DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 272 182 IR 012 270

TITLE Bringing Ideas to Reality: Technology in Our Schools.Proceedings of a Regional Invitational Forum (2nd,Orlando, Florida, 1985). Schooling and Technology,Volume 5.

INSTITUTION Southeastern Regional Council for EducationalImprovement, Research Triangle Park, N.C.

SPONS AGENCY Nations/ Inst. of Education (ED), Washington, DC.PUB DATE Nov 85NOTE 37p.; For volume 4 of this series, see ED 261 465.PUB TYPE Collected Works - Conference Proceedings (021) --

Viewpoints (120) -- Reports - Descriptive (141)

EDRS PRICE MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS *Computer Assisted Instruction; *Computers;

*Educational Change; Educational Innovation;Educational Principles; Educational Trends;Elementary Secondary Education; *Teacher Role;*Technological Advancement; *Telecommunications

ABSTRACTThis report summarizes a conference sponsored by the

Southeastern Regional Council for Educational Improvement whichexplored issues related to the purposes, roles, and practices of theschools in regard to the new technologies. After a briefintroduction, Part 1 focuses on strategies for integrating varioustechnological approaches into the curriculum, e.g., computers,electronic art, computer assisted instruction, and electronicnetworks. Use of technology in school management is also discussed.Part 2 discusses future uses of technology in tomorrow's schools,addressing possible changes in the structure and functions ofschools, the role of the teacher, problems that may be caused by theimplementation of electronic learning, the challenges of staffdevelopment, and the question of copyright. Part 3 briefly describesthree paths that educators may follow: (1) the full exploration ofthe creative and effective uses of electronic technologies in theinstructional process and in school management activities; (2) theuse of computers to assist in the instructional process, but withoutmaking changes in the curriculum to accommodate the computer; and (3)anticipation of far-reaching changes in the curriculum and publiceducation caused by technology and rethinking the purpose ofeducation accordingly. A list of participants and presenters at theconference is included. (JB)

************************************************************************ Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made ** from the original document. *

***********************************************************************

sun NI""7""""7"0411E77,771,Pr

011111

;.I ," to°44i-

Arraino.4

All

_

U & DEPARTMENT OP EDUCATIONOffice of Educehonal Reeeerch and Improvement

EDJCATIONAI RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)

XThis document has been reproduced asreceived from the person or organizationoriginating it

0 Minor changes have been made to improvereproduction quality

Pants of view or opinions stated in this docu-ment do not necesasniy represent officialOE RI position or policy A

--nor

p

Bringing Ideasto Reality:

Technologyin Our Schools

Air

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

B.H. Willis

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)."

1985 Board of DirectorsHonorable Wayne TeagueSuperintendent of Education, Alabama

Honorable Tommy R. VentersDirector of Education, Arkansas

Honorable Ralph D. TurlingtonCommissioner of Education, Florida

Honorable Charles McDanielSuperintendent of Schools, Georgia

Honorable Alice McDonaldSuperintendent of Public Instruction, Kentucky

Honorable Thomas C. ClausenSuperintendent of Public Instruction, Louisiana

Honorable Richard BoydSuperintendent of Education, Mississippi

Honorable A. Craig PhillipsSuperintendent of Public Instruction, North Carolina

Honorable Charlie G. WilliamsSuperintendent of Education, South Carolina

Honorable Robert McElrathCommissioner of Education, Tennessee

Honorable S. John DavisSuperintendent of Public Instruction, Virginia

Honorable Tom NcNeelState Superintendent of Schools, IVe.st Virginia

The Southeastern RegionalCouncil

for EducationalImprovement

P.O. Box 12746200 Park Offices, Suite 204

Research Triangle Park,NC '7709

(919) 549-8216

The activities repute. thi,spublication were supported, in

whole in in part, by a grant fromthe National Institute of Education.

U.S. Department of EducationHowever, the opinions expressed

!wit, do not necessarily relfect theposition or policy of the U.S. Depart-ment of Education, the SoutheasternRegional Council for Educational Im-

provement member states' depart-ments of education, or their chief

state school officers.

Schooling; a

Ovid

Technology

Series

Volume 5

Bringing Ideasto Reality:

rechnology in Our Schools

November1985

SoutheasternRegional

Councilfor

EducationalImprovement

i14;.4,-74

'IF' 40 -t

I

I?

Contents:Introduction:Bringing Ideas toReality:Technology in OurSchools iii

.ti

Section One:Technology andToday'sSchools

Section Two:Technology inTomorrow'sSchools 14

Conclusions:Three Paths forEducators 24

Appendix:Participants andPresenters r ..... 25

5

IIntroduction I

Bringing Ideas to Reality:Technology in Our Schools

Four years ago, fewer than half of the nation'sschool districts owned a computer, today over 80 per-cent of the school buildings have at least one In fact,well over a million microcomputers were used for in-struction in 1985. Educators are discovering that theyare confronting more than just the problem of acquir-ing hardware Schools are faced with numerous prob-lems, challenges, and opportunities. In short, "Youdon't just plug the computers in

Problems as basic as rewiring and as complex andsubtle as redefining curricular goals must be dealtwith Some of the challengesscheduling, forexamplewere anticipated, others, like defining copy-right, were not. Perhaps, above all, educators are dis-covering that bringing computer technologies into theschools means changeanticipated and not, positiveand problematic. That at least, was the message when100 invited regional educators gathered in Orlando,Flo"ida, earlier this year to share their experiences in`Bringing Ideas to Reality."

The conference was the second such forum spon-sored by the Southeastern Regional Council for Educa-tional Improvement, and it reflected implementationactivities that schools and states are undertaking tobring technology to the region's schools. At the firstforum, in 1983, the invited state and local school educa-tors, university representatives, and educational policy

makers met to consider the implications of integratingcomputers (and other electronic tools) into theschools For many, the discussion was somewhathypothetical Although there was a sense of excitementabout what computer technology could mean, fewschool systems in the region much experiencewith itparticularly on an instructional level Thus,the discussions in 1983 focused on policy Issues.teacher and student competencies in computereducation, computer literacy, networking, softwareconsiderations, and developing state leadership

Two years later, some of the faces were the same,but the chemistry had changed. There was a noticeablysharper, clearer sense of purpose; conversationsseemed less tentative. The change that had overtakenthese educators was clear. they were no longer a grOupof the simply technologically "literate"; they were ex-perts who were moving the technology in many dif-ferent ways to improve schooling for students Sup-ported by a variety of state and local initiatives andthrough a good measure of trial and error, these educa-tors brought to the forum not just Ideas for the future,but realities: sophisticated, statewide data collectionprograms, electronic communications networks, crea-tive software and administrative applications of com-puter technology; andmost importantlymanyinnovative and demonstrably effective ways of using

6

11,

the technology to strengthen the teaching-learningprocess.

Thus, the Orlando conference served, in effect, as aclassrooma forum where these educators couldshare the lessons learned in their efforts to bring tech-nology into the schools. And share they did Over thecourse of the two-and-a-half-day meeting, confereesoffered and absorbed a wealth of informationfromadvice on how to use computers for grade reporting tocautions about copyright violations

Running throughout the discussions was recogni-tion that, in addition to the practical, straightforwardproblems that must be overcome to introduce technol-ogy into the schools, educators face a number of crit-ical, as yet unresolved, issues

Staff Development and CertificationOf all these issues, none is more vital than staff

development preparing teachers to understand anduse computers and other technologies in ways thatbest serve students Nicholas Hobar of West Virginiaobserved that a "major issue of implementation" ofelectronic technologies in schools is "whether or notit's a job requirement." If it is not, then implementationwill be uneven at best A related policy issue is thevariety of certification requirements that are beingadopted or proposed by states in the regionfromgeneral encouragement to teachers to have at least asingle course in "computer literacy" to, in other in-stances, stringent evidence of competence

Determining what level of competence teachersmust acquire to understand and use electronic tech-nology in the schools is at the heart of a series ofimportant, often difficult, questions confronting edu-cators. State and local staff development programs andboth teacher education and inservice activities gainfocus and direction when there is agreement on pur-pose. Certification requirements, proponents say, canprovide that shared purpose

AccountabilityFlorida's Education Comr-issioner, Ralph D. Turl-

ington, raised a key policy issue when he noted thattechnology provides the opportunity to increaseeducation's accountability to the general public bymeasuring outcomes in far more comprehensive waysthan has been possible in the past.

"VVe can use this type of information as a tool forstimulating support," he said, "and also for stimulatingourselves. When people know you're keeping scoreand watchingand you can do that in very positiveways, in my judgmentit can have enormous effect onmotivation and success. At any rate, it's at the heart ofthe strategy we have underway here in Florida. I believeit will work."

At the same time, conferees acknowledged thegrowing problems of accountability in an informationage: the proliferation of information and educational

2

sources, changing perceptions of "basic" skill require-ments, and reporting concerns. It is clear that pres-sures for using technology to increase accountability,from within education and without, will raise new,complex issues for education policy makers

Successful ReformThe Council's Executive Director, Charles J Law,

Jr., challenged policy makers to move in newways in aneffort to engage people in the process of change at thegrass-roots k,e1. The failure of many educational re-form movements, he noted, has roots in the differcncebetween imposition and involvement "The simpletruth is, people need and want to be involved informulating changes that affect their destiny," saidLaw. When that opportunity is denied or limited, wemay be sure there will be great resistance to reform andchange." Policy makers are challenged to find ways tomake full use of the new technologies through a proc-ess that fully engages those who will be asked to usethem, he suggested Evidence that this is occurring inthe various states is uneven

Appropriate ToolsAs much as the technology has de, eloped in re-

cent years, it needs to change even more, these expertsagrued. It is time, they said, that hardware and softwarebe developed specifically to address the needs ofeducation. This plac 3S an obligation on policy makersto ensure that educators who are technologicallyskilledfew in number, but growing are engaged ful-ly in the planning process

This report offers, in summary form, much of thethinking and discussion presented in Orlando Its pur-pose was suggested by the conferees. to share twodistinct, but closely related, kinds of lessons. The firstof these, summarized in Section I, are the practicallessons with immediate application Much has beenlearned in the last two years about using electronictechnologies to improve instruction and school man-agement, and conferees were nappy to share the bene-fits of their own effortsfrom warnings about pitfalls torecommended shortcuts

In Section II, the focus shifts somewhat toward thefuture Jor, even as they compared notes on CAI andnetworking configurations, conferees acknowledgedthat "introducing technologies into the schools" hadimportantand often unexpectedlong-term im-plications as well. While "today's" problems wr,e dif-ficult, they agreed, "tomorrow" offered greater chal-lenges still. At one end of the spectrum were the con-cerns expressed by keynote speaker Mary Alice White,who urged conferees to "recognize how these newtechnologies will impact upon the schools . and howthey will change the role of school in society At theother end loom more specific and immediate concernsabout training staff and dealing with copyright laws inan age of electronic communications

Section One:

Technologyand Today's Schools

Local Initiativesto Promote Technology

When the idea of computers for our school wasfirst broached, some years ago, the first authoritativeresponse was, That's a foolish idea When interestpersisted, and the idea surfaced again, we were told,Well, it may be okay, but the time is not right Thenwhen some people actually began using computersand the idea refused to go away, we heard, 'Yes, it's agood idea but we can't afford it Finally, when com-puters began arriving in our school, we heard the com-ment, Of course I was always in favor of it anyway '''

That story prompted laughter and many noddingheads among the educational technology pioneers inthe Orlando conference room While facetious, it alsowas a familiar experience for mo.,, col iferees The realpoint of the story is that local-level initiative, by anindividual or small group, has most often been thecatalyst in introducing computers into schools. Inter-est and pressure from parents has perhaps been thesecond most influential factor in spurring interest incomputer education over the last four or five years.

However, while there are similarities in the experi-ences of educators who have taken steps into the com-puter age, there also are significant differencesandthose were shared in the remarks of three 'electroniceducators" as they recalled how computers moved intotheir schools. The implementation patterns were thesame. a search for funding, adoption of purposefulguidelines, training of teachers the most complex step,all agreed), and, finally, bringing computer and studentinto one-on-one contact. But, while the developmenta!pattern was the same, the method of accomplishmentwas different for each system

S

The "electronic educators" holding center stage inOrlando represented small- to medium-sized districtsin Alabama, West Virginia, and North Carolina Col-lectively, Herbert Alexander, Marilyn Stone, and JudyLeCroy made these key points, honed by their experi-ences:

Introducing computers into schools is a com-plicated business, replete with unexpected problems,ranging from temperature control and the potentialneed to rewire classrooms to overcoming the resis-tance expressed by many teachers

Yes, it's true. Computers do enhance learning forstudents, or at least that's the view of these educatorsworking in the electronic trenches" since 1980. As onesaid, "Computers in our school have had a positiveimpact on student life Kids come to school early andleave late because they're interested in learning. Com-puters have improved public interest in and supportforour schools and strengthened our relationship withthe public Computers, in sum, are getting high marksfrom these educators for helping education do its ;o1)

The key to getting res'ilts is the training and involvement of teachers Thi districts are using a vari-ety of inducements that are working. arranging forsubstantial purchase discounts on computer hard-ware and software for teachers who wish to own theirown machines, working with area teacher training in-stitutions to establish credit courses in computer in-struction, encouraging teachers to borrow computersto take home over weekends and holidays, involvingteachers in establishing guidelines for the use of com-puters on various grade levels and for purposes such as

L1

special education, industrial arts, ancl vocational edu-cation, and arranging 1,..i-cost sininnei training expen-enCeS for teachers who want (ben] Not surprisingly,teachers respond with interest and enthusiasm tosuch overawes That is a principal reason, said thesethreeeducators, that the can report On success stonesin thew districts

While funding max be a (Mt-1(1th issue, these edu-cators ball' Obtained support trop]11 Many dittel entsources, Inelliding parent-teacher organizations, stategrants programs, and tenercil program] funding for thedisaexantaged

The single greatest problem expressed by theseeducators is the need for additional computers I heelementary school in Welcome, North Carolina, has tenmachines for 800 students One computer is desig-nated for each grade level and is shared by four to fiveteachers, and one is used for special education "1 hegoaland the very real needis to have one computerfor every classroom," said Media Coordinator JudyLeCroy Raleigh County School District in West Virginiagot an early start in the computer business and thushas become a pilot program for the state, reportedMarilyn Stone, and now has about 650 computers avail-able for use by 18,000 studentsthe bt computer -to-student ratio in the state Reporting for the small ills-

trict of Medfield, Alabama, Herbert Alexander agreedhe would like to increase substantially the number ofcomputers that he has contigined into a serves of labset t rags

The three educators-- including PrincipalAlexanderagreed that the intohenient, interest. andsupport of the building pn:ipal is the crucial in-gredient in successful implementation of technologyinto schools Without it, chances of succe,s are remoteat hest, they agreed

As a closing comment, Judy LeCroy noted there'sstll a place for humor even when dealing with some-thing as potentially threatening as it is perrelyedmanvl as a computer At the conclusion of trainingprograms with teachers, she said a "Certificate ofAchievement" is awarded to participants "It has be-come one of the most coveted awards in the district" byteachers who clearly understand they will never bereplaced by something as literal and dumb as a compu-ter The certificate reads "We have not succeeded inanswering all your questions. Indeed, tt e sometimes feelwe have not completely, answered any of them, Theanswers we have given only serve to raise a whole set ofnew questions. In some war's we feel that you are asconfused as ever, but we believe no are confused on amuch higher level and about more important things."

Integrating Computersinto Content Areas

Listen for a moment to North Carolina's DocMcCulloch, the state education department's c onsul-tant for art education.

"I take great pride in art teachers. They are willingto take risks. So I'm not surprised that it was in arteducation that we established one of the first in-structional models for the use of computer technologyOf the twenty-three teachers involved, only two hadany familiarity with computers Collectively, they saidthey wished they had riot entered the program, be-cause it forced them to unlearn so much of what theyknew and made them start over with a fresh point ofview."

Computers have a way of doing that challengingtraditional thinking, insisting upon clarity, rationality,logical thinking Even in the arts

McCulloch was among the North Canillna repre-sentatives speaking about the intqo at ion of new tech-nologies into the content areas in thew statespecifically, in the arts, vocational education, and

writing. Their collective experiences and extremelypositive out' miles proved valuable models for :heconferees.

Technology and the iirts

North Carolina's continuing "Electronic Art" pro-gram began in 1983-84 in six elementary, eight middle'Junior high, and nine secondary schools More than3,500 students participated, "and they came early andleft school late," said McCulloch "Attendance im-proved and drop-outs declined in all of the programs

Each participating school purchased a computerand recommended software (total cost. about $4,5001for exclusive use in the art room The program waseclectic, reaching out to high- and low-achievers thegifted and talented, and special education students

"The role of the students Lecame an importantcomponent to the success of this project," said NIcCul-

9

loch "They were encouraged to become actively In-volved in the training processes necessary for the artteacher and other peers During the year, additionaltraining was offered to the teachers "We found it cht-ficult to keep up with them,- said McCulloch. "A lot isdetermined in the tea( hers themselves At the end ofthe year, more than halt of the teachers decided theywanted to attend additional training courses Wefound that space, time and access to the equipmentare importantbecause the computer truly is a per-sonal tool There were. other findings. as well

Hardware and sottw are choices are of critical im-portance Touch pads a desktop mouse, light pens,and graphic tablets roc ed to he invaluable. But thereare still real limitations "The computer, great as it is, isstill a machine that needs improvement Its not themachine we need in education," said McCulloch. Weneed to design a different tool Not only do we needdifferent courseware but we may need different hard-ware to be applicable to the different courses. Rightnow the same machine shows up in any instructionalarea. In art we ma need something a little differentthan in language arts The other side of that coin is thatwe as educators are trying to adapt our traditionalinstructional methodology to a new tool We need towork on both of thoae issues

The State Department of Public Instruction built anetwork system into the project that proved to be 'amajor factor in ensuring success When anyone had aproblem, he or she could immediately locate someonewith solutions

Technology was used to teach traditional art con-cepts applicable in the various media One importantoutcome, said McCulloch "Our attention became fo-cused on the realization that electronic art is a new artmedium and deserves to be explored in its own right(See bold

The program has been such a success m NorthCarolina that cumoulum components are being de-signed to ensure that the computer becomes inte-grated into the art education program in every school"Every aspect of electronic art will be explored withinthe state curriculum," said McCulloch

Further, with the help of state education experts.many of the 21 teacher training institutions in the statethat offer certification tracks in art education are in the

process of developing a component in electronic art fortheir students

Electronic Artin North Carolina

Art and computers make an interesting mix:Traditional art concepts can be taught

through the use of computers, and then appliedto a variety of media.+ A significant application is the understanding

that electronic art is the newest wave affectingthe art world. It is, in itself, a legitimate artformthe art of the 21st century.

O True integration of all the other art areas canbe possible to the user. Dance, drama, music, andvisual art can be composited into one singularmedia display. The user controls other elementssuch as sound, movement, and color.

Linked with the videodisc systems, the com-puter becomes an extensive teaching tool for artappreciation/history instructions that allow thestudent to interact with computer assignments.

Doc McCullochConsultant, Art Education,

North CarolinaDepartment of Public Instruction

10

Vocational Education

`Give a kid a hammer, and eterything becomes anail Give all teachers a computer. then everythingmust be taught with a computer With that kind ofapproach. says June Atkinson, "computers are quietlystashed in closets, computer labs remain empty . andmoney is spent for tools that are not being used

At the heart of using computers for Instructionalpurposes. she says, are answers to a series of questionsWhat will this tool help us do? Will it help us achievepositive results? In Terms of time and cost, will we beable to achieve results with computers that we couldachieve no other way'' And in vocational education weneed to ask another question. Will these tools help usprepare students for the job market'

In North Carolina, the answer to that last questionclearly is "yes As early as 1979. educators %%ere talkingwith people in business and industry' to establishpriorities for computer instruction with .t notationalorientation. We asked them to look at our curriculumtell us what was outdated and should no longer betaught, what competencies could best be taught on thecomputer, and what kinds of tasks computers wereperforming in the marketplace."

Accounting emerged as a top priority for a modelprogram, and businessmen and educators again sattogether to review software programs and formulateprogram objectives "Next, W2 carefully selected eightbusiness educators and gave them thorough training

Writingwith Computers

Michael Fry offered three concepts that have pro-ved their value in North Carolina for effective useof computers in teaching writing:

Be sure that the teacher understands theequipment and knows how to operate it. Theteacher must understand how microcomputersaid in writing.

Have the teacher train five or six studentsto use the equipment and software. Thesestudents toil: require a substantial amount ofpractice time on the computer in order to havea full understanding of its potential usefulness inthe writing process.

Have these students help train the re-mainder of the class by demonstrating the hard-ware and software, answering questions, andsupervising small groups of students as they prac-tice on computers.

with computers and the selected software programsThey, in turn. held a series of workshops throughoutthe state for accounting instructors.

"Our objective, really, was to create unrest amongthe accounting teachers We tt anted these teachers toperceive the computer as an important new tool intheir discipline and to be highly motivated to gainexpertise in its useas rapidly as possible The strat-egy worked. An electronic network now links count-ing teachers throughout the state, as they continue togain experience in using computers to teach account-ing

Vocational educators in North Carolina engaged insimilar processes as they introduced computer in-structiofi into business and office education, healthoccupations. hone economics, agriculture educationindustrial arts, marketing and thstributhe educationvocational dm elopment, and trade and industrialeducation A key step. in et ply instance, has been col-laboration between content and media specialists indesigning the most effective ways to pros +de studentswith computer skills and engage them in computerassisted instructional activities and skillful use of re-sources in the prnate sector

Computers and Writing

It was Dorothy Parker who said, "I hate to write I

love to have %%men Michael Fry of the North Carolinastate education agency reports that "by using com-puters. we're able to get students to that 'Hove to hatewritten' stage a lot more easily

A five-step computer program for improving thewriting skills of lath graders has experienced notablesuccess The steps are pi-milting. including rest-archdrafting !the no fear, no consequence" approach! re-vision. proofreading and publishing "While the neces-sary software w ill depend on the age of the studentsand their let el of skill development,' said t tv, the lourpiecet, of hardwaw that are essential include the com-puter, a moult tr, one disk date, and a printer"

Prewriting activities include choosing a topic. de-ciding what form to use in writing about that topic. andcompleting research Teachers are actively intonedwith students in completing these steps. encouragingthem to go beyond traditional printed referencesas

they learn more about their subjects They sometimesview films and videotapes, even tap into database services modem,

In the drafting stage, teachers encourage studentsto write clown their ideas freely, with little concern forerrors in spelling, punctuation, or grammar Draft to orkis usually done at the computer Teachers are equallyinvolved in the process of revision and editing. findingit a particularly useful time to work with students tostrengthen skill areas. Tutorial and drill-and-practice-

programs, as well as educational games, often are usedfor this purpose These activities lead to a final editingof the student's paper.

Multiple copies of the finished work are printedfor distribution to other students and for display onbulletin boards Dorothy Parker probably would agreewith Fly's comment that "students find writing muchmore rewarding when they know others will be readingwhat they have written."

Summarizing this successful program, Fry madethese observations. We found that using a computer isfun Kids are used to it, it's like an arcade game. Therewas no reluctance to become involved. What we were

surprised and delighted to find out is that students willcommit words more easily to a microcomputer thanthey will to a piece of paper There's something lesspermanent about putting writing in a machine whenyou know you can go back and correct it

"Computers can do things that humans cannot, atleast as well, and that makes them exciting tools indeveloping communications skills They're fastmuch faster than humans. They're flexible. They'reinfinitely patient They are accurate, and they'll doexactly what they've been told to do. They're probablythe only thing in the universe that truly follows direc-tions."

Major Statewide Programsfor CAI

Every state education agency in the region is work-ing with local districts to encourage effective use oftechnology. Most use advisory groups or statewidecommissions to conduct studies and formulate guide-lines Where the legislatures become active in the issueand provide funding, more even development through-out a state is Rely to occur. Such was the case in two ofthe region's statesArkansas and Tennesseewhosetwo very different developmental paths were sharedwith conferees

Two top executives raised $300,000 over breakfastone morning to launch Arkansas' public schools intothe computer age. Tennessee doubled its sales tax toimprove basic and computer skills. These representexamples of the various funding patterns that stateshave undertaken to provide comprehensive, ambitiousstatewide electronic technology initiatives in educa-tion. Purposes and objectives of the statewide activitieswere different in important respects

Project IMPAC in Arkansas

Responding to fund-raising efforts of the presidentof a major utility and the head of a large computersoftware company, toe legislature establ'shed theArkansas Commission on Microcomputer Instructionin 1983 to conduct a two-year applied research pro-gram, with funding of S2.5 million

A professional of seven headed by CecilMcDermott has made Project IMPAC (InstructionalMicrocomputer Project for Arkansas Classrooms) liveup to its name "Part of my job," said McDermott, "hasbeen to survey the literature Since 1962, there has been

12

as.

ensive research done that we can't afford to over.00h in education It says a lot of things to te, bout f-uvto create an unbalanced curriculum real quick withnew innovations ISee box).

Based on stall research. the Commission de-veloped a program and called toi applications. "It's athree-year ride," said McDermott We pay all the ex-penses, but it's a research and development programIt involves pretesting, posttesting, and so on."

Eighty-nine schools applied for participation inthe program The 22 selected 'represent the studentsmore than the size of schools. %1&re a rural state, so wewent where the children are There are a number ofmedium-sized and large districts involved

The programs were described as "nothing earth-shaking, just a good, basic introduction to CAI/C1\11We by the way, have not spent a single dollar oncomputer literac in grades K-8 Our state is not in-solved in computer literacy at all It %%as the first deci-sion made by the Commission

Research on CAIProject IMPAC's mar research review oncomputer-assisted instruction produced "sevengc.neralizatiuns about CAI with enough regulari-ty to inspire confidence in their use," said IMPACDirector Cecil McDermott:

CAI is most successful in helping learnersattain clearly specified objectives, especially inthe basic skills areas.

CAI saves a significant amount of time over"conventional instruction," as much as 20 to 40percent.

Retention rates fol' awing CAI are at least asgood as, and often better than, retention follow-ing conventional instruction.

Students have positive attitudes towardgood CAI programs and dislike poor programs,especially those over which Iney have no control.

Th appropriate instructional time for CAIfrom both a learner and administrative stand-point is 12-20 minutes on task four days a weekin a given subject.

Tutorial-drill-practice CAI are effectivetypes of courseware. Courseware incorpoi Mingboth Behavioral and Gestalt psychological prin-ciples increase effectiveness.

Achievement gains in reading are about 70percent of the gains in ma ematics when in-struction is supplemented with basic skills CAI.

IMPAC has been involl ed in the de%elopmert, im-plementatioti, and evaluation of 4 diffeirnt pi o_frains nr

the 22 schools, with the participation of 111 teachersgrades 4-6

Computer Managed andComputer-Assisted Instruction

A CMI-CAI program is being conducted to findways to use microcomputers for basic skills instructionin mathematics, reading, and language arts Course-ware and management software are on a 20 megab tohard disk networked to 24 micros in the schools, oneteacher at each of the grade levels, 4, 5, and 6, has eightmicrocomputers in the classroom Instruction is beingmanaged so as to prescribe and monitor the actuallessons taken by the students Records are kept onstudent performance and indicate whet' ?r specificobjectives have been attained

Computer Assisted InstructionThis component is similar to the C\1I -( \I pm-

gram except that floppy disk drives are used withstand-alone computers in the classroom; computer-managed instruction plays a less important roleTeacher management ...id control of access to thecomputers is crucial in both programs In mostschools, two teachers at each of the grade levels 4, 3and 6 have four computers in tneir classrooms

Microcomputer Basic Skills LaboratoriesA lab has been set up in one school district using a

network with a 7 5 megabyte hard disk There are 24ane room; several groups of students come to

the lab each day for about 24 minutes of on-task acti%-ity A 30-unit lab with similar equipment has been setup in another district, and functions much the sameway

Basic Skills Testing and Prescriptit ePro gram

Two school districts are implementing \i kaii-sas Basic Skills Mathematics and Beading I e st 'rig It ()-gram for the microcomputer A management s stemand CAI program an included in the project

The project has held two writing conferences anddeveloped three gin- service course guides that are beingused in thirty in- service training centers in the state Arecommended courseware list has been developedand made available to Arkansas schools for use inselecting basic skills courseware includii' , mathe-matics, reading, language arts. social studies and sci-ence. An updated supplement is published e ei sixmonth3.

With anticipated additii nal funding nom thelegislature, Project IMPAC expects to add 60 additionalschools over the next two years Then. it all goes asplanned, the program will become statewide based onan entitlement formula.

13

`Computer Skills Next Tennessee

lennessee's legislature captured national atten-tion in 198-4 when it enacted its Better Schools Program,establishing a career ladder for teachers and jinn iding$o) million to introduce compute'' -based instructionalprogramming for 140,000 students in grades 7 and 8The program emphasizes the notion of "Basic SkillsFirst" as a first priority, said Betty Latture of the stateeducation agency "'Computer Skills Next' (CSNI fol-lows not far behind in our school improvement plan

Allocation of funding for the computer programfollowed a two-year study by a statewide commissionA major concern was providing eflective training forabout 900 teachers In one summer, 900 teachers weretrained in the fundamentals of the planned course inan intensive, week-long session, followed by a two-day,hands-on workshop

CSN in Tennessee is a computer literacy courseoffered in over 600 schools for eve!), 7th and 8th gradestudent in the state The cuoiculum includes the his-tory and social impact of computing, an introductionto programming, word processing, and data bases, andCAI software About 8,000 single disk computers, withcolor monitors, were purchased for the programat acost of about $730 each This provides a ratio of about Icomputer for every 20 students Each elementaryschool in the state also received a more advanced mod-el to run the Basic Skills management program

Further, each schoo .served a $500 grant to pur-chase instructional software of its own choice Ninesupport laboratories were set up in developmental dis-

torts across the state There is also a statewide %VATSlineit functions like the Help key on many computerkex boardsto provide technical assistance to thosewho need it

The program provided $150,000 to establish sixsoftware clearinghouses Each location supports a dif-ferent subject area language arts, vocational and linearts, public domain, mathematics, science and socialstudies, and administration/school management Thepublic domain clearinghouse has mei- 400 p. ()painsavailable at a cost of S2 each for disk and copying

Tennessee also has adopted a state purchasingcontract for computer hardware, making the purchaseof equipment simpler and quicker for local districts

Other features of the new emphasis on high-techin Tennessee's schools

Thirty school systems subscribe to the specialeducation network, SpecialNet, with services rangingfrom electronic mail to updated national data onspecial education legislation and programs,

The State Education Department is manning amicrocomputer demonstration lab for both hardwareand software in Nashville. Hardware from four majorvendors and software from many sources are availableto try out.

As is true of most states in the region, Tennesseeis a member of MECC, making even more programsavailable to the schools

Tennessee's Education Department is publishinga technology newsletter, has formulated guidelines forsecondary special computer courses, and is develop-ing computerized data collection procedures forspecial education programs,

Bui l ngElectronic Networks

di

"Telecommunications." It's a word that ex-emplifies the whole notion of an Information Age, pro-viding for instanta-eous access to information, fromthe library next door or the other side of the globe.Need to examine 100 references in ed psych to gatherinformation on learning theory? Flip on your computerand modem, pick up the phone, and tap into a majordata base. The task may he completed in less than anhour, for a cost as low as $10especially if you have aclear idea of the information you're after Need to put a100-page document into the hands of someone on theother side of the continent within the hour? Telecom-

municat: ,sakes the job simple, the document canbe transmitted and printed out in elegant style in farless than 6U minutes

What are the educational possibilities of thisrapidly developing technology? in Orlando, con-versations were laced with references to networkingand the development of other multiuse'', multitask sys-tems And speakers from Maryland and Virginia re-ported on their states' efforts to link schools in a moreeffective information-sharing system Highlights ofthose presentations

14 LE]

4

14'

Maryland'sEducation Technology Network

Maryland's electronic network, on line in the fall of1985, will have a pilot program linking the network witheight classrooms. By 1993, planners say, more than1,000 classrooms will be connected electronically.

The most unusual feature of the Maryland plan isthe intent to develop a single standard computer hard-ware configuration for the state's public schools"Many standards currently exist for school- based com-puters used in instruction and instructional support,"said Frank Windsor of the state education agency"Simply put, these standards are not compatible andresult in costly duplication of effort in the acquisition ofboth hardware and software to meet instructionalneeds."

Maryland is addressing that problem by havingpersonnel of the Education Technolow Network (aunit of the state education agency) meet with partici-pating LEAs to review, select, install, and evaluate acomputer configuration that will then become thestandard for Maryland's schools, K through 12

The network has four other major objectives.

Staff DevelopmentOpportunities for state level and LEA staff to devel-

op electronic expertise will be fostered through thenetwork.

Software ReviewThe network and participating LEAs will review,

evaluate, and select from existing instructional soft-

F61

ware and develop new software of its own Adopting astandard hardware configuration, said Windsor, willencourage the development of original sott are sinceeveryone will he wilting for the same machine

Broadcast TechnologyThe network plans to increase public broadcast-

ing capabilities in Maryland to enable LEAs to recenesoftware and other information via this medium on ametered-use basis

ConsortiumFinally, Maryland plans to establish a multistate

consortium to serve as a large base to attract softwaredevelopers to the education marketplace, "and to allowthe economies of hardware and software acquisitionpossible on a multistate scale," said Windsor

VNET in Virginia

IS ANYONE USING DBASEII FORSTUDENT INFORMATION OR FORGENERATING IEP'S FOR SPECIAL ED'WE COULD USE HELP IN WRITING SOMECOMMAND FILES. ALSO WILLING TOGIVE ADVICE WHEREVER WE CAN.THANKS.

WE ARE LOOKING FOR ANY PROGRAMSTHAT DEAL WITH MUSIC SKILLS TORUN ON AN APPLE COMPUTER. THISIS FOR COLLEGE LEVEL BUT EVENELEMENTARY PROGRAMS WOULD BEHELPFUL.

These are typical messages on the ElectronicBulletin Board that is part of the Virginia Network forEducational Technology, a system up and runningunder the auspices of the State Department of Educa-tion since Jairuary 1984 Every public school in Virginiahas been issued a user ID that permits access to thenetwork's services from 8 a m to 8 p.m , Mondaythrough Friday.

The system includes three components. a BulletinBoard, Electronic Mail, and Software Evaluations Thebulletin hoard is currently restricted to queries andannouncements related to educational technologyThe electronic mail feature provides for the transmis-sion of private messages, up to 400 characters each,that are accessed by password

Users of the system are invited to read (or printout) evaluations of software packages or to "upload"(transmit to the system) their r.r.yri remws of softwareprograms. The system can contain about 500 reviews ofup to 1,000 characters (about 1 typewritten page) eachThe system also contains software reviews from Micro-SIFT of the Northwest Regional Educational Labora-tory.

1 0

Managing Electronically:Making SchoolsWork Better

Schools are complicated places to manage, withuntold burdens of scheduling and record keepingtasks more or less amenable to cent' al control No oneever asks if such jobs as bus scheduling, grade report-ing, managing the school lunchroom, gathering datafor state and federal reports, or generating tests arecreative or pleasurable They are generally acknowl-edged to be king-size headaches that simply have to bedone

Technology is changing school management asprofoundly as it is likely to change the instructionalprocess itself Administrators are finding ne's sat:sfacLion in their work as they ask the ubiquitous computerto perform drone tasks that are, for humans, arduousand complicated. Computers seem to love themor atleast they rarely complain

Conferees in Orlando heard a fascinating presen-tation on the use of the microcomputer as a tool foreducators, and they learned about statewide informa-tion and record management programs coming on-line in Florida and Noi th Carolina

J R Pennington, a school principal helm e he be-came director of Georgia's Educational TechnologyTask Force, plays with computers like a kid with a newtoy His fascination with the machines0,ith whatthey do and what they can be made to do--is evidentand infectious.

As a principal in a Small Georgia school, he wa,anxious to explore the new world of technology Likemany others, he found existing sottwa3 limiting inmany instances and simply unusable in others, Teach-ing and learning together, he and his school colleaguesbecame "educational hackers"eventually writingtheir own prcranis or modifying others beyondrecognition For an hour and a half in Orlando, hecaptivated his fellow educators by booting up and run-ning some of these home-grown products. The pro-grams fell into four categories. teacher utilities, ad-minism ,e uses, instructional uses, and planning

Pennington's running commentary, as he de-scribed his test generation and test scoring programs,went something like this.

"I have a file of questions on this disk that a teachermade several % ears ago I'm going to pretend that I'm anAmerican histoiy teacher, and I'm going to generatetest I.crhaps last year I had stored several hundred

16 11

questions in a fill' of my ow n design I'd like now to gnmy students a test

"The computer comes up and asks \ hat file ofquestions I'd like to use I'd like to use a file called'history The computer IS going to the disk and loadingin only the index to those questions 1 here are severalhundred questions in this file, so It takes a minute ortxx o to randomize the index

"1 hen the computer asks, AVhat °Inertly.. would)you like to measure with this test I'd like to measureobje( nve 34 'Flow many questions tvould you like onyour test'' Normally I'd select 13 or 20 Also, laNt week Itaught objective 32, I'll take two questions on that

'So I simply go through the process of determiningwhat objective I would like to measure, and how manyquestions on the test will relate to that objective WhenI've finished, the computer says, 'flow many differenttest sheets would you like"'' lhis means how manydifferent forms of the test do I want to create If thereare 50 questions on the disk about objective 32, andwant 20 on the test, the computer %yin go in and ran-domly select 20 from the 50 w hen it prints the first testFor the next test, it will select different questions So Iend up with equivalent tests, but they will not heidentical tests

'I think some of the teachers, when they began touse this, were surprised that sixth period no longeralways scored better than first period Test validity is ani portant Issue

Once the test is administered, there's the questionof scoringand another locally concocted programoffers a few interesting wrinkles here, as well "We havea program we call Score and, on the same disk, ScoreX'ersion 0, that looks just like Score, except the teacherhas the opportunity before scoring the test to look atthe question he or she has i..sked the student and say tothemselye-, 'If the student misses this particular ques-tion, what would I like to give that student as Aremechation activity or what w ould I like to tell thestudent about the question nussed'' You have thechoice to load imp the computer four Imes ofinformat umanyt hing you'd like to say about the pd r-

titular question before you score the test It might he,for example, 'You missed question 1 I'd like you toreread pages 23-26 in the hook and % Ork examples 8and 9 at the cool of the chapter, where you will find theanswer to this question I hus, each sto 'dent gets acompletely unique set of remediation statements aspart of their score, based on w hat they have demon-strated they know or don't know on the test This canlie a xerx powerful tool in the hands of the teacher whounderstands instructional design Just the presence oftechnology in the hands of the teacher doesnt improveInstruction It perhaps allows Ilt'W ways and oppor-tunities to nut wove, but, still, those fundamental teach-ing skills need to be then'

In like manner. Pennington demonstrated pro-grams that customize recipes in the school lunchroom,make grade and report keeping easier', take care ofattendance, and handle other fundamental manage-ment concerns His experience on the school lex el withthese kinds of computerized management tools con-vinced him that

Because they are quicker and more accurate forcertain kinds of tasks, computers tvill save staff timeand energy and, in all likehhood,nuprove morale "Oneimportant and unanswered question How will we usethis additional time that technology will make availablefor both teachers and adnumstrators9n

Computers do a better job of record keeping, thusthey generally will bring in added revenue sin iply bykeeping better track oil what's going on in the school

Computers can be extremo lsx useful in eqahlish-ing and maintaining Irene!' relationships with parentsand the community in general It twosomes far easier tocustomize communications tyith parents, for example,to provide them with more. and better information,through the use of technology, about their children'sprogress in school

The original or modified materials des eloped inGeorgia are available through the state education] agen-cy rSee Appendi,k for the names and ,iddresssess of pr('-senters)

12

Using technology to Gatherand Manage Records

Equity loas a high price tag land, of course, in-equity's price tag is even higher) One of the con-sequences of the public schools' mandate to reaclo outand serve the educational and social needs of an ania-zingly diverse group of young people is the layers of

accountability that funder sancl the general publioimpose on the process 'I t,e time-energy-effort burdenon local district personnel is staggering I echnologyopens a door that tx ill oh atomically redact. that burden,sharply merease accurac, of tabulations and general

17

record keeping, and thus, in many cases, bring in morerevenue to local districts from funding sources. Whileperhaps less fun than a computer program that willscore 100 tests per second, information and recordmanagement programs have a major role to play inpublic education. Orlando conferees learned aboutsuch developing statewide programs in Florida andNorth Carolina.

Standardization a Key in Florida

Florida's school system will increase the speed andaccuracy of its record keeping as it moves toward stan-dardization, Robert Friedman of the state educationagency suggested as he described the emergingstatewide Education Information Data Base Plan.

The plan, fully implemented, has four goals thatare easy to express and far more difficult to achieve:

build more flexible, integrated data bases at thestate level;

reduce the data burden on school districtsthrough streamlining of reporting;

promote equitable computing resources andcommonly defined information systems at the locallevel; and

facilitate more efficient and rapid exchange ofinformation within and between levels of the stateeducation system.

Fully implemented, the plan will consolidate noless than 18 separate reports currently required ofLEAs into a tingle individual student record. Some ofthe implementation objectives provide a good idea ofhow the new system will be introduced. Items:

January 1, 1985State course numbers wereassigned for use in each school district, to be used forreporting purposes July 1 and thereafter. This in-troduces the key concept of standardizing reportingto permit files to be computerlzei

June 30, 1986The state-level Student Informa-tion Data Base will be operative, integrating stateeducation files currently maintained separately tc per-mit more flexibility in manipulation of data.

June 30, 1987Each school system will imple-ment an automated Student Information System,which will include all state-required data elements andprocedures for local record keeping, for state repor-ting, and for the transference of records andtranscripts to other school districts and postsecondaryinstitutions.

July 1, 1987Individual student reporting willbe initiated from local districts to the SEA, replacingcurrent aggregate state reports submitted by schooldistricts. The data will be tiled electronically.

Similarly, the plan sets timelines for introductionof staff and financial data base plans.

North Carolina's Five-Year .13,in

North Carolina's goals are much like Florida's, butits approach has been quite different. Following a bidprocess, a computer system consulting firm was re-tained to develop a five-year plan to introduceautomated information gathering and record keepingin the state.

Projects currently under /ay, said Elsie Brumbackof the state education agency, include such fundamen-tal matters as data collection about personnel and cer-tification status of teachers. The first piece of the pro-gram to be fully up and running is the Student Infor-mation Management Systems (SIMS). It is designed for:

Pupil record maintenance.Class assignment preparation and review.Competency test score documentation.Attenclance and membership reporting.Exceptional children records maintenance.School administration support including relief

of teacher administration workload.Basic education program monitoring.Special program cost accounting and education

results analysis.Eventually, sa' -1 the system's director, David

Bryant, SIMS files will include classroom-level statisticsfor students and teachers, ADM and principal'smonthly reporting data, annual competency testingresults, basic program statistics, exceptional childrenheadcounts, special program reporting, professionalpersonnel activity reporting, and student and masterschedules. The SIMS package will be fully integratedall of these data will be entered only once for all ofthe functions described.

Two advisory committees have been formed toprovide guidance and aid for the SIMS project. TheManagement Advisory Committee, composed ofsuperintendents, state personnel, university pro-fessors, and interest group representatives, providesguidance with general policy. A Steering Committeemade up entirely of school principals providesassistance with the details of implementation.

1813

Section Two:

14

Technology in Tomorrow'sSchools

Will it Change the Structureand Functions of Schools?

The "technological revolution" isn't happening inone neat move Rather, it is fundamentally unpredict-able and is likely to remain so for some time and ofcourse, even that prediction is very uncertain). Plan-ners gazing into their crystal balls foresee advancesthree to five years into the future. More often than notthe changes occur within a year and may themselvesbecome obsolete as new electronic innovations appearin the marketplace.

One consequence of this technology-bred instabil-ity is that it is difficult to predict many c,f the changesthat may occur in public education in the future "En-lightened" educators, those aware of the currents ofchange, need to be sensitive and flexible, always pre-pared to address the learning needs of their studentswith the most effective tools at handbut with theknowledge that those tools may change tomorrow

An important part of the Orlando agenda was toexplore the ways technology can be used to do manyschooling tasks more quickly, accurately, and efficient-ly. The validity of the tasks themselves was not, for themost part, the topic of discussion. There were ex-ceptions, howeverespecially in the remarks of thekeynote speaker, Dr Mary Alice White of ColumbiaUniversity's Teachers College (her comments, in editedform, are included below) The realization is beginningto emerge, it seems, that technology will not simplysupplement the activities of contemporary educators,it will change the teaching/learning process as weknow it today. How will that occur? Some ideas sur-faced at the Orlando conference.

Individual Instruction of StudentsWe are just beginning to understand the potential

of the computer to interact with one student to pro-mote learning. "With the computer," said Nicholas

Hobar of West Virginia, "we will be able to find out, forexample, how long it took a student to do a long dwi-sion problem, where he got stuck, and what patternsand learning styles are evident You won't have to waitfor the student to tell you, or guess

Military ResearchThe three main branches of the military are joining

resources to study the educational potential of elec-tronic technologies The thrust of military research isan effort to create learning activities that are designedfor individual use, make the learning program asengaging and entertaining as possible, and take fulladvantage of such technological breakthroughs asvoice generation and graphics capabilities in small,portable units

Ann Leopold of the Army Research Institutedemonstrated several products of that research foreducators in Orlando.

CHIP is a computer-based, hand-held in-structional prototype that the services are using toincrease the reading skills of recruits from the sixth tothe ninth grade levelin about six weeks. This highlyportable device has many of the qualities of an arcadegame It is designed to be taken into the field Recruitsfind it fun to useand they do so by the hour CHIPcontains voice generation Testing leading com-prehension, it gives the user three choices for eachcuestion it asks When a short series of questions isanswered correctly, the program moves on to the nextunit. CHIP also has graphics capabilities

A vocational education model of CHIP, designedto he taken to the job site guides recruits throughprocedures for maintenance of equipment and vehi-cles The program includes line drawings of equip-ment, with zoom capability down to the smallestcomponentsto see how things work and how they fit

together "Conceivably someone who has never seen apiece of equipment before can be led through trouble-shooting maintenance procedures with this device,"Leopold said

CHIP is education in a briefcase And it worksextraordinarily well. When control groups using CHIPand receiving standard classroom instruction werecompared, CHIP learners did nearly twice as well asthose in the classroom The military services also areconthiting extensive research on educational applica-tions of interactive videodisc instruction, Leopold said

While CHIP is designed to meet a very specificinstructional need of the military, its significance ismuch broader. As a model for the efficient use of elec-tronic technology to solve specific vocational and re-medial instruction problems it has great potential inthe public schools

Greater Flexibility for TeachersTeachers are becoming more technologically

hterateand therefore are demanding more of soft-ware and hardware manufacturers Said Michael By ofNorth Carolina, As we move into tutoring, we will needprograms that illoxv teachers more flexibility in us-ing the computers. A major problem of the past hasbeen the inflexibility of software programs. With the

introduction of authoring systems, that liability iscoming to an end Language teachers can use thevocabularies they wish to teach, not just those pre-scribed in the software."

Preparing for ChangesEducators need to prepare for technological ad-

vances that at the moment may be in some hacker'shead, but are likely to be in our stores tomorrow J.R. Pennington of Georgia demonstrated some of thoseitems with educational usefulness They inchul- awristwatch that contains a vocabulary of about 10,000words in five different languages, which can be usedinterchangeably; music and voice sythesizers for com-puters, adding a powerful learning dimension to themachines; computers for less than $100 that can beused to compose music, and calculators not muchlarger than a postage stamp. This is a modest andlimited sampling of the innovations and devices nowinvading the marketplace, he made clear. What effectwill they have on the traditional teaching/learningprocess in our schools? Will they be recognized as op-portunities for learning and therefore be welcomedin the schools, or will there be resistance to the un-familiar, forcing creative products and the learningthat goes with them outside the school domain?

The Role of the Teacher

Where will teachers be, how will they function,in this new school environment that seems destinedto be influenced by the electronic technologies? Howwill teacher training institutions prepare their studentsto work in this setting? Those questions fuel a livelydebate in education. Mary Alice White, who is a direc-tor of Columbia's Electronic Learning Laboratory, saidshe thought "some teachers ought to be put into thisfuture learning environment, and we should askourselves: What are the teaching functions? What cankids get from teachers that they can't get from thetechnology?

"I think schools should be rethinking their cur-riculum and should be asking themselves: What in theworld can we do with schools, going into the infor-mation age, that is uniquely educational and that noone else is doing?

"My belief is that there are two important needs.One, children need to be taught how to evaluate thequality of information they receive. Infoglut is goingto overwhelm us all; we need to teach kids how toevaluate it. And, two, I think it's time we taught nu-

agery comprehension in the schools. We teach howto read and decode, but I think you have to learn toread and decode images. Imagery is the language ofthe information age. I would go so far as to say thatyou cannot make an informed judgment today unlessyou know how to look at images in an educated way."

White believes institutions of higher educationwill rapidly become proficient in using the newtechnologyand that a new level of expertise will findits way into teacher training programs and, eventually,through their graduates, into the public school system"Teacher training institutions need to be doing muchmore At Columbia, we're inventing a future le;,rningenvironment in which we're going to put all of thetechnologies in the service of learning We want to seewhat learning looks like, what happens to learningwhen you put in students of different ages in a momwith all of the technologies We start with no assump-tions about what the curriculum will be. We ask only.What happens?"

Following are her remarks at the Orlando con-terenc-;

15

Dr. Mary Alice White

The Future of ElectronicLearning and the Schools

To set the stage fora look into thefuture, I'm going to begin by assum-ing that we were all around in about1650 in England and that we hadthe vision to see what was going tohappen. We knew the printingpress had been invented, and wehad seen the Psalter and the Bibleprinted in vernacular languages.Being full of foresight, we madesome predictions:

We predicted that the printingpress would enable ordinary mor-tals to read the sacred Scriptures intheir own language. As soon as peo-ple had access to the Holy Word, wepredicted that there would be achallenge to the authority of theChurch. We predicted that some-body would use the printing pressto question the interpretations ofthe Church in Rome and wouldoffer different interpretations of theScriptures. We predicted, in fact,the (mergence of someone likeMartin Lutherand the Ref-ormationwhich is pretty goodpredicting.

We al o predicted that thedevelopment of a printing pressand of reading materials wouldmake people want to learn how toread so they could have access to in-

F1-61

formation. This would mean, weanticipated, the development ofsystem for teaching reading. So wepredicted that the common schoolwould be developed, well beyondwhere it was in 1650, which wasnot very far. We went on to predictthat before long all the children inEngland would be going to school,not just to learn to read, but to learnto count, and to write. So wepredicted the rise of the publicschool, largely because of the print-ing press.

We went on to predict that thingswould not stop there. We thoughtthat if you gave people a little tasteof education, they were going towant more. So we predicted therise of universal education from anearly age to adolescence and that allchildren would be required to at-tend school at the expense of thestate. (This prediction was con-sidered totally ridiculous in 1650.)

Finally, we predicted that, withthe development of the publicschool and the desire on the part ofpeople for more and more informa-tion, the level of education wouldrise over the next few centuries un-til there would be more student,'than farmers in an advanced

society.This last prediction came true

in our countryin the 1960s, when,for the first time in human history,there were more students in ourpopulation than there werefarmers. This might help us tounderstand what happened in the1960s. Instead of Shay's Rebellion,we had the students' rebellion.

As you can see, we were verybright back in 1650. We predictedthe major impact of the printingpress. We were right in assumingthat it was revolutionary; that it

affeJ society in the broadestsense; that it would change institu-tions; that it would cause theemergence of a new onethepublic school; and the division anddecline of anotherthe Chu' Al inRome. We learned from that lessonthat once people have access to in-formation, there is no way of turn-ing back. Access to informationmay be the most important politicaltool that people can have.

For those of you who may haveread Barbara Tuchman's most re-cent book, The March of Folly, youwill recognize that our predictionswere not shared by a series of Popesin Rome. They made some pretty

21

dr eadod nos. ikes by no'uncle! standing \dim was happenlug "I hey made fir e mistakes thatIiat e some special meaning tot u,today .1 educator,

First, they (lid not I ecognize thenit e loon of the pi lining

Second, they dui not s,'e the 'a 4implications that the pi wring pt e,swould hat e ac r o.. z.,01

14110/, they dal not see 111e 1111pall

of the printing ess on then' ownin,nt itionthat of the Church in

Fourth, they did not anticipatethe implications for the loss ofpower of then 1W11 institution

Fifth, they did not de\ clop apositive plan to maintain wadeiship position

,I111 g( mg to argue fOdaN 111,11

educational leaders face senile of thesame problems that the Popes lacedin the 16th century with the arrivalof the printing press This time thesc hook are faCed with the develop-ment of new informationtechnologies which ai e going tohat e, I belie e, a \TEN' great impactOn our society

flax mg had the benefit of histori-cal hindsight with respect to the et-periences of 1630, I am going tostick my neck out and make sixdictions about the dexelopment ofthe new information lechnol-ogies--bV IN'111C11 I mean not Just the

computer, but videotape, videodisc,

«imputei -di wen videotape, MI-NN oiling, AtTll 0111C Mall, and 50f01 Iii i ti t1110 that these 1,t"A' 111-

111,1n011 sec 1111010gles IN111:

1 I alter the fundamental nature ofthe learning process,

2i pram ide a nett lea' rung s'sterriand require a nett pit c hologt oflearning,

31 alter the content of !that islearned,

41 Drot ide an alternative educa-tional environment,

5/ provide a learning environmentin which almost anyone still beable to learn almost anything,and

6i provide a curriculum of in-dividual choice in tt Inch the in-dividual nal choose what tolearn, where to !earn, when tolearn, and how to learn

If these predictions prove at allaccurate, they will bring with themsonic problems. obviously I w (awllike to look at these problems fromthe point of view of an educator,ignoring for a moment some of thelegal and political implicationsFour problems that I see will he

Problem # 1Schools trill lac k ui articulated

curriculum I see die developmentof a curriculum at home, and theother at school, and the inav ormay not pi ore to he «impatible

Problem ri 2

The way in w Inch our schoo11currently are organized probahlwill become unworkable and w illneed to be reconceptualized Outschools are organized hy age(which is what a grade means1 onthe assumption that the matei 1 11 is

being learned for the first tulle bythe pupils Ot, curl :cilium elle( isthe belief that certain things areappropriate for first gradeis andothers fur eighth graders -a I -hetbased on the assumption that thisis the rust major contact that thechild has with that mateiial If thatassumption is wrong, as I 01111k it

well might bC %%all liome learning,then we must ask how should rteorganize a school ui w Inch child! en

2.4

"Today, all the newtechnologies are incompetition with theschools.Furthermore, theyare competitive withrespect to everyaspect of theschooling process."

of the same age are going to bring anenormous range of knowledge ofthe same school sub): ct

Problem #3The third problem confront

the teachers For they, if we keepthe graded system, will be asked toteach standar LI material to pupils ofthe same age, despite those pupils'widely different levels of com-petence (Indeed, they are eingasked to do that right now I What inthe world is a teacher going to dowith that situation'' the teacherbecome an information manager%A/11mm el' that is'

Problem #4The fourth maim' probleh: gill be

that the schools will nu longer con-trol access to the skills and knowl-edge essential for an educatedcitizen and workel Ibis is probablythe most profound change of all It

stokes at the basic assumptions ofthe public schools IA hat happensto schools when they no longerhave a monopoly on access tolearning' Will they find themsek esin a historical parallel to that of thePopes xn ho do longer controlled a-cess to the sacied Scriptures'

The beginning of the loss of con-trol mei' access to lean rung startedsome time ago, although I do notthink we recognized it It began a bitwith the radio, but it certaiiik tookoft with the widespread installationof television in the 1950s We, aseducator;., outer saw telex !sum kmwhat it is, w Inch is nut a wasteland,not lust an entei Liniment system,but actually a second edur diurnal

"It may be that thereally crucialeducational problemconfronting us andour children is`infoglut'."

system. It meant that schools m_longer controlled access to in-formation Children could turn tothe television for access to certainkinds of information This meantthat the schools had a competitorThat was only the beginning

Today, all the new technologiesare in competition with the schoolsFurthermore, they are competitivewith respect to every aspect of theschooling process in content, inhow to teach, in how to make learn-ing fun, in how to motivate thelearner, and in providing socialinteraction among children that islearning centered (which somesoftware now does provider Butmost of all, the technologies chal-lenge some basic assumptions inpublic schooling today They com-pete with schools by offering theoption of learning by individualchoice, as opposed to learning in agroup setting, at group pace, and bygrade

We, as educators, failed to seetelevision forwhat it was It sneakedinto our living rooms as mereentertainment and has turned intoan alternative information systemAnd the new tr chndogies are goingto turn learning into a combinationof education and entertainmelit

All of this happens at a time whenschools are weathering a period 01intense criticism In nw view, oneset of criticisms has come fromcomparing television with school,and this has conic from the children They have found that learningfrom television is fun and, by com-parison, they find school holing attimes

Another set of criticisms hascome because we are the most edu-cated society the world has ever

18

known No society anywhere in thehistory of man has been as edu-cated as the United States' societytoday The more society is edu-cated, the more likely it is tocriticize its educational systemEverybody is an expert oneducationeven though we do notagree on what is good education'That is not going to go away Themore educated we become, themore likely that education will be amajor focus of debate, and I thinkthis is rather healthy But, the erainto which I see us going is one inwhich the schools are going to befacing increasing competition fromalternative learning environmentsAt the same time, education willstill be increasing in our society, soschools are likely to come understill more competition and criti-cism I am sorry to have to say that,but I think it is accurate

What then should school leader-ship do, faced with this prospect ofa rival in learning at home', Mindyou, I did not say it was a rival inteachingbut I did say it was a rivalin learning, and a growing one andin a society that is highly educatedI think school leadership todaymight take a lesson from what hap-pened to those 17th century Popesand do several things

First, school leaders need todevelop a very broad picture of thechange that all the technologies w illbring, and 1w all, I mean not focus-ing exclusively on the computerWithin a vear or so, I am reasonahlysure we will he seeing computer-driven videodisc as well ascomputer driven videotape, and ifwe do not anticipate that change,we will he caught with our compu-ter terminals down

1 his year, there are expected tobe twenty million VCRs (video cas-sette recorders) in the homes in thiscountry at least twice as many asthere are computers VCR sales thisyear are up 78 percent, computersales, 10 percent People are beingentertained and being educated byvideo cassettes right now Thismight suggest to school leaders that

we should pay attention to thattechnology It is a wonderfulmedium for modeling, if we areinterested in modeling behavior,and, as educators, I think that is oneof our primary goals We will see arise in networking and in electronicmad

So. the first job as I see it, is todevelop a broad picture of the fu-ture of all the technologies It isoften pointed out that technoloRvlsadopted in ways that are un-expected by the ones who invent itI was told recently that there aretwo large groups of users for theTandy-100 portable computerJournalists make up the first largeuser group, for reasons which we allwould expect. Those in the secondlargest group like the computer'sportability and its speed of com-putation, and they are great admir-ers of the speed with which the datacan be dumpedthey are bookies

Second, I think that, unlike thePopes, we as educators should seekan understanding of what this tech-nology will mean in terms of socialchange It certainly will affect thework place as well as the home, itprobably will affect commercial es-tablishments (sonic already haveinstalled videodiscs) It will affectwhat we want to learn and how wewant to learn It will put more andmore information into the hands ofpeoplea trend with profoundpolitical implications

Third, I think that we have torecognize how these new tr 'h-nologies will impact upon the

"We, as educators,failed to seetelevision for what itwas. It sneaked intoour living rooms asmere en:ertainmentand has turned intoan alternativeinformationsystem."

2

:ems

14.11h.

schools I have already indicatedthat I think they will change the roleof school in society: The school willno longer be the controller of theaccess to learningit will be onlyone of the doors to learning. I thinkwe need new ideas about how toorganize schools. And we needthem soonbefore it happens tous.

Fourth, given these changes,we obviously will need a newunderstanding of what teachersshould be doing If we were verysmart, I think we would be ex-perimenting now with new teach-ing functions for the new tech-nological environment.

Fifth, we will need articulationbetween what is being learned athome and what is being learned atschool.

Sixth, I think schools need todevelop a positive plan to sunivewithand bythe new tech-nologies.

Let me make very clear what myvalues are about schools. I care verymuch indeed about the survival ofthe public school system. A democ-racy without a public school systemwould be in very serious trouble. I

want to see the public school con-tinue as a healthy, lively institution.In order to do so, I believe schoolsmust become much more imagina-tive about what they do in the newlearning society that is differentfrom what they are doing right now

It will not be enough to buy somecomputers. It will not be enough toset up a computer resource room orlaboratory. Computer literacy willfade out very quickly In fact, com-puters will be only a small part ofthe picture of what is coming So, inaddition to my predictions, I wouldlike to offer some suggestions forwhat the educational leadershipcould be doing to meet the elec-tronic learning revolution.

Suggestion #1First, I suggest that we recognize

that the school market is a verysmall part of the softwar marketand therefore does not have muchclout. Textbook manufacturers arenot terribly interested in producinga lot of software for fear they mayhurt their sales of their textbooks.People who design software for thehome are not very concerned withthe school market, which mayrepresent 10-30 percent of the total

24

software market What an schoolsto dO One obvious thing theschools could be doing is to Jointogether within states and acrossstatesto put their purchasingpower together so as to influencethe standards of software and hard-ware being de,igned Parentswould welcome activity on the partof schools in setting some stan-dards.

You and I know that some soft-ware is very good, and a lot of soft-ware is not very good This is a logi-cal place for the schools to assertwhat they know, which is whetheror not this particular piece of soft-ware is likely to help a child withthis particular subject in the schoolcurriculum It would establish theschools as an institution that caredabout technology in a meaningfulway for parents and consumers

Suggestion #2Schools must make up their

minds about what they are going todo with the technologies I am sureyou have heard advocates of manypoints of view, so I will advocate myown opinion on this. I think com-puter literacy does not belong inschools, if by that you mean teach -ing children how to use unusEblemachines The computer industryshould not ask the schools to dotheir job for them Industry shouldbe designing machines that are aseasy to use as television (wnich allchildren from age 4 can operate inabout 15 seconds). Precious schooltime and resources should not bespent to teach people how to usepoorly designed tools I also do notsee much point in teaching pro-gramming languages, except forthose few students who want tolearn them I do not think youshould have to know a program-ming language to use a computer asa learning tool.

At the present time and this maychange quickly), I see computersbeing used as a learning tool pri-marily in one area, and that is as aword processing tool Computersare superb writing tools. If I wererunning a school today, that would

[191

be where I would put my moneywould encourage parents to buvappropriate xvord processing hard-ware and software for the home iwould encourage word processingin school in every part of the CLI:le-

LIM I would encourage teachersto encourage pupils to write with acomputer I would spend money toget computers into the school, and Iwould make them available to par-ents after school In short, i woulddo anything and everything I couldto say, "Here is a useful learningtool It is called word processing,but what it is, is an electronic fingerthat helps you to write If I were asuperintendent or a member of astat, education agency, I would beusing a word processor in my office

Suggestion #3Educational leaders, through an

association, should be setting upstudy committees on videotape,videodisc, and videotextto antic-ipate how they will be used at homeand how they might be used inschool Committees should bestudying networking, electronicmail, and the use of data bases athome, at school, and at work, andthey should be making recom-mendations and carrying out trials.We cannot lead without informa-tion, and information has to be up-to-date If I were running a schoolsystem, I would be doing my best toanticipate what will happen, decid-ing which of the technologies (or allof the then)) could be used at schooland at home I would be changingmy thinking from looking at schoolin a narrow way to looking at learn-ing in a broad way

"Computers aresuperb writing tools.If I were running aschool today, thatwould be where Iwould put mymoney."

I must confess that I worry a lotabout what could happen iii the fu-ture if certain scenarios unfold I

can imagine technology mm mginto homes, into libraries, intomuseumsbecause it already ismoving there I can see educationaltechnology moving into shoppingcenters, into public parks, intostoresbecause it already is mov-ing thew

I can see education moving out ofthe public schools in this scenarioIf this happens, ecru' fition will nolonger be the school's major func-tion

I worry that schools are reactingto these educational technologiesas though they were just anothersubject to be learned, such as acomputer language or computer lit-eracy. Some schools seem to beresponding to a technological revo-lution by trying to absorb it into thetraditional curriculum

worry that we educators are notasking the right questions Toomany of us are asking. How can webox this innovation into anothercourse? Another credit? Anotherclass period?

The questions we should be ask-ing are more difficult to answerbecause they demand that we reex-amine our basic assumptions aboutschools and learning.

The questions I think education-al leaders should addresshopefully in association with othereducational leadersare questionssuch as this

When people can learn a wydevariety of subjects at home througha combination of technologies suchas computer, videotape, videodisc,and networking with peers, thenwhat is the school's job going to be?

Since children cannot stayh.. me because their parents arenow both working 160 percent ofmothers with children under 6years old are now at work), theymust go somewhere during the dayand presumably that somewherewill be school. Question. How is theschool going to be something morethan an unattractive alternative to

"What wouldlearning look dike ifwe put the power ofthe technologies towork for thelearner?" -children who have access toentertaining learning technologiesat home?

What would learning look likeif we put the power of the tech-nologies to work for the learner?

What would a technologicallearning environment look like(You will notice I did not use theterm "classroom

What should learners have incommon who come together tolearn with these technologies? OrShould they come together? Do weneed a "help" function as a live per-son in the room or a live person atthe end of a communications net-work:-

What will be the learner's viewof reality when the learner movesfrom learning from speech, to print,to hands-on experience, to sim-ulations that represent a more ab-stract conception of reality? Whathappens when the direct experi-ence and the simulation give con-flicting perc..dions of reality?

How do learners deal with abroad flow of data which vanes inacc-racy, relevance, and concise-ness?

These are fundamental ques-tions Fundamental questions arewhat you ask about a revolution. Ifwe do not ask such fundamentalquestions, we will not ask the rightquestions If we do not ask the rightquestions, we will make the terriblemistake of hying to confine radicalchange in little boxes The boxeswill never hold it The learning rex J-lution will escape those little boxesIt will go out into the home and themuseums and the libraries andpublic places, and it will leave theschools If that happens, the publicschool system will become a day

I 0

care center for people who are fix eto eigliteenyears of age I'hat makesme worry

And I worry about software beingdeveloped by the private sectorwithout any participation by a pub-lic agency or representative xx howill ask' Is this appropriate educa-tion? or good education') or desir-able education? or does it makeser-a in the head of an eight 'ear-old?

I worry about who will be able toafford these learning technologiesand the software, and who will not

But-1 also am excited andthrilled when I see learning withthe new technologies that is re-sponsive to the learner's pace, thatis under the learner's control, thatis interactive, that is fun to use, andthat is full of images This is whatlearning could be like, and it is veryexciting What a wonderful placeschool could be

We are no longer' the school thatwas invented because of a printingpress Pupils will have choices thatthey did not have before. Whenpeople have choices, they makecomparisons. When they makecomparisons, some options aregoing to come of well, and someare not As an educator, I wouldhave to say that the institution wecall schools will have to change ifit is to survive in a meaningful way.It could survive in a nonmeaningfulway as a place for children to gowhile their parents are at work, butI don't think you and I are in-terested in that

For schoolsand by schoolshere I don't mean rust K-12 schools,I mean colleges and graduateschools and schools of educationare clearly going to have to changeto be an attractive alternative towhat people will be able to get ontheir OW11. Why should a studentcome to my school of education at agreat deal of trouble and expense(be unable to park her car and paywhat she feels is a great deal ofmoney1 for a course in which shesits and listens to somebody talk? In1985 that does not make a whole lotof sense.

All of us educators haze glue inour heads about the great %attic ofhaving people listen to us talk,which I am illustrating at this verymoment What the new tech-nologies say to me is that there aremany different ways to learn Peo-ple can learn from hearing some-one talk, yes, but they also can learnin a game format, and they canlearn through manipulation, theycan learn through all kinds of inter-activity, and they can learn ex-tremely well through images

All of this leads me, as an educa-tor, to recognize that the school is-nt going to control the access to

orning in the future In fact, it doesnot today

School leaders might well askthemselves What is our uniqueeducational role in the middle of an

"I would like to seeour schools have thewit, the imagination,the intelligence, andthe courage toanticipate, topredict, and toplan."

electronic revolut ion ' 1.1 hat can wedo in the schools that is consistentwith our institution and vet makes adifferent con tnbu t ion?

It may be that the really crucialeducational problem controntingus and our children is "infoglut

Educational leader's could beasking themselves, 'What are theskills that people are going to needas they move into an age of learningthrough the new technologies?"Should school be the place whereone learns how to evaluate the qual-ity of information? Should school bethe place where we learn how toorganize information for memorystorage and how to retrieve it?Should school be the place wherewe learn to cope with an over-whelming amount of information')

26

I think the answer to those ques-tions is "yes Schools should be de-fining and teaching the skills iv-gulped to handle "Infoglin

One skill that will be needed isthe ability to evaluate the quality ofinformation A second skill thatalready is needed is the ability toanalyze images Imagery is the newlanguage of the in forma non age. It is

also the dominant language in ourpolitical life It is crucial that ourchildren learn how to decode im-ages, as information carriers, rust asthey learn how to decode printThis is a rob for the schools that isbegging for initiative

I am teaching a course in Elec-tronic Imagery this year, for the firsttime, at Teachers College, and theseare some of the questions and wor-ries that are on my mind It is toughgoing because it makes me rethinkall my assumptions about educa-tion and schooling I have to askmyself which of these skills andknowledge areas can best belearned using the technologies?Which of these has to be learnedface to face with an instructor?What can this technology do betterthan 1, as a teacher, can do? *Thatcan I do that is better than this tech-nology? I am asking these ques-tions, and I hope you are If we don'task these questions and if we don'tdevelop some way of understand-ing what is happening to all of us,and to our schools in particular, Ithink we are going to 1w bypassedThe schools are running out of tune.

the worst thing that could hap-pen is for schools to see only the!larch% are, the gimmicks, thehooplato 1w blind to the broadsocial change affecting all aspects ofour society, but particularly theschool, and to avoid thinking abouthow the school should change it-self If we don't change intelligently,I think we will repeat the message ofthe 17th century We will be for( Alinto an Educational ReformationMaybe that is nievitable Butwould like to see our schools havethe wit, the imagination, the in-telligence, and the courage to antic-ipate, to predict, and to plan

21

The Challengesof Staff Development

A poignant question lingers from the 1960s. "Whatif they gave a war and nobody came?" hi the 1980s wemight ask, "What if technology offered opportunities torevolutionize schools and teaching and learningandno one paid much attention'"

That no one" has to mean teachers, because it 1:,teachers who are key factors in the teaching/learningprocess. Of all the topics that swirled around the three-day gathering in Orlando, none commanded more en-ergy and attention than this. How do we help teachersto understand and use these new electronic tools withenthusiasm and success? Efforts tc enrich and expandprograms in teacher training institutions are impor-tant, of coursebut given the reality that 80 percent oftoday's teachers will still be in the classroom ten yearsfrom now, the fundamental job is one of in-servicetraining and staff development. Those who spoke onthe topic in Orlando made it clear that approaches andmandates vary from state to statebut a commontheme that emerges is that using techi.ologv itself mayprove to be the best way of all to involve teachers in theinstructional applications of technology

Kenr.eth McGill of the Virginia state educationagency described the Commonwealth's approach atask force defined three levels of ability in educationalcomputing, basic literacy, utilization in instruction,and specialization. We decided that by 1986 everyteacher in Virginia should have level one traininga16-hour program with 13 specific objectives Then thequestion was, how are we to provide this kind of train-ing to 65,000 instructional personnel in 1,700 schoolsand 140 different school divisions by 1986? The answer

certainly was to use the technology, so we decided touse instructional TV. With some limited funding pro-vided by the legislature, we developed and produced a16-program series around level one objectives." Theseprograms are 30 minutes long; the 16 hours provideone continuing education credit.

The "utilization in instruction" level of com-petency in Virginia is for educators who will be usingcomputers as instructional and management tools Aminimum of 45 hours ofinstruction orequivalent expe-rience and study is required to attain this level, effectiveuse of a program language is necessary, as well The

decializahon" level is for teachers who want specialpurpose training. The idea is to develop people withsped..lilies who can serve as resources in differentareas, such as programming languages, developingand using instructional software, and developing database systems. A state agency goal is that between 5 and10 percent of the educators in Virginia be qualified in atleast one area of specialization by 1988

In Florida, said Doris Nabi, the Office of TeacherEducation coordinates the master in-service plans forthe local districts and also coordinates a series of sum-mer institutes for teachers In 1984-85, the office a('ministered a $9 million program to provide teachertraining in math, science, and computer educationThis exemplifies the commitment Florida has made to

institutionalize tech nolog in our school districts," shesaid. Further, different bureaus and offices within thestate education agency have staff development pro-grams that often include gaining proficiency in compu-ter technology There is also 1 statewide system forevaluation of special education software

Robert Re?se in South Carolina, part ol the Office ofInstructional Technology that includes instructionaltelevision and radio, has been bh,y, providing three-hour computer workshops for teachers, especiallythose who teach grades one through eight lie and fivecolleagues share responsibility to reach out to thestate's 34,000 teachers in 1,000 schools Included in: it activities have been establishing guidelines for thek..,, -chase of instructional software in mathematics and"angL age arts A "blue-ribbon" committee of teachersstud.ed countless software reviews as part of that !woe-es.,. While evaluations indicate the workshops havebeen successful, Reese said that he and stall membisare increasingly turning to use of the state educationalcommunications system to do this instructional work

2'/

The Question of Copyright

Some educators 11 laV get their hands slapped itthey don't get them out of the cook, jar, ShirleyMcCandless of the Louisiana state education agencywarned Anxious to find effective educational materialsfor t IWIrStlidentS, lanV educators arP rOpying compu-ter software programsoften unknowingly breakingthe law Part of the problem is that there has not been adefinitive court case expressing clear guidelines foreducators

The expert advice offered in Orlando w as simple Ifin doubt, don't do it Its probably illegal

"There's going to be a test case coming WI' quik-ly," McCandless said, "and I don't want it to ime:eanyone in my state Or, hopefully, In yOUrS In theSoutheast, only Louisiana, she said, has state laws deal-ing Neith copyright

It is a matter of finding a solution to a majorheadache for the computer industry, she said In thecorning school year, public schools will spend s13 5billion on educational software And while this is asizable chunk of business, dealing with the educationcommunity, said 1cCandless, "Is like stepping into aLouisiana bayou swamp You need to hear the night-mares, the horror stories, that puhlishers and de-velopers lot software' are going through Issues of

backup copies, multiple disks, networking, licenand on and on It's just a matter of time before it allends up in court Seeking to be helpful, the Inter-national Council for Computer's in Education hasissued a statement on network and multiple machinesoftware asking that

"Educators lace tl.e legal and ethical issuesinvolved in copyright laws and publisher license agree-ments and accept the responsibility for eAtorcingadherence to these laws and agreements Budget con-straints do not excuse illegal use of software

"Hardware vendors assist educators in makingniaxinnim cost-ellPrtae Use of the 11,111M are and helpin enforcing software copyright laws and liCen e agree-ments

"Software developers and their agents shareresponsibility for helping educators ohseri. e copyrightlaws and publishers' license agreements by dm elopingsales and pricing policies

Gar' Becker, a con an I III the Ii Id, describedthe situation in different language. "We' e mixed edu-cational rationale and the law hfticationa I rationale!,that we don't have sufficient budgets to deal with thesethings it we buy one copy, we certainly, legitimately

must be able to reproduce it '1 he prObleni IS that thisdoesn't hold up in court

"'Who's going to catch VOU ask 'vhat are theodds') What are they going to do to me,' It's a moralpredicament in education What kind of model do wewant to present to our students)"

Educators also "need to be awai, of the differencebetween licensing and purchase If you license a pieceof software and they tell you it can be run on an Applecomputer while hanging over 1-95 on a bridge at 3o'clock in the morning on machine number 6005that's the only way you can use it, folks So it ou signlicensing agreements, please be aware that you areobligated to the license, and copyright doesn't hold

There are other tricky, unresolved ISSUE'S If ateacher writes a piece of software and is using it in herclasses, who owns the teacher or the school system''What if the teacher wrote it at home, but did the workon a computer borrowed from shool')

As they say in the high-tech age, stay tuned forfurther developments "All policies regarding technolo-tw are cast in Jena" commented presenter Leroy FinkWhat w helieve is true today may well prove to besomethir quite different tomorrow 1 he SoutheasternRegional Council for Lducational Imprmement willcontinue to assist educators in threading their was'through the thorny thicket of computer coliyight law

In sum, the copyright issue is both difficult andcomplacated for educators, and it Seems essential thatSLAs provide leadership to ensure, that legal iequire-ments are fulfilled It is also certain that the copyrightIssue, still being defined, w ill become increasingly im-portant for public education in the years immediatelyahead l'he Orlando conference began the process ofcharting waters which are clearly full of shoals

2523

Conclusions:

Three Paths for Educators

The Orlando conference on using electronic technology in the schools dealt with the details of manytropics and in so doing, gave shape and subtance tothree major themes.

It is true that a sizable portion of the educationalestablishment has its heels in the sand when it comesto using and understanding the educational potentialof electronic technologies Repeated suiveys, for ex-ample, have indicated little movement on this issue inteacher training institutions across the country Thereasons this is so are many, the consequences are thatvast learning opportunities are being developed forlearners of all ages with limited involvement of schoolsand educators The Orlando conferees, by their pres-ence and their participation, made a -lear statementthat they believe in a full exploration of the creative andeffective uses of electronic technologies in the In-structional process and in school management actwi-ties

It perhaps is true to say that of those who areexcited about the potential of computers and otherelectronic devices to assist in the teaching/teamingprocess, a substantial majority see these machines astools to make today's curriculumand today'sschoolswork even better This point of xiew wasclearly expressed by one conference participant, whorose to say, "Certainly I intend to use computers toassist with the instructional processI can see theclear advantages in doing so. But I don't for one secondplan to change my curriculum to accommodate thecomputer. The computer will serve me and the stu-dents. We will not serve the computer

Finally, there is a third group- --in Orlando, MalyAlice White ;vas their chief spokespersonwho believe,he technology will indeed change the curriculumand a good deal more about public education It willchangeit already is doing sothe way people think,the way they collect information, process it and use it.It introduces a wholly different approach to learningthan the linear, sequential pattern of the print-dominated age. People like White, and many others inOrlando, have no interest in promoting technology But

they believe technology, powerful as it is will pusheducators to ask, again and again. What is the purposeof education' What can we do in education to fulfillthat purpose for our students'

As the Southeastern Regional Council's ExecutiveDirector Charles Law said in closing comments at theconference, "When we are ready to deal with that ques-tion of purpose, then the questions of the shape andcontent of our curricula and the use of technology willbe simple problems with self-evident answers

Appendix:

Participantsand Presenters

Victor AkelDirectorStudent and Program EvaluationTennessee Department of Education132 Cordell Hull BuildingNashville, TN 37219(615) 741-2851

Gail AlbrittonSpeaker's OfficeFlorida House of RepresentativesRoom 324 CapitolTallahassee, FL 32301(904) 488-0710

Herbert AlexanderPrincipal, Rutledge Elementary School1221 Eighth StreetMidfield, AL 35228(205) 780-8647

Aleda R. AndersonDirector, Computer ProgramsLexington School District 5P.O. Box -38Ballentine, SC 29002(803) 781 0457

Arlayne AsliCoordinator of Staff DevelopmentRichland District I1616 Richland StreetColumbia, SC 29201(803) 786-5600

.Done S. AtkinsonAssociate Director, Division of Vocatiom:IEducationNorth Carolina Department of Public InstructionRoom 569, Education BuildingRa:eigh, NC 27611(919) 733-3001

Jim BarrAcademic ProgramsLouisiana Department of' Education8th Floor, Education BuildingBaton Rouge, LA 70806(504) 342-3420

Gary H. BeckerDirector of Media ServicesSemin'- County Schools1211 1,dellonville AvenueSanford, FL 32771(305) 322-1252, Ext. 243

Margaret H. BinghamComputer Cool-dinatoMedia and Technology ServicesNorth Carolina Department of Public InstructionEducation BuildingRaleigh, NC 27611(919) 733-3193

C. Pristen BirdInstructional Computing ConsultantEducational TechnologyFlorida Department of EducationKnott BuildingTallahassee, FL 32301(904) 487-3102

Ronald E. BirdResearch DirectorSoutheastern Regional Council fOrEducational ImprovementP 0. Box 12746Re:,earch Triangle Park, NC 27709(919) 549-8216

Lanni BlanchardCoordinator, Library Media ServicesHorry County Schools1701 Horry StreetConway, SC 29526(803) 248-2206

,John BridgewaterState Education AdvisorIBM, Department 48-E3715 Northside ParkwayAtlanta, GA 30055(404) 238-4919

30

David BrittainAdministrator, Educational TechnologyFlorida Department of EducationKnott BuildingTallahassee, FL 32301(904) 488-0980

Dalinda W. BrownTechnology CoordinatorInstructional Media ServicesGeorgia Department of Education2054 Twin Towers EastAtlanta, GA 30334(404) 656-5957

Elsie L. BrumbackAssistant Superintendent for Media andTechnology ServicesNoi h Carolina Department of Public InstructionEducation BuildingRaleigh, NC 27611(919) 733-3170

David BryantDeputy Assistant State Superintendent for Mediaand Technology ServicesNorth Carolina Department of Public InstructionEducation BuildingRaleigh, NC 27611(919) 733-3193

Jim CainComputer CoordinatorComputer CenterDecatur High School310 North McDonough StreetDecatur, GA 30030(803) 377-6271

Ernestine CapehartMath CoordinatorWest Virginia Department of EducationCapitol Complex B-330Charleston, WV 25305(304) 348-7805

Barbara Holland ChapmanSpecial Assistant, Elementary EducationInstructional ServicesNorth Carolina Department of Public InstructionEducation BuildingRaleigh, NC 27611(919) 733-3512

Allen D. ClevelandAssistant Director, Division of ProfessionalServicesAlabama Department of Education521 State Office BuildingMontgomery, AL 36130(205) 261-2777

26 i

Dianne A. CothranAssociate for Federal RelationsFlorida Department of Education1701 CapitolTallahassee, FL 32301(904) 487-2910

Douglas CranfordDirector, Division of Public SchoolsFlorida Department of Education523 Knott BuildingTallahassee, FL 32301(904) 488-2601

Weyman CulpEducational Technology Task ForceFiscal Services DivisionGeorgia Department of Education1666 Twin Towers EastAtlanta, GA 30334(404) 656-2435

Johnny L. DavisCoordinator for Compensatory EducationGeorgetown County School District624 Front StreetGeorgetown, SC 29440(803) 546-2561

Linda FitzharrisLanguage Arts CoordinatorCharleston County School District3 Chisholm StreetCharleston, SC 29401(803) 722-8461, Ext. 240

Mr. LeRoy FinkelInstructional Computing CoordinatorSan Mateo County Office of Education333 Main StreetRedwood City, CA 94063John FortenberryIMPAC Project ConsultantArkansas Commission on MicrocomputerInstructionArkansas Department of EducationState Education BuildingLittle Rock, AR 72201(501) 371-1401

Helen B. FrankeDirector, Federal ProgramsPalm Beach County Schools3323 Belvedere RoadWest Palm Beach, FL 33402(305) 684-5120

31

Robert A. FriedmanAdministi:ator, Management Information Ser-vices/Data Base ManagementFlorida Department of Education255 Kott BuildingTallahassee, FL 32301(904) 487-2280

Michael W. FryChief ConsultantDivision of Communication SkillsNorth Carolina Department of Public InstructionEducation BuildingRaleigh, NC 27611(919) 733-3703

Clyde H. GreenDirector, Office of Instructional TechnologySouth Carolina Department of Education205 Rutledge BuildingColumbia, SC 29201(803) 758-3661

Laura GrounsellComputer Education ConsultantOffice of Instructional ServicesGeorgia Department of Education1966 Twin Towers EastAtlanta, GA 30334(404) 656-2685

Carlos E. GutierrezDivision SuperintendentAlbemarle County Schools401 McIntire RoadCharlottesville, VA 22901(804) 296-5826

Joshua D. HartfordChange-PointP.O. Box 3631Chapel Hill, NC 27515(919) 942-0785

John R. B. Hawes, jr.Administrative OfficerEvaluation StudiesLouisiana Department of EducationP.O. Box 94064Baton Rouge, LA 70804-0580(504) 342-0580

Robert R. HillDeputy Superintendent for Administration andPlanningSouth Carolina Department of EducationRoom 1008 Rutledge BuildingColumbia, SC 29201(803) 758-3508

Nicholas HobarAssistant Bureau ChiefPolicy and Organization DevelopmentWest Virginia Department of EducationCapitol Complex, Room B-318Charleston, WV 25305(304) 348 -3737

Jim HockmanCoordinator, -1 Teacher CenterRichland County School District One2600 Barhamville RoadColumbia, SC 29204(803) 254-5314

Michael H. HoppeResearch AssistantSoutheastern Regional Council for EducationalImprovementP.O. Box 12746Research Triangle Park, NC 27709(919) 549-8216

Betty J. HowieSecretary/Research AssistantSoutheastern Regional Council for EducationalImprovementP.O. Box 12746Research Triangle Park, NC 27709(919) 549-8216

Linda S. JenksCoordinator, Special ProjectsDivision of Instructional MediaGeorgia Department of Education2054 Twin Towers EastAtlanta, GA 30334(404) 656-5985

H. F. Johnson, Jr.Associate State SuperintendentOffice of Administrative ServicesGeorgia Department of Education1666 Twin Towers EastAtlanta, GA 30334(404) 656-2438

T. E. JohnstonAssistant Superintendent for InstructionBerkeley County School DistrictP.O. Box 6G8Moncks Corner, SC 29461(803) 761-8600

Lucille G. JordanAssociate State Superintendent for InstructionalServicesGeorgia Department of Education1966 Twin Towers EastAtlanta, GA 30334(404) 656-4722

27

Dorothy JuddAssistant ProfessorSoutheastern Louisiana UniversityP.O. Box 749, University StationHammond, LA 70402(504) 549-2221 or 549-2230

Eloise T. KirkECIA Chapter 2 State CoordinatorAdministrative arid Financial ServicesAlabama Department of Education40'; State Office BuildingMontgomery, AL 36130(205) 261-5145

David A. LariscyDirector, Fiscal Services SectionGeorgia Department of Education1566 Twin Towers EastAtlanta, GA 30334(404) 656-2449

Alexia. LatimerMathematics/Computer TeacherEastside High SchoolRt. 4, 700 Brushy Creek RoadTaylors, SC 29687(803) 268-1571

Betty LattureDirector, Computer Software InstructionalMaterialsTennessee Department of Education2100 Hemingway DriveNashville, TN 37215(615) 741-5082

Dee Ann LaurieComputer ConsultantKentucky Department of Education18th Floor Capital Plaza TowerFrankfort, KY 40601(502) 564-2106

Charles J. Law, Jr.Executive DirectorSoutheastern Regional Council for EducationalImprovementP.O. Box 12746Research Triangle Park, NC 27709(919) 549-8216

Sylvia LawlessDirector of InstructionTarrant City Board of Education1318 Alabama StreetTarrant, AL 35217(205) 849-5843

F28-

Judy Le CroyMedia CoordinatorWelcome Elementary SchoolBox 849Welcome, NC 27374(704) 731-3361

Jane LeoneAssistant Superintendent for InstructionBroward County Schools1320 S.W. 4th Street, P.O. Box 5408Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33310(305) 765-6335

Ann LeopoldProduct ManagerArmy Research Institute5001 Eisenhower AvenueAlexandria, VA 22333(202.) 274-5948

Paul E. LuehrData Processing ManagerArkansas Department of EducationEducation BuildingLittle Rock, Arkansas 72201(501) 371-1762

M. Kenneth MagillDirector, Division of Instructional Media andTechnologyVirginia Department of EducationP.O. Box 6QRichmt nd, VA 23216(804) 225-2396

Myra L. ManderscheidState Activities CoordinatorSoutheastern Regional Council for EducationalImprovementP.O. Box 12746Research Triangle Park, NC 27709(919) 549-8216

Shirley McCandlessEducation AdministratorComputer EducationLouisiana Department of Education3455 Florida BoulevardBaton Rouge, LA 70806(504) 342-0090

Doc McCullochCoordinator of Creative Instructional SystemsInstructional ServccsNorth Carolina Department of Public InstructionEducation BuildingRaleigh, NC 27611(919) 733-3512

3 Li

Cecil McDermottDirector, Project IMPACArkansas Department of EducationState Education Building,'Little Rock, AR 72201(501) 371-1401

Debra McGtobonAssistant SuperintendentWake County Public Schools601 Devereux StreetRaleigh, NC 27611(919) 755-6599

Reeves Mc GlolionSpecial Assistant to the SuperintendentNorth Carolina Department of Public InstructionEducation BuildingRaleigh, NC 27611(919) 733-3813

MeaselAssistant Superindent for InstructionPulaski County Special School District1500 Dixon Road/Box 6409Little Rock, AR 72216(501) 490-2000

Glen W. MooreProgram Specialist, Division of Vocational Educa-tion, Region 2Florida Department of Education901 Northwest Eighth Avenue, C-5Gainesville, FL 32601(904) 373-8551

Dor T. MortonAdministrative AssistantEtowah County Board of Education109 Courthouse, 800 ForrestGasden, AL 35901(205) 546-2821, Ext. 353

Dollie S. MoseleyStaff Consultant for Computer EducationMississippi Department of EducationP.O. Box 771Jackson, MS 39205-0771(601) 359-3434

Doris NabiAdministrator of Program ServicesBureau of Education for Exceptional ChildrenFlorida Department of EducationKnott BuildingTallahassee, FL 32301(904) 488-1712

Lew N011Education ConsultantDivision of Public SchoolsFlorida Department of EducationKnott BuildingTallahassee, FL 32301(904) 487-2282

David O'NeilEducation Microcomputer Lab CoordinatorDepartment of Curriculum and InstructionGeorgia State UniversityUniversity PlazaAtlanta, GA 30303(404) 658-4050

J. Randy PenningtonDirector, Technology Task ForceGeorgia Department of Education1862 Twin Towers EastAtlanta, GA 30334(404) 656-2008

Donovan PetersonProfessor, College of EducationUniversity of South Florida4202 Fowler AvenueTampa, FL 33620(813) 974-3420

D. L. PilkintonDeputy Director for Administrative ServicesArkansas Department of EducationState Education Building, Room 304-ALittle Rock, AR 72201(501) 371-1466

Stephen M. PrestonDirector, Division of Planning, Research. andEvaluationGeorgia Department of Lducation1862 Twin Towers EastAtlanta, GA 30334(404) 656-2008

Bob ReeseInstructor, Macon Computer Center3300 Macon Tech DriveMacon, GA 31206(912) 781-0551

Robert W. ReeseChief Supervisor for UtilizationOffice of Instructional TechnologyScuth Carolina Department of Education206 Rutledge BuildingColumbia, SC 29201(803) 758-3667

3429

Lynne RiggAssistant Director, CurriculumGarland Indpendent School District72U Stadium DriveGarland, TX 75040(214) 494-8486

Julia RobbinsDirector of MathematicsRock Hill School District ThreeP.O. Drawer 10072522 East Main StreetRock Hill, SC 29703(803) 324-5360

Eloise RudyMathematics ConsultantThe School District of Greenville CountyP.O. Box 2848Greenville, SC 29681(803) 242-6450

Ellison M. SmithSuperintendentOrangeburg School District No. 7Drawer LElloree, SC 29047(803) 897-2211

Jennie Lou SmithComputer ConsultantOffice of Administrative ServicesKentucky Department of Education162b Capital Plaza TowerFrankfort, KY 40601(502) 564-3314

Lloyd SteeleConsultant, Trade and Indnstrial EducaticiVocational EducationSouth Carolina Department of EducationRoom 924 Rutledge BuildingColumbia, SC 29201(803) 758-2 t82

Marilyn StoneSecondary Supervisor/AccreditationRaleigh County School System105 Adair StreetBeckley, WV 25801(304) 252-7355

Charles StudstillEducational Data CenterSouth Carolina Department of Education12th Floor, Rutledge BuildingColumbia, SC 29201(803) 758-8846

30

Carol SwinneyComputer Center CoordinatorMacon Computer Center3300 Macon Tech DriveMacon, GA 31206(912) 781-0551

Lejeane G. ThomasAssistant Professor, Teacher EducationLouisiana Tech UniversityP.O. Box 3061, Tech StationRuston, LA 71272(318) 257-3923

Sheilah N. ThomasChange-PointP.O. Box 3631Chapel Hill, NC 27515(919) 942-0785

Samuel M. TullyDirector of Vocational EducationFayette County Schools111 Fayette AvenueFayetteville, WV 25840(304) 574-1176

Ralph D. TurlingtonCommissioner of EducationFlorida Department of EducationTallahassee, FL 32301(904) 487-1785

George E. UhitgDean of EducationUniversity of South Alabama124 Instructional Laboratory BuildingMobile, AL 36688(205) 460-6277

Mary Alice WhiteThe Teachers CollegeColumbia University525 West 120th StreetNew York, NY 10027Brenda WilliamsNetwork Computer CoordinatorWest Virginia Department of EducationBuilding 6, Capitol ComplexCharleston, WV 25305(304) 348-3703

Bernice H. WillisDeputy DirectorSoutheastern Regional Council for EducationalImprovementP.O. Box 12746Research Triangle Park, NC 27709(919) 549-8216

3o

O. Max WilsonDivision DirectorInstructional Media Serx R es Did isionGeor gm Department of Educition2054 Twin Towers EastAtlanta, GA 30334(404) 656-5945

Frank WindsorInstructional TelevisionMaryland Department of Education11767 Bonita AvenueOwings Mills, MI) 21117(301) 337-4101

David WoollyAssistant SuperintendentAlma Public SchoolsP.O Box 1018Alma, AR 72921(501) 632-4791

Samuel R. WootenSuperintendentEdgefield County School DistrictP.O. Box 608Edgefield, SC 29824(803) 275-4601

Mar), lVorlei'Assistant Superintendent for InstructionNorth Little Rock School DistrictP.O. Box 687North Little Rock, AR 72215(501) 771-6111

Jane WorshamManagement SpecialistNorth Carolina Department of Public InstructionState Education BuildingRaleigh, NC 27611(919) 733-3813

C. Dan WrightDirector-Department HeadLearning Resources CenterDepartment of Educational MediaAuburn University3402 Haley CenterAuburn University, AL 36849(205) 826-4422 or 826-4529

Ronald WrightCoordinator, Education Technology SectionAlabama Department or' Education111 Coliseum BoulevardMontgomery, AL 36193(205) 261-2744

R.

Staff

1985 SteeringCommittee

W. E. Mellown, Jr., Alabama

D. L. Pilkinton, Arkansas

Dianne Cothran, Florida

Werner Rogers, Georgia

Rebecca Brown, Kentucky

Jerald Joe Hinton, Louisiana

Tom Saterfiel, Mississippi

Reeves McGlohon, North Carolina

Robert R. Hill, South Carolina

JoLeta Reynolds, Tennessee

William J. Burkholder, Virginia.

James Gladwell, West Virginia

Charles J. Law, Jr., Executive Director

Bernice H. Willis, Deputy Director

Ronald E. Bird. Research Director

Myra L. Manderschied, State ActivitiesCoordinator

Sharon A. Wright, AdministrativeAssistant

Mildred A. Williams, Secretary/TravelCoordinator

Betty J. Howie, Secretary/ResearchAssistant

Margaret H. Keyes, Executive Secretary

Acknowledgements: Photographs: Joshua Ilcutford.

37