Teachers in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) need professional learning opportunities to understand how to integrate geospatial technologies like ArcGIS into classroom experiences. Few studies have examined how teachers engage in professional development and then apply new technology knowledge to school environments. Improving the pipeline into STEM career pathways requires alignment between K-12 STEM teaching and learning with STEM careers; thus, research is needed to explore ways K-12 educators can infuse their classroom practices with STEM industry applications like geospatial technologies. This descriptive case study explored one STEM teacher’s 3-year journey in a geospatial technology professional development program led by a university. Over 2 years, the teacher gained expertise in ArcGIS and eventually created an independent robotics exercise incorporating the technology. The study highlights how teachers’ technology integration pathways vary based on individual experiences, school settings, and teaching assignments. Understanding teachers’ experiences with professional development and classroom implementation provides insight into the challenges STEM educators face when transitioning from training to real-world application. Successful geospatial technology integrations require an intricate balance of teachers’ instructional decisions about content with student engagement and technology capabilities. STEM teacher educators should consider the intentional placement of geospatial technologies into courses that have curricular flexibility with content, instruction, and assessment to increase the success of teacher technology integration.

This qualitative study examined 1st-year teachers’ perceptions of how social media supported professional learning across affective, social, and cognitive domains. Using interviews and focus groups, three novice teachers described using platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube to access instructional resources, seek emotional support, and build virtual communities. Social media enabled just-in-time learning and affirmed teachers’ sense of belonging, confidence, and professional identity. Although participants valued these digital spaces, they acknowledged limits in addressing complex, job-embedded needs best met by in-person colleagues and mentors. Findings suggest that social media serves as a meaningful extension of teachers’ professional learning networks, complementing formal support structures. However, participants often accepted online educators and content as credible without critically examining their visibility or authority. Implications highlight the need for educator preparation and induction programs to foster critical engagement with informal digital learning environments.

This editorial introduces a two-part special issue of the CITE–General section that reexamines technology leadership across K–12 and higher education in an era marked by rapid technological advancement, post-COVID transformation, and the growing influence of artificial intelligence. Emerging from conversations within the SITE Technology Leadership SIG, the special issue responds to the urgent need for conceptual clarity and multidimensional perspectives on technology leadership. The six systematic and integrative literature reviews featured across the issue collectively highlight the diverse roles of teacher educators, academic leaders, instructional designers, K–12 administrators, teachers, and technology coaches. Each paper employs rigorous methodological approaches to synthesize definitions, leadership practices, contextual factors, and recommendations. Together, these contributions reconceptualize technology leadership as a distributed, multi-dimensional, context-dependent construct essential for guiding ethical innovation, supporting systemic change, and fostering inclusive digital learning environments. The editorial reflects on the collaborative process that shaped the special issue, identifies critical gaps for future research, and discusses implications for policy and practice. It also marks the transition from CITE–General to CITE–Current Research, inviting the field to continue advancing scholarship in technology and teacher education that bridges theory, practice, and emerging technological landscapes.

K-12 administrators play a crucial role in practicing technology leadership in order for their schools and districts to effectively integrate technology in classrooms to promote student learning. For this reason, the field needs an agreed-upon definition and a set of best practices to guide administrators’ technology leadership enactment and facilitate preservice preparation. This paper describes a systematic literature review on the definition and best practices of K-12 administrators’ technology leadership, as well as the impacting factors and recommendations for improvement. The authors identified 213 articles from five databases published from 2010 to 2024. Through screening and quality appraisal, 36 articles are included for full-text analysis. Open and a priori coding were used to analyze the included papers. Results include an expanded definition with seven domains, a set of 67 best practices, a list of factors affecting leadership, and an assortment of recommendations for administrators’ technology leadership. Directions for future research and practices are discussed.

K-12 teachers are increasingly assuming leadership roles in technology integration within schools by mentoring peers, modeling effective technology integration, and helping shape the school’s culture for innovation. Nevertheless, research on the role of these teacher technology leaders is limited, resulting in a lack of an agreed-upon definition and best practices to guide K-12 teachers’ technology leadership. This article describes an integrative review to determine the definition, best practices, factors, and recommendations for K-12 teacher technology leaders. The authors identified 298 articles and dissertations from five databases published between 2010 and 2024. After screening and quality appraisal, 10 papers were included for full-text analysis. Open and a priori coding were utilized for data analysis. Results include a proposed definition of teacher technology leadership for technology integration with six domains spanning technology integration, reflective leadership, professional collaboration, stakeholder partnerships, grassroots innovation, and digital citizenship, which offers a comprehensive model for understanding K–12 teachers’ technology leadership. Additionally, the results discuss best practices, key factors influencing leadership, and recommendations for preparing and supporting teacher technology leadership. Future research considerations are also discussed.

This article shares a systematic literature review of journal articles between 2010 and 2024 that focus on the leadership role of K-12 technology coaches and specialists. Using the PRISMA methodology, 38 articles were initially identified, with 18 articles meeting the eligibility criteria. Using qualitative research methods, the researchers found that the job titles of technology coaches and specialists varied based on their institutional roles. Primary responsibilities included planning and coordinating, leading professional development, mentorship and coaching, curriculum integration, collaborating with coaches/teachers, leading reflective practice, providing technology and logistical support, and policy development and advocacy. Effective technology coaches were experienced former teachers who possessed technical knowledge and were flexible/responsive to the needs of teachers. Effective coaches had leadership and administrative support, actively engaged in collaboration and partnerships, and knew how to navigate the strategic management of resources. Barriers to effective coaching included the ambiguous definition of the role, ineffective professional development implementation, limited resources, organizational alignment, and challenges when navigating teachers’ existing attitudes and beliefs. Additionally, unique barriers included assistive technologies, the digital divide, and technological determinism. The discussion includes recommendations for best practices to better support technology coaches and specialists, as well as suggestions for future research directions.