The following project discusses the effects of classroom technology on student achievement in various California school districts. The data investigated came from existing studies and literature; as well as, comparisons of a random group of schools from each district’s 2005-2006 California Standards Tests (CST). Common technologies used in the classrooms were compared among the different districts. The objective of this project was to try to establish a link between classroom technology and the level of student achievement. The results were unexpected; the research results demonstrated very little evidence that technology has an impact on increasing student achievement, but rather instructors’ lesson plans and teaching strategies were more influential on improving student achievement.

Chapter One

This look aims to investigate the technology implemented in disadvantaged schools and whether these schools have found a obvious impact on student achievement through the use of classroom technology. Classroom technology has become a national priority of the United States Department of Education over the past decade (U.S. Dept. of Education, 2005). Technology provides children, especially those with educational disadvantages, an opportunity to expend different learning methods to increase comprehension of a difficult subject or lesson (2005). Since the passing of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, schools are held responsible for the success of their students; this can motivator schools to invest in classroom technology in order to enhance positive student achievement. Schools of low socioeconomic status had had difficulty providing students with up-to-date technology (2005). Over the past four years however, several grants and funding opportunities have been available to disadvantaged schools

The Problem

Student achievement varies among California school districts. A distinct achievement gap is found between high and shameful socioeconomic schools. Technology is a national priority however how it is used by teachers differs; some use it as an occasional tool for demonstrating a lesson where other teachers incorporate technology into everyday lessons, assignments and after school projects. The pickle is that while the country is focusing on improving student achievement across the country, the reasons for the varying achievement levels are questionable as well as whether technology has a large enough impact on student achievement to make it a focus worthy factor of student achievement.

The Need

Varying degrees of student achievement in California is causing a need to redefine the roll technology plays on improving student achievement; especially in disadvantaged schools. Research needs to be more focused on the effects technology has on student achievement.

Background of the Problem

In 1996, the United States government began making classroom technology a national priority. It was a slow moving change for the first couple of years, with few schools having access to newer technologies. After grant accumulations from federal, state, local and private organizations, many schools were able to implement classroom technology into their school structure. The United States Department of Education now makes educational technology one of the top national priorities (U.S. Dept. of Education, 2005).

Significance of the Project

An investigation into the effectiveness of classroom technology on student achievement will give educators, school administration and researchers a better idea of whether technology should be a focused on when looking to improve student achievement. This study focuses on a random group of disadvantaged school districts in California and the technology currently used. The investigation of the results of classroom technology effectiveness on student achievement in disadvantaged schools could result in a more focused strategy for raising student achievement in disadvantaged school districts.

Areas of Investigation

This study is based in California and involves several random districts from both high and low socioeconomic statuses. The pickle investigated is the influence of technology on student achievement. This view aims to investigate:

1) the technology implemented in chosen school districts

2) Are there well-known differences between the level of student achievement and technology found among chosen districts?

3) Have school districts have found a positive impact on student achievement through the use of classroom technology?

Chapter Two

Literature Review

Project

This study aims to investigate the technology implemented in disadvantaged schools and whether these schools have found a definite impact on student achievement through the use of classroom technology.

Relation to the Problem

The problem associated with the chosen California districts is the lack of new and appropriate technology as well as a lack of great teachers in areas of new information technology. This is affecting not only student performance but the parents and communities are frustrated with the lack of student progress. The literature reviewed in this chapter is a little fragment of the massive quantity of available literature on school technology.

Relation to Major Research Topics

This literature was chosen based on the following criteria; 1) current popular technology primitive in the classroom 2) proven effective technology in raising student achievement and 3) school technology policies implemented in schools displaying high student achievement.

An extensive review will be done on the United States Department of Education’s executive summary for educational technology (2000). The reason for such an extensive review of the executive summary is because of the United States Department of Education’s involvement in improving technology implementation in the classroom. The U.S. Department of Education has been alive to in providing federal programs, strategies and grants; as well as extensive research on the results of increased student achievement due to technological advances.

Effective Technology Policies

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children (2000) is the National Educational Technology Plan which outlines the countries progress in educational technology since 1996 ( U.S. Dept. of Education, 2000). e-Learning (2000) is a revised version of the fresh Getting America’s Students Ready for the 21st Century: Meeting the Technology Literacy Challenge (U.S. Dept. of Education, 1996) publication which outlined the nation’s unique strategies and goals for educational technology.

The latest 2001 publication “outlines five new national educational technology goals (2000)”, based on existing opportunities and challenges. The five national educational technology goals outlined by the Department of Education are as follows, “Goal 1: All students and teachers will have access to information technology in their classrooms, schools, communities and homes. Goal 2: All teachers will use technology effectively to help students achieve high academic standards. Goal 3: All students will have technology and information literacy skills. Goal 4: Research and evaluation will improve the next generation of technology applications for teaching and learning. Goal 5: Digital content and networked applications will transform teaching and learning (2000)”. Internet accessible classrooms and schools are major focal points of this publication; the unlimited information available through the internet gives students access to research and endless learning possibilities. In order to succeed in improving student achievement through the country, “the use of technology in education must remain a national priority. It must be at the core of the educational experience, not at the periphery (2000, p.7)”. Public support reveals a need for increased elementary school technology as well as in secondary schools (2000).

Teacher Technological Literacy. Many U.S. government and educational institutes are now implementing policies in which teachers must be trained in the newest classroom technology advances; in order to effectively educate their students.

The 1996 national educational technology goals were the four pillars of a comprehensive strategy for realizing large-scale improvements in teaching and learning. Addressing issues of abet for teacher use of technology, teacher and student access to technology (computers and connectivity), and use of digital content and resources, achieving the national educational technology goals was intended to support widespread improvements in student achievement (p.13).

As of the early to mid 1990s, only fourteen percent of public school teachers ad more than eight hours of educational technology training; and over fifty percent of the teachers had no training in classroom technology. Teachers were graduating from college and beginning their teaching careers with limited idea of how they could implement technology into their classroom and lesson plans (U.S. Dept. of Education, 2000). Worthy progress was made by the raze of the 1990s. One-third of teachers in public elementary and secondary schools felt well-prepared and efficient in classroom technology (2000). The majority of public school teachers reported that professional development in classroom technology was available to them (2000). A raise from fourteen percent in the early 1990s to nearly half of public school teachers were trained for more than eight hours of classroom technology by the waste of the 1990s (2000). Although progress was being made, it was not nearly enough.

Among the issues facing teachers’ effective expend of computers and the internet are a lack of the following: release time to learn, practice and plan ways to spend computers or the Internet (cited by 83 percent of public elementary and secondary school teachers); support for integrating telecommunications into the curriculum (68 percent of teachers); training opportunities (66 percent of teachers); technical support or advice (64 percent of teachers); and administrative support (43 percent of teachers) (U.S. Dept. of Education, p.14).

A study by the CEO Forum on Education and Technology showed teachers graduating from preparation schools are doing so with less than half being prepared in technology designing and delivering instruction (U.S. Dept. of Education, 2000). Even less are graduating with experience in incorporating technology into the “teaching experience” (2000). It was because of this data that the CEO Forum on Education and Technology (2000) designed a Teacher Preparation School Technology and Readiness (StaR) chart.

The STaR chart provides teacher preparation programs with a set of benchmarks they can use to measure their progress in integrating technology into their programs.14 As of November 2000, 243 teacher preparation institutions had committed to using this self-assessment tool to help ensure that every new teacher graduates from their institution prepared to use and integrate technology effectively into teaching and learning (p. 16).

Another program recently implemented for teacher preparation in classroom technology was the U.S. Department of Education’s Preparing Tomorrow’s Teachers to Exhaust Technology (PT3). This initiative support program developed by “higher education institutions, state agencies, school districts, non-profit organization” (2000) and other educational organizations, supports teacher preparation programs for advanced learning in classroom technology. The program supported over 600,000 teachers to become technology proficient nationwide as of the year 2000.

The Technology Literacy Challenge Fund (2000) provides resources to state and district levels to encourage the development and implementation of plans focused on the achievement of the national technology goals, originated in 1996 (2000). Another program, the E-Rate program provides discounts on telecommunication services to schools and libraries (Puma, et al., 2000), making it possible for most if not all schools to have internet access as well as provide computers for all teachers and students.

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) “began systematically collecting data on the availability of technology in elementary schools and secondary schools” in 1994. The results increased yearly from the start to the time of the publication of e-Learning (Refer to Figure 1).

Research and Development of Proven Classroom Technologies

High-speed internet connection has become a must in the school classroom. In 1999, eighty-six percent of public school classrooms were connected with high-speed (2000). The trend in increased internet access has expanded outside the classroom to homes, businesses and libraries, bright the community as a whole; students now have access to learning after school hours.

The Education rate (E-rate) program (Telecommunications Act of 1996) provides financial “support to schools and libraries for Internet access and other telecommunications services (2000)”. A published evaluation of this program showed;

E-Rate and the Digital Divide: A Preliminary Analysis from the Integrated Studies of Educational Technology, confirms that the program is operating as intended, increasing the acquisition of equipment and services for building connections, telecommunications services and Internet access. Thus far, more than $5 billion has been committed to public school districts, public and private schools, public libraries, states and consortia since the first wave of E-rate commitments in November 1998 (p.17).

e-Learning (2000) reported that over one million U.S. classrooms have been “wired” due to the E-Rate program; with the majority of the funding resources going to high-poverty schools (high SES rates) through-out the United States, even though the highest impoverished districts consisted of only twenty-five percent of public schools. That twenty-five percent received sixty percent of the total dispersed E-Rate funds, ten times more than wealthier school districts (2000).

Teachers are aloof showing concern in areas of “cite access-related concerns regarding the use of technology in instruction” (p.18). Three-quarters of public school teachers reported a lack of computers and two-thirds are reporting having “outdated, incompatible or unreliable” computers. The majority of teachers, six out of ten, report that; “internet access is not easily accessible” (2000, p.18). Most classrooms in the United States have less than five computers for student use in their classroom; only ten percent of the nation’s public classrooms have more than five computers (2000). Many classrooms are still without computers; out of the total amount of public school teachers with a computer, one-third are not connected to the internet (2000). Part of the reasoning for limited internet access is the amount of bandwith needed for school internet connectivity; many public schools have limited bandwith availability. This allows for only “about one in every four computers in any given school to connect to the internet simultaneously with other computers in the school (2000)”.

The “digital divide” is a problem that the United States Department of Education has been working on since the 1996 Technology Literacy Challenge. e-Learning discusses their progress up to the year 2000, at the time of its publication.

While progress has been made in bridging the “digital divide”-that is, the socioeconomic and racial/ethnic gap in access to computers and the Internet-challenges remain. For example, data reveal that students in poorer schools continue to have less access to computers and the Internet. In 1999, the ratio of students per instructional computer was 16 to 1 for the poorest schools in the United States, while our nation’s richest schools averaged seven students per computer. In addition, Internet access in classrooms was also less likely in the poorest schools, with 39 percent connected. In difference, three-fourths of the classrooms in wealthier schools were connected (p.18).

The lack of technology accessible to students, classroom and schools is “compounded by the fact that students with runt access to technology in school are also less likely to have access to computers and the Internet at home (2000, p.19)”. A household’s income determines the likelihood of a student having computer and internet access at home. Studies reported in e-Learning found that ninety-four percent of student households in 2000 with incomes greater than seventy-five thousand dollars per year have computers in the home. In contrast, only thirty-one percent of student households with less than a twenty thousand dollar yearly income will have home computers (2000). This trend is the same for internet access at home as well, “most households in the wealthiest income bracket have a family member who uses the Internet at home (85 percent), while only 18 percent of the poorest households with children use it at home (2000, p.17)”.

The Link Between Technology and Student Achievement

Technology’s Impact on Teaching and Learning. Building upon a knowledge base developed over the past 40 years on the use of technology to improve teaching and learning, (Lesgold & Reif, 1983) the 1996 national educational technology goals laid the foundation for widespread improvements in student achievement.

Recent research and evaluation substantiates what anecdotal evidence has suggested for quite some time about the effectiveness of computers and the Internet for education: It works (U.S Dept. of Education, 2000, p.21).

Numerous grants such as, Technology Innovation Challenge Grants (2000) have created a better understanding of the positive effects of classroom technology. Grant recipients have developed and implemented various innovations such as Virtual High School and online teaching resources (2000). “The U.S. Department of Education’s Expert Panel on Educational Technology recently designated seven programs-several of which are Challenge Grants (2000, p.21)”. These seven “exemplary” programs have demonstrated effectiveness and usefulness in the classroom as well as educational significance. The positive effects of classroom technology on student achievement include; 1) faster and increased comprehension, 2) student are opting for more challenging projects, and 3) positive attitudes are demonstrated by students towards classes which incorporate technology into lessons. The list of positive results of classroom technology on both students and teachers goes on and on. “New and

emerging technologies have the potential to enhance learning and the development of new knowledge (Bransford, 1999, p.25)”. The most promising enhanced learning opportunities through technology are as follows:

1. Helping students to comprehend difficult-to-understand

concepts

2. Helping students to engage in learning

3. Providing students with access to information and

resources

4. Better meeting students’ individual needs (U.S. Dept. of Education, 2000, p.25).

An important factor in increasing student achievement is to connect family, school, community and student in the educational process. Technology creates a arrangement for students’ parents to get involved with their child’s education without a time barrier (2000). The uses of voicemail and school websites give parents an opportunity to communicate with the school without a time restriction. School administration and parents can access information such as attendance, test scores demographics and finances through networked applications at any time (2000).

Recent research suggests a strong link between classroom technology and student achievement. When incorporating technology into school projects such as multimedia projects teachers have reported much success. One 1999 report stated;

In English language arts and social studies, teachers report observing significant change in student skills and knowledge acquired after their students’ first multimedia project. After student completion of the first multimedia project, teachers reported increased student knowledge in:

* research skills

* ability to apply learning to real-world situations

* organizational skills

* interest in the content (Burchett, 2002, p.46).

Technology has a positive effect on students’ critical thinking skills, problem solving skills, research and organizational skills and creates positive achievement in significant core subject areas (2002).

Technology has been linked to sure student achievement in California as early as the 1980s; computer-enriched schools were found to result in higher California Achievement Test (CAT) scores and more positive attitudes toward school (Page, 2002, p.389). Mathematics has had the most profound improvement among students in classrooms with technology (2002). The same glance also reported that, “technology-enriched elementary classrooms are conducive to higher levels of mathematics achievement, higher levels of self-esteem, and student-centered environments among low socioeconomic status elementary children (2002, p.389).”

Recent Student Achievement Data. The California Standardized Tests were analyzed during this study as a variable in determining the level of student achievement in the three randomly chosen districts. Technology’s influence on student achievement was the main factor investigated, however other factors had to be considered in order to accurately resolve whether technology is a major factor in improving student achievement. Other factors considered were, classroom size, teacher qualifications and socioeconomic factors. Statistics on each of the following factors, for each district, were briefly reviewed as a basis of conception for this project.

Core Subject Areas and Technology

Numerous studies document student understanding of mathematics concepts from using computer-based and -assisted software. Logo programming, computer-assisted instruction (CAI) microworlds, and algebra and geometry software are among those effective in facilitating mathematics achievement for elementary, middle, and high school students when teachers are skilled in guiding student activities (Burchett, 2002, p.46).

Science and math teachers are more likely to exhaust computers as research tools than English teachers; science teachers use computers as problem-solving tools three times as much as English teachers according to a 2002 study (Barron, et al., 2003).

This peruse provides data that demonstrate many teachers are implementing technology as a tool for research, communication, productivity, and quandary solving; however, the goal of technology integration across all subject areas and grade levels is yet to be reached. The proportion of teachers using computers as a tool in the classroom in this study ranged from 20% (problem-solving tool in high schools) to 59% (communication tool in elementary schools). Across subject areas, the range was 10% (problem-solving tool in English) to 59% (communication tool in science) (2003, p.489).

Current Popular Classroom Technology

Virtual High School. e-Learning (2000) discusses a popular school technology, Virtual High School (VHS). This program implements a consortium of schools and teachers which offer network- based courses (Netcourses) over the internet which is all supported by the federal Technology Innovation Challenge Grant (2000).

The growth of Virtual High School is impressive. In September 1997, VHS offered Internet-based courses for the first time to about 500 students in 27 schools in ten states. By May 2000, after six semesters of operation, VHS offered 87 different courses to about 1,700 students in 112 schools located in 29 states. The number of students enrolled and the average number of students per NetCourse have been steadily increasing. The NetCourses, which are often quite entertaining, include topics like economics, Shakespearean literature, nuclear physics, world conflict and peacemaking, and various languages of computer programming (U.S. Dept. of Education, p. 10).

Virtual High School is popular especially with students attending schools in remote or small schools with limited course choices. The majority of schools participating in VHS (eighty percent) have less than 1,500 students enrolled in their school; half of this percentage has less than eight hundred enrolled students (2000). VHS is a great opportunity to offer microscopic schools with limited resources to expand their curriculum and increase student achievement without spending excess money on recent curriculum, teachers and extra classroom space (2000). Results of the VHS have been very positive with participating schools reporting the VHS curriculum to be high-quality and appropriate for their students, according to an SRI International evaluation (2000). The only problem that has occurred with VHS is a lack of computers for use in the program among small schools, putting a restriction on the amount of students able to participate.

Digital content is an notable factor in educational technology, and increasing student achievement; its capabilities include being randomly accessed, relevant, up to date and authentic, as well as multilevel for thorough exploration, easily manipulated, instantaneous and creative (2000). e-Learning (2000) defines digital express as, “…the multimedia material that calls upon students to seek and manipulate information in the collaborative, creative, and engaging ways that make digital learning possible (p.21)”. Digital stammer includes CD-ROMS, video on seek information from, email and websites, on-line learning management systems, streamed discussions, computer simulations, data files and databases, and audio (CEO Forum, 2000).

Digital content and educational software produced in the early 1990s was criticized for being of poor quality; and there was a lack of software in many of the core elementary and secondary schools.

Due to dramatic increases in the availability of computers and Internet access and to an increased emphasis on professional development, a majority of the nation’s public elementary and secondary school teachers (53 percent) were employing digital content and networked applications in their classrooms at least to a small extent by 1999 (p.20).

Internet access has enabled teachers to save projects for students to complete outside of school. Such projects include; “word processing/spreadsheets, internet research, solving problems/analyzing data, and drills (2000, p.20)”. Internet access has also allowed for individualizing assignments based on individual students as well as preparatory and administrative purposes. Most teachers however have reported that they use the internet as a supplement to regular classroom instruction.

Cable in the Classroom (CIC, 2006) is a popular technology used in classrooms nationwide. CIC’s website explains their mission as;

Cable in the Classroom (CIC) fosters the use of cable content and technology to expand and enhance learning for children and youth nationwide. Working in partnership with and on behalf of the cable industry, Cable in the Classroom advocates for the visionary, sensible, and effective use of media in homes, schools, and communities. We work closely with member cable companies to develop and maintain a broad variety of efforts that include the following:
Education Outreach

· Provides free cable and broadband connections to schools and libraries across the country.

· Provides access to 500+ hours of educational television programming and online resources from cable networks.

· Creates visionary and educationally powerful resources that fire the imagination of creative educators, parents, notion leaders, and policymakers (CIC, 2006, p.1)

A Cable in the Classroom provider in California, Bright House Networks, provides free quality educational programming and high-speed internet access to educational institutions” in their service area (Bright House Networks (2006, p.1).

There are several technologies available for student use in the classroom, as well as assessment tools for teachers. PDA’s have become popular as a learning device for students and was tested as a possible assessment tool as well in 2001 (Hudgins, 2001). Students have used PDA’s in school for downloading assignment, accessing the internet, note-taking and scheduling (2001). A pilot program for the usage of a handheld blueprint as a classroom assessment tool, the Classroom Wizard from Scantron Corp, was performed in a California school in 2001. The handhelds only purpose was for testing and communicating with the instructor.

This use of the technology allows teachers to administer pop quizzes at any time. The answers are scored instantaneously and posted on the student’s desktop computer in real-time, while class is in session. In a glance, the instructor can immediately identify and follow the comprehension level of each individual in the entire class, make necessary adjustments to the lesson or attend individual students who need a little extra help (Hudgins, 2001, p.46).

Classrooms were given each a portable scanner, software and each student receives a PDA developed by Scanton. The PDA’s are for classroom use only and are specifically used for interrogate taking.

Results were overwhelmingly clear, so remarkable that this particular school implemented a school-wide change in assessment strategies by using the Scanton assessment system. The time spent on data entry and grading was reduced, “allowing more time for analysis, adjustment and the ability to focus on students who need more help (2001, p.46)”. Students showed interest in the new system as well, they were studying harder for quizzes and actually looked forward to using the PDA’s.

Laptops have been an effective tool for students over the past few years. One independent school district in Texas with a majority of disadvantaged students began implementing laptops in high school classrooms in 2001 (Christensen, et al., 2005). As of 2005, there were over 9600 laptops through the district’s high schools, one for every student. The community is primarily business, the community therefore has a strong feeling of responsibility to provide students with business technology and applications for use in preparing them for a future in business. Loans and donations have made the one-on-one classroom, laptop project possible. Students have the power of information at their disposal and are allowed to bring their laptops home for after school work; many students share their laptops with others after school, spreading the power of technology through their families and benefiting the community. Teachers reported a better use of classroom time, attendance, and a raise in student grades with the use of laptops (2005).

Wireless technology is widely accepted as a positive influence on student achievement (Thurston & Varvel Jr., 2002). Less classroom space is customary and the cost has come down over the years, making wireless networking a more viable classroom tool (2002).

Chapter Three

Applied Research Study-White Paper

The United States Department of Education (2005) considers classroom technology and literacy a national priority. There is substantial literature regarding the effectiveness of classroom technology on student achievement. Technology provides children, especially those with educational disadvantages, an opportunity to use different learning methods to increase comprehension of a difficult subject or lesson (2005). The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 holds schools responsible for the success of their students; motivating schools to invest in classroom technology in order to enhance certain student achievement. Schools of shameful socioeconomic status have had difficulty providing students with up-to-date technology (2005). However, over the past four years several grants and funding opportunities have been made available to disadvantaged schools.

This report discusses four factors of classroom technology. The first factor investigates core subject areas that are need of improvement. The second involves fresh research and development of proven classroom technologies. The third factor highlights specific school or district policies currently in effect which have produced positive student achievement with the consume of classroom technology. Finally, this report will discuss the link between vulgar student achievement and the lack of classroom technology as a basis for argument for the need to improve the existence of classroom technology in disadvantaged schools.

Background

In 1996, the United States government began to make technology in the classroom a national priority. It was a slow moving change for the first couple of years, with few schools having access to newer technologies. After grant accumulations from federal, state, local and private organizations, many schools were able to implement classroom technology into their school structure. The United States Department of Education now makes educational technology one of the top national priorities (U.S. Dept. of Education, 2005).

Student achievement has improved over the years, but not consistently. Before the implementation of Technology in Education in 1996, there were few options to choose from when trying to improve student achievement. Students at an educational disadvantage were not given alternative learning methods. There are many theories as to why certain school districts have lower student achievement then others. New advances in classroom technology have proven results. By gathering research on appropriate educational technologies, districts in need may be able to base their decisions and funding options on this study. Lack of funding in low socioeconomic schools has been a reason for the lack of adequate technology; as well as, under qualified teachers who are unable to use the technology available.

Current Practice and Opinion

As demonstrated in the literature review (chapter two), there is no doubt that the United States Department of Education finds technology to be a major factor in student success. The majority of American population, especially those involved in business and global enterprise understand the importance of providing schools with adequate amounts of technology. Between federal, state, nonprofit and private organizations provide many schools with the funding needed to supply schools with technology, teacher professional development and networking components.

The need for classroom technology is not disputed because of the learning advantages and opportunities it provides. What is disputed among researchers is the accomplish technology has on student achievement.

There are numerous existing literatures supporting the exhaust of technology such as software programs specifically designed for a students learning draw. There is also support for technology such as PDA, wireless networks and laptop use.

Many studies have been conducted on disadvantaged schools and their use of technology as means for improving student achievement.

As an instructional tool, technology helps all students – including poor students and students with disabilities – master basic and advanced skills required for the world of work (Ed.gov, 2003, p.1).

Classroom technology has increased student motivation, parental involvement and the ability to assess students at any time in any subject (2003).

A random group of school districts in California were investigated as to the type of technology used and the student achievement levels. Achievement levels were based on the results of the 2005-2006 California Standardized Tests (CST)).

In 2005-2006 California venerable the California Standards Tests (CSTs) to test students in English language arts and math in grades 2 through 11; science in grades 5, 8 and 10; and history-social science in grades 8, 10 and 11. Middle and high school students also took subject-specific CSTs in math and science, depending on the course in which they were enrolled (greatschools.com, 2005, p.1).

The California Standardized Tests were analyzed during this gawk as a variable in determining the level of student achievement in the three randomly chosen districts. Technology’s influence on student achievement was the main factor investigated, however other factors had to be considered in order to accurately choose whether technology is a major factor in improving student achievement. Other factors considered were:

· classroom size

· teacher qualifications

· socioeconomic factors

Statistics on each of the above mentioned factors, for each district, were briefly reviewed as a basis of conception for this project.

Bakersfield school districts emphasize high-usage of technology through their schools; it has had a positive effect on reducing student dropouts, higher test scores and a fuller curriculum with better student attitudes. Schools in Port Hueneme, California with a majority of disadvantaged students have reported, “improved test scores; increased student comprehension, motivation, attitude; strong student, parent, and teacher support (Edgov.com, 2003, p.1).” E-Rate federal financial assistance for the implementation of internet technology in the classroom was discussed in the chapter three literature review. Bakersfield City district is in their tenth year as recipient of E-rate assistance and is currently proposing for another grant for updated technology.

BCSD has an established Cisco standard for Wireless LAN technology and is seeking to expand wireless LAN capabilities to it’s 42 locations. Since BCSD will apply for funding through the Federal Universal Service Fund, also known as the “E-Rate program,” it will procure all eligible services under the established guidelines of this federal program (BCSD, 2006, p.1).

Bakersfield school district is in the midst of updating original technologies such as updated hard drives and implementing Network Interface Connections in the classroom for increased student involvement with curriculum (2006). The district uses Bright House Networks, Cable in the Classroom technology, to enhance learning with variety of interactive lessons and research possibilities in all core subjects and many non-core subjects. (See Table 1).

Pomona Unified School District in California demonstrated the highest student achievement levels of all investigated school districts (CA Dept. of Education, 2005-2006). The school district began using wireless networking in the district’s schools in 2003, with overwhelming results (Ito, 2003). With wireless computer labs, the whole class is now eager in a lesson at once with the teacher. The districts perspective on wireless networking is;

Wireless computing also provides opportunities that extend beyond classroom use. Wireless laptops are an unparalleled resource for students engaged in learning activities in science labs, fieldwork and all activity-based learning (Ito, 2003, p.1).

Table 1
Bakersfield City District 2006 CST Results

Student Achievement Factors

_______________________________________

Factors 2006 Avg.

_______________________________________

Valid Teachers [1] 96 94
Average Class Size 20 29
Socioeconomic Status[2] 78 51

_______________________________________

Note: Statistics developed from California

Department of Education 2005-2006.

Along with the new technology in the classroom, the district has expanded the technology to other departments, such as, the libraries, administration and extra curricular instructors (2003). The district’s “E-Team develops teaching materials, and conducts training classes in technology applications, and models the integrated use of technology in the classroom (PUSD, 2006, p1)”. Constant, updated training is available to ensure that teachers are able to provide students with up-to-date information technology. There is also a mentoring program where student, the Junior E-Team, mentor younger students in technology programs. Technology used throughout the district includes;

· RxNet – PUSD student test results, assessment, and information

· Groliers – Online encyclopedia

· Riverdeep – Interactive math training

· RxNet Writer – Interactive writing and assessment

· Digital Curriculum – Electronic standards-based video on demand

· iLife – Multimedia creation tools for Apple users

· E-mail – Electronic correspondence

· Zangle – Student information system

· Internet – World Wide Web access

· E-Locker – Server-based student locker

· SmartBoard – Interactive computer whiteboard

· SmarteFinance – PUSD internal accounting system

· Microsoft Office – Word, Excel, Access, and PowerPoint

· Atomic Learning – Web-based tutorials of various applications (2006, p.1)

The majority of Pomona schools are considered disadvantaged (CA Dept. of Education, 2005-2006), based on the percentage of students eligible for the reduced or free lunch program

Table 2
Pomona Unified School District

______ ______________________________________________\
Grade 5^th Avg. 8^th Avg. 10^th Avg.

^{_______________________________________________________________\}
Science 18 32 30 38 26 35

English 31 43 29 41 29 37

Math 30 48 6 26 3 10

______________________________________________________
Note: Results are the percentages of students at, or above, state averages in specific skills defined for each grade by the state of California..

The odds are against Pomona district; it has “one of the lowest median incomes in Los Angeles County (Technology Governance Committee, 2002, p.4)”. Only an estimated one percent of Pomona Unified district’s youths have computer access at home (2002). Adequate funding however has enabled the district to implement technology infrastructures and training to increase student achievement and tackle the odds against them.

Based on existing literature, Tuscan Unified district is not up-to-date with the available classroom technologies. A 2005 press release announced however, that a new online teacher training program will be implemented, with the hopes of integrating better and more advanced technologies into their schools. The program for educators, which is partnering with AOL, is described below;

Recognizing the role technology plays in enhancing classroom learning, T.H.E. Institute offers educators a complete range of professional development services, as well as providing consulting, research, and custom publishing products (The Journal, 2005, p.1).

Tustin does have an extensive science program which began in 2005 with the implementation of Science as a core subject throughout elementary school (TUSD, 2005). Very little is mentioned on Tustin district’s website concerning technology (See Table 3).

Table 3
Tustin Unified School District
__________________________________________________________

Grade 5^th Avg. 8^th Avg. 10^th Avg. ^{_____________________________________________________________________} 51 Science 51 32 59 38 46 35

English 63 43 55 41 51 37

Math 62 48 22 26 13 10 ____________________________________________________________

Note: Results are the percentages of students at,
or above, state averages in specific skills defined
for each grade by the state of California.Student Achievement Factors

________________________________________

Factors 2006 Avg.

________________________________________

Qualified Teachers [5] 98 94

Average Class Size 29 29

Socioeconomic Status[6] 35 51

________________________________________

Note: Statistics developed from California

Department of Education 2005-2006.

Suggestions

Results of the Investigation. All the districts investigated in this study use internet access. The most updated schools are now using wireless technology, including but not limited to wireless laptops and PDAs. Technology is proven to increase interaction between student and teacher, providing a variety of ways to learn and demonstrate comprehension skills. During the investigation it was noted that the most prevalent student achievement increases due to technology were in the subjects of math and science. Reading and English had considerably less integration with technology; these two subjects demonstrated the lowest percentages of overall student achievement. It must be noted however that two of the three districts investigated demonstrated overall student achievement that was much lower than the national norm; which would suggest that technology is not the key component to increasing student achievement.

Factors that were influential among these three districts were the percentage of qualified teachers and the socioeconomic status of students. This suggests that teachers in lower SES districts are not provided with adequate training in classroom technology.

Suggestions of the Researcher. Based on the much higher test scores demonstrated in Tustin Unified School District, it is suggested that this district be used as a model for lower achieving schools. A program could be implemented to use staff at Tustin as mentors to schools with less qualified teachers such as Pomona and Bakersfield. All three schools mentioned the availability of funding for school programs; however Tustin was the only one to distribute their funds properly. Districts such as Pomona demonstrated such poor student achievement that it is necessary for them to direct funding to the right departments. Financial management could help with this. Pomona should consider hiring a professional financial advisor when trying to decide how to distribute funding, especially in the areas of technology. Technology can be helpful in the classroom but only when implemented properly. Most importantly, teachers must know how to use technology in their curriculum to maximize student comprehension and achievement.

Surprisingly, Tustin has little to no specifications as to what they use and require in classroom technology; Pomona has an established E-Team for this purpose, yet they demonstrate poor grades. The majority of the indecent grades Pomona’s district was in eighth and tenth grade math; which according to the literature reviewed is one of the subjects with the most technological relieve. It would seem that this district is lacking in the basics of core subjects, rather than focusing on technology, they should first focus on bringing students to the level of comprehension set by national standards in core subjects. The average class size of Pomona district schools is quite large, for the purpose of bringing students to an acceptable achievement level; class size should be reduced for more personalized learning. The district has extensive technology and relevant programs, however, taking a step support to focus on student learning of primary subjects is a priority.

Bakersfield district could help from the same focus on core subject comprehension, but their limited technology should be focused on as well. It is possible that student would benefit from core subject computer software used with classroom lessons.

Tustin Unified School District demonstrates that, while there is heavy emphasis on incorporating technology into the classroom, it is essential that students have a proper comprehension of the core subjects before adding technology into the curriculum. Many students are being forced into lessons and curriculum laden with technology which requires a more thorough understanding of core subjects before they have adequate comprehension of the basics.

Discussion

This study had its limitations. The key limitation was the factor used in determining overall student achievement of a school district, the CST results from the 2005-2006 school year. The problem with using only the CST results is that California has a variety of assessment tools and tests, meaning some students may not perform well on CST’s; possibly their learning style is not that of CST exam formatting, but they may succeed in a different type of assessment. The second limitation was by basing student achievement on the CST data provided in this study; it does not cover scores from other core subjects which are added to the high school curriculum (ex. algebra II).

This was an captivating project; it was shocking to see the extremely low scores of these California school districts. Out of sheer curiosity, I compared California’s Report Card to those of other states on the NCES website and found California to be considerable lower than the comparison states. It is concerning to think of that regardless of the amount of technology provided in the classroom, many of California’s students are still way behind in core subjects. The types of technologies investigated were interesting, very advanced; however it seemed a waste to use funding on technology when the students aren’t benefiting from it.

If I were to do this study over, I would have focused on one level of education, such as elementary school. This approach would give a better belief of the overall needs of the students in the level. I would have been able to use more schools as a comparison. I think I was successful in proving technologies limitations, and the necessity of better preparing students in the basics. Overall, I learned that more is not necessarily better; as is the case with the students in the three districts investigated. Schools boasting advanced technology in their classrooms are not focusing on the individual learning needs of their students and therefore the technology factor becomes useless.

References

Bakersfield City School District. (2006). Request for Proposal: Wireless LAN. Retrieved December 08, 2006 from: http://static.bcsd.com/gems/BCSD/BCSDWirelessLAN.pdf

Barron, A. E., Kemker, K., Harmes, C., & Kalaydjian, K. (2003). Large-Scale Research Peruse on Technology in K-12 Schools: Technology Integration as It Relates to the National Technology Standards. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35(4), 489+. Retrieved December 9, 2006, from Questia database: http://www.questia.com/PM.qst? a=o&d=5002540546

Bransford, J., Brown, A., Cocking, R., and Bransford, J. (Eds.) (1999). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience,and School. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Shining House Networks Corporation. (2006) Website. http://www.mybrighthouse.com/about_us/community_involvement/star_teachers_main/default.aspx

Cable in the Classroom. (2006). Website. http://www.ciconline.org/mission

CST Results (2006) Website. Retrieved December 01, 2006 from: http://www.greatschools.net/

Hudgins, B. (2001). Leveraging Handheld Technology in the Classroom. T H E Journal (Technological Horizons In Education), 29(5), 46+. Retrieved December 3, 2006, from Questia database: http://questia.com/PM.qst? a=o&d=5000936283

Ito, A. (2003). The Reality of Anytime, Anywhere Learning. Santa Ana Unified School District. Retrieved November 30, 2006 from: http://thejournal.com/articles/16486

Lesgold, A., and Reif, F. (1983). Computers in Education:Realizing the Potential. Report of a Research Conference, Pittsburgh, Pa., November 20-24, 1982. Prepared for the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), (2006). Website. Nation’s Report Card. Retrieved December 11, 2006 from: http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/

Owen, A., Farsaii, S., Knezek, G., & Christensen, R. (2005, December). Teaching in the One-to-One Classroom: It’s Not about Laptops, It’s about Empowerment!. Learning & Leading with Technology, 33, 12+. Retrieved December 9, 2006, from Questia database: http://www.questia.com/PM.qst? a=o&d=5012403284

Page, M. S. (2002). Technology-Enriched Classrooms: Effects on Students of Low Socioeconomic Status. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(4), 389+. Retrieved December 9, 2006, from Questia database: http://www.questia.com/PM.qst? a=o&d=5002499036

Pomona Unified School District, Technology Unit. (2006). Website. Retrieved December 05, 2006 from: http://www.pusd.org/departments/its/

Pollard, C., & Pollard, R. (2004). Research Priorities in Educational Technology: A Delphi Study. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37(2), 145+. Retrieved December 9, 2006, from Questia database: http://www.questia.com/PM.qst? a=o&d=5008328132

Puma, M. J., Chaplin, D.D., Pape, A. D., (2000). -Rate and the Digital Divide: A Preliminary Analysis from the Integrated Studies of Educational Technology. E Doc. # 00-17. U.S. Department of Education, Planning and Evaluation Service and Office of Educational Technology., The Urban Institute, Washington, D.C.,

Rodriguez, C., & Moore, N. B. (1995). Perceptions of Pregnant/parenting Teens: Reframing Issues for an Integrated Approach to Pregnancy Problems. Adolescence, 30(119), 685+. Retrieved December 9, 2006, from Questia database: http://www.questia.com/PM.qst? a=o&d=5000337276

Siegle, D., & Foster, T. (2001). Laptop Computers and Multimedia and Presentation Software: Their Effects on Student Achievement in Anatomy and Physiology. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(1), 29+. Retrieved December 9, 2006, from Questia database: http://www.questia.com/PM.qst? a=o&d=5002430740

Staples, A., Pugach, M. C., & Himes, D. (2005). Rethinking the Technology Integration Challenge: Cases from Three Urban Elementary Schools. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37(3), 285+. Retrieved December 9, 2006, from Questia database: http://www.questia.com/PM.qst? a=o&d=5009317214

Technology Governance Committee, (2002). Master Technology Use Plan. Retrieved December 04, 2006 from: http://www.pusd.org/departments/its/files/4D3B5222BA1548C58AC6B6155A1C0BD3.pdf

The CEO Forum on Education and Technology, (2000). The Power of Digital Learning: Integrating Digital Content. School Technology and Readiness Report – Year 3. Retrieved November 15, 2006 from: http://www.ceoforum.org/downloads/report3.pdf

The Journal (2005). T.H.E. Institute and AOL @ SCHOOL Launch New Online Course for Educators. Press Release. Retrieved December 1, 2006 from: http://thejournal.com/the/pressreleases/? id=17647

Varvel, V. E., & Thurston, C. (2002). Perceptions of a Wireless Network. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(4), 487+. Retrieved December 9, 2006, from Questia database: http://www.questia.com/PM.qst? a=o&d=5002499061

[1] Result in a percentage

[2] Result in a percentage

[3] Result in a percentage

[4] Result in a percentage

[5] Result in a percentage

[6] Result in a percentage

Student Achievement Factors

_________________________________________

Factors 2006 Avg.

________________________________________

Qualified Teachers[3] 94 94

Average Class Size 28 29

Socioeconomic Plot [4] 74 51

________________________________________

Note: Statistics developed from California Department of Education 2005-2006

______________________________________________

Grade 5^th Avg. 8^th Avg. 10^th Avg.

^{______________________________________________________}

Science 15 32 17 38 n/a 35

English 27 43 21 41 n/a 37

Math 32 48 6 26 n/a 10

_______________________________________________________

Note: Results are the percentages of students at, or above, plot averages in specific skills defined

for each grade by the status of California.

Tags: Free Customer Support Software, free help desk software, Free Knowledge Base Software, free knowledge management software, open source knowledge base software

Related Posts

• QuickBooks Pro 2007 for Mac Accounting Software Review (0)
• Free Printable Science And Social Studies Crossword Puzzles (0)
• How To Get A Job In Computer Animation (0)
• How To Get A Job In Computer Animation (0)