technology integration maroba m. zoeller university of north texas august 5, 2000
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION MAROBA M. ZOELLER UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AUGUST 5, 2000](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022071807/56649ed85503460f94be666e/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION
MAROBA M. ZOELLER
UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS
AUGUST 5, 2000
![Page 2: TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION MAROBA M. ZOELLER UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AUGUST 5, 2000](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022071807/56649ed85503460f94be666e/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
HOW DOES TECHNOLOGY AFFECT SCHOOLS?
• 3 CENTRAL QUESTIONS POSED BY KERR (1996):
• 1. The overall level of adoption and acceptance of technology into schools
• 2. The impact of technology on specific patterns of organization within individual classrooms and schools
• 3. Organizational changes under conditions of technological change
![Page 3: TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION MAROBA M. ZOELLER UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AUGUST 5, 2000](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022071807/56649ed85503460f94be666e/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
FACTS ABOUT OVERALL LEVEL OF TECHNOLOGY
• Office of Technology Assessment, 1995:
• Approximately 5.8 million computers in use in schools in U. S. (1 for every 9 students)
• In 1992, average high school: 54 computers
• “ “ average elmentary: 25
![Page 4: TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION MAROBA M. ZOELLER UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AUGUST 5, 2000](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022071807/56649ed85503460f94be666e/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
INTERNATIONAL COMPARISON
• ENGLAND , WALES & NORTHERN IRELAND:
• SECONDARY SCHOOLS: 8-10 Microcomputers per school
• Elementary campuses - computers usage varies depending upon the enthusiasm of teachers & administrators
![Page 5: TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION MAROBA M. ZOELLER UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AUGUST 5, 2000](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022071807/56649ed85503460f94be666e/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
INTERNATIONAL COMPARISON
• China - School Administrators hold a collective vision for their schools: – Upgrade teacher competencies in technology – Locate quality instructional software– Secure more private funds for instructional
technology
![Page 6: TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION MAROBA M. ZOELLER UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AUGUST 5, 2000](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022071807/56649ed85503460f94be666e/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
INTERNATIONAL COMPARISON
• Korea -
• Many problems and difficulties
• School curriculum is not appropriate to the integration of technology
• Focus has been on programming skills and operating knowledge
• Need software beyond tutorial and drill-and-practice
![Page 7: TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION MAROBA M. ZOELLER UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AUGUST 5, 2000](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022071807/56649ed85503460f94be666e/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
INTERNATIONAL COMPARISON
• SINGAPORE • Government Intervention: Report of the
Economic Committee in 1996
• Computer to Student Ratio 1:2 with target use of 40% of class time
• $2 Billion for Instructional Technology
![Page 8: TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION MAROBA M. ZOELLER UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AUGUST 5, 2000](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022071807/56649ed85503460f94be666e/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
INTERNATIONAL COMPARISON
• SINGAPORE
• Masterplan for IT - Trains 23,000 teachers in 4 dimension framework:
• curriculum & assessment
• learning resources
• teacher development
• physical and technological infrastructure
![Page 9: TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION MAROBA M. ZOELLER UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AUGUST 5, 2000](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022071807/56649ed85503460f94be666e/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Falling Through the Net ‘99
• FACTS ABOUT THE GAP IN INTERNET USAGE:
• Gap expanded from 13.5% to 20% in 1999
• 32.4% OF WHITE HOUSEHOLDS
• 11.7% OF BLACK HOUSEHOLDS
• Gap between Hispanic & White - Rose to 19.5% in 1998
![Page 10: TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION MAROBA M. ZOELLER UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AUGUST 5, 2000](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022071807/56649ed85503460f94be666e/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Falling Through the Net ‘99
• ISSUES OF ACCESS IN SCHOOLS
• LOWER LEVEL INSTRUCTION
• LOWER SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND MINORITY STUDENTS RELEGATED TO DRILL-AND-PRACTICE AND DEFECTIVE, OUTDATED HARDWARE
![Page 11: TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION MAROBA M. ZOELLER UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AUGUST 5, 2000](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022071807/56649ed85503460f94be666e/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Technology Counts
• Education Week - October 1998
• Perspectives on Education Technology
• Impact on Test Scores, Policy perspectives, statistics on how technology is taking hold in public schools
• Archer cites NAEP links 4th & 8th grade scores to computer math learning games and simulations
![Page 12: TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION MAROBA M. ZOELLER UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AUGUST 5, 2000](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022071807/56649ed85503460f94be666e/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Cuban(1986) Teachers and Machines: The Classroom Use
of Technology Since 1920 • 4 Reasons why Educational Technologies failed
to meet their potential– 1. Teachers lack training & skills – 2. Equipment and media expense – 3. Equipment reliability & dependability – 4. Instructional material does not fit student’s
instructional needs –
![Page 13: TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION MAROBA M. ZOELLER UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AUGUST 5, 2000](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022071807/56649ed85503460f94be666e/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Kozma & Croninger (1982)
• 3 Aspects of School Failure that Educational Technology can successfully address:
• 1. Gap between in-school and out of school learning
• 2. Overemphasis on lower order skills
• 3. Low engagement and motivation
![Page 14: TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION MAROBA M. ZOELLER UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AUGUST 5, 2000](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022071807/56649ed85503460f94be666e/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
David & Roger Johnson (1996)
• Failure of schools to adopt available instructional technologies attributable to 2 factors: – 1. Individual assumption underlying most
hardware and software development– 2. Failure to utilize cooperative learning – “The best way to conduct technology-assisted
instruction is to embed it in cooperative learning.”
![Page 15: TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION MAROBA M. ZOELLER UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AUGUST 5, 2000](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022071807/56649ed85503460f94be666e/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Robert Holloway(1996)
• Factors related to frequency with which technology is used in classroom: – 1. Availability of hardware in classroom,
building and district media center – 2. Amount of teacher input into purchase of
hardware and software – 3. Level of administrative encouragement – 4. Amount of training teachers had in use
![Page 16: TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION MAROBA M. ZOELLER UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AUGUST 5, 2000](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022071807/56649ed85503460f94be666e/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
• CUBAN (1993) Computers Meet Classroom: Classroom Wins
• “Certain cultural beliefs about what teaching is, how learning occurs, what knowledge is proper in schools, and the teacher-student focus on human rather than machine interaction”
![Page 17: TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION MAROBA M. ZOELLER UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AUGUST 5, 2000](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022071807/56649ed85503460f94be666e/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
• Mehan(1985) & Becker (1994b) • Technology teaching teachers appear to be in
schools: • 1. Where there is a strong social network of many
computer using teachers • 2. With a full-time technology coordinator on staff • 3. In a district that provides teachers with formal
staff development . . .
![Page 18: TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION MAROBA M. ZOELLER UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AUGUST 5, 2000](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022071807/56649ed85503460f94be666e/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
• 4. That have made long-term commitment to students using word-processing. . In subject matter classrooms
• 5. That have policies ensuring equity of access between boys and girls.
• 6. Where pattern of use extends beyond basic math, language arts, and computer literacy to fine arts, social studies
![Page 19: TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION MAROBA M. ZOELLER UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS AUGUST 5, 2000](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022071807/56649ed85503460f94be666e/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
• 7. That allocate time at school for teachers to use school computer. . . For their own professional tasks.
• 8. That are faced with additional maintenance
• 9. That need, perhaps most costly of all, smaller class sizes for computer using teachers.