Specialization Question for Warren Buckleitner

Educational Psychology

January 2003 (advisor: Patrick Dickson)

REVISED MARCH 14, 2003

Dialogue between researchers positively inclined toward the value of technology in education and those of a more skeptical inclination often generates more heat than light. For example, the debate between Larry Cuban and Roy Pea is reflected in the title of Cuban’s book, “Oversold and Underused,” compared with the title of Pea’s presentation: “What We Know and What We Need to Know.” This dialogue has continued for many years, without apparent resolution or movement toward consensus. You have been asked to speak to the local school board of a mid-size school district in Michigan. They want you to help them understand this contradictory stream of research results about the importance of technology in education; offer advice on how to make sense of this research; and suggest technology plans and policies consistent with your interpretation. In addition to your oral presentation, they have asked you prepare a “position paper” that addresses the following specific points.

• Discuss briefly your perceptions of the on-going dialogue on the promise of technology in education, including changes (if any) you have observed. Cite research on both sides.

• Describe your own view on the importance of technology in education, offering research support and explanation for your views.

• Based on this background, propose three specific actions (and their rationales) to the board. You may focus your advice on one level of schooling (elementary, middle school, or high school). Include specific technologies (learning environments, software, etc.) as examples.

• Also, present a plan for implementation, follow-through, and evaluation of the effectiveness of your proposal.

• Discuss briefly your perceptions of the on-going dialogue on the promise of technology in education, including changes (if any) you have observed. Cite research on both sides.

Over the past three decades, the use of microprocessors-based technology in educational settings has been the subject of research and debate.

Proponents of educational technology (Clements, 1992; Dwyer, Ringstaff, and Sandholtz 1991; Kay 1996; Papert 1980; Pea 1995; Sheingold 1991; Shneiderman 1992; Soloway; Spoehr 1994; Suppes 1966; Tinker 1993; Turkle 1995) have suggested that technology could improve, or perhaps dramatically reform schools. Two predictions stand out. The first was from an early pioneer in CAI, Patrick Suppes (1966) who said "one can predict that in a few more years, millions of school children will have access to what Philip of Macedon enjoyed as a royal prerogative: the personal services of a tutor as well-informed and responsive as Aristole." Semour Papert went as far as to say “...much if not all the knowledge schools presently try to teach with such pain and expense and such limited success will be learned, as the child learns to talk, painlessly, successfully, and without organized instruction.” (Mindstorms, 1980). More realistically, Pea has argued that web-based computer tools could be used to intellectual partnerships and cognitive apprenticeships between learners, rather than aim at the “cultivation of student’s solo activities.” He centers this view in the social-cultural perspectives of Vygotsky. “The computer promotes shared problem solving without controlling it directly. The teacher is only sometimes present.. technology may be able to help establish… the general concept of “community of practice” (e.g., Lave and Wenger, 1991).

Critics of educational technology the cost effectiveness of the investment, given the limited proof of performance. They state that technology can distract already overburdened educators from the business of tried-and-true curriculum methods, that have research and test scores as evidence (Cuban, Healy, Stohl). As Cuban writes "technological innovations have never been central to any national movement to improve schooling since the origins of public schools a century and a half ago. Secondly, the seemingly marginal use of computers and telecommunications in schools is due less to inadequate funds and all the typical excuses than to dominant cultural beliefs about what teaching, learning, and proper knowledge are and how schools are organized for instruction." Others question whether the abstract, symbolic nature of computers are appropriate, or might even harm for young children (Healy 2000, The Alliance for Childhood, 2001).

Many of these issues emerged during a debate between Pea and Cuban (1998) called the pros and cons of technology in the classroom (www.tappedin.org/info/teachers/debate.html). Many general issues were discussed, but few specific examples where given, leaving some observers feeling as if the entire debate was stuck somehow in a circular loop.

Moving Beyond the Debate

At the onset of any discussion about technology in education, two points should be made. The first is that the discussion about change, technology and schools is not new, as Cuban and Dockterman remind us. Thomas Edison claimed that his new motion picture technology could “wipe out narrow-minded prejudices which are founded on ignorance, it will create a feeling of sympathy and as desire to help down-trodden people of the earth, and it will give new ideals to be followed.” Secondly, because technology can come in various forms and can support vast number of theories, it must be defined before meaningful discussion of effects can take place. “The first potential difficulty in any discussion of the ‘effects’ of ‘computers’ on children is that the computer itself is a multifaceted invention. The computer may serve as a tutor, an assistant, a coach, a mentor, or a drill sergeant; it may offer experiential learning opportunities through simulations, microworlds, or hypertext programs; it may also provide tools for word processing, data analysis, music composition, and telecommunications ... many effects of computer use are also likely to vary as a function of individual differences in children's aptitudes, backgrounds, and attitudes. As a result, it simply does not make sense to discuss the effects of exposure to ‘the computer’ without a specification of the uses to which it is being put and the children with whom it is being used.” (Lepper, 1989).

What is happening with technology in schools? Here are four observations worthy of consideration by a typical local school board of a mid-size school district in Michigan, as of Spring 2003.

OBSERVATION 1. THE NUMBERS OF COMPUTERS IN SCHOOLS IS INCREASING (BUT BECOMING OBSOLETE QUICKLY). Over the past three decades, the increase in numbers of computers in schools has increased from 1 to 168 in 1983, to 1 to 6 in 1998 (Anderson & Ronnkvist, 1999). In addition, thanks in part to programs like the e-rate, 98% of public US schools are said to have access to the Internet, from 35% in 1994 (National Center for Education Statistics). This survey does not account for the age of the computer, or if it is actually used.

OBSERVATION 2. MICROPROCESSORS HAVE CONTINUED TO EVOLVE OVER TIME, AND DROP IN PRICE. Moore’s Law, the prediction that there would be an exponential growth in the number of transistors per integrated circuit (Moore, 1965) has held true to this day, and is expected to continue through 2010.

Chip  Year Transistors

4004 1971 2,250

8008 1972 2,500

8080 1974 5,000

8086 1978 29,000

286 1982 120,000

386 processor 1985 275,000

486 DX processor 1989 1,180,000

Pentium processor 1993 3,100,000

Pentium II processor 1997 7,500,000

Pentium III processor 1999 24,000,000

Pentium 4 processor 2000 42,000,000

(www.intel.com/research/silicon/mooreslaw.htm).

This rapid evolution of hardware has resulted in a corresponding change in software. In the past year, two new computer operating systems have been released: Windows XP (which attempts to integrate Windows NT and Windows ME), and Macintosh OS X, based on UNIX. Unfortunately, nearly all of the computers found in 98% of USA schools are running older operating systems, considering that the survey referenced in Observation 1 was taken prior to the launch of these operating systems. Both operating systems take advantage recent microprocessors to enable more sophisticated, graphically detailed software. Other advances have been made in LCD computer displays, wireless Ethernet technology and battery life.

The hardware/software innovation has not been limited to traditional computers. A new generation of smart toys and portable computing devices now make it possible for teachers, parents or librarians to bring interactive media experiences to a child, without the complexity of a desktop computer. These include the LeapFrog LeapPad (1999-2003), the AlphaSmart Dana (2003), Neuorosmith’s Music Blocks (2000), the PowerTouch, Fisher-Price (2003), with more on the way this fall.

OBSERVATION 3. THERE IS LIMITED, BUT INCREASINGLY SOLID EVIDENCE THAT THE TECHNOLOGY PROPONENTS ARE RIGHT

A search of ERIC on research on the effects of technology on learning brings up thousands of studies on a wide variety of topics. One pattern that emerges is that the research results are more reliable when both the “technology” and the outcomes are carefully defined (Lepper, 1989). Research has demonstrated the benefits of technology when applied to tasks such as word processing (Bangert-Drowns, 1993), learning pre-math skills (Elliott, 1997), learning about the weather (Gardner, Simmons & Simpson, 1994), reasoning abilities (Raghavan & Sartolis, 1997), and math problem solving (Wenglinsky, 1998) can be found. The computer’s utility for specific functions such as editing video or helping children with special needs (Hasselbring, 2000) has also been noted. In addition, meta-studies on computers and learning by Kulik & Kulick (1991) and Bialo & Sivin (1997-2000) provide useful, but dated summaries of research in this area. One can conclude, when comparing technology vs. non-technology learning settings, that there can be benefits to a technology-based approach, providing the tasks are well defined.

OBSERVATION 4. THERE IS EVIDENCE THAT THE CRITICS ARE RIGHT

A visit to any typical US elementary classroom can prove critics to be correct. Ask a forth grade teacher if he or she uses technology, in any form, for daily instruction. Or examine a typical child’s backpack at the end of the day to see what types of materials are sent home. Many non-interactive, non-self-correcting worksheets there still used, despite significant investments in wiring schools (e.g., with the eRate of the ‘90s). It is natural to wonder why, in an age when microprocessor power is exponentially growing, that student backpacks are still filled with paper. The conventional wisdom leans toward the critics.

If interactive media does bring advantages to the education process, and schools have the hardware, why isn’t it being used? In order for a teacher to use any new technology, the perceived benefits must exceed the perceived. “A model that is teacher-driven rather than district directed, which is based on making time and resources available for teachers to experiment with technology on their own terms, and which includes finding ways to enable teachers to instruct with each other informally about personally satisfying and effective technology uses.” (Zhao & Ropp, 1998). Put another way, “if the technology doesn't support the classroom environment-if it creates a discipline problem or undermines teacher control, either of pedagogy or management, it won't be used.” (Dockterman, 2002).

• Describe your own view on the importance of technology in education, offering research support and explanation for your views.

Microprocessor-based technology hold great promise for the education of children, but most of that promise has not yet been realized. Two questions should be addressed when approaching this issue.

Question 1) How does technology support the development of the child?

If Piaget and Vygotsky were alive in these times, they would advise researchers to pay attention to the existing road maps of human development that they worked to give us; and to look at any new technology through this lens. Cole and Cole (2001) provide six essential human development “tools”, four of which I feel are useful for understanding the proper role for technology in education.

1) Sequence is fundamental in development. In other words, we know a lot about what children can do at each stage, and by giving the a rich foundation at the beginning, we can prevent problems before they occur. This means that we must consider each interactive media experience as a material, and evaluation whether it is appropriate for a child’s particular stage of development.

2) Timing is Important. There are times when there are windows of development where learning opportunities occur that won’t be repeated. As educators, we watch for these opportunities, and use whatever technology tools we have at our disposal to enhance prime developmental opportunities.

3) Development emerges from multiple sources that act more or less simultaneously and interactively. This view is pertinent regarding the nature/nurture debate common in child development. When used appropriately, interactive media products can provide important empowering experiences children. (Dan Shade has documented this in preschool settings).

4) Development is culturally mediated. We must view technology-based products as additional products of culture, both good and bad, and respond accordingly. As online multiplayer games continue to be created, mobile phones and PDAs with Instant message capabilities will undoubtedly move symbols into a child’s life at an earlier age. But that doesn’t mean a child will develop any faster (see #1).

The essential guiding question should always start with “how does this new technology support the learner, when viewed trough the lens of child development processes? Is it worth the price? Only if we can justify it from this perspective is it worth continuing.

Question 2. How does the technology support the existing classroom structures? Envision a 4^th grade classroom in the year 2020. Nearly all educators who have experienced a search with Google or that have played with a powerful history simulation like new Liberty’s Kids knows that technology “offers an incredible opportunity of engaging kids in learning by creating or enhancing communication options, putting learners in touch with more capable others, and fostering collaborative learning opportunities” (Ames, 2002)

However, it is important that any new technology respects existing classroom processes. Only when a classroom teacher decides that technology will take away existing worries, instead of adding them will it have a chance of improving the quality of classroom life.

• Based on this background, propose three specific actions (and their rationales) to the board. You may focus your advice on one level of schooling (elementary, middle school, or high school). Include specific technologies (learning environments, software, etc.) as examples.

Steps to Becoming A “ --INSERT PROJECT NAME--” District

The title for this sequence should be generated, and voted on, by the entire staff so that they have ownership over the concept at the onset. While outside technology implementation plans exist and are useful to consult (e.g., ISTE’s NETS standards) it is important to keep in mind that any change is more likely to work if each member of the district has a stake in the change. (Ropp). Also, many district technology plans tend to emphasis the technology instead of the existing curriculum. The following three-point plan outlines key events that are necessary for successful technology integration.

Action 1. Google on every desk and in every backpack. Every student, regardless of family income level, will be issued a light, durable portable TabletPC-like hardware device that requires no training to use (open it up and it turns on), is theft proof (disables itself if it is the wrong hands) is affordable (multiple venders make the same product), and it runs off the shelf software from many different vendors. It must have enough battery power to last the entire day, and have the ability to link to any wireless network, of the variety being installed currently in MacDonald’s restaurants in Manhattan. A note of caution is in order, from the perspective of the taxpayer. This category of hardware is presently evolving and it is important not to be a pioneer when making district wide purchases. As a rule of thumb, let 100 other districts buy and successfully implement the hardware first.

Action 2. Interactive Teacher Utilities, Including Electronic Report Cards, Attendance and Lesson Plans. Technology must replace the mundane tasks that the teacher presently does. Paper report cards and lesson plans will be replaced with “smart” alternatives that are linked directly to electronic lessons and Internet, so that classroom management tasks are automated and integrated. One can foresee a time when these electronic assessment tools are proven to be reliable measures of individual achievement, replacing the need for state and national standardized tests. In the meantime, here are some specific product recommendations for the teacher’s computer.

· DateBk5, Handango,Palm OS utility for personal organzation

· Dreameweaver MX Studio, Macromedia, a utility for creating and managing Internet sites

· Essential Tools: Teacher Tools, Tom Snyder Productions, teacher utility for making tests, worksheets and puzzles

· Google

· Group Fusion, Centrifuge Solutions LLC, utility for calendaring

· Handmark Checklist 2.0, Handmark, Inc.,utility for making classroom checklists

· KeyContacts,Chapura, Inc., palm utility for keeping contact information

· Learner Profile 3.0, Sunburst Communications, Inc., assessment utility for teachers

· LockerManager, Dudley, Inc., a utility for administrators to keep track of locker information

· McGraw-Hill Learning Network, The (www.mhin.com), The McGraw-Hill Companies, teacher utility

· mCLASS:Reading, Wireless Generation, Palm OS utility for reading assessment

· School Center, School Center, utility/company that offers web development services for schools

· Suite for Teachers, ADLSoftware, PDA utility for teachers

· ThinkWave Educator, ThinkWave, Inc., utility for tracking and sharing grades

Action 3: Interactive Curriculum Materials. A set of well-designed interactive basals that provide each child with an in-depth, quality interactive experience with each subject, with enough depth of content, interactive text books will come with print books as supplements, not the other way around. Last fall, Harcourt announces formation of an eLearning Group (part of the Reed Elsevier Group, who also now owns Classroom Connect). So there are indications of electronic textbooks in progress. Here are some existing interactive materials for the student’s computer.

· Adobe Photoshop Elements, Adobe Systems Incorporated, art, creativity, design, graphic arts, how to use Photoshop

· Decisions, Decisions Online on CD-ROM, Tom Snyder Productions, social studies, current events, critical thinking

· Duke TIP Series: Peace and Protest, erroyo, history

· Holt Interactive Spelling Level 1, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, spelling, reading

· Google, reference

· Hungry Red Planet, Health Media Lab, Inc. nutrition

· HyperStudio 4, Knowledge Adventure, creativity, programming, HTML editing

· Inspiration Version 7, Inspiration Software, Inc., organization, brainstorming, critical thinking

· Math Arena Advanced, Sunburst Technology, math, algebra, geometry, measurement

· Microsoft Office, Microsoft Corp.creativity, spread sheets, writing and presentations

· National Geographic 112 Years CD-ROM Collector's Edition, Topics Entertainment, geography, social studies, history, science

· On Track Time, Money & Fractions 1-2, School Zone Interactive, telling time, money, fractions

· On-Track Same or Different/Beginning Sounds Value Pack, School Zone Interactive, reading

· Oregon Trail 5th Edition EEV, Riverdeep - The Learning Company, US history

· Pencil-Pal Kindergarten, School Zone Interactive, math, reading, shapes, colors, numbers, counting, alphabet, patterns, etc.

· Print Shop 7 School Version for Macintosh, The, Riverdeep - The Learning Company, creativity, design, printing

· ProjectPower v.2.5, Kids Energy, Inc., a utility for finding, modifying assigning and monitoring student activities/projects on the Internet

· QuickMind.net, Sunburst Technology, a complete K-3 online math and reading curriculum

· Riverdeep Destination Math and Reading, another K-3

· Tenth Planet Explores Math Number: Experimenting with Ratios, Sunburst Communications, Inc., math: ratios, equivalent fractions

· The Graph Club 2.0, Tom Snyder Productions,

· Time Engineers, Vibrating Virtues, Inc., science, engineering

· TimeLiner 5.0, Tom Snyder Productions, history

· Type to Learn 3, Sunburst Communications, Inc., typing, keyboarding

When all three of these goals are reached, the benefits of a digital classroom that have been discussed by a legacy of optimistic, mostly constructivist reformers (Suppes, Banat, Pea, Papert, Shank, Snyder, Clements, Shade, Hawkins, Piestrup, Kay) may be realized.

• Also, present a plan for implementation, follow-through, and evaluation of the effectiveness of your proposal.

Using the suggestion of Zhao and Ropp, my first approach would be to start with a “bottom’s up” approach by understanding the processes of individual and classroom development, and asking teachers directly what they want the technology to do for them. But before initially approaching them, a selection of latest products would be showcased for the teachers during a one day “Show and Tell” session. Emphasis would be on technology that they can use immediately (such as a digital camera for the creation of online photographs, MClass Reader for the PalmOS, digital videotape and iMovie, a videoprojector. After this day, teachers would be surveyed to see which products they want to use.

The next step would be to document individual success stories in a publicly, using digital video and photography (e.g., the medium is the message). Each school would post these accomplishments on their Internet site, and examples of effective use, along with lessons learned, would be shared as part of regular staff meetings. The idea is to disseminate the ideas that work, from classroom to classroom. Finally, no plan can survive work unless it results in higher standardized measures of achievement. I would suggest that these measures continue to be used to evaluate the plan.

Conclusion

Few would dispute that most children currently attending US rarely use interactive technology over the course of a typical day, besides a one hourly visit to a computer lab. The current method of delivering content doesn’t branch, self-correct, or tie into any larger assessment system. As a result, today’s teachers are still photocopying and grading worksheets. While the majority of school buildings have high speed Internet access, the nervous system of the network is not complete, until every student is online. These students represent the “synapses” of the digital nervous system. There has been no other time in educational history when there has there been so much opportunity. The Google search engine proves to even skeptic that it is actually possible to put the world’s knowledge at a first grader’s fingertips. Perhaps it is not quite the same as Suppes “own personal Aristotle” but it is pretty close. Every element needed to implement the three steps currently exists—the Internet, wireless LANS, portable computers, and integrated software systems. The trick is to stay focused on what is best for child development, and to give the teachers a stake in the process.