported a net gain of +0.95 levels across the five levels illustrated on the next page, reflecting a
net positive gain in digital literacy before and after engagement with SFI resources. This represents 68% of
respondents reporting at least a +1 level increase in their proficiency with technology as a result of SFI.

Findings
I guide students in adopting innovative mindsets and prepare them for the challenges of the future using
Level 5 technology-infused learning experience.
Level 4 I actively encourage innovation and effectively use technology to create engaging and creative learning experiences.
I am comfortable using technology to deliver content and am now focusing on improving the wat I design and lead learning
Level 3 experiences.
Level 2 I am new to using technology in learning an am building my foundational skills.
Level 1 I have little to no exposure using technology in learning.
2 . Changes in Teaching Behaviors

86% of respondents reported that the SFI encouraged educators to adopt more innovative and technology-infused
methods and the SFI program prepared them to create technology-infused learning experiences for their students.
In addition, the program made them more effective in using technology to develop students' innovation skill sets and
mindsets.
3 . Frequency of Technology Use

86% SFI program has led to an increase in the frequency of technology use in teaching after participating in the SFI
program. This substantial increase demonstrates that the program enhances educators' confidence and changes
their behaviors by consistently applying them in their teaching practices.
Teachers’ perceptions of Starter Packs
100%
75%
77% 78%
68% 68%
50% 58%
25%
0
PD opportunities Grade- Aligned to Comprehensive Sufficient info
enable SP level appropriate curriculum to learn new tech
implementation
Favorable Neutral Unfavorable No Response
4 . Correlation between device access and confidence

Finally, there was a strong correlation between level of device access (for students) and educators’ confidence,
behaviors and frequency of technology use, suggesting that educators’ levels of engagement with technology is
driven by the availability of student devices within their classroom.

Findings
Research Question 2
What is the impact of the SFI program on students’ skills development, engagement of learning, and
future-readiness?
Impact of the SFI program on students (teachers’ perceptions)
100%
75% 84% 82% 83% 84% 82%
50%
25%
0
Helped students Increased students' SFI has helped Improved student Equipped students
gain confidence interest in STEM students solve ability to collaborate with innovation skill
subjects problems creatively and communicate sets and mindsets
effectively
The Skills for Innovation (SFI) program has made significant strides in equipping students with the skills and
confidence to engage with technology and develop future-ready skills.
1. Confidence in Using Technology

84% of teacher respondents reported that the SFI program had successfully helped students gain confidence in
using technology for learning. Students agree, with 86% declaring that they felt more comfortable using new
technologies.
2. Engagement of Learning
92% of student respondents reported that they were more engaged and interested in class activities when they used
new technology as part of the SFI program. This has spillover effects on career readiness: 82% of teacher
respondents agreed that SFI has been effective in increasing students' interest in STEM subjects and careers,
3. Skills Development & Future-Readiness

Teacher respondents agreed that the SFI program equipped students with the skills needed to thrive in the future,
such as innovation skill sets and mindsets (82%), creative problem-solving (83%), and communication skills (84%).

Findings
Research Question 3
While the program has been largely successful, educators provided valuable feedback on how it could be refined and
improved further including areas that can be improved to further enhance student learning and engagement. Based on
the findings from the mixed-methods study, the following recommendations are proposed to refine and improve the SFI
program:
• Enhance and Align Existing Content

A segment of educators suggested enhancing the existing content of the SFI program, specifically naming aligning
the content more closely with national curriculum standards, translating more Starter Packs into local languages, and
providing alternative software suggestions for those featured within Starter Packs making the program more
accessible and relevant to a wider range of educators and students. Educators acknowledged that developing
additional starter packs focused on less represented areas would offer more opportunities to integrate the SFI
program across all subjects and grade levels.
• Provide Robust Professional Development Opportunities

Many teachers expressed the need for more robust and intentional professional development opportunities
including offering more hands-on training experiences, providing localized training that explores the concepts
covered in greater depth, and developing mentoring and coaching structures to support less experienced teachers.
• Incorporate Hardware Provisioning and Support

Some educators noted the lack of resources to fully implement SFI in the classroom and how addressing issues of
device access and quality would ensure implementation of the SFI program more effectively for all students to have
the opportunity to benefit from the program. In addition, budget constraints were identified as a significant barrier to
implementing the SFI program and consideration should be given to strategic partnerships with technology
companies to provide schools with access to affordable devices, software or funding

Recommendations
Findings
Recommendations
The Intel Skills for Innovation (SFI) program has demonstrated a significant positive impact on both educators and
students, translating into significant student gains in areas such as technology skills, engagement in learning, and
perceived future-readiness.
To further enhance the program's impact and reach, the following recommendations are presented:
• Enhancing Program Content and Resources

- Leverage Generative AI for Customization: Utilize generative AI tools to personalize learning experiences for
diverse student populations.
- Expand the Scope of Starter Packs: Develop new Starter Packs for subjects currently underrepresented in the
program, such as geography, career and technical education, health, arts, and foreign languages as well as for
early learners (Kindergarten to Grade 2).
• Strengthening Teacher Professional Development

- Extend a Teacher Growth Model to complement the SFI Framework: Establish a competency framework for
digital literacy and future-ready skills, and implement a data-driven approach to professional development,
providing targeted interventions based on teacher needs.
- Align SFI with School Improvement Plans: Offer dedicated training for school leaders and administrators on
integrating SFI into their school improvement plans, and encourage mentoring and coaching structures within
the SFI network.
- Support a Vibrant Teacher Community: Further enhance the SFI platform for educators to share resources and
experiences, and incentivize participation in this online community.
• Addressing Device Access and Infrastructure Challenges

- Prioritize Device Provisioning: Invest in providing devices for schools and educators lacking resources, and
explore strategic partnerships with device manufacturers to offer subsidized access.
- Ensure Reliable Infrastructure: Assist schools in enhancing their network infrastructure, and offer ongoing
technical support to educators and schools to address any hardware or software issues.

Impact Report
Intel Skills for Innovation Report 8

Overview
Findings
Overview of the Intel Skills for Innovation Program

The Intel® Skills for Innovation (SFI) program is a professional development
and classroom support initiative aimed at helping educators integrate
technology and innovative teaching practices into their instruction.
Through hands-on workshops, ongoing coaching support, and curated
classroom resources called "Starter Packs," the SFI program equips
educators with the mindsets, skill sets, and confidence to design
transformative learning experiences for students.
The SFI program promotes the development of key "future-ready" skills in

students such as computational thinking, design thinking, collaboration,
communication and creativity. These skills are illustrated in the SFI
framework which was shared with educators during professional
development. The program objectives are to make students more
confident users of technology for learning and better prepared to solve
problems creatively using technology.
The goals of the SFI program are to develop educators' digital literacy, cultivate design thinking, collaboration, critical
thinking, and problem-solving skills in students, engage students by connecting classroom concepts to real-world
issues, and prepare students for jobs of the future by exposing them to skills like coding, data science, artificial
intelligence, and computational thinking.
Adapter Owner Catalyst Mentor Goal
Level 1: Level 2: Level 3: Level 4: Achieve

Adapter of Leader of Catalyst of Mentor of student
Technology Learning Creative Upgraded readiness for
Experiences Confidence Mindsets the 4th
Support Industrial
educators who Help educators Enable Introduce Revoution
are new to transition from educators to educators to the
technology in and Beyond.
being content reimagine upgraded
building a strong experts to learning mindsets that
foundation for becoming experiences are essential for
basic digital effective owners with technology students to
fluency through and leaders of to empower thrive in the 4th
a mix af F2F and learning students to Industrional
supervised, experience in become Revolution and
online modules. anywhere confident successfully
learning innovators. navigate
scenarios. unknowns of
tomorrow.

Overview
Findings
The SFI initiative aims to help educators adopt technology to create innovative learning experiences that engage
students and build skills needed for the future. The SFI framework provides a four-step process for planning, testing,
training, and deploying skills-based learning models across education systems. Below is the path to implementing Intel
Skills for Innovation.
By supporting educators as agents of change, the SFI program plays a key role in transforming education from a passive
experience to an active, student-centered one where technology elevates the learning process.

Introduction
Findings
Introduction
This study aims to evaluate the impact of the SFI program on educators and K-12 students. As part of the study, over 600
educators teaching a variety of subjects completed an online survey to provide feedback on their experiences with the
SFI program. The survey gathered information on educators' level of engagement with SFI professional development
opportunities, integration of SFI resources like the Starter Packs into classroom instruction, perceived impact on teaching
practice, and overall experience with the program.
Additional qualitative data was collected through focus groups and one-on-one interviews with educators who have
implemented multiple SFI lessons. The purpose of this mixed-methods research was to understand how the SFI program
influences educators' technology skills and use, as well as students' learning outcomes. Insights from this study can be
used to refine the SFI program and further support innovative, technology-infused teaching practices.
This report examines the impact of the SFI professional development program on educators and K-12 students. The SFI
program aims to develop future-ready skills in students by providing educators with training and resources to integrate
technology and design thinking into their instruction. Through a survey of SFI educators and their students, this study
sought to understand the effects of the program on educators' confidence, behaviors and technology use in the
classroom, as well as its influence on developing skills, engagement and career readiness in students. The results provide
insights into how the SFI program experience impacted both educators and learners, as well as opportunities to further
strengthen the initiative. The findings can help guide the continued evolution and impact of the SFI program on
developing a generation of innovators.

Purpose
Findings
of Study
Purpose of Study
Research Question 1
What is the impact of the SFI program on educators’ confidence, behaviors, and frequency in
using technology for innovative learning?
Research Question 2
What is the impact of the SFI program on students’ skills development, engagement of learning,
and future-readiness?
Research Question 3
This study examines the impact of the SFI program on educators and students. It investigates the impact of the SFI
program on educators' technology skills and comfort level, confidence levels in using technology for teaching, behaviors
around the use of active, project-based, collaborative learning, and frequency of technology use for innovative learning. It
also evaluates the impact on students' frequency of technology use, integration of skills like computational thinking, AI
and coding into lessons, engagement in learning, and development of skills for future-readiness. Additionally, the quality
of technology integration, perceived student engagement and skills development, educator perceptions of barriers to
adoption, and impact on teaching practices and lesson planning are assessed. Educator and student outcomes are
measured through surveys and interviews to answer the three driving research questions regarding the impact and
potential improvements to the SFI program.

Methods
Findings
Overview
Methods Overview
This study utilized a mixed-methods approach, collecting both quantitative and qualitative data to evaluate the impact of
the Intel Skills for Innovation program. The primary methods of data collection were online surveys, focus groups, and
one-on-one interviews.
Surveys
Online surveys translated in multiple languages were administered to both teachers and students to collect quantitative
data on perceptions of the impact of the SFI program. The teacher survey consisted of 22 questions gathering
demographic information, details about technology access and use, level of engagement with SFI professional
development, perceived impact on teaching practice and student learning, and overall experience with the program. The
student survey was shorter at 15 questions and was administered by teachers to gather students' perspectives on
technology skills, engagement in learning, and skill development through participation in SFI lessons. The surveys
provided valuable insights into perceived changes in behaviors, mindsets, and skills as a result of the SFI program.
Focus Groups & One-on-One Interviews
One focus group was conducted virtually with a total of 2 teachers who had implemented multiple SFI lessons in their
classrooms. The focus groups, which lasted 1.5h, aimed to gather more in-depth qualitative feedback about teachers'
experiences with specific SFI resources and professional development opportunities. Teachers shared real examples
from their teaching practice to illustrate the impact of the program. Individual interviews were also conducted with 8 other
teachers to gain a deeper understanding of personal journeys and perspectives. Each 45-minute interview followed a
semi-structured protocol to explore challenges, benefits, and potential improvements to the SFI program in more
nuanced detail.
This combination of quantitative and qualitative data collection methods through surveys, focus groups, and interviews
provided robust insights into how the SFI program influenced both educators and students.
Limitations
While the mixed-methods approach provided valuable insights into the impact of the SFI program, there are some
limitations to acknowledge. The study relied heavily on self-reported data from surveys, which is subject to potential
biases. Participants may have overestimated or underestimated with no calibrated metrics for digital literacy. They also
may have interpreted questions differently or focused more on recent experiences rather than taking a broader view.
Self-reported data cannot be independently verified and does not consider a valid comparison of respondents
competencies before and after engagement with SFI.
Additionally, using a survey tool to assess digital literacy comes with limitations. Digital literacy is a somewhat subjective
concept that can be interpreted differently by individuals. The study was not able to directly observe skills in practice or
account for the various contexts in which skills may manifest. There may have been an element of unconscious
competence whereby participants did not fully recognize the full extent of their abilities.
The qualitative data from interviews and focus groups provided valuable context, but with a small sample size there are
limitations to generalizability. The perspectives captured may not be representative of all participants.
Finally, there is the issue of self-selection bias in that those who opted to complete the survey and participate in
interviews/focus groups may differ systematically from non-respondents. This threatens the external validity and
generalizability of the findings. While the mixed-methods approach aimed to address some of these limitations, they
nevertheless constrain the ability to make definitive claims. The findings provide useful insights but should be interpreted
with caution in light of the methodological constraints.

Participant Profiles/Demographics
Findings
Study Participants
The impact report represents data from survey responses and conversations of 627 teachers and the survey data from
167 students. Participants were invited to participate directly as registered users on the Skills for Innovation platform as
well as social media outlets with an anonymous survey. Study participants range in their level of engagement consider
either participation in SFI Professional Development opportunities or using SFI Starter Packs. The participants represent
over 45 countries in elementary, middle, and high school classes teaching all the core disciplines (Math, History,
Language Arts, and Science) and a variety of other classes including technology/computer science, career and technical
education, geography, and foreign language classes.
In addition, participants represented a diverse group of technology users ranging from educators taking first steps to
implement technology in their teaching practices to educators that demonstrate high digital literacy and are innovators
and ambassadors for technology-infused teaching and learning. This includes a wide spectrum illustrated relative to
access, quality, and availability of resources to fully engage in digital-based learning. Lastly, participants varied in level of
engagement in the SFI Program.
Country Respondents
China 177
South Africa 59
Indonesia 51
USA 17
Argentina 34
Mexico 30
United Arab Emirates 31
Kenya 13
Brazil 12
Ukraine 12
Saudi Arabia 10
Zambia 10

Findings
Subject & Grade Level Breakdown
Subjects taught by participants
8% 30% Science (30%) Technology/Computer Science (19%)

4%
4%
13% Mathematics (13%) Language Arts (9%)
4%
Social Studies/History (6%) Career and Technical Education (4%)
Geography (2%) Health (2%)
19%
30% Arts (4%) Foreign Language (4%)
6% Others (8%)
Note: Percentages in graphs within this Report may not total 100 due to rounding
The majority of teachers who responded teach Science (30%) and Technology/Computer Science (19%). Other
commonly taught subjects include Mathematics (13%), and Language Arts (9%). Subjects that were less represented
included Geography (2%), Career and Technical Education (4%), Health (2%), Arts (4%), and Foreign Languages (4%).
Grade level taught by participants
Early Childhood/Kindergarten (Ages 4-6)

5%
High School (Ages 14-18) Elementary School (Ages 6-11)

40% 28%
Middle School (Ages 11-14)

25%
The majority of teachers who responded teach High School (40%). Fewer teachers reported teaching Middle School
(26%) and Elementary School (29%) and very few teaching Early Childhood/Kindergarten (5%). A potential inference for
why more teachers of higher grades participated could be that technology integration may be more established in older
grade curricula. Younger students may also have less independent access to devices for activities or the preliminary
digital skills to access the curriculum.

Findings
Introduction to SFI
When did you start using SFI?
50%
40% 43%
30%
20%
22%
10% 17%
10% 8%
0
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
A majority of educators (43%) indicated just accessing SFI resources within the last 12 months. This outlines both an
increase in engagement with SFI resources and inferred need for resources that integrate digital learning in the current
curriculum to prepare students for a digital world and access to learning.
How were you introduced to SFI?
30%
26% 26%
20%
14%
10% 11%
11%
6% 6%
0%
Professional School Educational Colleague Intel® Online Search Social
Development Administrator or Conference Website Media
Workshop System Leader
For a quarter of teacher respondents (26%), the introduction to the SFI program and the resources to support practice
and implementation is done through school and district leaders. This suggests that overall program strategy should
focus on introducing SFI to schools via school leaders and decision makers - those that have authority over curriculum,
school culture and mission, budget and resources, and expectations for teaching and learning.
A similar proportion of teachers learn about SFI through direct and indirect professional development. This highlights
that there is demand from teachers seeking professional development to improve their teaching practice through
integration of technology and SFI resources. It also highlights the value of professional learning in supporting teachers to
integrate technology in their teaching practice. The study data does not differentiate how Professional Development was
introduced to teachers - either through school leaders or teachers seeking individual professional development.

Findings
Access to Technology
Access to technology emerged as an important Insights on Student Devices
determinant that impacted implementation of SFI
resources in the classroom. The category of technology While personal laptops remain the dominant student
includes both access and quality of devices/hardware device currently, smartphones and Chromebooks show
and internet/mobile networks as well as preliminary rising use. At the same time, both teacher and student
digital teaching and learning competencies impacting respondents noted limitations in using smartphones for
the comfort, confidence and understanding of classroom activities, especially in comparison with
implementing digital learning tools in the curriculum. devices with larger screens like laptops and tablets. In
addition, some participants said there were school
The most commonly used devices for classroom policies that prohibit the use of smartphones in school.
activities reported by teachers are personal computers
& laptops, smart phones, and iPads/tablets. 69% of In contrast, the rising trend of Chromebooks, coupled
teachers stated that personal computers & laptops were with their lower cost and the adoption of mobile
used by students, while 36% of teachers reported the Chromebook carts could be an opportunity to scale a
use of smartphones for classroom activities, and 34% digital integration initiative for schools with limited
reported the use of iPads/tablets. This information was budgets. The opportunity to couple specific resources
confirmed by student respondents - 59% reported that with targeted devices depending on a school's
personal computers & laptops were the most commonly readiness to adopt would prove to be an important
used devices in school. Smartphones were represented strategy to scale the SFI initiative.
at a much higher rate (55%) for student respondents
compared to teacher respondents, followed by Finally, iPads/tablets and VR are emerging but have not
iPads/tablets (19%). The discrepancy between teacher overtaken traditional form factors as of this data. With
and student perspective on smart phones might be due just 2% of teachers citing the use of VR headsets in the
to smartphone policies and the interpretation of ‘using’ classroom, adoption of VR is still low. VR is still an
versus ‘allowed to use’. emerging technology and may not be widely available or
suitable for many classroom settings.
While Chromebooks fill a similar role as laptops, they are
less prevalent in the classroom. Only 11% of teachers In summary, the diverse range of devices and digital tools
reported that their students used Chromebooks, while named by respondents highlighted their varied digital
the corresponding figure for student respondents was literacy levels and experiences, in turn influenced by
6%. their access to resources. This spectrum of devices
foreshadowed key findings revisited throughout the
VR headsets had the lowest reported usage (2%) in the study:
classroom, while the "Other" category accounted for 7%
of teacher responses. Teacher respondents cited other 1. The availability and quality of devices pose
devices that are used for learning such as projectors, significant barriers to digital learning
smartboards, or interactive displays . Students, on the implementation in classrooms,
other hand, cited desktop computers (likely in computer 2. Access to the internet or mobile networks is crucial
labs), audio/visual equipment like projectors and sound for enhancing digital literacy, and
systems, and specialized devices like 3D printers and 3. Disparities in the availability of devices among
microscopes. students often create gaps between teaching digital
skills and providing hands-on technology practice
opportunities.

Findings
Students Comfort and Engagement with Type of Device Access

Technology Outside of the Classroom
The majority of students (60%) reported using a The data indicates that the majority (65%) of students
personal computer or laptop outside of school as well, access fixed devices in a classroom, lab, or other venue
continuing their dominance in student device usage. where devices are not brought out of the room. This
Expectedly, significantly more students (79%) use a suggests most activities requiring digital devices occur
smartphone outside versus inside school (55%). This on shared equipment located within a specific classroom
suggests smartphones play an even greater role in or lab space. The second most common access type is
students' lives when not in educational settings. that students are assigned individual devices which they
iPad/tablet use saw a slight increase outside of school can take home (24%). This allows for more flexible
(24% vs 19%). Their portability makes them well-suited access beyond the classroom and potential continuation
for flexible usage. VR use also saw a small increase - as of classroom activities at home. Relatively few students
the technology becomes more accessible, interest may (11%) access devices on a cart. Device carts allow for
grow beyond schools. Chromebook use decreased shared devices to be moved between classrooms but
outside school (9% to 6%) - their education focus may present logistical challenges of scheduling and
limit broader personal adoption. Common "other" transporting the carts. It seems as if most classroom
devices included gaming consoles (PlayStation, Xbox, activities requiring digital devices currently take place on
etc.), eReaders (Kindle), and music players (iPods). In shared, fixed equipment located within classrooms/labs.
summary, while laptops remain the top device, A smaller portion of students have individual, take-home
smartphones see greatly increased use outside school. devices assigned. Device carts providing shared, mobile
Tablets also rise, suggesting their value for flexible access are utilized the least based on this data.
personal and educational use. VR and Chromebooks
show less adoption beyond classrooms currently.

Findings
Level of Device Access While processing power seems sufficient, availability of

devices and variety may need to be expanded to fully
The data indicates that for the majority of students realize the goals of promoting future-ready, innovative
(69%), devices for classroom activities are either always skill sets. Addressing reliability concerns could also help
(34%) or somewhat available (35%), requiring some students focus on learning without disruption. The
planning but generally accessible. This suggests a capabilities seem in place but resources may need to
reasonably high level of reliable access to digital grow to consistently facilitate the innovative activities
resources. The second most common experience is that envisioned
devices are usually available, but there may be
occasional waits or limits during peak times (25%). This
level of access is still fairly reliable with only minor Additional Devices and Resources
constraints. Relatively few students reported devices The most requested additional device was higher
being seldom available (7%) - the lowest level of access performance laptops, with 26% of respondents selecting
where digital resources are rarely or inconsistently this option. This suggests that educators recognize
accessible. Overall, this data indicates a high level of that laptops are a core device for classroom
availability of digital devices across student experiences activities, but students’ existing devices may be lacking
based on this sample. For most students, devices seem in capabilities to fully enable innovative learning.
to be fairly available to support classroom activities when
needed, with only limited constraints. Despite Higher performance PCs (19%) and 3D
occasional waits or the need for some judicious planning printers/makerspace equipment (19%) were also
ahead, students’ access to devices is generally reliable. popular requests. This indicates a need for more
powerful general-use and specialized devices to power
creative workloads, and could be influenced by both an
Features of Existing Devices that engagement with SFI resources and the barriers to full
Enable Innovative Learning Activities implementation of selected Starter Packs.
100% VR/AR headsets were selected by 17% as another

valuable emerging technology that could cultivate
75%
innovative skills when more widely available. This
69% 65%
50%
63% 64%
represents a potential market develop educational tools
that leverage students' engagement with VR/AR
25%
technology.
0
Sufficient Devices Variety of Reliabity and
Processing Power Available Devices Durability A notable 20% of teacher respondents selected "Other",
with specific/branded tools, immersive technology,
projectors/smartboard, iPads, and the Internet cited as
the most common examples of devices that should be
69% of teacher respondents felt that their students’ upgraded. Within this category, many also mentioned a
devices had sufficient processing power and desire to raise device budgets and quantities,
memory to handle innovative learning activities. This presumably addressing access as well as quality of
indicates the devices have the technical capabilities to devices.
support skills like problem-solving and creativity.
In summary, the top priorities appear to be more powerful
However, fewer (65%) felt that there were sufficient general-use laptops and PCs to drive innovative
devices to facilitate innovative activities. This suggests activities, along with specialized equipment like 3D
device availability may sometimes limit the types of printers and VR/AR tools. For many teachers, their
activities that can be done. students’ current devices may be insufficient to fully
realize the goals of the SFI program. Investing in a refresh
A similar pattern is seen in terms of device variety - a or expansion of these device categories could better
majority (63%) felt that students had sufficient variety of empower educators to develop future-ready skill sets in
devices to explore different approaches, but some felt students.
that variety was lacking, suggesting that greater variety
could further innovation.
Reliability and durability also received favorable

ratings overall (64%) but with more neutral responses
(21%) than other categories. Technical disruptions could
impede a focus on learning innovative skills.

Findings
Engagement with SFI

In summary, while in-person workshops seem
Professional Development well-utilized, barriers like scheduling may prevent some
from attending. However, SFI PD appears to be
Engagement in SFI In-person Professional Development successful in transferring knowledge that most educators
NA Always
consistently apply in innovative ways in their teaching.
5% 22% Opportunities for both synchronous and asynchronous
learning hold promise and should be explored further.
Never
8%
Rarely
Starter Packs
11%
Starter Packs Implemented
Often
Sometimes 23%
31% 20+ 10-19
2% 5%
45% of respondents indicate they either always or often 0
attend in-person workshops when available. This 45%

suggests in-person workshops are well-attended when
offered. However, a significant portion (31%) only attend
1-9
sometimes, with 19% saying they rarely or never attend. 49%
This indicates opportunities for in-person learning may
not be accessible or feasible for all educators. Further
exploration would be useful to investigate how PD aligns
with budget, curriculum, and current technology A total of 1734 SFI Starter Packs were implemented
available. across 627 respondents, averaging 2.8 Starter Packs
implemented per educator. The total number of Starter
Actively Apply Information Gained from SFI PD Packs implemented shows meaningful adoption of, and
engagement with. these resources among educators.
NA Always
5.3% 22.0%
This level of implementation suggests the Starter Packs
are providing valuable guidance and activities. That the
Never majority (78%) of respondents reported implementing 3
8.3% or fewer starter packs indicates that most are at a
relatively early stage of integrating multiple Starter Pack
Rarely
themes and lessons into their teaching practice.
10.5%
Often
The table below illustrates a significant finding and
Sometimes 23.0%
correlation between respondents' use of SFI resources
30.9%
(Starter Packs used in the classroom) and their
self-reported role in using technology for learning. There
is a positive and direct proportion that showcases
When it comes to actively applying information from SFI
increased digital competency in teaching practice with
PD, an even higher proportion (60%) say they always or
the increased number of Starter Packs used.
often do so. This positive response communicates that
SFI PD is generally effective at imparting guidance to
educators which then translates to classroom practice. Starter Packs Self-reporting Increase
Very few (10%) report rarely or never applying what they Implemented in Digital Proficiency (avg)
learn, showing PD is largely having its intended impact.
The responses suggest educators value SFI learning 0 0.62
opportunities and are motivated to integrate new
strategies when possible. It is clear that the SFI PD is 1 0.91
highly effective and can be leveraged to support teachers
implementation of digital learning in the classroom. 2 1.04
3 1.07
4+ 1.17

Findings
Integration of Starter Packs
Teachers’ perceptions of Starter Packs The majority (68%) of participants agreed that
the Starter Packs were grade-level appropriate,
100% while only 5% disagreed. This shows most
participants felt the starter packs were
75%
78%
appropriate for their grade level.
77%
68% 68%
50% 58% While the majority (58%) agreed that the Starter
Packs were aligned with their existing
curriculum, a significant proportion (36%) of
25% respondents were neutral or expressed
unfavorable responses. This suggests there was
0 greater variability in how well participants felt the
PD SP were SP were SP were SP provide
opportunities grade-level aligned comprehensive sufficient
starter packs aligned with their individual
enable SP approriate information curricula, and also highlights potential barriers
implementation educators are confronted with relative to required
Favorable Neutral Unfavorable No Response or prescribed curriculum.
The majority (68%) agreed that the Starter Packs were comprehensive and user-friendly for teaching, making them
easy to integrate into their existing curriculum, while only 6% disagreed or strongly disagreed. The majority (78%) also
agreed that the Starter Packs provided sufficient information and guidance, while only 3% disagreed or strongly
disagreed. On the whole, responses were more favorable towards statements about PD enablement, grade
appropriateness, comprehensiveness and guidance. There was less agreement about alignment to individual curricula.
When we drilled deeper into the variables Proportion of respondents who reported “Favorable” to
influencing Starter Pack integration, we found a questions on SP integration, broken down by device access
strong correlation between the ease of Starter
Pack integration and device access. Teachers 100%
experiencing higher levels of device access
with their students were more likely to report 80%
that the PD opportunities equipped them with
the skills required to implement the Starter 60%
Packs. They were also more likely to agree that the
Starter Packs were grade-level appropriate, 40%
aligned with curriculum, were comprehensive/
user friendly, and provided sufficient information 20%
and guidance for learning new skills and
technology. This suggests that the level of student 0
device access may influence teachers’ PD SP were SP were SP were SP provide
opportunities grade-level aligned comprehensive sufficient
interpretation of the Starter Packs. Alternatively, enable SP approriate information
teachers in schools with higher levels of student implementation
device access could also have benefited from
Always Availaible Usually Availaible Somewhat Availaible Seldom Availaible
more in-depth professional development in the
use of technology in the classroom, enabling them
to more easily integrate the Starter Packs into their
classroom.
In summary, these figures demonstrate that SFI Starter Packs are achieving initial integration into classrooms as
intended, with most educators applying lessons from an average of three Starter Packs to cultivate innovative skills in
their students. The resources appear well-aligned to support the program's goals. This illustrates successful uptake of the
Starter Packs as a crucial component of the SFI program, and highlights an opportunity to continually support teachers
in Starter Pack implementation, yielding an increased and more consistent utilization of SFI resources.

Findings
Digital Spectrum - Case Comparison

Survey participants come from over 45 countries around the world, with differing levels of access to technology and
digital infrastructure. Unsurprisingly, this influences their approaches to integrating technology. This section serves to
illustrate the diverse experience participants in the study have had with integrating technology into their teaching
practice and how it has impacted student learning. The case method approach examines qualitative data to synthesize
insights that both profiles have in common and to highlight the differences and various factors that influence their
experiences.
Landline Internet subscriptions, 2022

Subscriptions to fixed access to the public Internet with a download speed of at least 256 kbit/s.
No data 0 300,000 1 million 3 million 10 million 30 million 100 million 300 million 1 billion
Data source: Multiple sources compiled by World Bank (2024) OurWorldInData.org/internet | CC BY

Findings
The Digital Pioneer: Mr. S's Story
Mr. S has always had a passion for technology, even though access has been limited in the rural
community where he teaches middle school science and math. With only 200 iPads shared among
hundreds of students at his school, resources are scarce. However, Mr. S is determined to give his
students opportunities to learn with technology.
When he first learned about the SFI program, Mr. S jumped at the chance to expand his skills.
Through online courses and tutorials, he taught himself how to navigate educational websites and
use their interactive tools in his lessons. It was a challenge at first, but Mr. S's curiosity and
perseverance paid off. He gained confidence presenting virtual experiments and simulations to
bring abstract concepts to life for his students.
Each day, Mr. S packs up the iPads and leads his classes to the computer lab, transforming it into his
digital classroom. Students who had never used computers before now collaborate to solve
problems together online. Mr. S loves seeing the lightbulb moments when concepts finally click
through interactive games like Kahoot. The competition and real-time feedback keep students
engaged and motivated to learn.
Word of Mr. S's innovative teaching methods has spread among the staff. He is often found
mentoring less experienced colleagues, helping them find new ways to integrate technology into
their lessons as well. Mr. S's vision is for every student to gain vital digital skills for the future, but the
school's limited resources present challenges. He dreams of a day when they have enough devices
for coding lessons and advanced programs.
I'm taking them very far. In fact, I'm one of the few teachers that
have those skills.
Through it all, Mr. S remains passionate about continuous learning. The SFI program lit a spark that
keeps him striving to bring out the best in his students, despite infrastructure barriers. He has truly
become a pioneer blazing the digital path forward for his entire community.

Findings
A Champion is Born: Ms. K's Journey
For many years, Ms. K was content relying on traditional textbooks and worksheets in her middle
school English classroom. But when she learned about the SFI program from a colleague, something
clicked. Here was an opportunity to expand her skills and try new approaches with the technology
readily available at her international school.
From the start, SFI opened Ms. K's eyes to a whole world of possibilities. She immersed herself in
online courses, tutorials and lesson ideas. Soon, multimedia projects and flipped lessons became
the norm. Students now collaborate virtually on Padlet boards and take interactive quizzes using
tools like Edpuzzle. Data from online assessments also gives Ms. K deeper insights into individual
progress.
The transition has been seamless for Ms. K's students, who each have a personal laptop or tablet at
their disposal. They are highly engaged through choice, collaboration and immediate feedback.
Seeing the positive results, Ms. K's colleagues now look to her as a leader in educational technology
integration. She is eager to share her knowledge through school-wide professional development.
It just makes my lesson planning much easier...it just guides the lesson and
helps the lesson flow better.
They really had fun...it kind of opened their eyes to...different types of
advertising.
I want them to think more globally and think more outside themselves.
Ms. K remains passionate about continuous learning herself. She aims to further customize
instruction based on student needs and interests. Her goal is to empower each learner as a creator
using technology. Thanks to SFI opening her mind to possibilities, Ms. K now feels fully equipped to
teach students for the digital future. She has truly become a champion for innovative practices in her
school.

Findings
Profile/Comparison
Through their journeys, Mr. S and Ms. K demonstrate how the right resources and ongoing support can cultivate true
advocates for technology in learning. Their stories also show how context shapes implementation - but with vision and
determination, great strides are possible.
Mr. S and Ms. K are both passionate about bringing technology into their classrooms to enhance teaching and learning.
However, their experiences with and access to digital tools differ in important ways due to the contexts in which they
teach. This profile examines the factors that have shaped their technology use and abilities to become advocates for
digital literacy in their own rights. It also considers how a program like SFI can better support educators at varying levels
of engagement.
Mr. S teaches middle school science and math in a rural community in Nigeria. Technology access is limited—the school
shares a set of 200 iPads among hundreds of students. While the government aims to promote digital skills,
infrastructure and support are lacking. However, Mr. S's curiosity and initiative have made him a leader in his school's
efforts. He regularly takes students to the computer lab and uses online resources to bring concepts to life. Through trial
and error, he has gained confidence navigating sites and troubleshooting issues.
Students initially struggled but now collaborate to solve problems. They compete using Kahoot and other games to
reinforce lessons. Mr. S also mentors less experienced colleagues. While passionate about learnin g, he recognizes the
need for sustained support as technologies evolve. His vision is for every student to advance digitally but needs more
devices and training to integrate subjects like coding.
In contrast, Ms. K teaches middle school English at a private international school in Lindale, Georgia, USA. Each of her 30
students has a personal laptop or tablet. High-speed WiFi is ubiquitous. However, until recently, Ms. K relied mainly on
textbooks. Participating in SFI expanded her toolkit and confidence. She now designs multimedia projects, offers flipped
lessons, and assesses virtually. Students are highly engaged through choice and collaboration using tools like Padlet
and Edpuzzle.
Ms. K sees room for growth in areas like learning analytics and adaptive learning. She aims to individualize instruction
further and empower students as creators. Colleagues already look to her for ideas, but she wants school-wide
professional development on advanced uses of technology. Overall, Ms. K feels digitally literate and future-focused in her
approach thanks to SFI's influence.
Both educators have become champions for technology in learning. However, their experiences illustrate how access,
infrastructure, and ongoing support shape the realities of implementation. For SFI and similar programs to truly leverage
passionate advocates at different stages, resources and training must differentiate based on teachers' starting points
and environments. Follow-up communities of practice could sustain momentum beyond initial certification. With tailored
guidance and examples, even the most limited contexts may blossom with teacher leaders paving the way for digital
transformation.

SFI Impact
Findings
on Educators
Results/Discussion
The Skills for Innovation (SFI) program aims to enhance educators' capabilities in integrating technology into their
teaching practices. By analyzing quantitative survey data, qualitative insights from focus groups, detailed interviews, and
additional qualitative responses from the teacher survey, we can comprehensively understand the program's impact on
educators' confidence, behaviors, and frequency of technology use in classrooms.
Research Question 1
What is the impact of the SFI program on educators’ (1) confidence, (2)
behaviors, and (3) frequency in using technology for innovative learning?
Impact on Teaching Practice
Impact of SFI program on educators
100%
85% 86% 86% 83%

75%
50%
25%
0
Confident Preparedness Effectiveness Frequency of tech use
in using tech in creating in tech use
tech-infused lessons
1
Confidence* in Using Technology: The majority of educators (85%) felt that the SFI program significantly
increased their confidence in using technology in the classroom.
*Confidence in this context refers to the self-assurance teachers feel when incorporating technological tools and methods into their teaching.
2
Preparedness to Create Technology-Infused Learning Experiences: A substantial proportion of respondents
(86%) agreed that the SFI program prepared them well to create technology-infused learnig experiences for their
students.
3
Effectiveness in Using Technology to Develop Students' Innovation Skill Sets and Mindsets: Educators largely
agreed (86%) that the SFI program made them more effective in using technology to cultivate students'
innovation skills and mindsets.
4
Frequency of Technology Use in Teaching: The program also led to a higher frequency of technology use in
teaching, with 83% of participants indicating an increase.The program also led to a higher frequency of
technology use in teaching, with 83% of participants indicating an increase.

SFI Impact
Findings
on Educators
This data underscores the significant positive impact of the SFI program on educators' confidence, preparedness,
effectiveness, and frequency of technology use in the classroom. The overwhelming majority of responses were
favorable, highlighting the success of the program in enhancing teachers' capabilities and integrating technology into
their teaching practices. Overall, this data demonstrates that through its various components like Starter Packs and
professional development, the SFI program has successfully boosted educators' technology abilities and integration. It
has empowered them to cultivate future-ready skills in students through innovative uses of tech in the classroom. The
goals of the program appear to be well-achieved based on these self-assessment results.
Overall Sentiments on SFI
Overall experience with the SFI Program
100%
89% 91% 91% 88%

75%
50%
25%
0
SFI program has positively Would recommend the SFI Excited to continue to deepen Ready to upgrade our technology
impacted my approach to program to other educators. engagement with the SFI to take on more sophisticated
teaching and lesson planning. program. technology-based activities.
The majority of respondents agreed that overall participation with the SFI program was a largely positive experience that
has influenced their teaching approach, their propensity to recommend the program, their enthusiasm for continued
engagement, and their readiness to adopt advanced technology in the classroom.
1
Overall Impact on Teaching and Lesson Planning: The majority of educators (89%) felt that participating in the
SFI program positively impacted their approach to teaching and lesson planning.
2
Recommendation to Other Educators: A significant majority of educators (91%) would recommend the SFI
program to other educators.
3
Excitement to Deepen Engagement: Most educators (91%) expressed excitement about continuing their
engagement with the SFI program and technology-based teaching.
4
Readiness to Upgrade Technology: A large portion of educators (88%) felt ready to upgrade their technology to
support more sophisticated technology-based activities
These responses highlight the overall positive experience educators have had with the SFI program, emphasizing its
impact on teaching practices, willingness to recommend it to peers, enthusiasm for ongoing engagement, and readiness
for technological advancements. The results clearly illustrate that through its approach, resources and impacts
observed, the SFI program has delivered a successful experience that has transformed educators' practices and
passions. It has created advocates eager to deepen involvement and take on more complex technological teaching. The
program appears to exceed expectations based on these feedback results.

SFI Impact
Findings
on Educators
Progression in Using Technology to Create Effective Learning Experiences

This section examines how teachers have progressed in their use of technology to create effective learning experiences
for their students. The survey explored various aspects of technology integration, from initial adoption to advanced
usage, and captured educators' perceptions of their growth and development in this area. The responses provide
insights into the ways in which the SFI program has supported teachers in enhancing their instructional practices
through technology.
Survey Statements
Teachers were asked to select the statement that best describes their role in using technology for learning BEFORE and
AFTER participating in the SFI program. Five statements were provided, each corresponding to the levels of progression
below:
Mentor of Upgraded Mindsets: I guide students in adopting innovative mindsets and prepare them for the challenges of the
Level 5 future using technology-infused learning experience.
Catalyst of Creative Confidence: I actively encourage innovation and effectively use technology to create engaging and
Level 4 creative learning experiences.
Leader of Learning Experiences: I am comfortable using technology to deliver content and am now focusing on improving
Level 3 the way I design and lead learning experiences.
Level 2 Adapter of Technology: I am new to using technology in learning an am building my foundation skills.
Level 1 Novice of Technology: I have little to no exposure uisng technology in learning.

SFI Impact
Findings
on Educators
Distribution of Responses
Difference in reported roles of using technology for learning, before and after using SFI
30%
20% +26%
10% +11%
0%
-11% -11%
-10% -15%
-20%
Novice of Adapter of Leader of Learning Catalyst of Creative Mentor of
Technology Technology Experiences Confidence Upgraded Mindsets
Before 14% 21% 39% 19% 7%
After 3% 10% 24% 30% 33%
Progression Summary: Out of 627 teachers, 596 (95%) retained or increased the level of their role in using
technology to create effective learning experiences. The average progression in levels was +0.95.
Analysis of the Shift in Roles
The data reveals a notable increase in the percentages of teachers at the "Catalyst of Creative Confidence” and "Mentor of
Upgraded Mindsets" levels after participating in the SFI program. This increase is a positive indication of the program's success
in advancing teachers' proficiency and confidence in using technology. Specifically:
- Catalyst of Creative Confidence: The increase of 11 percentage points indicates that more teachers are now actively
encouraging innovation and using technology to create engaging and creative learning experiences.
- Mentor of Upgraded Mindsets: The increase of 26 percentage points highlights a remarkable shift, with many teachers
now guiding students in adopting innovative mindsets and preparing them for future challenges through
technology-infused learning experiences.
Correspondingly, there is a substantial decrease in the percentages of teachers at the lower levels:
- Novice of Technology: The decrease of 11 percentage points signifies that many teachers who initially had little to no
exposure to technology have successfully moved beyond the novice stage.
- Adapter of Technology: The decrease of 11 percentage points suggests that a significant number of teachers have
progressed from building foundational skills to becoming more adept at using technology.

SFI Impact
Findings
on Educators
Qualitative Analysis
In addition to the quantitative data, detailed qualitative insights were gathered from open-ended survey responses,
individual interviews, and focus groups with educators who participated in the SFI program. These insights provided a
deeper understanding of the program's impact on educators' confidence, teaching behaviors, and frequency of
technology use in classrooms, as well as their students' learning experiences. This section highlights the significant
benefits reported by educators, drawing on their personal experiences and reflections to paint a comprehensive picture
of the program's influence on teaching practices and professional development.
Significant Benefits from the SFI Program

Based on open-ended responses to the prompt, "What was the most significant benefit you gained from participating in
the SFI program?", the SFI program has significantly enhanced teaching and professional development for educators.
Teachers reported increased confidence in using technology, creating more dynamic and interactive lessons, fostering
critical thinking, and encouraging collaboration among students. The program has also provided valuable resources,
innovative teaching methods, and professional development opportunities, preparing students for future challenges.
The chart below categorizes the responses into six key domains highlighting the most impactful aspects of the program.
Of note, the Professional Development domain accounted for the highest proportion (27%) of responses,
underscoring its critical role in enhancing educators' skills and knowledge.
Significant Benefits of Engaging with the SFI Program
General Development 15.3%

Tech Integration
Improved Teaching Approaches
General Tech Use
Workshops & Training 5.9%
Exposure to New Tech
Improved Tech Skills
Curriculum Resources
General Resources
Collaboration & Networking 3.4%
Increased Confidence
General Discovery
Innovative Thinking
General Confidence 2.1%
Increased Interest & Motivation
Engaging Methods
New Ideas
Innovative Mindsets
General Engagement
Improved Learning Outcomes
New Experiences
Collaborative Learning
Increased Student Confidence
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Professional Development (27%) Student Engagement (4%)
Innovation & Discovery (7%) Teaching Methods (24%)
Resources (8%) Technology Skills & Tools (19%)

SFI Impact
Findings
on Educators
Elevating the Voices of Educators
Educators shared specific examples of how the SFI program has benefited their teaching practices and professional
development. These standout quotes illustrate the diverse advantages across several key areas:
Quote How did SFI support educators?
Technology Skills & Tools (19%):
"Thanks to Intel SFI, I was able to utilize technologies to Highlights how the program enabled educators to fully
the fullest extent in my classroom. Teaching and utilizing leverage technology, making their teaching more
technologies are the most effective ways of conveying effective.
information to students."
"I learned new possibilities of teaching English using Educators found innovative ways to teach subjects,
different technology tools and my students could learn enhancing students' learning experiences.
more the English language while using the technological
tools in class."
"Use of new digital tools for my classes. Now I can make The introduction of digital tools made lessons more
my classes more dynamic and interesting for the engaging and interactive.
students."
Resources (8%)
"SFI program gave me a spectacular opportunity to think The program encouraged innovative thinking among
out of the box." educators.
"Learning new ways to deepen the heartset, mindset, It promoted holistic development in teaching strategies.
and skillset."
"Enhanced students’ awareness of innovative thinking." Students became more aware of innovative approaches.
Teaching Methods (24%)
"It broadens the horizons of technology integration in the The program expanded the scope of technology use in
classrooms." classrooms.
"Ways to take SFI and STEM cross-curricular in Cross-curricular integration of technology and STEM
meaningful, engaging ways. The way students use subjects made learning more relevant and engaging.
collaboration to take ownership of the lesson while
learning and creating on different types of technology
(hardware/software) that will enhance their
opportunities in the real world."
"Making my teaching more interesting for the students Teaching methods became more interesting and
and more meaningful." meaningful for students.
"The SFI Program saved me time and effort in The program provided ready-to-use materials, saving
developing materials from scratch, and my students time and increasing student engagement.
were more engaged and participative [in] implementing
tech-based scenarios."

SFI Impact
Findings
on Educators
Quote How did SFI support educators?
Professional Development (27%)
"The most significant benefit I gained from participating The program enriched teachers' approaches to
in the SFI program was expanding my toolkit for student-centered learning.
student-centered learning approaches. Through
innovative teaching methods introduced in SFI, I learned
to structure lessons around challenging projects, group
work, and discovery-based learning. These techniques
foster critical thinking skills and encourage peer-to-peer
learning. Participating in SFI helped me successfully
apply student-centered strategies to engage every
learner. I am now a more thoughtful and adaptive teacher,
able to spark curiosity and promote deeper mastery of
materials."
"SFI provided opportunity to develop valuable The program fostered important professional skills
professional skills, such as research, communication, through practical experience and mentorship.
teamwork, and problem-solving, through hands-on
experience and mentorship."
Student Engagement (4%)
"Learning has become more engaging." Teachers observed increased student engagement.
Active participation of students." Students participated more actively in lessons.
"My students become more motivated to learn and The program boosted students' motivation and
generate more self-esteem to create and share content." self-esteem.

SFI Impact
Findings
on Educators
Interviews Insights
Extended interviews with individual educators provided further insight into the impact of the SFI program on teaching
and learning processes. A summary of
Educator A
Impact on Teaching Impact on Learning Improvements to SFI

Educator A gained significant Students' digital literacy has improved, enabling Educator A did not have specific suggestions for
confidence in using technology for them to independently navigate websites, improvement, expressing satisfaction with the
teaching after participating in the SFI participate in online quizzes, and use program's resources and a desire for continuous
program. They now incorporate devices presentation software and Excel. The learning. They remarked, "I have no comment.
like iPads and utilize online resources competitive and collaborative elements of online And yeah, I don't know what to improve because
extensively, such as projecting activities have made learning highly engaging I find everything so exciting.
experiments and using online quizzes to and have prepared students for future digital
engage students. This transformation environments. Educator A noted, "They can be
has made them one of the more able to use the computer and prepare a
advanced teachers in their school presentation using it.”
regarding technology use. They also
support other teachers in integrating
technology into their classes.
Educator B

Educator B's confidence and The program equipped students with essential Educator B suggested improving accessibility to
proficiency in using technology research skills and tech proficiency, preparing devices and internet connectivity, as these were
improved significantly through the SFI them for higher education. Educator B significant barriers for some students. They also
program. They transitioned from highlighted that their students' performance emphasized the need for ongoing support and
traditional lecture-style teaching to improved, with many achieving distinctions, training for both educators and students.
interactive, task-based methods, partly due to their enhanced engagement and
making their lessons more engaging. familiarity with modern gadgets. They
Educator B shared, "Before they mentioned, "The program prepared our
introduced this program, I was an students to do better at university.”
average user. Now, after, I'm at another
level.”
Educator C

Educator C's technology skills and Students' abilities to use online platforms and Educator C suggested more teacher training
confidence improved through SFI tools have increased, fostering independence in programs focused on technology integration
training. They now create interactive learning. The integration of technology has and improving internet connectivity and
slides with video, audio, and made learning more engaging and has helped hardware access. They also recommended
assessment clips to engage students students develop digital content, preparing developing offline tools to mitigate connectivity
and frequently incorporate tools like them for future challenges. Educator C aims for issues.
Google Translate and Doctrainer into students to "go the extra mile and be part of the
their teaching. Educator C stated, developers."
"Technology enables them to share
their views without fear or limits."
Educator D

Educator D's confidence in using The SFI curriculum has been more practical and Educator D suggested integrating SFI with other
technology for teaching significantly relatable to students' lives compared to other software like Nearpod, adding multi-language
increased, particularly appreciating the STEM curricula. Educator D highlighted the VR support, and developing more age-appropriate
exposure to new technologies provided activities as particularly engaging, helping content for younger students. They also
by SFI. They value the ability to create students see beyond their immediate emphasized the need to focus on fundamental
differentiated learning plans for IEP environment. They remarked, "Once they're skills like typing and spreadsheet use to make
users, utilizing the extra resources from exposed, they're invested. students future-ready.
SFI.

SFI Impact
Findings
on Educators
Focus Group Insights
It is important to note that only two educators were able to participate in this focus group, which may limit the
generalizability of these insights. However, their feedback provides valuable perspectives on the impact of the SFI
program.
Impact on Teaching:
Both teachers in the focus group reported increased confidence in teaching technology after participating in the SFI
program. One teacher mentioned feeling comfortable teaching Python despite not using it for 10 years. Another teacher
took on more of a facilitator role, focusing on individual student needs. The starter packs introduced new digital tools and
resources, which the teachers have incorporated into their non-SFI lessons as well.
Impact on learning:
One teacher observed significant skills development in a student who can now code independently and was willing to
attempt a high school Python lesson. The starter packs also helped students understand academic concepts better,
such as photosynthesis. The lessons promoted creativity, collaboration, and out-of-the-box thinking, leading to in-depth
discussions and new directions in learning. One teacher stated, "I have seen my students grow so much... whatever
technology you want to push in their head, put it in their head. We know where technology is leading and where it's going
in the future."
Improvements to SFI:
The teachers suggested translating more starter packs into different languages to support students and colleagues who
struggle with English. They also recommended adding difficulty levels or differentiated activities to cater to a wider range
of students and including more starter packs using more affordable software and programs.

SFI Impact
Findings
on Educators
This section delves deeper into how various factors related to device access and capacity influence the impact of the SFI
program on educators and students. By examining the effects of device access type, device access level, device
capacity, device availability, device variety, and device reliability, we aim to provide comprehensive insights that can
guide school and district leaders in making informed decisions about investing in technology. The goal is to highlight the
importance of reliable, consistent, and varied technological resources in promoting tech-infused, innovative learning
environments that enhance teaching practices and improve student outcomes.
Clarification:
Device access level refers to the actual ability of students to use these devices when needed, including whether
devices can be taken home, are available at all times, or need to be shared among students. Device availability refers
to the extent to which devices are present and ready for use in the classroom, focusing on the quantity and readiness
of devices.
Access to Devices
This section explores how student device access types and levels affect the impact of the SFI program, providing
insights for school and district leaders on the importance of investing in technology to promote innovative learning.
Effect of Student Device Access Type

Providing students with individual devices and fixed devices in classrooms shows a strong positive correlation with
several key outcomes. Educators with students assigned individual devices reported the highest levels of increased
confidence (87%), preparedness for creating technology-infused learning experiences (89%), and overall positive
impact on their teaching approach (91%). Similarly, educators with students using fixed devices reported high
confidence levels (87%), preparedness (87%), and positive teaching impacts (89%). Both groups also showed high
effectiveness in using technology to develop students' skills, with 82% for individual devices and 85% for fixed devices,
and a high likelihood of recommending the SFI program, with 90% for individual devices and 91% for fixed devices. These
correlations highlight the importance of investing in reliable, consistent technology access to maximize the benefits of
the SFI program and enhance teaching practices and student outcomes.
Effect of Student Device Access Level

Access to technology significantly impacts the effectiveness of the SFI program. Educators with devices always or
usually available reported higher positive impacts on teaching and lesson planning (91%), felt more confident in using
technology (90 %), and increased their frequency of technology use (88%). In contrast, educators with seldom or
somewhat available devices reported lower positive impacts on teaching and lesson planning (88%), had lower
confidence in using technology (81%), and used technology less frequently (79%). These correlations underscore the
importance of reliable and consistent device access in enhancing educators' confidence, teaching behaviors, and
frequency of technology use, ultimately promoting more effective and innovative teaching practices.

SFI Impact
Findings
on Educators
Quality and Availability of Devices
Access to devices with sufficient processing power, memory, and reliability significantly impacts the effectiveness of the
SFI program. Educators who agreed or strongly agreed that their students' devices are adequate reported higher levels
of confidence, frequency of technology use, and positive teaching behaviors.
Device Capacity
Confidence Frequency of Technology Use Teaching Behaviors

88% of educators with sufficient device 86% of educators with sufficient device capacity 89% felt more effective in developing students'
capacity reported increased confidence in reported using technology more frequently, skills, compared to 76% who were neutral and
using technology, compared to 76% who compared to 72% who were neutral and 79% 81% with insufficient device capacity.
were neutral and 78% with insufficient with insufficient device capacity.
device capacity.
Device Availability

88% of educators with sufficient device 85% of educators with sufficient device 91% felt more effective in developing students'
availability reported increased confidence, availability reported using technology more skills, compared to 71% neutral and 83% not
compared to 75% neutral and 81% not frequently, compared to 74% neutral and 81% not favorable.
favorable. favorable.
Device Variety

89% of educators with sufficient device 87% of educators with sufficient device variety 91% felt more effective in developing students'
variety reported increased confidence, reported using technology more frequently, skills, compared to 80% who were neutral and
compared to 76% who were neutral and compared to 76% who were neutral and 76% 76% who reported insufficient variety.
77% who reported insufficient variety. who reported insufficient variety.
Device Durability

90% of educators with reliable and durable 88% of educators with reliable and durable 92% felt more effective in developing students'
devices reported increased confidence, devices reported using technology more skills, compared to 79% who were neutral and
compared to 78% who were neutral and frequently, compared to 78% who were neutral 69% who reported unreliable devices.
72% who reported unreliable devices. and 66% who reported unreliable devices.

SFI Impact
Findings
on Educators
Conclusion - Teacher Impact

In conclusion, the SFI program has proven to be a transformative initiative for educators, significantly enhancing their
confidence, teaching practices, and frequency of technology use in the classroom. Both quantitative and qualitative data
underscore the program's success in improving educators' technological skills, providing valuable resources, fostering
innovative thinking, improving teaching methods, and boosting professional development. These benefits have led to
increased student engagement and improved learning outcomes, making the SFI program a valuable asset in modern
education. The insights from individual interviews and focus groups highlight the program's success in building
educator confidence, enhancing student skills, and promoting a culture of innovation and collaboration. The availability
of adequate and varied technological resources further amplifies these benefits, emphasizing the critical role of quality
technology in advancing teaching practices and enriching student learning outcomes.
Educators reported positive overall experiences, with an overwhelming majority noting an improved teaching approach,
and an increased readiness to adopt advanced technology. Notably, the program was successful in shifting educators
from novice to advanced technology users. They would recommend the SFI program to colleagues, and are eager to
continue engagement with the program.
Additionally, educators reported the following after participating in the SFI program:
• Increased confidence in using technology

• Better preparedness in creating technology-infused learning experiences
• Greater effectiveness in developing students' innovation skills
• Higher frequency of technology use
Qualitative Insights
Educators' open-ended responses, interviews, and focus groups revealed significant benefits, including enhanced
technology skills, valuable resources, innovative teaching methods, and professional development. Personal testimonies
highlighted increased student engagement and preparedness for future challenges.
Analysis showed that providing students with individual or fixed devices leads to higher confidence, more frequent
technology use, and more effective teaching practices. The importance of device capacity, availability, variety, and
reliability was also evident.
Synthesis and Implications
The SFI program effectively improves teaching practices and technology integration. Continued investment in
high-quality, reliable, and varied technology is essential to maximize these benefits. The positive outcomes demonstrate
the program's value and transformative potential, guiding future investments to enhance teaching and foster innovation
in education.

SFI Impact
Findings
on Students
Research Question 2
What is the impact of the SFI program on students’ (1) skills development, (2)
engagement of learning and (3) future-readiness?
Skills Development
Teacher Survey Insights
Impact of the SFI program on students (teachers’ perceptions)
100%
75% 84% 82% 83% 84% 82%
50%
25%
0
effectively
In general, educators feel positively about the impact of the SFI program on students' skills development. This indicates
the program is largely succeeding in its student learning and engagement goals. 84% agreed that the program has
improved students' ability to collaborate and communicate effectively using technology. These are core skills
that build digital literacy and future-readiness of students. 82% agreed that implementation of the SFI program helped to
increase students’ interest in STEM subjects/careers and 83% agreed that students were gaining confidence
using technology for learning. This suggests the program is sparking student motivation. Overall, this data illustrates
that through the technologies, activities and teaching approaches introduced via SFI, the program has empowered
students with valuable skills while boosting their engagement and confidence. It appears well-aligned to developing
future-ready learners as intended.
Student Survey Insights

Impact of the SFI program on students (students’ perceptions)
100%
75% 81% 84%

73% 73% 81%
50%
25%
0
Working with Problem- Real-world Increased Promotes
Classmates Solving Connections Interest in STEM Creativity
Based on the student survey results (N = 167), the impact of the SFI program on students' problem-solving skills (73%)
is notably positive, although less pronounced compared to its effect on working with classmates (81%). Consistent
with insights from teacher interviews, students reported that the SFI program effectively helps them connect
technology to real-world applications, with 84% expressing favorable views. However, relatively fewer students
responded positively regarding the development of their problem-solving skills and career interests in STEM. As most of
the respondents were in highschool (121 out of 167 respondents have teachers that taught exclusively highschool
students), they might already have made up their minds for their college applications and/or future career plans, which
could provide a possible explanation for this observation.

SFI Impact
Findings
on Students
Qualitative Insights - Teacher Focus Group/ Interviews
In the 1 focus group interview (with 2 participants) and 5 teacher

interviews, participants unanimously expressed positive sentiments
towards the impact on students. The most quoted benefit of
So from stem class just to give
students’ learning is the improvement of computer literacy, which
was mentioned 5 times. An elementary teacher in the US compared you some context. But then in our
the SFI programs with the STEM class in their school, besides school they just learn about
helping students relate their learning to their personal lives, coding and how to be safe. But I
computer literacy also means increased ability to navigate a
digitalized world. This is particularly the case for students in more think with the SFI, it's a little bit
resource-constrained countries. As students’ digital literacy more practical and how they can
improved in the classroom of one of our interview participants in actually use that within their
Kenya, students were starting to be able to participate in competitive
and collaborative online activities, which improved learning
personal lives."
outcomes and career potential.
Engagement of Learning

Educators responded positively about the SFI program's impact on students' engagement in learning. Specifically, 82%
agreed that the program has increased their students' interest in STEM subjects and/or careers. How the students’
interest in the SFI program has spillover effects onto other school subjects will be further discussed with student surveys
and qualitative evidence in subsequent sections.
Impact of the SFI program on students (students’ perceptions)
100%
92%
86% 85% 73%
75% 80%
50%
25%
0
More engaged and Felt motivated to increased class Comfortable Used tech
interested learn more about participation and confident in other classes or
the technology in using new outside of school
tech
The student survey results indicate that the SFI program has positively impacted students' class participation. Up to 92%
of students reported that the use of new technology made them more engaged and interested in class activities,
corroborating the findings from teacher interviews. A large majority of students also felt more motivated (87%),
experienced increased participation (86%), and felt more comfortable using technology (86%). However, the
translation of these skills to other classes or outside of school appears to be slightly weaker (81%). Some teacher
participants noted in their interviews that not all of their colleagues possess the same ability and confidence to integrate
new technology into their classrooms. This might explain the relatively lower percentage of students who agree that they
have used technology they learn in other classes due to the lack of opportunity.

SFI Impact
Findings
on Students
Qualitative Insights - Open-ended responses from student surveys
Students were asked in their surveys about their favorite and least favorite lesson or activity that helped them learn new
technology.
Student survey results indicate that the favorite topics among students were history (11%), programming languages (7%),
and cybersecurity (7%). Science (6%) and environmental science (6%) followed closely. The most favored activity was
games/quizzes (11%). The primary reason students enjoyed the SFI program was the opportunity to learn something new
(16%), with the program's appeal to their interests also being significant (11%). Although SFI is predominantly seen as a
STEM-focused program, the fact that history emerged as students' favorite subject might be surprising. Reflecting
insights from teacher interviews, students also found games and quizzes engaging, which helped boost their
participation. The program appears to have successfully nurtured students' curiosity, as the chance to learn something
new was the main reason for their enjoyment. Additionally, the program effectively connected technological concepts
with topics that students find interesting, aligning with teacher observations.
Regarding students' least favorite activities, the majority indicated that there was no "least interesting" activity (35%), or
that the least interesting parts were non-technology related, such as ice-breaking activities or reading (28%). Among
those who mentioned tech-related activities, "web development and coding" (8%) were the most frequently cited,
followed by passive learning activities like watching videos. The lack of relevance was the most common reason for this
disinterest. Some students expressed a dislike for activities such as Scratch and QB64, commenting that they did not
find them useful in their daily lives and considered them boring and irrelevant.
Qualitative Insights - Teacher Focus Group/ Interviews

Two teachers talked about how the SFI program enhanced their students’ engagement in class. A participant of the
interview from Kenya told us how their students were aenabled to participate in interactive group activities and
competitions in class due to the SFI program.
Furthermore, thanks to the hands-on and project-based nature of the SFI program design, three teachers were quoted to
mention how the SFI program promotes creativity and the active consumption of knowledge by their students. For
example, a participant described how SFI enabled students to learn how to research using digital tools, which increased
students’ engagement.
Overall, due to the change in pedagogical approach, students who were in SFI classrooms typically find themselves
involved in active learning, thus improving their level of engagement.
You know, they're engaged. They like I love project-based [learning] because
the competition. There's a social and the kids really like hands on stuff and
fun and love of learning (environment). they don't want to just be sitting behind
the screen all the time

SFI Impact
Findings
on Students
Future-readiness
Teacher survey data indicates that educators perceive the SFI program as significantly enhancing students'
future-readiness. The program is credited with increasing students' interest in STEM subjects, enhancing their
problem-solving abilities, improving their collaboration and communication skills, and equipping them with innovation
skill sets and mindsets. For example, 83% of educators responded favorably to the statement that the technology skills
learned through SFI help students solve problems creatively. Additionally, 82% of responses were favorable regarding
the program's impact on innovation skill sets and mindsets. Overall, the SFI program is viewed as helpful in sparking
students' interest in pursuing STEM-related careers while also preparing them with essential transferable skills for the
future.
Overall, students expressed a positive

100% experience with the SFI program. A
significant majority (88%) reported
88%
75% 83% feeling motivated by the use of
technology in learning and expressed a
50% desire to learn more about it. This
indicates that the SFI program effectively
25% fosters a love and interest in technology,
setting students up for future success by
0 instilling these foundational interests.
Overall, I love using technology Overall, the learning experience was
in learning and want to learn more. positive and I would recommend it
to other students.
Qualitative Insights - Teacher Focus Group/ Interview

Two teachers highlighted how the SFI program has
helped students develop transferable skill sets and
mindsets, preparing them for the future. One teacher [The lesson packages help my students]
cited the sustainability lesson packages and the Braille think of other people and not just about
curriculum as examples of the valuable perspectives the
SFI program introduced to their students. The teacher themselves, and it gives them
noted, perspective in helping others.
The interviewer believed that the program helped their students build character, become more globally aware, and less
focused on just their "little corner," thereby enhancing their future-readiness. Another teacher, working in a more
resource-constrained environment, highlighted the skill-based benefits of the program and believed that SFI could help
their students gain easier access to universities. These responses emphasize that the SFI program not only builds
technical skills but also, through its multidisciplinary nature and focus on social issues and equity, helps learners become
better global citizens and future-ready.
Student Survey Results: Open-ended questions

When students were asked about the technology tools that they were most excited to learn more about in the coming
year, the overwhelming majority of responding students expressed interest in learning about AI (32%), followed by
extended reality (19%). This is potentially due to the extensive mentioning of AI by the general media and social media
after the initial launch and subsequent public interest in generative AI tools like ChatGPT. It might be worthy of
continuing the development of AI-related learning materials due to the strong student interest in the topic.

SFI Impact
Findings
on Students
Learning Conditions
In this section, we explore the factors that teachers perceive as contributing to higher student impact. These factors
include device quality, availability, and type, as well as the subjects and grade levels taught by the teachers. The numbers
in the following visualizations represent the percentage of favorable responses for these questions, broken down by
teacher subgroups.
Effect of Device Quality on Student Impact
Impact of the SFI program on students (teachers’ perceptions), split by perceptions on device quality
100%
88% 87% 88% 88% 87%

80%
High device quality*
60% Neutral device quality
Low device quality

40%
*Device quality measured by the response to question, “The

20% devices available to my students have sufficient
processing power and memory to handle the demands of
innovative learning activities”
0
effectively
Teachers whose students had higher-quality devices were more likely to agree that the SFI program had a
positive impact on their students. For those who reported that their students have high-quality devices, the average
favorability across the five questions about student impact was 87% - 88%. This percentage decreases with lower device
quality, with those who reported that their students have low quality devices averaging only 71% - 77% favorability. This
data highlights the strong relationship between device quality and the perceived impact on students' skills, engagement,
and future-readiness.
Effect of Device Reliability on Student Impact
Impact of the SFI program on students (teachers’ perceptions), split by perceptions on device reliability
100%
90% 89% 89% 90% 89%

80%
High device reliability*
60% Neutral device reliability
Low device reliability

40%
*Device reliability measured by the response to question,

20% “The reliability and durability of the devices available to my
students allows them to focus on learning without technical
disruptions.”
0
effectively
Similar to the previous analysis, the reliability and durability of devices are highly correlated with student impact.
For teachers who cited a high device reliability across student devices, 89% - 90% provided favorable responses across
questions regarding student impact. This trend continues across all indicators, as teachers who were neutral on the
reliability and durability of students devices reporting a higher student impact than those who disagreed. Just like device
quality, device reliability and durability is important in enhancing student outcomes.

SFI Impact
Findings
on Students
Effect of Type of Access on Student Impact
Impact of the SFI program on students (teachers’ perceptions), split by type of access
100%
86% 84% 84% 83% 85% 84% 85%

80% 82% 83% 83% Device Cart
74% 74% 77% 74%
72%
60% Fixed devices in a
classroom, lab, or
other venue.
40%
Individual devices
20%
0
effectively
Teachers using device carts reported the lowest favorable responses across all metrics, with 72% noting
confidence in using technology for learning and 77% recognizing improved collaboration and communication. In
contrast, teachers with fixed devices in a classroom or lab reported higher favorable responses, with 86% noting
increased confidence in using technology for learning and 85% observing improved problem-solving skills. Similarly,
teachers with individual devices reported high favorable responses, with 84% acknowledging increased
confidence in technology use and 85% recognizing improved collaboration and communication. These results suggest
that the location of access is not the primary driver of student impact. Instead, the ability to control the availability of
devices appears to be crucial, as using device carts often requires coordinating with IT support or other teachers,
whereas fixed or individual devices likely provide greater flexibility.
Effect of Grade Level on Student Impact

Impact of the SFI program on students (teachers’ perceptions), split by grade level
Improved student
Increased students' SFI has helped Equipped students
Helped students ability to collaborate
interest in STEM students solve with innovation skill
gain confidence and communicate
subjects problems creatively sets and mindsets
effectively
Early Childhood/
95%
Kindergarten 81% 88% 88% 94% 75%
(Ages 4-6)
Elementary School
(Ages 6-11)
88% 85% 87% 85% 86%
80%
Middle School (Ages 11-14) 88% 87% 84% 84% 80%
High School (Ages 14-18) 83% 81% 81% 86% 82%

65%
More than 1 78% 79% 80% 78% 78%
Most participants (37%) of this survey teach high school students exclusively, followed by elementary school (25%).
While we note the concerns raised (particularly in the qualitative data) about the grade-level appropriateness of the SFI
Starter Packs, the results here indicate that students' learning of skills and development of confidence are not affected by
their grade level. In fact, elementary school teachers reported higher levels of favorable responses in all but one indicator
(i.e. effective collaboration and communication). This points towards a perception that students are still gaining
confidence and skills, regardless of concerns about grade-appropriateness. A possible explanation is that the SFI Starter
Packs for elementary school may lack the more sophisticated technology covered by SFI, making these innovations
more novel and engaging for elementary school students compared to their middle or high school counterparts. Another
possibility is that teachers are proactively adapting the Starter Packs to cater to their respective student profiles, driving
positive student impact despite concerns about grade-level appropriateness.

SFI Impact
Findings
on Students
Effect of Subject Taught on Student Impact
Impact of the SFI program on students (teachers’ perceptions), split by subject taught
Improved student
Increased students' SFI has helped Equipped students
Helped students ability to collaborate
interest in STEM students solve with innovation skill
gain confidence and communicate
subjects problems creatively sets and mindsets
effectively
Visual Arts 81% 74% 76% 76% 74%
Career and Technical

Education
69% 75% 73% 81% 69%
Foreign Language 90% 86% 82% 84% 84%
95%
Geography 84% 84% 80% 80% 80%
Health 72% 72% 66% 69% 66%

80%
Language Arts 81% 79% 81% 78% 80%
Mathematics 81% 79% 82% 81% 80%

65%
Other 75% 74% 74% 72% 74%
Science 86% 86% 85% 87% 85%
Social Studies/History 79% 82% 79% 82% 79%
Technology/ Computer
Science
83% 82% 81% 84% 83%
Most teachers (60%) who participated in the survey are either Science or Technology/Computer Science instructors. They
rated the SFI program highly across various questions regarding student impact - all questions have received more than 80%
of favorable responses on average from teachers in these two disciplines. Notably though, for non-STEM subjects, Foreign
Language and Geography teachers also rated SFI’s student impact very highly. Conversely, teachers in Health or Career and
Technical Education perceived a slightly lower student impact, indicating potential areas where additional support for teachers
in these disciplines could be beneficial.

SFI Impact
Findings
on Students
Teacher Attribution
Dashboard engagement data was analyzed for teachers with more than 10 students surveyed. However, for the nine
teachers meeting this criterion, their engagement data was either incomplete or limited. They had not completed any PD
courselets, and only one teacher had downloaded three lessons. Although the engagement data includes more data
points, most teachers showed only a single instance of engagement. The table below illustrates the relationship between
teachers' engagement and their students' (n = 139) engagement in technology.
Impact of the SFI program on students (students’ perceptions), split by application of teacher PD
100%
Always attend PD
80% Often attend PD
Sometimes attend PD
60%
*PD frequency measured by
teacher’s response to the
40% question, “ I attend SFI in-person
workshops when they are
available.”
20%
0
More engaged Felt motivated to learn Increased class Comfortable and Used tech in other
and interested more about the participation confident in using classes or outside of
technology new tech school
The students of teachers who always participate in in-person professional development (PD) workshops outperform
other students in being engaged in class activities and feeling motivated. However, the results are less conclusive for
participation and confidence in using new technology.
Impact of the SFI program on students (students’ perceptions), split by application of teacher PD
100%
Always apply PD*
80% Often apply PD
Sometimes apply PD
60%
*PD application measured by
teacher’s response to the
40% question, “I actively apply the
information and guidance I gain
from SFI PD opportunities in my
20% classroom.”
0
More engaged Felt motivated to learn Increased class Comfortable and Used tech in other
and interested more about the participation confident in using classes or outside of
technology new tech school
The frequency with which teachers apply the information and guidance from the SFI professional development sessions
strongly correlates with student-reported participation in class. Teachers who consistently apply learnings from SFI PD
outperform those who apply them only occasionally across all five student engagement metrics. For example, 65% of
students whose teachers always followed the guidance from SFI PDs strongly agreed that they became more engaged
and interested in class activities. In stark contrast, only 31% of students whose teachers only sometimes followed the
guidance from SFI PDs strongly agreed that they were more engaged and interested in class activities.
Combining the results of the two analyses above, it seems that SFI PD sessions have an overall positive impact on
student engagement. Specifically, teachers who implement the learnings from the PDs with high fidelity have students
reporting considerably higher levels of engagement in the classroom. SFI should consider developing strategies to
encourage teachers to follow the PD guidance with greater fidelity.

Feedback
Findings
from Educators
Research Question 3
Alongside the positive sentiments surrounding the SFI program, educators provided important feedback to help
improve its effectiveness and impact. This feedback highlights three key areas for refinement: enhancing existing
content, building teacher capacity to use technology innovatively and promote digital literacy in the classroom, and
providing the necessary infrastructure and hardware for successful implementation. Educators’ insights are invaluable in
guiding these improvements, ensuring that the SFI program not only maintains its current strengths but also evolves to
meet the changing needs of both teachers and students. By addressing these areas, the program can better support
educators in creating engaging, future-ready learning environments.
Content Enhancement
A significant segment (28%) of educators commented that further enhancements to the current pool of SFI resources
would support their efforts to promote future-ready skill sets and mindsets in their classroom. Within this group,
suggestions for specific enhancements include:
Localization
19% of all educators polled indicated that localization of
content would help them implement the SFI program more
effectively in their classrooms. Notably, 49% of respondents [C]urriculum needs to be designed
from China indicated that this was the case (compared to 7% with the use of technology built into it,
for the rest of the world). To many of these educators,
localization also meant a closer alignment to national but in a manner where the content is
curriculum standards. A sizable minority (7%) of all used to develop innovative skills
educators felt that that curriculum misalignment was a through the use of technology. This is a
challenge in implementing the SFI program, and one
educator commented that “the biggest challenge is to cover
mammoth task [especially] in public
the syllabus side by side with the SFI program.” At the same schools, where there is rigid adherence
time, educators acknowledged that national curricula had to to the prescribed curriculum.
evolve to be in line with the future-ready orientation of SFI as
well, with one educator commenting:
At the same time, educators’ desire for more localized content extends beyond curriculum alignment. They also
expressed an interest to see more Starter Packs translated into local languages (9% of respondents) and case
studies/examples more relevant to their local context (7% of respondents). This was often framed in terms of
supporting students who were weaker in English. One educator commented that many of her students were from
immigrant backgrounds where English was not their first language, and offering more robust multilingual support would
help to address issues of digital inequity in her classroom. Other educators pointed out that many teachers themselves
were not fluent in English, and might not be confident in adapting a Starter Pack not written in the language of instruction.
Support for third-party tools

19 educators commented that greater support for third-party software tools featured in the Starter Packs would
provide greater flexibility in implementing SFI. Of this group, many shared that providing recommended alternatives for
the software featured within Starter Packs would be useful in cases where “district approval of recommended software
can be an obstacle” (CTE teacher, USA). Other respondents wondered how existing edtech software they were already
using - for instance, Nearpod - could be woven into the lesson plans outlined within each Starter Pack.

Feedback
Findings
from Educators
Instructional material
A cluster of responses revolved around specific changes
they would like to see within the instructional material
(worksheets, slides and Educators’ Guide) of each Starter [An] increased focus on formative
Pack. While supportive of the hands-on and project-based assessment strategies, such as
learning orientation of the Starter Packs, 17 teachers
commented that they would benefit from having peer/self evaluation, would aid in
instructional material that was differentiated for different empowering students through
learner profiles, including accommodations for special feedback.
needs learners. Doing so would offer, for instance, “simplified
alternatives for…the Jupyter Notebook [Starter Packs]” to
cater to learners who needed to build confidence in the
technology used, while “extension activities…to push the
faster learners” (Computer Science teacher, Spain). Five
teachers mentioned that more detail could be provided on
assessment strategies to clarify student learning.
Starter Pack creation

A significant segment of respondents (8%) indicated that they would like to see additional Starter Packs developed,
either focusing on specific subjects they were teaching, or emerging technology areas (e.g. robotics, AI). This could be
a reflection of a desire to bring the implementation of SFI closer in line with local curriculum, or specific future-ready skills
that are perceived as important. For instance, one teacher commented that she would like to see more SFI Starter Packs
in the realm of “financial literacy, especially for high school students”.
Capacity Building
11% of educator respondents felt that more robust and intentional professional development opportunities would help
increase confidence and aptitude of teachers implementing the SFI program. This was the case even for teachers who
had benefited from the SFI PD modules. Most agreed that this would help to address worries amongst a significant
minority of teachers regarding not being knowledgeable enough to conduct lessons on emerging technology (6%), or
shifting their pedagogy towards more student-centric approaches (3%).
Training
The general consensus amongst this group was that additional training would help teachers understand the
future-ready mindsets, skill sets and technology tools explored within SFI, as well as keep them abreast of developments
in technology. One teacher mentioned that SFI training could be localized further and explore the concepts covered in
greater depth, as the existing training he received served merely as an introduction to the program:
The [SFI training] gave me an initial exposure, but…most of the time, we don’t really have
experts who are giving us exclusive training in our language…I end up [having to do]
further exploring on the platform by myself.
Suggestions on training modalities included workshops and webinars. Teachers indicated a preference for hands-on PD
experiences where they could “try out some of the Starter Pack activities and discuss applications with like-minded
teachers”. Of note, nine teachers explicitly mentioned a preference for in-person PD, which would allow them to easily
clarify any questions they had with the trainer.

Feedback
Findings
from Educators
Community activities
Within this subgroup, 21 teachers further recommended building a stronger professional learning community within
the SFI network. A number suggested encouraging teachers to share authentic teaching artifacts, such as student work
or videos of themselves conducting the Starter Packs, which could serve as references for the broader community. Two
teachers suggested mentoring and coaching structures, where more experienced teachers could “mentor the
newcomers to SFI, and provide guidance, feedback, and support throughout the program”.
Infrastructure and Hardware

5% of educators recommended that the SFI program be enhanced to incorporate hardware provisioning and
support. As might be expected, teachers within this subgroup were also more likely (76%) to report that devices were
only “sometimes” or “seldom” available for their students, compared to the average respondent (61%). Educators in this
group recognized that promoting future-ready skill sets and mindsets requires an exposure to industry-ready software,
which do not run well on students’ existing devices. In other cases, particularly for educators in developing countries, the
issue revolved around insufficient devices for each student - or even the educator himself - to have hands-on exposure
to Starter Pack content. Moreover, a few educators mentioned that network infrastructure was insufficiently robust to run
the software programs featured in SFI.

Recommendations
Findings
Recommendations
This report has demonstrated the significant positive impact of the SFI program on both educators and students. The
program has successfully increased educators' confidence in using technology for innovative teaching practices,
fostered a change in teaching behaviors towards technology-infused learning experiences, and increased the frequency
of technology use in classrooms. These positive outcomes have translated into significant student gains in areas such as
technology skills, engagement in learning, and perceived future-readiness.
However, the research has also highlighted areas where the program can be further enhanced and strengthened to
realize its full potential. The following program and policy recommendations aim to build on the existing successes of the
program and address the key areas for improvement identified through the research.
Program Recommendation s
We highlight here recommendations for the Intel SFI team to consider when evaluating and refining the program.
Enhancing Content and Resources

The SFI program serves a diverse teacher and student population. This study suggests that in order to ensure greater
accessibility and relevance for this diverse community, the program will need to prioritize the customization and
localization of its resources.
First, SFI should leverage Generative AI for customization. The rapid advancement of generative AI technology presents
a valuable opportunity to enhance the program's flexibility and adaptability. By incorporating tested AI tools, the SFI
program can create customized and personalized learning experiences for students. This includes using AI tools to
facilitate differentiated instruction, where activities and materials are tailored to meet the unique needs of different
learners, including students with special needs, bilingual learners, and other targeted demographics. SFI could look
towards pioneers in the field like Diffit, for examples of how this has been done at scale while minimizing risk. SFI should
also consider using AI tools to facilitate country-specific localization, particularly in regions like China where around half
of 177 total respondents indicated a greater desire for localization. Localization includes both the translation of materials
into local languages and adapting examples to specific cultural contexts. While human-in-the-loop checks should still be
retained, Generative AI will enhance the overall efficiency of localization efforts, ensuring the continued accessibility and
relevance to educators and students around the world.
Second, SFI should consider expanding the scope of Starter Packs to reach a wider audience and address the evolving
needs of various subject areas and grade levels. This includes developing new Starter Packs for subjects not currently
well-represented in the program, such as health, arts, music and foreign languages. It is worth exploring if current Starter
Packs can be adapted to cater to some of these less well-represented subjects - retaining the gist of the
technology-integrated activity while weaving in different cross-curricular connections. Echoing the suggestions of our
educator respondents, SFI should also continue to ensure that Starter Packs are designed with real-world relevance in
mind, as well as connected to students’ interest. Future-ready skill sets, like AI or coding, should be taught in the context
of age-appropriate scenarios to ensure authentic learning. Finally, SFI could consider creating age-appropriate Starter
Packs specifically designed for early learners (Kindergarten to 2nd grade). While self-reported engagement levels of
younger learners was high and on par with their older counterparts, designing resources explicitly for younger learners
(e.g. addressing technology basics) would help foster a foundation for future-ready skills from a young age.

Recommendations
Findings
Scaling SFI Across Education Systems

Throughout our study, teachers uniformly indicated a desire to see the SFI program scaled up further, to impact more
teachers. However, achieving widespread adoption of the program will require strong coordination between Intel, local
partners, and education systems around the world.
First, SFI should continue and intensify the existing approach of engaging system leaders and decision makers (e.g.
Ministry officials, district leaders, administrators) to get their buy-in and support for the program. Despite the well-known
long adoption cycles of working through systems leaders, these leaders are often highly influential in promoting and
introducing SFI amongst their constituents. To strengthen this strategy, we recommend that SFI should invest further in
establishing thought leadership and brand recognition in the field of education and edtech, to position itself as the
partner of choice for system leaders and decision makers. This should be done by highlighting the impact and outcomes
of SFI within lighthouse sites where adoption of SFI is high. Concurrently, these lighthouse sites should also be
supported with resources and incentives to encourage them to advocate for SFI with peer districts or schools, as these
user testimonials help to influence other administrators and leaders.
Second, we recommend a ‘bottom-up’ approach focused on promoting the SFI program through direct educator
engagement, which will complement the ‘top-down’ approach via the engagement of system leaders mentioned above.
Effort has already been made in this regard, in the form of a robust Ambassador Program, regular webinars and SFI
presence at education conferences. To enhance current efforts, we recommend the expansion of the existing
Ambassador Program by increasing both the number of qualified ambassadors and the opportunities for them to share
about the SFI program with fellow educators. This is an invaluable tool in expanding the reach of SFI - for many educators
we surveyed, the strongest endorsement of SFI was found in “hearing how other teachers…have done it [with] their class”
(CTE educator, USA). We also suggest organizing in-person meetups for SFI educators, for ground-level community
building and deep engagement. These meetups could be facilitated by local Intel partners and hosted by lighthouse
schools/districts. Along with the valuable networking, these gatherings also present an opportunity for educators to
share their experiences with the SFI program and, over time, create a community of practice around SFI.
Enhance Professional Development Offerings

This study demonstrated the importance of teacher professional development (PD) for the continued effectiveness of
the SFI program, with a strong correlation between the number of PD hours consumed on the SFI platform, and student
self-reported engagement levels. Hence, the program should be further enhanced by creating a more robust and
intentional professional development program for educators. This will require a shift from one-off workshops to a
long-term, ongoing support model that prioritizes teacher growth and development.
While PD resources are widely available on the SFI platform, they are scattered across different modalities; additionally,
PD trainers are given considerable latitude in designing their PD plan. For closer alignment between PD and the desired
outcomes of SFI, the program should consider developing a ‘menu’ of recommended PD options, leveraging on existing
SFI PD resources and backed by research. This could first involve an audit of the existing connections and degree/type
use of existing available PD resources. Rationalizing across PD resources and articulating the connections between
them, if any, would provide partners and teachers with a clear vision on SFI’s approaches to professional development.
Thereafter, SFI should consider working with local training partners to develop a ‘menu’ of recommended PD programs,
drawing on research-backed modalities like professional learning communities and learning walks, as alternatives to the
current workshop-oriented options. Partners should be encouraged and supported to adapt the existing SFI PD
resources for educators they are working with. Eventually, these experiences should be documented and shared with
other partners, to grow the overall SFI ecosystem.
The study also demonstrates a strong desire amongst teachers to learn how their colleagues have used technology
innovatively in the classroom. In this vein, SFI should aim to grow a vibrant teacher community focused on professional
growth. We should further investigate how the SFI Platform, and specifically the SFI Forum page, could be fully exploited
in service of this goal. As the central location available for all SFI educators to connect asynchronously, the SFI Forum
page serves as the de facto hub of the SFI community. Due consideration should be made on how to encourage teachers
to share their experiences with SFI - for example, by providing incentives to upload authentic teaching artifacts, including
student work, videos of lesson delivery, and reflections on their experiences with the SFI program.

Recomendations
Findings
Policy Recommendations
Focusing on future-ready skill sets and mindsets is a policy priority that requires education leaders and administrators to
work in tandem with educators and other stakeholders. Policy makers and leaders should consider the following when
determining how to promote the innovative use of technology in K-12 classrooms.
Addressing Device Access and Infrastructure Challenges

The research findings collectively underscore the critical role of device access and reliable infrastructure in the
successful implementation of the SFI program - when access to suitable devices is more abundant, teachers are more
confident student outcomes are stronger. Conversely, the program's potential to foster innovative learning experiences
is significantly limited when schools and educators lack access to suitable devices and reliable internet connectivity.
How school systems address this challenge will directly affect the effectiveness of SFI.
Our research suggests that education systems should prioritize device provisioning as a key enabler of student
outcomes. This includes ensuring that students have access to devices that can handle the demands of innovative
learning activities and specialized tools required for certain Starter Packs. While acknowledging resource constraints
faced by school systems, we believe that systems need to be intentional about both the quantity and specifications of
devices procured, if these devices are to make a tangible impact. To ensure this is the case, device purchasing decisions
should be made with close reference to the desired graduate outcomes articulated by policy, and made in close
consultation with curriculum leaders and teacher leaders. Where budget constraints pose a challenge, education
systems should actively explore strategic partnerships with edtech companies or hardware providers, which could
enable subsidized device access.
While providing appropriate devices are crucial, ensuring they are adequately networked and connected is equally
important. Hence, education systems should not overlook the development and updating of technical infrastructure.
This includes providing assistance and support for schools to enhance their network infrastructure, ensuring sufficient
bandwidth and reliability for technology-intensive learning activities. Schools must have robust and resilient network
systems capable of handling the increased demands of modern educational technologies and online resources.
Additionally, education systems should offer ongoing technical support to educators and schools to address any
hardware or software issues that may arise during the implementation of the SFI program. This technical assistance
should be readily accessible and responsive, ensuring that any disruptions to the learning process are minimized. By
providing continuous technical support, schools can maintain the functionality and efficiency of their technological tools,
thereby maximizing the benefits of the SFI program.
Strengthening Teacher Professional Development

In line with the recommendations in the previous section on enhancing the SFI professional development (PD) offerings,
it is also essential for schools and school systems to continuously refine their craft to stay ahead in the ever-evolving
educational landscape. Developing robust professional development systems will not only ensure that teachers and
teacher leaders are equipped to maximize the use of SFI PD offerings, but that the education system as a whole is geared
towards continuous improvement and changing technologies.
First, education systems should work in concert to develop a teacher growth model centered on digital literacy and
future-skilling. While there are widely used models for assessing student digital literacy competencies, the field that
examines how educators are equipped to impart these competencies is more sparse. Creating a teacher growth model
for digital literacy skills will help better articulate the needs of teachers and, in turn, how targeted PD can bridge the gap.
This growth model should provide a clear and comprehensive framework for defining and developing teacher
competencies in digital literacy and the delivery of future-ready skills. Additionally, it should outline specific skills,
knowledge, and dispositions necessary for educators to effectively integrate technology into their teaching practices. A
common vocabulary around these competencies will enable more effective communication and goal setting within the
education system.
Using this framework, we can promote a data-driven and customized approach to SFI PD. For example, education
systems can work with the SFI program to determine teachers' baseline digital literacy competencies via intake surveys
administered on the SFI platform. This allows for targeted interventions based on their needs and skill gaps, ensuring that
PD is tailored to individual teachers, maximizing its effectiveness.

Recommendations
Findings
Second, due consideration should be given to formalizing mentoring and coaching programs for educators teaching
with technology. Encouraging the development of robust mentoring and coaching structures, between teachers of
different levels of exposure to SFI (or digital literacy more generally), will support teachers' ongoing growth. Experienced
educators should guide and support newcomers, sharing best practices and fostering a collaborative learning
environment.
Third, schools should consider strategies to nudge teachers to try new pedagogical approaches learned from
professional development sessions in their classrooms. This stems from our finding that whether teachers have applied
SFI PD is a better predictor of student impact, than the amount of PD consumed. To encourage this, schools can create
a supportive environment that fosters experimentation and innovation - teachers need to understand that they are not
expected to use new technology or pedagogical approaches perfectly on the first try!
Finally, it is necessary to address the change management required for program implementation. While educators we
surveyed were enthusiastic about helping to promote the resources and paradigm shift brought about by SFI, a number
would benefit from strategies to convey the benefits of SFI to conservative colleagues. Developing clear communication
plans and offering training in change management can empower teachers to advocate for SFI effectively, fostering a
more supportive and unified approach to educational innovation.
By implementing these recommendations, the Intel Skills for Innovation program can continue to make a significant
positive impact on the educational landscape. By strengthening its resources, expanding its reach, and providing
ongoing support to educators, the program will play a critical role in equipping students with the skills and mindsets
needed to thrive in a rapidly evolving digital world.

Conclusion
Findings
Conclusion
The Intel Skills for Innovation (SFI) Program has made significant strides in enhancing educators' technology integration
and fostering innovative learning experiences for students. The program has successfully increased educators'
confidence in using technology, influenced their teaching behaviors towards more innovative and technology-infused
methods, and increased the frequency of technology use in teaching.
Moreover, the SFI program has positively impacted students' learning and engagement, helping them gain confidence in
using technology, increasing their interest in STEM subjects and careers, and equipping them with innovative skill sets
and mindsets like computational thinking and design thinking.
For SFI to increase its impact in the education ecosystem, there are areas for improvement that can further refine and
enhance the SFI program. These include enhancing the existing content, providing more robust professional
development opportunities, incorporating hardware provisioning and support, improving curriculum, grade, and subject
alignment, and addressing budget constraints.
To engage more users, the SFI program could develop a comprehensive user engagement strategy, leverage social
media and online platforms, and offer incentives for user engagement. To promote global equity and provide
opportunities for users to upgrade to more advanced technology, the SFI program, in partnership with Intel, could
advocate for digital equity, offer tiered resources, and partner with other technology companies.
By addressing these areas for improvement and implementing these recommendations, the SFI program can continue
to evolve, maximize its impact on developing a generation of innovators, and scale globally. The future of education is
digital, and the SFI program is well-positioned to lead the way in preparing educators and students for this digital future.

Summary
Findings
Summary
This study evaluated the impact of the Intel Skills for Innovation (SFI) professional development program on educators
and K-12 students. The project engaged over 600 educators and students to assess the effects of the program on areas
such as educators' technology skills and integration practices, and students' skill development, learning engagement,
and career readiness. Focus groups and interviews provided additional qualitative insights.
The results indicate that SFI significantly increased educators' confidence in using technology, improved their ability to
design technology-infused lessons, and led to more frequent technology use in teaching. Students demonstrated gains
in technology skills, engagement, and future-ready competencies like problem-solving and collaboration. The findings
reveal SFI as an effective initiative for developing innovative teaching practices and a generation of learners prepared for
future challenges.

Future
Findings
Exploration
Future Exploration
The following section articulates possibilities for future investigation based on the findings of the current study while
considering the limitations that surfaced.
• Intentional Frameworks and Standards

- Conduct ongoing assessment of educators' digital literacy skills. The report found that effective professional
development is key to technology integration, but did not assess teachers' baseline skills. Administering regular
digital literacy assessments could help calibrate expectations for skill development through SFI and ensure
professional learning opportunities are appropriately targeted.
- Develop standards or competency frameworks for educators' digital literacy and ability to teach future-ready
skills. While standards exist for students, the report noted the lack of guidance for defining and cultivating
teachers' technology skills. Creating research-backed frameworks in this area would provide clarity around
desired outcomes from the SFI program.
• Prepare for and Monitor Longitudinal Impact Studies

- Evaluate the long-term impact of SFI beyond the initial implementation period. The report only measured
short-term perceptions of the program's effects. Longitudinal studies could assess whether changes in teaching
practices and student skills are sustained over time. This would help determine if ongoing support is needed.
- Administer a longitudinal study of recommended SFI classroom technology configurations. Compare student
performance, subject interests, transferable skill development between classrooms meeting and not meeting
device access guidelines. Provide data to justify investments in digital learning environments.
- Perform follow-up investigations of students taught by SFI-certified educators. Track career and education
pathways to quantify long term impacts of SFI on workforce/post-secondary readiness. Promote successes to
expand program scale-up and hardware sales.
• Explore accessibility and equity relative to resources and digital literacy

- Investigate the relationship between technology access conditions and student learning outcomes in more
depth. The report found correlations but did not establish clear causality. Further research could provide more
definitive guidance around device specifications, availability, etc. to maximize SFI's benefits.
- Pilot customized professional learning based on educators' baseline digital skills. Given variability in skills,
tailoring support may better achieve the goal of enhancing all teachers' abilities to integrate technology
effectively. Pilot programs could test differentiated models.
- Conduct a pilot implementation study of scaling the SFI program at the district/system level. Research the
resources, supports and barriers to rolling out SFI to all educators within select partner districts/systems.
Evaluate impacts on teaching practices, student outcomes and guidance for continued scale-up.
• Invest in and measure the impact of Professional Learning Communities

- Develop an SFI certification pilot for schools meeting adoption and implementation benchmarks. Certify
schools that achieve targets for educator participation rates and levels of classroom technology access. Track
impacts on student achievement, STEM enrollment, graduation rates to quantify benefits of certification.
- Pilot "SFI classrooms of the future" modeled on best practice guidelines. Feature pilot classrooms in marketing
research with administrators to understand decision factors for technology investments. Evaluate impacts of
highly-resourced classrooms on peer school purchasing behaviors.
• Innovate - Consider Nontraditional Learning Opportunities

- Conduct partnership research blending SFI professional learning with recreational technologies. Study impacts
on educator familiarity, classroom integration rates and sales of new product categories. Evaluate benefits of
exposing educators to consumer technologies students engage with outside school.

Appendix
Findings
Appendix
Teacher Survey
Demographics
D1 What subject(s) do you teach?
D2 What grade level(s) do you teach?
D3 When did you start using the SFI resources?
D4 How did you first learn about the SFI program?
Technology (T)
T1 What type of devices are your students using for classroom activities?
T2 Which of the following best describes the type of access to devices your students have for classroom activities?
T2a Which of the following best describes the level of access to devices your students have for classroom activities?
T3 The objectives of the SFI program are to promote students' future-ready, innovation skillsets and mindsets, as
illustrated in the image below.
T3a To what extent do you agree with the following statements about the capacity and availability of student
devices?
- The devices available to my students have sufficient processing power and memory to handle the demands of
innovative learning activities.
- The number of devices available to my students is sufficient to facilitate activities that promote innovative thinking.
- The variety of devices available to my students allows them to explore different approaches to problem-solving and
learning.The reliability and durability of the devices available to my students allows them to focus on learning without
technical disruptions.
T3b What additional devices and resources would empower you to further advance the SFI program and cultivate
future-ready, innovative skill sets and mindsets in your students?
Engagement Level & Instructional Support (ELIS)
ELIS1 Please indicate the frequency with which you engage in the following SFI professional development
opportunities.
- I attend SFI in-person workshops when they are available.
- I actively apply the information and guidance I gain from SFI professional development opportunities in my
classroom.
ELIS2 Roughly how many SFI Starter Packs have you implemented in your classroom instruction? (Enter '0' if you
have not implemented any Starter Packs.)
ELIS3 To what extent do you agree with each of the following statements regarding the integration of the SFI Starter
Packs into your classroom instruction?
- The SFI professional development opportunities (online modules, in-person workshops) equipped me with the skills
to confidently implement the Starter Packs in my classroom.
- The SFI Starter Packs were grade-level appropriate.
- The SFI Starter Packs were aligned with my existing curriculum.
- The SFI Starter Packs were comprehensive and user-friendly for teaching, making them easy to integrate into my
existing curriculum.
- The SFI Starter Packs provided sufficient information and guidance for learning new skills and technology.

Appendix
Findings
Impact on Teaching Practice (ITP)
ITP1 To what extent do you agree with each of the following statements regarding the impact of the SFI program on
your teaching practice?
- The SFI program has made me more confident in using technology in the classroom.
- The SFI program has prepared me to create technology-infused learning experiences for my students.
- The SFI program has made me more effective in using technology to develop students' innovation skill sets and
mindsets.
- The SFI program has made me a more frequent user of technology in my teaching.
Impact on Student Learning (ISL)
ISL1 To what extent do you agree with each of the following statements regarding the impact of the SFI program on
your students' learning and engagement?
- The SFI program has helped students gain confidence in using technology for learning.
- The SFI program has increased my students' interest in STEM subjects and/or careers.
- The technology skills I learned through SFI have helped students solve problems creatively.
- The SFI program has improved student ability to collaborate and communicate effectively using technology.
- The SFI program has equipped students with innovation skill sets and mindsets like computational thinking and
design thinking.
Overall Experience (OE)

OE1 To what extent do you agree with each of the following statements regarding your overall experience with the SFI
program?
- Overall, participating in the SFI program has positively impacted my approach to teaching and lesson planning.
- I would recommend the SFI program to other educators.
- I am excited to continue to deepen my engagement with the SFI program and technology-based teaching.
- I believe I am ready to upgrade our technology to take on more sophisticated technology-based activities.
OE2 Please select the statement that best describes your role in using technology for learning BEFORE and AFTER
participating in the SFI program.
- I have little to no exposure using technology in learning.

- I am new to using technology in learning and am building my foundational skills.
- I am comfortable using technology to deliver content and am now focusing on improving the way I design and lead
learning experiences.
- I actively encourage innovation and effectively use technology to create engaging and creative learning
experiences.
- I guide students in adopting innovative mindsets and prepare them for the challenges of the future using
technology-infused learning experiences.
OE3 What was the most significant benefit you gained from participating in the SFI program?
OE4 What were your biggest challenges in implementing the SFI program in your classroom?
OE5 What specific changes would you recommend to the SFI program to better support you in designing and
leading learning experiences that empower students to become confident innovators?

Appendix
Findings
Student Survey
SFI SP Refresh
Q10 To help you recall, here are some examples of the SFI lessons you might have gone through. Do note that the SFI
lessons your teacher went through might look different from those shown below.
Technology (T)
T1 What type of equipment/devices do you use in school?
T2 What type of equipment/devices do you use outside of school?
Participation and Confidence
PC1 This section of the survey asks you to reflect on how the lessons and activities impacted your participation in
class.
- I am more engaged and interested in class activities when we learn and use new technology.
- I felt motivated to learn more about the technology we used in class.
- The technology-based lessons we did in class increased my participation.
- I feel more comfortable and confident using new technology for learning.
- I have used technology and skills I learned in other classes or outside of school,
My Learning
L1 This section of the survey asks you to reflect on how participation in technology-based activities improved your
technology skills.
- I am better at working with my classmates and communicating ideas

- The technology skills I learned through the SFI lessons help me solve problems
- The activities helped connect learning to the real world
- The SFI lessons increased my interest in STEM subjects and careers.
- I am a more creative thinker.
- Overall, I love using technology in learning and want to learn more.
- Overall, the learning experience was positive and I would recommend it to other students.
L2 What was your favorite lesson or activity that helped you learn new technology? Tell us why it was fun.
L3 What activity was least interesting? Tell us why you were less engaged?
L4 What technology tools are you most excited to learn more about in the coming year?

Appendix
Findings
Focus Group & Interview Protocol

Meeting Launch
Facilitator: Welcome Participants

Observer: Press Record / Take Notes
Facilitator, Observers, and Participants: Introductions
Facilitator: Confidentiality Statement, Agenda Walk & Expectations
Introduction
Thank you all for participating in our focus group discussion about the Skills for Innovation program. The goal of this
session is to understand your experiences and perspectives to help evaluate and improve the program. Please introduce
yourself by sharing your name, where you’re joining us from, and the subjects/grade levels you teach.
Confidentiality Statement
Before we continue, I want to remind you that this meeting is being recorded for transcription and note-taking purposes.
Everything discussed will remain strictly confidential. You have been assigned a participant number instead of using your
name, so your identity will remain anonymous. Notes and recordings will only include numbers, not names. Once our
research is complete, all information will be destroyed. Please feel comfortable sharing openly without fear of your
privacy or identity being compromised. Are there any questions before we begin?
Expectations:
I now want to take a moment to review our expectations for today's focus group.
- Open and Honest Feedback: There are no right or wrong answers here. We're most interested in hearing your
honest opinions and experiences with the SFI program.
- Perspectives: We value a variety of viewpoints! Feel free to disagree with others or share a different perspective on
SFI.
- Sharing Feedback: We encourage both positive and critical feedback. Let us know what you liked about the
program and where you see areas for improvement.
- Active Listening: To ensure everyone's voice is heard, please speak one person at a time. This way, we can capture
everyone's responses accurately.
Does anyone have any questions about these expectations before we begin?
Discussion Roles:
- Facilitator: Will ask questions (observer will provide support and type question in the chat)
- Participants: Can choose to respond or be invited by Facilitator
- Facilitator: Might ask follow-up questions for clarity.
Focus Group Questions
Implementation Experience:
- Can you tell us about a time you applied the SFI program in your class, and it went really well?
- What are some examples of challenges you faced when implementing the SFI program?
- In terms of lesson plan format, what adjustments or improvements would you suggest to enhance the effectiveness
of the SFI program?
Support and Resources:

- Regarding training and resources, what support do you feel would have been helpful during the implementation of
SFI?
- Can you share your experiences with SFI professional development courses/sessions? How did these
courses/sessions contribute to your understanding and implementation of the program?

Appendix
Findings
Focus Group & Interview Protocol

Student Engagement and Impact:
- How has your students' access to technology in the classroom impacted your ability to apply the SFI program? Are
there any tools/devices you wish they had access to that they currently don’t?
- How do you assess student progress and learning outcomes when using the SFI program?
- How did you assess your students' readiness to engage with the SFI resources and approach? Did you encounter
any challenges in this regard?
Teacher Development and Confidence:
- Can you provide examples of how the SFI program has impacted your approach to teaching methods and lesson
planning?
- Thinking back to before you started SFI, how has the program changed your confidence and skills in using
technology for teaching, and your overall relationship with technology in general? Can you share any specific
examples?
Catch All: Is there anything else anyone would like to share about your experience with SFI that we haven't already
discussed?
Closing
- Thank you again for your participation and feedback. Your responses will help strengthen the program for future
educators and students.
- As a token of our appreciation for your time today, we'd like to offer you a $20 gift card. If you'd like to receive it at a
different email address than what we have on file, please let us know now through the chat or by emailing
survey@skillsforinnovation.intel.com.

SFI Impact Report_2024

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SFI Impact Report_2024

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SFI Impact Report_2024

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Impact Report

Intel® Skills for Innovation Report i

Intel® Skills for Innovation Report ii

About Intel® Skills for Innovation

Intel® Skills for Innovation Report 1

2 . Focus Group and One-on-One Interviews

Intel® Skills for Innovation Report 2

SFI Program Impact on Teaching and Learning

85% 86% 86% 83%

Favorable Neutral Unfavorable

1. Conﬁdence in Using Technology

Intel® Skills for Innovation Report 3

Level 2 I am new to using technology in learning an am building my foundational skills.

Level 1 I have little to no exposure using technology in learning.

2 . Changes in Teaching Behaviors

3 . Frequency of Technology Use

Teachers’ perceptions of Starter Packs

4 . Correlation between device access and conﬁdence

Intel® Skills for Innovation Report 4

Impact of the SFI program on students (teachers’ perceptions)

75% 84% 82% 83% 84% 82%

Favorable Neutral Unfavorable

1. Conﬁdence in Using Technology

3. Skills Development & Future-Readiness

Intel® Skills for Innovation Report 5

• Enhance and Align Existing Content

• Provide Robust Professional Development Opportunities

• Incorporate Hardware Provisioning and Support

Intel® Skills for Innovation Report 6

• Enhancing Program Content and Resources

• Strengthening Teacher Professional Development

• Addressing Device Access and Infrastructure Challenges

Intel® Skills for Innovation Report 7

Intel Skills for Innovation Report 8

Overview of the Intel Skills for Innovation Program

The SFI program promotes the development of key "future-ready" skills in

Adapter Owner Catalyst Mentor Goal

Level 1: Level 2: Level 3: Level 4: Achieve

Intel® Skills for Innovation Report 9

Intel® Skills for Innovation Report 10

Intel® Skills for Innovation Report 11

Intel® Skills for Innovation Report 12

Focus Groups & One-on-One Interviews

Intel® Skills for Innovation Report 13

Intel® Skills for Innovation Report 14

Subject & Grade Level Breakdown

Subjects taught by participants

8% 30% Science (30%) Technology/Computer Science (19%)

Grade level taught by participants

Early Childhood/Kindergarten (Ages 4-6)

High School (Ages 14-18) Elementary School (Ages 6-11)

Middle School (Ages 11-14)

Intel® Skills for Innovation Report 15

How were you introduced to SFI?

Intel® Skills for Innovation Report 16

Intel® Skills for Innovation Report 17

Students Comfort and Engagement with Type of Device Access

Intel® Skills for Innovation Report 18

Level of Device Access While processing power seems suﬃcient, availability of

100% VR/AR headsets were selected by 17% as another