Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
This article takes an historical look at the lessons learned in the 20 years of computer-based technology integration (Valdez, McNabb, Foertsch, Anderson, Hawkes,
& Raack, 1999). Interjected are the perspectives of usage during the 15-year
implementation within a highlighted school district, including current issues
related to their technology plan. Whereas some issues associated with technology use
have been evident since its inception, others are just now emerging. By studying
the progression from a focus on print automation, to learner-centered approaches,
to virtual learning via the Internet, strategies applicable in todays classroom are
revealed. The consensus of the accumulated knowledge is analyzed in a look at
current challenges and trends.
Technology use finds itself woven into an almost daily educational discourse and debate. It is relatively easy to forget that computer use in
education is a relatively new phenomenon that has evolved to widespread use only within the last 20 years. Teachers began to have
more control over classroom technology use with the introduction of
the first microcomputers in 1997 according to Roblyer and Edwards
(2000). Even as technology use and application advances at an almost
logarithmic pace, many of the issues related to technology use remain
remarkably constant. These include properly trained staff, adequate
equipment, ongoing funding, and successful integration of technology
in order to maximize learning. Effectively meeting such challenges can
magnify the advantages of incorporating technology while diminishing
the disadvantages.
473
474
475
time sufficient and disregarded the computer that sat in the classroom
corner.
Furthermore, there were not enough computers to allocate one to
each class. When class sizes of about 25 students are taken into
account, each student may only have computer exposure on average
once per month, unless an in-class computer was accessed in the
interim. Thus, even when early efforts were made to expose students
to technology, actual usage per student was minimal. A result of this
was an obvious disparity in the level of technical experience by students who received opportunities at home compared to the majority
who did not.
This first phase of computer use can be characterized as a behavioral learning approach based on Skinners methods of branching:
dividing into small units, rewarding collective responses, and teaching
discrete facts (Valdez et al., 1999, p. 5). The advantage of this
approach is individualized self-paced instruction targeting specific
skill deficiencies that still has positive applications today especially in
the at risk populations who need remediation. In these applications it
is critically important for educators to evaluate the software to ensure
that educators as opposed to strictly programmers were involved
in its development. Toward the end of the first phase a more cognitive
approach began with an emphasis on problem solving.
Researchers found evidence that the success of computer-assisted
instruction was greatest in structured content areas such as math
(Valdez et al., 1999). In summary, the computer-assisted instruction
foundational to the first phase of technology use has relevance today
especially when the software, the purpose for instruction, and the
learning objectives match teachers understanding of learners needs
to memorize and respond to predetermined answers (Valdez et al.,
1999, p 7). With equal access to high-quality remediation software,
disadvantaged groups can especially benefit from this learning format
(Roblyer & Edwards, 2000). These findings remind teachers of the
importance of reflecting on the educational goal before technology is
chosen for intervention purposes.
When one considers that even as late as 1998, just over half of
teachers had Internet access at home (Becker, Ravitz, & Wong, 1999),
lack of technical expertise was widespread. Often computer aides,
known as specialists, were hired to demonstrate software programs in
the classroom and to assist students in the makeshift computer labs.
The computer specialist was frequently one of the only staff members
who had technical knowledge and often faced resistance from educators reluctant to implement changes. It was not unheard of for a
students knowledge base of technology to exceed the staff s especially
476
if the student had access to a home computer. Often the focus was on
simply learning the basics of how to utilize the hardware such as
turning on monitors and central processing units, loading software,
and controlling input with a mouse. These basic techniques has to be
mastered before the learning of software applications could occur.
Much of instructional time was taken in the logistics of the hardware.
However, these basic computer skills laid the foundation of technical
knowledge needed as technology implementation transitioned to the
second phase of computer usage in education. Furthermore, and more
importantly, research upheld that school-based computer applications
resulted in an improvement in the attitudes of students toward school
and subject matter (Roblyer, 1989; Roblyer & Edwards, 2000). Any
educator experienced in using computers with students can validate
this result. These combined findings of successes with technology
undoubtedly served to cement technologys place within the classroom.
477
478
479
Evaluation-level teachers create and appraise classroom opportunities for learning beyond the design of instructional software and
accompanying curriculum materials (Decatur School District 61,
1998).
In technology integration, as with almost any curriculum innovation that is successfully implemented, the catalyst for accomplishment
remains the teacher.
The newest challenge is to use technology to individualize instruction to help students meet standards. Teachers should consider using
technology to adjust content to students individual learning styles to
achieve this goal. A meta-summary by (Valdez et al., 1996) verified
that students put more effort in tasks that incorporate technology.
Studies also show that technology positively affects students attitudes
toward school, self-image, and self-confidence (Roblyer, Castine, &
King, 1988). Properly implemented technology use offers schools an
opportunity to transform the learning environment helping students
to meet standards as a result.
For technology integration to be effective in the classroom, the following guidelines can be summarized from the three phases of technology evolution. Teachers must receive adequate ongoing training,
technology use must be matched to the curriculums philosophy and
theory of learning, and adequate numbers of computers must be conveniently located within the classroom. As McNabb (2001) notes,
computers improve learning when there is alignment of curricular
goals and technology uses and assessment measures that capture
evidence that learning has occurred (p. 52). Addressing these challenges should enable schools to transition into a new phase of technology innovation.
480
481
482
483
used (Shields & Berhman, 2000). Zenger and Zenger (1999) also caution us to avoid believing that technology is a solution to all problems.
Research must now focus of developing standards to implement
technology into the curriculum.
One also should consider the impact that information technology
will have on society, including globalization and democracy. Cerf
(1999) reminds us of the need to protect the free exchange of information on the Internet. His concerns proved prophetic as restriction
increased after the events of September 11. Because the Internet
serves as a repository for the accomplishments of our society, we must
ensure that it remains affordable, unrestricted, accessible, and supported by the proper infrastructure. Cerf (1999) suggests that a global
framework of laws should be developed to protect its use. Measures
need to be taken to protect privacy and to create protected content
areas for the young (Cerf, 1999; Robyler & Edwards, 2000). If these
goals are achieved, they will serve to unite the world in the process of
globalization while promoting democratic ideals.
By reflecting on the cumulative best practices of technology integration and by avoiding ineffective practices, educators are better able
to make research-based decisions regarding the most beneficial
approaches to technology . . . in educational settings (Valdez et al.,
1999, p.iii). We must recognize the speed with which technology progresses and be responsive by adjusting our techniques as necessary. It
also is appropriate to acknowledge that some technology applications
remain constant when properly inserted into an aligned curricular
plan. Although technology offers educators one of the most powerful allies
impacting how education is delivered and supplemented, the ultimate
success of our schools still remains in training and supporting quality,
irreplaceable frontline teachers.
REFERENCES
Becker, H. J., Ravitz, J. L., & Wong, Y. T. (1999). Teacher and teacher-directed student
use of computers and software. Teaching, learning, and computing, 1998: National
survey. Report 3. University of California at Irvine: CRITO. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service N. ED437927)
Cerf, V. (1999, April). The internet is for everyone. Speech presented at the meeting of the
Internet Society on Computers, Freedom, and Privacy. [On-line]. Available:
http:==www.isoc.org=isoc=media=speeches=foreveryone.shtml
Decatur School District 61. (1998). Technology plan update for Decatur School District
61. (Available from Decatur Public Schools, 101 W. Cerro Gordo, Decatur, IL 62523).
International Society for Technology in Education. (2000). National educational technology standards for students: Connecting curriculum and technology. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Education.
484
Johnson, D., & Bartleson, E. (2001, October). Assessing technology skills for educational
leaders. Learning & Leading with Technology, 29, 42 45.
Johnson, J. M. (2001a) Evaluating technology resources. Learning & Leading with
Technology, 29, 58 61.
Johnson, J. M. (2001b). Software reviews save time selecting software. Learning and
Leading with Technology 27(6) 1 12. [On-line]. Available: http:==206.58.233.20=L&L=
archive=vol27=no6=software=reviews.html
McNabb, M. (2001, October). In search of appropriate usage guidelines. Learning &
Leading with Technology, 29, 50 53.
Ornstein, A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (1998). Curriculum foundations, principles, and issues
(3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Robyler, M. D. (1989). The impact of microcomputer-based instruction on teaching and
learning. A review of recent research. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED346082)
Robyler, M. D., Castine, W. H. & King, F. J. (1988). Assessing the impact of computerbased instruction: A review of recent research. Computers in the Schools, 5, 117 149.
Robyler, M. D. & Edwards, J. (2000). Integrating educational technology into teaching
and learning (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Shields, M. K. & Behrman, R. E. (2000). Children and computer technology: Analysis
and recommendations. The Future of Children, Children and Computer Technology,
10(2), 1 27. [On-line]. Available: http:==www.futureofchildren.org=information2826=
information_show.htm?doc_id=69789
Valdez, G., McNabb, M., Foertsch, M., Anderson, M., Hawkes, M., & Raack, L. (1999).
Computer-based technology and learning: Evolving uses and expectations. Oakbrook,
IL: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory.
Zakon, R. H. (2003) Hobbes internet timeline. [Online]. Available: http:==
www.zakon.org=robert=internet=timeline.
Zenger, W. F., & Zenger, S. K., (1999, April). Schools and curricula for the 21st century:
Predictions, visions, and anticipations. National Association of Secondary School
Principals Bulletin, 83(606), 49 60.