Barkin 1

Ellie Barkin

Dr. Conte

Advanced Core Block

March 30. 2013

Instructional Technology: What should the 21st century classroom look like?

Every generation in the western world since the dawn of the twentieth century has

received a nick name. Students currently in the public school system were most likely born

between the years 1995-2007. People born during this time period are referred to as Generation

Z, or as Apple would like to call them, iGen. Children from Generation Z are constantly

surrounded by technology. They probably have at least one computer, MP3 player and tablet at

their house. Students from Generation Z have been exposed to technology since they were

young children. They are used to being constantly stimulated by a fast moving screen and loud

audio. The dilemma as teachers is figuring out how to take technology and make it functional in

an educational setting. Technologies that serve this purpose are referred to as instructional or

educational technologies. Thus, in a time period when technology rules the world, parents,

teachers, and administrators must work together to create a classroom that properly serves the

needs of Generation Z.

The Association for Educational Communications and Technology defines instructional

technology as technologies that are used to teach or disseminate information. Specifically, it is

the “theory and practice of design, development, utilization, management and evaluation of

processes and resources for learning” (Anderson, 2008). However, this term and definition does

not cover the most recent development of interactive technologies. Thus, the term educational

technology has come into existence. While these terms are very similar in their definitions,

Barkin 2

educational technologies focuses more on facilitating learning, and improving performance,

while instructional technologies are used to teach. People commonly use these terms

interchangeably, even though educational technology is normally associated with interactive

technologies. For the purpose of this paper, the term instructional technology will be inclusive

of all types of technologies used to educate children.

Instructional technology is nothing new to the field of education. There have been new

forms of instructional technologies present in the classroom since the roman times when books

and slates were first introduced. These technologies may not have plugged in, or responded to a

person’s touch, but these items improved education none the less. Since the beginning of the

nineteenth century, technological innovation and the inclusion of these technologies into the

schools has occurred at a daunting rate. Instructional technology has transformed from black

boards and books, to interactive computers and screens. Classrooms have traveled through the

Audio Visual Age, the Information Age, the Computer and Digital Age, and are now finally

beginning to enter the Interactive Age.

However, before teachers can effectively integrate technology into their classrooms they

must recognize the difference between instructional technology and technology education.

While these two terms sound very similar, the theories and philosophies behind these educational

principles are very different. According to the International Technology [and Engineering]

Educational Association’s Standards for Technological Literacy: Content of Technology (STL),

“Technology is the modification of the natural environment to satisfy perceived human wants

and needs” (ITEA, 2000, p.9). Technology education is the study of these technologies.

Studying technology provides students with an opportunity to study the processes, such as

problem solving, needed to create different technologies. When students study technology in

Barkin 3

grades K-12 they obtain a level of technological literacy that can be referred to as, “one’s ability

to use, manage, assess, and understand technology” (ITEA, 2000, p.9).

While technology education is focused on creating a hands-on educational environment

that encourages students to investigate math, science, and engineering principles through the

creation of technology; instructional technology is concerned with the technology in education.

The philosophies behind instructional technology are concerned with, “teaching and learning

with technology” (Dugger & Naik, 2001, p. 2). Additionally, the theories associated with

instructional technology identify technology in a classroom as a “tool” to enhance the teaching

and learning process across all subject areas. Teachers regularly confuse teaching technology,

and teaching with instructional technology. While these concepts may sound very similar, the

principles behind theses educational theories are very different.

Instructional technology serves its own very useful niche within the classroom.

Researchers have found that about “91% of teachers currently have computers in their classroom

but 1 in 5 feel their classrooms have the right level of technology” (Open Colleges, 2012). The

main questions that educators need to address in the twenty first century are: How will schools

obtain the technology necessary for properly teaching Generation Z? And how will teachers

adapt their teaching style to the new integrative technology classroom?

Focusing on the first question requires an in depth look at the economics behind

instructional technology. Technology is expensive for school districts and individuals. The

iPad3 costs about $550 per device. The average class size across the United States is about

twenty five students. Now this means that to supply just one class with enough iPads for every

student it would cost about $13,750. There are grades k-12 in the public school system.

Barkin 4

However, it can be expected that most kindergarten and first grade classrooms would not a have

a full set for the class due to the cost of these devices and the benefits of the use at this age. So

assuming that a complete class set is provide for grades 2-12, and most schools have at least one

class for every grade, the least possible amount of money that a school district could pay for

iPads would be $137,500. Now this number is not an outrageous figure but this is an unrealistic

scenario. Rarely do you find a school district that only has one class per grade. Imagine

multiplying this number by two, three or even twelve to simulate a larger school. Very quickly

this number gets over one million dollars.

Now imagine you are the superintendent of a large school district and parents, teachers

and students are pressuring you to bring more technology into the classrooms. How will you

spend your money? Do you invest in one large piece of technology that is very expensive but

affects a lot of students at one time? Or do you splurge and get every student their own personal

computing device? Recognition that technology is expensive is the first step of the process to

understanding the relationship between the benefits that technology provides, and the cost that is

spent on each type of technology.

The economists have looked closely at the costs, effectiveness and surrounding

conditions of different instructional technologies since the turn of the century. Specifically,

Jeffrey M. Puryear claims that, “technologies have at least two kinds of costs: fixed cost and

variable costs. Fixed costs are the upfront investments needed to put in place the necessary

infrastructure and software for making the technology available” (Puryear, 1999). Fixed costs

may include the costs of setting up a central managerial and training system that is necessary to

produce, distribute, implement, and maintain the technology.

Barkin 5

Not surprisingly the fixed costs vary for different kinds of technology. The fixed costs

of a television are fairly low compared to the fixed cost of a smart board. However, the benefit

of a fixed cost is that it is spread out over all the students served. Thus, if the instructional

technology will become a fixture within the classroom the cost of this technology decreases as

more students are served. In essence, “the fixed cost per student drops rapidly when you can

divide that cost by 100,000 students, or by a million, rather than by 1000 (Puryear, 1999).” In

contrast, variable costs are the price of adding students to the system after it has been set up.

School districts need to calculate both the fixed and variable costs when assessing technology

programs, and need to consider how many students they expect a particular technology to serve.

Instructional technologies that serve a large group of people and become fixtures within a

classroom and school often have a high fixed cost, but a low variable cost, and over time can be

quite inexpensive and cost effective. Items such as smart boards, document cameras, televisions

and webcameras are perfect examples of instructional technologies that satisfy these criteria.

Contrastingly, technologies with a high variable cost, and that work in conjunction with

conventional teaching, such as personal computers or tablets are unlikely to have any cost

advantage.

Administrators who are faced with the dilemma of determining what technologies a

school district should invest in need to understand the difference between fixed and variable

costs, but they also need to remember that the ultimate goal is student education. If a new

technology comes out that is cheap but does not have any additional educational value it is not

worth the investment. Conversely, if a new instructional technology comes out which is

expensive but has lots of potential for new innovative lessons and interactive learning it is worth

Barkin 6

the investment. Overtime, that investment will pay for itself through the educational value that it

provides to the students.

Recognizing that technology plays an integral role in the twenty first century classroom,

and understanding that instructional technology is undeniably changing the face of education;

many school districts are searching for the cheapest ways to increase the amount of technology

found within their classrooms. To achieve this goal many school districts are adjusting the way

they approach instructional technology and are introducing new educational programs to

accommodate the quickly and constantly changing medium. These instructional technology

programs are Bring Your Own Device and the Flipped Classroom.

With many schools around the country receiving major budget cuts due to the recession,

schools are embracing Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) programs as an effective alternative.

According to an article found in National Educators Association Today, “Over the past year,

BYOD or BYOT (Bring Your Own Technology) programs have been piloted in Ohio,

Minnesota, Texas and Georgia” (Chadband, 2012). Additionally, New Jersey has 19 school

districts that have begun to initiate the BYOD programs including, but not limited to, Forsyth

County Schools, Mankator Public School System and Allen Independent school district. Many

district officials insist that the BYOD programs are the best and only available option for

schools. These programs overtime have proven to be cost effective but they are not perfect

(Heick, 2012). The only reason that BYOD programs are cost effective for school districts is

because the burden to provide technology falls to the parents. As schools across the country

loose potentially more funding, are students and their families responsible for making up the

difference?

Barkin 7

Not all families can afford to buy the same device which means that in one classroom a

teacher could be working with several different types of technology. Thus, in a BYOD

classroom, teachers must be confident with technology so that they can easily adapt their lessons

to several different devices. To adapt to these lessons it may require a large amount of teacher

creativity in addition to teacher flexibility (Chadband, 2012). So while district administrators see

BYOD programs as the easy and cost effective solution, in reality BYOD it is much harder on

the teachers. “Not every district has the resources to properly train teachers to use the devices

students will bring in … A BYOD program could save money if implemented properly, but

tossing teachers into a BYOD environment without any training wouldn’t be very effective”

(Ritchel, 2013). Additionally, according to Elliot Soloway, a computer science professor at the

University of Michigan, there is no concrete evidence that a classroom full of students using

different personal devices would enhance learning (Ritchel, 2013).

Besides the cost and effectiveness of the BYOD program administrators and parents are

concerned with student use and accessibility of these devices. In most BYOD pilot programs,

the students are required to sign some sort of agreement which indicates the proper use of their

device (Flanigan, 2013). However, many students are able to bypass school policies and website

blocks by logging into guest networks. Teachers, parents and administrators need to be aware of

the issues and create proper educational policies and enforcement procedures to ensure that

students and teachers are using the internet and connected devices appropriately in their schools.

Additionally, the BYOD program enshrines the inequalities that are already found within

the school systems. The only way to ensure that all students receive a fair education is if

students have access to the same materials and learning opportunities. BYOD leaves this more

to chance, “with more affluent students continuing to have an unfair advantage over their

Barkin 8

classmates,” because they are able to buy the newer and better technology (Stager, 2011). Thus,

to make sure that all students will have access to technology at a particular time schools must

still have computers or other devices available for student use.

Another way that schools are bringing more technologies to their schools for very little

cost is by flipping the classroom. Specifically, “the flipped classroom inverts traditional teaching

methods, delivering instruction online outside of the classroom and moving ‘homework’ into the

classroom” (Knewton, 2011). In a flipped classroom, the instructional portion of a lesson occurs

at home or after school through educational videos. Taking the instructional portion of a lesson

out of the classroom allows for more time for classroom activities and targeted teaching. The

instructional videos often have an interactive component where students can answer questions

and complete problems that are associated with the lesson. Usually, the teacher will immediately

be able to access compiled data about how well the students understood the material from the

night before.

For teachers who use the Khan Academy in their classrooms the data provided from the

quizzes provides a content area breakdown. This means that teachers can see which specific

areas students need more help with. Thus, the teacher can focus the in class activity accordingly,

and offer more practice in that particular area. Additionally, if a teacher sees that only one

student did not understand part of the lesson, the teacher can easily request that one student to

stay after school for extra help or provide that student a little extra support in the classroom.

Flipping a classroom makes instructional technology and active learning key components

of the learning environment. Individually these two educational practices have been proven to

positively affect a student’s learning environment and comprehension of the material being

Barkin 9

discussed. The incorporation of these two techniques through a flipped classroom has proven

particularly beneficial for mathematics and English courses. In one case study taken from a

population of 736 students at Clintondale High School near Detroit, fifty percent of freshmen

failed English, and forty-four percent failed mathematics, before flipping the classroom. After

flipping the classroom, now with a population of 249 students nineteen percent of freshman

failed English and thirteen percent failed mathematics (Knewton, 2011). This case study

clarifies that flipping a classroom can be beneficial to a learning environment, but one has to

question how much of a role instructional technology inside the actual classroom effects this

change.

When a classroom is flipped most of a student’s access to technology for educational

purposes occurs at home or after school to view lectures. So again the burden to provide

technology falls upon the parents. While it is an important to change in, “instructional models so

the students can receive more instructional support in the classroom,” flipping a classroom does

not necessarily mean more instructional technology will be utilized. (Knewton, 2011).

However, flipping a classroom provides many organizational benefits for teachers in regards to

keeping track of student work and tracking student achievement online.

However, any method to implement instructional technology will prove to be

unsuccessful if the proper education is not provided to teachers and principals. Currently, one of

the major down falls of instructional technology is that schools invest in the newest and most

expensive technology available, install it in a teacher’s classroom and never teach the teacher

how to use it. While some teachers will take the initiative to learn on their own how to properly

use the technology, many others are not technologically literate and let this new powerful tool

gather cobwebs on the side of their classroom.

Barkin 10

Research says that teachers need to be given sufficient education and support whenever

they are provided with a new technology in their classroom for this technology to be effective

(Cavaghn, 2013). A brand new instructional technology does nothing if it is just sitting in a

classroom not being used. Teachers need to know how to use the technology in their room and

they need to be encouraged to use the technology in their rooms. The evidence suggests that,

“principals and teachers should be encouraged to participate in post graduate education” in

instructional technology (Cavaghn, 2013). Principals and teachers who receive a higher

education in instructional technology are more likely to take on a leadership role within a school.

With a higher education teachers and principals can help further educate other professionals and

encourage them to more effectively incorporate technology into their classrooms.

Besides all the research that helps to justify the use of instructional technology in

classrooms because of its adaptability, ability to engage students, and its versatility, there is the

actual opinion of the students. Recall that Generation Z has been exposed to technology since

they were young children and they probably have at least one hand held device on them by the

time they leave elementary school. Thus, there is a growing frustration among students that they

have to “power down” their use of technology when they enter school buildings (Ash & Davis,

2010). Many students feel that by “powering down,” they are cutting off a major source of

information and tools that they have grown accustomed to using. Additionally, students are

demanding more technologically rich learning environments. Students are requesting classrooms

that incorporate web 2.0 devices, the more hands-on interactive internet found on mobile touch

devices (Oberdick, 2011).

Based on the information discussed, instructional technology should be used within the

schools, as long as teachers and administrators are properly educated about the technology and

Barkin 11

associated systems in their district. Additionally, it is important that teachers remember that

instructional technology can be used as a teaching aid or to improve upon current teaching

methods. While instructional technology is expensive, it is important that school districts

recognize that there are many ways to reduce the cost and increase the educational benefit per

student of these technologies.

School districts need to recognize that more technology is necessary in order to engage

the twenty-first century student. While implementing these technologies, schools should try to

avoid the traditional technology classroom and transition towards an integrated technology

classroom where students use and understand the technology around them. Due to budget cuts

school can consider a BYOD or Flipped Classroom programs, but districts need to recognize the

burden they are placing on the parents and understand that even these programs come with their

own fixed and variable costs.

Overall, there is a lot of potential for instructional technology to create positive changes

in the classroom environment, to pedagogy, and to teacher student interaction. However,

without the proper funding schools are forced to implement programs like, BYOD and the

Flipped Classroom, that only partially fill the need for technology in schools. While these

programs work as a temporary fixes, and cheaply solve a very big problem. This problem is only

going to get bigger as more technology becomes available. School districts need to begin fully

addressing the issue of instructional technology and how they intend to pay for the technology

that many parents, educators and students deem as necessary for a proper education in the

modern world.

Works Cited

Barkin 12

Anderson, L. (2008). Definition of Instructional Technology. Retrieved from University of North

Carolina Wilmington: http://arcmit01.uncw.edu/andersonl/Documents/Definition%20of

%20Instructional%20Technology.pdf

This article clearly defines what instructional technology is, based on the terms defined by the

AECT. It also clarifies that Educational and Instructional Technology can be used

interchangeably, since the AECT adopted Educational Technology as an appropriate term in

2008.

Ash, K., & Davis, M. (2010, January 28). Sound of on School Tech Use. Retrieved from

Education Week: http://www.edweek.org/dd/articles/2010/02/03/02kids.h03.html

This article and connected video analyze the technologies students are exposed during their

home life verses school life. The article and video has students of different backgrounds

discussing the technologies they use at school and at home. The students in this video are

consistently dissatisfied by the technology that they are provided in their schools. The associated

article explains that students in the 21st century use technology constantly.

Cavaghn, S. (2013, February 22). Views of Technology Differ Among Elementary, High School

Educators. Retrieved from Education Week:

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/DigitalEducation/2013/02/views_of_technology_differ_a

mo.html

This article explains that at different age levels there is a different amount of emphasis put on

technology and finding teachers with a background in instructional technologies. The article

states that high schools emphasize finding teachers and principals with a strong instructional

technology background more than schools at the elementary level.

Barkin 13

Chadband, E. (2012, July 19). Should Schools Embrace "Bring Your Own Device?". Retrieved

from NEA Today: http://neatoday.org/2012/07/19/should-schools-embrace-bring-your-

own-device/

This article addresses the concept of bring your own device. The article takes an in depth look at

the positive and negative effects of this policy. Identifying costs for school districts as a major

benefit of the new bring your own device policy. The article also discusses the impacts of this

new policy on school infrastructure, web policies and parents.

Dugger, W. E., & Naik, N. (2001, September). Clarifying Misconceptions about Technology

Education and Educational Technology. Retrieved from ITEEA Connect:

http://www.iteaconnect.org/TAA/LinkedFiles/Articles/TTTpdf/2001-02Volume61/

duggernaik_sept01.pdf

This article defines both educational technology and technology education. The side by side

comparison of these two fields allows the reader to recognize the major differences within the

two fields.

Flanigan, R. L. (2013, February 7). Schools Set Boundries for use of Students' Digital Devices.

Retrieved from Educational Week:

http://www.edweek.org/dd/articles/2013/02/06/02byod.h06.html

This article mainly discusses how the implementation of the new bring your own device policy

has forced schools to create new web policies. These web policies are no longer just for the

classroom but are for the halls, lunch rooms and auditorium. This article also discusses how the

bring your own device policy is encouraging teacher creativity.

Barkin 14

Heick, T. (2012, 7 31). 10 Schools That Have Implemented BYOD Successfully. Retrieved from

Teach Thought: http://www.teachthought.com/technology/10-schools-that-have-

implemented-byod/

Knewton. (2011). The Flipped Classroom Infograph. Retrieved from Knewton:

http://www.knewton.com/flipped-classroom/

This infograph defines what is meant when a teacher say "flipping the classroom." The

infograph explains the benefits and provides accurate statistics about flipping a classroom. The

infograph also explains the logic and educational theory behind flipping a classroom.

Oberdick, J. (2011, March 4). Symposium Stories #2: Different Views on Educational

Technologies. Retrieved from Pennstate:

http://symposium.tlt.psu.edu/2011/03/symposium_stories_2_davis_shaver_different_vie

ws_on_educational_technology/

Symposium Stories #2 is a podcast which provides the views of different college students on

educational technology in their classrooms. During the podcast these Penn State students discuss

the benefits of working with technology and how technology can cause students to be interested

in a subject they might not otherwise like.

Open Colleges. (2012). 21st Century Classroom. Retrieved from Ed Tech Magazine:

http://www.edtechmagazine.com/k12/sites/edtechmagazine.com.k12/files/uploads/

21stcentury-classroom.jpg

This graphic provides a detailed overview of what the 21st century classroom should look like. It

graphically explains how students and teachers are constantly interacting with technology

Barkin 15

throughout the course of a school day and even at home. It contains many useful statistics that

support instructional technology in the classroom.

Puryear, J. M. (1999, September/October). The Economics of Educational Technology. Retrieved

from Techknowlogia: http://www.techknowlogia.org/TKL_Articles/PDF/17.pdf

This article provides the economic break down to instructional technology. Instructional

technologies are expensive and schools need to recognize that there are certain technologies that

are more effective per dollar spent than others. This economic break down explains how certain

types of instructional technology practices are just wasting money because they are ineffective

based on the numbers of dollars spent.

Ritchel, M. (2013, 3 22). Digitally Aided Education, Using the Student's Own Electronic Gear.

Retrieved from The New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/23/technology/in-some-schools-students-bring-their-

own-technology.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

This article introduces how several schools in Florida implemented a BYOD program. The

article highlights the controversy the district encountered, the success of the program and the

issues that the program still encounters.

Stager, G. (2011, October 8). BYOD - Worst Idea of the 21st Century? Retrieved from Stager-to-

Go: http://stager.tv/blog/?p=2397

This article presents the negatives of BYOD programs. Highlighting some very essential

arguments that are often over looked by educators and researchers because they are focused on

the monetary issues associated with instructional technology.

Barkin 16