Dave PrahlSandra Bowman

Lois Reed

EDU 6700 – Technology in EducationDr. Runyan

The Digital Generation

Generation X 1965 - 1979 Beatles18 year old voteApple computers sold as kitsComputer mouseLaser printersWord processorsEthernet (Rosen, 2011)

Net Generation 1980-1999IBM PCs Computer Assisted Instruction (CAI)Classroom PCsInternet in schoolsPalm Pilots (Rosen, 2011)

iGeneration 2000 - present

WikipediaiPodsiTunesMySpaceWorld of WarcraftYouTubeTwitterSkypeNooks (Rosen, 2011)

Digital Generation-real or unreal

NO!—levels of understanding and comfort vary greatly within each generation. (Congenitally

Digital, 2009)

Digital Generation-real or unrealNO!—many students not affluent enough to

have digital experience. (Congenitally Digital, 2009)

Digital Generation-real or unrealYES!—but they are dumb. (O’Conner, 2009)

Supporters & Skeptics of Technology in Education

Supporters of Technology

1. Keeps the attention/interest of the students (Bekebrede & Warmelink & Mayer, 2011)

a. Students are developing in a society where they find entertainment

and attention in front of a TV screen.b. Students are more likely to pay attention to something that catches their interest.

Supporters (cont.)

2. Quicker learninga. Immediate obtainment (Dreon & Kerper & Landis, 2011)

1). Internet (updated info)b. Immediate feedback

1). Heart rate monitors (Partridge & McClary King & Bian,

2011)

2). Clickers3). Test assessments (state testing)

4). Video evaluation (Wang & Myers &

Yanes, 2010)

Supporters (cont.)

3. Information is easily accessible

a. School (Reeve Boles 2011), (Partridge & McClary King & Bian)

b. Home

c. Mobile (Banister, 2010), (Fons, 2010) d. Libraries

Supporters (cont.)

4. Some technologies can be used to reach students who are difficult to reach

a. Students with special needs (Xin & Sutman, 2011)

1). Spell checkers, headphonesb. ESOL

1). Document translation

Supporters (cont.)

5. Ability to communicate outside the classrooma. b. Class pages

c. Wiki d. ee. blog

Supporters (cont.)

6. Is there a benefit in the job market?

a. They will be familiar with the programs and technology that they would be exposed to in their specified job.

b. Knowing this technology could possibly give them an advantage over someone else they are competing with.

c. Not just test passing tests, but needing to know the technology to get somewhere.

Supporters (cont.)“What makes a smart education system?” – Scott

Taylor

Click here to watch video (1:26), or

Click on link in the chat pod.

Please raise your hand when you are finished.

Everyone should be able to achieve in all schools, and later contribute to society in a positive way.

Skeptics of Technology

1. Teachers don’t know how to use the technology (Prawd, 1996)

a. Do not use the technology on their own time to be familiar.

b. Not up to date with the knowledge of the technology.

Skeptics (cont.)

2. Students don’t know how to usethe technology

a. Haven’t been trained fully at school.

b. New technology to them. 1). They haven’t used it at home.2). Use outdated programs

Skeptics (cont.)

3. Teachers aren’t willing to use the technology

a. Lazinessb. Preparation is time consumingc. Feard. Comfortable with old routines

Skeptics (cont.)

4. Obtaining and maintaining the technology is expensive

a. Replacing partsb. Upgrading programsc. Poorly funded schools

d. Schools use money for other purposes (Woody, Daniel, Baker, 2010)

Skeptics (cont.)5. Funding to educate

the faculty and staff on the use of the technology

a. Time to schedule training (contracts)b. Reimbursement for training

Skeptics (cont.)

6. Does the learning of technology teach the students or entertain them? (Bekebrede & Warmelink & Mayer)

a. Is there a purpose to using the technology?

b. Can they learn just as equally without the use of the technology?

Skeptics (cont.)

7. Will the information they learn in school benefit them in the job market?a. Will they be using these technology

skills in their job?b. Is this technology current or is there

something else out there they would use instead?

Points of ViewPublic School Teacher(elementary)Christian School Teacher(middle)Home School Teacher(high)

How Does Technology Impact Learning?

THREE SCENARIOS

1:1 Computing and an Investigation of the first year of 1:1 computing in New Hampshire middle

Study of 21 Technology Immersion middle schools

Experiences of four Ohio K-12 art educators

What it is.

A technology-rich educational reform where access to technology is not shared—but where all teachers and students have individual access to laptop computers

What it is not.

“1:1 computing” refers to the level at which access to technology is available to students and teachers; it says nothing aboutactual educational practices.

Students who have participated in 1:1 computing report:

Achievement in content area learning

Higher-order thinking and problem solving skill development

Workforce preparation

Why does it work?

Teachers play a critical roleHaving a strong commitment from school

leadershipDeveloping consistent and supportive

administrative policiesCreating professional development opportunities

for teachers, particularly the sharing of best practices

New Hampshire Study

laptop computers for 400 studentswireless networklaptop computers for teachersdigital cameras, printersvideo cameras a video conferencing cameraApple Computer's contract also stipulated intensive teacher training and program support

“On September 2, 2003, New Hampshire Governor Craig Benson announced a program called "Technology Promoting Student Excellence" (TPSE) that would provided 1:1 laptop computing to all 7th grade students in six of state's neediest schools. Over 1.2 million dollars was raised from 24 private organizations to fund the program.”

Bebell, D. (2005)

New Hampshire 1:1 ResultsTeachers Reportincreased teacher and student use of technology across the curriculumincreased student engagement and motivationimproved teacher-student interactionsimprovements in student achievementimprovements in students' ability to retain content material

Teachers’ attitudes towards technology were generally positive in both pre and post surveys with the majority of respondents indicating that they “strongly agree” or “agree” to the following statements:

Students create better-looking products with computers than with other traditional media.

Computers help students grasp difficult curricular concepts. Students work harder at their assignments when they use

computers. Students are more willing to write second drafts when using

a computer. Students develop a deeper understanding of the subject

material.

Bebell, D. (2005)

Analysis of 21 Technology Immersion Schools

5 middle schools selected the Apple package15 selected the Dell package1 school selected the Region 1 ESC package (with Dell computers)

Expectations Teachers would become more technically

proficient Teachers would use technology for

professional productivity Teachers would have students use technology

in their classes Teachers would have students use laptops

and digital resources to increase the intellectual rigor of lessons

Shapley, K. S., Sheehan, D., Maloney, C., & Caranikas-Walker, F. (2010)

Classroom Change Expectations

Data collection for the study began in August 2004 and continued through spring 2008.

improve students’ technology proficiency improve student’s learning experiences increase collaborative interactions with peers Improve student self-direction, and

engagement in school and learning increased academic performance as

measured by standardized test scores

Shapley, K. S., Sheehan, D., Maloney, C., & Caranikas-Walker, F. (2010)

Results Full implementation of the Technology Immersion model was challenging, with

just 6 of 21 schools reaching substantial levels of implementation by the end of the fourth year.

Mean immersion standard scores were measured on a 4-stage progression scale with minimal immersion (0 to 1.99), partial immersion (2.00 to 2.99), substantial immersion (3.00 to 3.49), and full immersion (3.50 to 4.00)

Unexpected Results: Level of Student Access and Use declined slightly across three years

(from 2.17 to 2.07) Higher levels of Classroom Immersion were associated with the

strength of administrative leadership, teachers’ collective support for innovative practices, and the quality of professional development

Core-subject teachers at 4 of the 21 schools achieved substantial levels of Classroom Immersion in the fourth year

Teachers at 16 schools had partial implementation levels Teachers at one school had minimal Classroom Immersion.

Shapley, K. S., Sheehan, D., Maloney, C., & Caranikas-Walker, F. (2010)

Impact on Reading and Math Scores

ReadingThe implementation strength of

Student Access and Use (of technology) was a consistently positive predictor of students’ reading and mathematics scores.

Students’ use of their laptops for Home Learning (homework and learning games) was the strongest implementation predictor of students’ reading and mathematics scores.

Math

Shapley, K. S., Sheehan, D., Maloney, C., & Caranikas-Walker, F. (2010)

Technology in 4 Ohio Art Classrooms

School 1 Elementary School used internet to do genealogy

research Students interviewed relatives Brought in objects and artifacts that represent their

families Photographs were taken by a professional

photographer Students scanned photos into computer Using the Astound program they produced

multimedia presentations

Wang, L. Y. (2002)

School 2 Two computer labs at the school and computers in every class room Virtual museum – teach takes art class to computer lab Students research an artist and present a project An after school virtual museum group was initiated:

~ One of their special assignments is to collect students’ works from all of the art classes and select exemplary works.

~ The students in the virtual museum group digitize the selected works, create a PowerPoint presentation, and showcase the presentation on the school web site.

Wang, L. Y. (2002)

School 3 Teacher gives at least one assignment that requires computer use to

every class that she teaches. Students create a Dream Collage using magazines, photographs,.. Teacher introduces students to scanning. Students are then asked to

scan their collages, open Photoshop, experiment with the tools of the program, manipulate the collage and record their work time on a classroom chart for this assignment.

Wang, L. Y. (2002)

School 4 Students are required to print a small book

that combines images and words by using applications such as PageMaker, Photoshop and various word processing programs.

Senior students are required to develop multimedia projects and design websites.

Students are also responsible for designing the school yearbook.

Students publish a literary magazine, portfolio, to showcase their work.

Wang, L. Y. (2002)

A great example of technology enriching the learning

experience

Click Here

Resources Banister, S. (2010). Integrating the iPod touch in K-12 education:

Visions and vices. Computers in the Schools, 27, 121-131. Bebell, D. (2005). An Investigation of the first year of 1:1 computing

in New Hampshire middle schools. InTASK, 1. Retrieved July 8, 2011, from http://www.bc.edu.

Bekebrede, G., Warmelink, H., & Mayer, I. (2011). Reviewing the need for gaming in education to accommodate the net generation. Computers and Education, 57, 1521-1529.

Congenitally digital?(2009). The Wilson Quarterly, 33(1), 76-77. Cradler, J., McNabb, M., Freeman, M., & Burchett, R. (2002). How

Does Technology Influence Student Learning?. Learning & Leading with Technology, 29(8), 46-50.

Resources (cont.) Dreon, O., Kerper, R., & Landis, J. (2011). Digital storytelling: A tool

for teaching and learning in the youtube generation. Middle School Journal, 4-10.

Fons, J. (2010). A year without paper: tablet computers in the classroom. The Physics Teacher, 48, 481-483.

O’Conner, E. (2009). Review of the book The dumbest generation: How the digital age stupefies young Americans and jeopardizes our future (or, Don’t trust anyone under 30), by Mark Bauerlein. New York: Jeremy P. Tarcher/Penguin, 2008. Academic Questions, 22(2), 234-239.

Partridge, J., McClary King, K., & Bian, W. (2011). Perceptions of heart rate monitor use in physical education classes. The Physical Educator, 30-43.

Prawd, L. (1996). Are Our Children Ready for the Future? A Look at Technology in Education. International Journal of Instructional Media, 23(3), 281-288.

Resources (cont.) Reeve Boles, S. (2011, Summer). Using Technology in the Classroom.

Science Scope, 34(9), 39-43. Rosen, L. D. (2011). Teaching the iGeneration. Educational

Leadership, 68(5). 10-15. Shapley, K. S., Sheehan, D., Maloney, C., & Caranikas-Walker, F.

(2010). Evaluating the implementation fidelity of technology immersion and its relationship with student achievement. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 9(4), 1-65. Retrieved July 12, 2011, from http://ejournals.bc.edu/.

Wang, L. Y. (2002). How teachers use computers in instructional practice - four examples in American schools. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 21 (2), 154.

Resources (cont.) Wang, L., Myers, D., & Yanes, M. (2010). Creating student-centered

learning experience through the assistance of high-end technology in physical education: A case study. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 37(4), 352-356.

Woody, W. D., Daniel, D. B., & Baker, C. A. (2010). E-books or textbooks: Students prefer textbooks. Computers and Education, 55, 945-948.

Xin, J. F., & Sutman, F. X. (2011). Using the smart board in teaching social stories to students with autism. Teaching Exceptional Children, 43(4), 18-24.

Concluding Thoughts

In order for technology in

education to be successful…

Teachers and administrators must be on the same page

Teachers must well trained in technology use

Technology must be integrated across curriculum

Health & Physical Education

Health & Physical Education