Brookings Papers on Education Policy

Comment by Linda G. Roberts

[Federal Support for Technology in K-12 Education]

[Figures]

My perspective on Gary Chapman's paper comes from more than a decade of policy analysis on technology and learning for the U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment (OTA), coupled with many years of experience as a teacher and university professor and now as director of the Office of Educational Technology and senior adviser to Secretary of Education Richard W. Riley. I have played a key role in initiating and developing the U.S. Department of Education's educational technology policies and programs.

Chapman raises critical questions about how technology is used in American classrooms and its impact on teaching and learning. Programs and policies must be focused on the end result. But attention must also be paid to access, because without access, or even with limited access, much of the promise of technology falls short. The question at all levels of policymaking is not whether technology should be used but how full advantage can be taken of these new tools and resources to provide benefit to all learners. Therefore, policymakers must be concerned about disparities in access as well as disparities in teacher training and operational support. All schools have some computers, and more than three quarters already have some Internet access. But school access cannot be the goal; computers and on-line resources have to come directly to the classroom, just as curricular reform and new teaching materials matter little if they fail to reach students.

In examining technology access, the gap between rich and poor schools has decreased, but the digital divide in classrooms is still real (see figures 1 and 2). The recent Department of Commerce report Falling through the Net makes clear why students in poor schools have the most [End Page 348] to gain by federal policies and programs that address classroom needs. Those same students are the least likely to have access to technology at home or in their communities. ⁷⁷ An impact has already been seen of the first round of the E-Rate telecommunications, in which the greatest discounts were targeted to the schools and libraries with the highest concentrations of poverty. In addition, almost 60 percent or $1 billion of the total amount of the E-Rate funds went to the neediest applicants. ⁷⁸ Moreover, new data confirm that federal technology programs, such as the five-year, $2 billion Technology Literacy Challenge Fund and other programs targeted to disadvantaged students, have helped reduce the technology disparity that would have been far greater without them. For example, while all schools have continually added and upgraded their base of computers, half of the new computers purchased by high-poverty schools were purchased with federal funds. ⁷⁹

In addition to building the infrastructure and keeping it up-to-date and operational, no technology strategy would be successful without focusing on effective and compelling use of these resources. Here is where teachers and the quality of the content and applications are [End Page 349] absolutely key. Four equally important goals are part of the National Educational Technology Plan. They are: ⁸⁰

1. Provide all teachers the training and support they need to help students learn through computers and the information superhighway.

2. Develop effective and engaging software and on-line learning resources as an integral part of the school curriculum.

3. Provide access to modern computers for all teachers and students.

4. Connect every school and classroom in America to the information superhighway.

As OTA's study and numerous other studies demonstrate, teachers need training, not only in operating equipment or getting on-line, but also in linking the technology resources to curriculum goals, content, and pedagogy. And, yes, this takes time and is not easily accomplished. ⁸¹ Recent data from the National Center for Education Statistics are not encouraging. Only 20 percent of full-time K-12 teachers report that they are "fully prepared to integrate technology" in their classrooms. ⁸² However, the 1998 survey conducted by the University of California at Irvine and the University of Minnesota indicates teachers who use technology have [End Page 350] moved well beyond drill and practice, and an increasing number are using computers and the Internet for complex, curriculum-based tasks. ⁸³

The substantial funding in technology and more recently the investment of both dollars and time for teacher development require evidence that they make a difference. It is time to move beyond the evaluations and analyses that were completed more than a decade ago, because their data and the designs are outdated, given today's technology and new capabilities for teaching and learning.

In the past year, a number of studies have offered new evidence of impact or lack of impact, and they raise important questions. The recent analysis conducted by researchers at Columbia University's Teachers College on West Virginia's grade-by-grade introduction of computers for reading and math shows gains in student achievement, especially for the lowest performing students. ⁸⁴ Furthermore, these gains are cumulative over time. However, a recent analysis of the National Assessment of Educational Progress mathematics achievement among fourth and eighth graders raises questions about the value of drill and practice, especially for eighth graders, but show positive impacts for problem-solving and math simulation applications. ⁸⁵

OTA's 1988 report Power On!: New Tools for Teaching and Learning called on Congress to invest in educational research and development (R&D), with levels comparable to the Manhattan Project. ⁸⁶ More recently, the Report to the President on the Use of Technology to Strengthen K-12 Education in the United States called for concentrated broad-scale initiative. ⁸⁷ Up until now these calls have had little influence. What factors contribute to a concerted effort now? Given the large and growing base of technology, and the significant level of investment at all levels, local educators, state leaders, members of Congress, and the research community are demanding results, and there is so much more to analyze. ⁸⁸

I have five recommendations that would advance the nation's use of computers, new interactive tools, and on-line resources and telecommunications in powerful and beneficial ways. These recommendations underlie the Department of Education's proposed Title III, Technology for Education, in the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA).

1. Close the digital divide. With full funding for the E-Rate ($2.25 billion annually), all schools and libraries can have affordable access to telecommunications services, the Internet, and internal connections to the [End Page 351] classrooms. The Department of Education proposes to target funding to the poorest and low-performing schools in the Technology Literacy Challenge Fund and other related programs.

2. Focus on teaching and quality teachers. While technology must be a component of teacher training and teacher preparation, the quality and preparation overall is critical. Increased emphasis on professional development that incorporates technology can help reach more teachers in the field. The opportunity to reach the next generation of teachers must not be missed. As programs prepare teachers in their content areas and provide prospective candidates with field experiences, technology applications must be integrated. Preparing Tomorrow's Teachers to Use Technology is a new program that needs to continue.

3. Raise the standards for content and high-quality software and Web-based learning resources. Technology development is largely the responsibility of the commercial sector, and software publishers look to the education community for guidance. An increasing number have begun to build products around state and national content standards, especially in areas where broad consensus and agreement exist over the standards. Research studies, such as the recent National Research Council report Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children, can have broad influence, especially if the states and districts bring these findings to the attention of developers and provide clear signals about market demand. 89 The federal government can help bring the parties together. Reading instruction is one of the most promising areas for new development, not only because of the substantial knowledge base about reading and its acquisition, but also because new technological capabilities, such as speech recognition, are coming into development. Now is the time to merge insights from research with the creative minds in the software industry.

The federal role can also encourage much broader development of content, from teachers and students in classrooms to faculty on campuses in research centers, with tools that enable collaborative and shared development. Several efforts already highlight teachers' lesson plans, and many federally funded projects share their content development on-line, but much more can be accomplished.

4. Help the education community look to the future; invest in research and development. All projections of technology suggest that costs will decline while power and capability will increase. Education ought to be at the front line, involved in new development, with schools serving as test [End Page 352] beds for new technology and applications. As the federal government invests in information technology R&D, learning applications have to be part of the mix of the R&D portfolio. The Next Generation Innovation Awards Program in Title III of the ESEA reauthorization proposal could help accomplish that goal.

5. Fund evaluation. The time has come to ask hard questions, gather serious data, improve the tools for assessment and evaluation, and conduct serious evaluations. 90 Student achievement must be determined, using both traditional measures and tools that capture new skills and new ways of learning. The imperative now is to develop better diagnostics, better tools for student and teacher self-assessment, multiple-site classroom evaluation protocols, and other new tools, many of which can be imbedded in the technology applications.