Connie Kolosey, Ed.D., serves as the Director of Media, Text, and Digital Learning for the Pinellas County School District in Florida. Pinellas is a large, county-wide district serving more than 100,000 students. It is the seventh-largest district in the state and the 26th largest in the country. Recently, the Learning Counsel’s Charles Sosnik interviewed Dr. Kolosey about the challenges of deploying technology at scale and the practical solutions her district has implemented.
Learning Counsel: How does being in a large district create challenges of scale? Why is consistency important?
Dr. Kolosey: Technology is now a major part of how we deliver instruction, and vendors respond with a wide array of solutions. Many of those options reach teachers directly on a “freemium” basis, while others are bought by principals for individual schools. Nearly all such purchases carry ongoing requirements for professional development and technical support. In a district with roughly 100,000 students and 8,000 teachers, it is simply impossible to maintain technical staff who are expert in every combination of platforms unless we standardize across schools.
Teachers and students move between schools and classrooms, so consistency across the district matters. Just as a Big Mac should taste the same whether you buy it in Florida or California, teachers and students should be able to transition between classrooms without relearning tools or workflows. Standardization improves efficiency for user support, simplifies training, and ensures reliable content delivery.
LC: Your district makes all purchasing decisions for curriculum. What process ensures that purchases align with the core curriculum?
Dr. Kolosey: Our schools have access to a wide variety of tools and platforms, and they retain some flexibility to purchase digital content or devices. To ensure those buys align with our core curriculum and technology infrastructure, we use a formal review process. Our IT Governance Committee includes leaders from Teaching and Learning, Technology and Information Systems, Finance, Area Superintendents, CTAE, Operations, and Assessment, Research, and Accountability.
Schools submit a simple form describing the desired purchase, the cost, and the support required. The committee evaluates each request for appropriateness and for compliance with district policies. Most requests are approved, but the review helps ensure necessary considerations—such as data sharing agreements and integration with the district single sign-on—are addressed before purchases proceed.
LC: Why is collaboration important? How can collaboration create challenges around responsibility?
Dr. Kolosey: Many platforms require collaboration across departments for successful implementation and ongoing support. That said, collaboration can sometimes lead to diffusion of responsibility: when multiple groups are involved, it’s easy for nobody to take full ownership. When problems arise and no single party has authority to resolve them, the end user suffers.
A recent example involved our school news broadcasting system. The multicast encoders and software were purchased years ago by staff who are no longer with the district. The system required an extension on each teacher device, periodic updates, and wired connections—requirements that conflicted with teachers’ growing preference for wireless flexibility. Fixing issues often demanded coordination among maintenance, telecommunications, technology information systems, the cable company, the vendor, and classroom staff. A breakdown at any point stopped broadcasts, and when the system was inconsistent teachers stopped using it.
To address this, we selected a new broadcasting solution and, before rolling it out, convened every impacted department to build a collaborative implementation plan. This clear plan of responsibilities should prevent the “ownership gap” and improve reliability for schools.
LC: How do free curriculum resources affect your process? Do any of these free resources become district-wide?
Dr. Kolosey: We welcome free resources, but we know “free” often comes with hidden costs. Many vendors market free tools to teachers, but these products can create concerns around data security, archiving, and accountability. In a large organization, communicating district policies to every teacher is a significant challenge. Once the district engages a vendor to ensure compliance with district and state requirements, a “free” product can become expensive to manage.
We have successfully made a few free applications available district-wide when data sharing agreements and rostering through our single sign-on were possible. However, we constantly monitor and vet tools to ensure they meet privacy, security, and interoperability standards before broad adoption.
LC: How does your single sign-on solution work with district resources?
Dr. Kolosey: From the end-user perspective, we strive to make resources appear accessible from a single sign-on portal. Many vendors integrate directly with our single sign-on, while others support OneRoster; in those cases we provide direct links from our portal so access remains simple and consistent for teachers, students, and families.
LC: Can you tell me about the personalized learning platform built by students?
Dr. Kolosey: Our Personalized Learning Pathway (PLP) began at the intersection of work funded by a Gates grant and our Bridging the Gap initiative, which focuses on closing achievement gaps. The Deputy Superintendent envisioned a digital platform that would link individualized student data to targeted remediation and enrichment lessons, available 24/7 so parents, mentors, and community members could guide students to meaningful practice outside school hours.
Students at the Center for Advanced Technology at Lakewood High School, who had previously built a hurricane shelter management site for the district, were engaged to design and develop the PLP. Working with Digital Learning, Assessment, Accountability and Research, and Technology Information Systems, the students built the site on SharePoint, designing the interface and coding the data tables.
They faced technical challenges—managing large volumes of data and achieving interoperability among vendors—but iterated through solutions over two years. Ten students were paid to continue development over a summer, and the 2018–2019 school year was the first full implementation. To date, more than 43,000 unique users have logged in. New users are often motivated by seeing personalized information—photos, graduation progress, GPA, credits earned, SAT/ACT results, and NCAA standing—plus playlists of standards-based lessons tailored to their needs.
LC: How does Pinellas Virtual School fit into the district’s offerings?
Dr. Kolosey: Pinellas Virtual School was created after legislation expanded opportunities for full-time virtual programs. Developing a district-run virtual option allowed us to retain students within the district, preserve full-time equivalent (FTE) funding, and ensure students moving between virtual and traditional settings remain aligned with district learning expectations. Currently, about 2,000 K–12 students are participating in this virtual option.
LC: What difference would becoming a 1:1 district make?
Dr. Kolosey: Pinellas has not set a goal to achieve district-wide 1:1 device status; we are currently closer to a 3:1 ratio, with some special programs operating as 1:1. When every student has a device, teachers have more flexibility to integrate technology and individual students can access personalized platforms more readily. However, research does not support continuous device use throughout the entire school day, and the costs of purchasing, managing, updating, licensing, and replacing devices across a large district are substantial. A 1:1 program creates both instructional opportunities and logistical and financial challenges.
LC: Looking ahead five years, how might technology hurt, help, or change content delivery?
Dr. Kolosey: We are already seeing concerns about excessive screen time and the risk of technology replacing meaningful face-to-face instruction. Technology should never be a babysitter that supplants instructional time with a teacher. At the same time, digital tools are powerful for differentiation, collaboration, and creative work. Over the next five years, I expect continued tension as schools seek balance between effective classroom interaction and thoughtful use of technology to personalize learning.
This interview was originally published by The Learning Counsel, a research institute and news media hub focused on the shift in education toward digital curriculum.