Description: Tags: Obj1-7
Description: Tags: Obj1-7
National Need
National Concerns. Research has found that educational technology, when used effectively, can
significantly improve teaching and learning. To support schools in incorporating technology into their
curricula, the President has established the four pillars of the Educational Technology Literacy Challenge:
1. All teachers in the Nation will have the training and support they need to help students learn
using computers and the Internet.
2. All teachers and students will have modern multimedia computers in their classrooms.
3. Every classroom will be connected to the Internet.
4. Effective software and online learning resources will be an integral part of every school’s
curricula.
The educational resources of the Internet are growing rapidly. However, many students and teachers,
especially those in high-poverty or rural schools, have limited access to these resources.
Our Role. We have made great progress toward our goals to put modern computers in classrooms and
connect them to the Internet. With increasing access to computers and advanced telecommunications, we
must ensure that teachers also have the ongoing training and support they need to effectively use these
investments for improved teaching and learning.
In response to this significant need, the Administration’s educational technology fiscal year 2000
investments placed special emphasis on technology training for current and prospective educators. These
funds will help ensure that all new teachers can use technology effectively in the classroom. In addition,
the fiscal year 2001 budget requests increased funding for closing the digital divide--especially for
increasing access to technology in communities with concentrations of disadvantaged students and their
families--as well as for developing the next generation of learning tools to address critical educational
needs.
The Department’s educational technology initiatives include, among others, the Preparing Tomorrow’s
Teachers to Use Technology program, the Technology Literacy Challenge Fund, the Technology
Innovation Challenge Grant and Star Schools programs, the Community Technology Centers, and
Learning Anytime Anywhere program.
Our Performance
How We Measure. The Technology Literacy Challenge envisions a 21st century in which all students
are technologically literate. The aforementioned "four pillars" are the concrete goals that help define the
task, and they are at the heart of the challenge. These goals also provide the basis for performance
indicators against which the Department measures the National progress in areas of educational
technology supported by its programs.
To make technology a viable instructional tool requires that schools have enough computers to provide
full, easy access for all students. Citing Glennan and Melmed (1996), Getting America’s Students Ready
for the 21st Century (U.S. Department of Education, 1996) notes that many studies suggest that full, easy
access requires a ratio of about five students to each multimedia computer. As shown in Figure 1.7.a.1, in
1996-97, the ratio of students per instructional computer was 7:3:1; by 1998-99, the ratio had dropped to
5.7:1. In 1996-97, the ratio of students per multimedia computer was 21:2:1; by 1998-99, it had dropped
to 9.8:1. As the cost of computing power continues to decline, schools are increasingly able to afford
multimedia computers and the newer hand-held technology devices.
Figure 1.7.a.1
Number of Students per Instructional and
Source: Market Data Retrieval, Technology in Education, 1997, 1998, and
40 Multimedia Computer 1999; Market Data Retrieval, 1997 as cited in Education Week, Technology
Students per Computer
37.0
Counts, 1997. Frequency: Annual. Next Update: Fall 2000 for the 1999-
30 31.0 00 school year. Validation procedure: Data supplied by Market Data
24.0
21.2 Retrieval. No formal verification or attestation procedure applied.
27.0 19.2
20 Limitations of data and planned improvements: Market Data Retrieval
21.0 13.5 data do not have consistently high response rates, and response rates vary
10.8 9.8
10
9.0
GOAL substantially across sites. Accuracy of responses may vary considerably
12.0 across districts and states. Planned improvements: None.
9.1 7.3 6.3 5.0
5.7
0
1988-89
1992-93
1996-97
1997-98
2000-01
1989-90
1993-94
2001-02
1987-88
1991-92
1995-96
1999-00
1986-87
1990-91
1994-95
1998-99
Year
Instructional Use Computer Multimedia Computer
Connections to the Internet make computers versatile and powerful learning tools by introducing students
and teachers to new information, people, places, and ideas from around the world to which they might not
otherwise be exposed. Figure 1.7.b.1 shows that in 1994 only 3 percent of instructional rooms were
connected to the Internet. By 1999, 63 percent of classrooms were connected to the Internet. At this rate
of progress, the goal of 100 percent by the year 2000 is likely to be met.
80% 63% Frequency: Annual. Next Update: February 2001 for fall 2000 data.
Validation procedure: Data validated by NCES’s review procedures and
60% 51% NCES Statistical Standards. Limitations of data and planned
improvements: The measure looks at access to the Internet, but does not
40%
27% look at Internet use or the quality of that use. Planned improvements: None.
20% 14%
8%
3%
0%
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Y ear
80% 74%
62%
Frequency: Annual Next Update: February 2001 for
60%
G G
fall 2000 data. Validation procedure: Data validated
39% 39% O O by NCES’s review procedures and NCES Statistical
36%
40% A A Standards. Limitations of data and planned
18% 14%
L L improvements: Poverty measures are based on free and
20%
9% 7% reduced-price school lunch data, which may
4% 3%
2% underestimate school poverty levels, particularly for
0%
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
older students and immigrant students. Planned
High-poverty schools: 71% or m ore eligible
Ye ar improvements: None.
for free and reduced-price lunch
High-P overty
Low-poverty schools: 11% or less eligible for Low-Pov erty
free and reduced-price lunch
Figure 1.7.d.1
Availability and Use of the Internet by
Students in Public Schools by Disability Status
100% 96% Source: NCES, Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools and Classrooms,
91%
February 2000, unpublished tabulations. Frequency: Annual. Next
GOAL:
80% All Students and Students with Update: February 2001 for fall 2000 data. Validation procedure: Data
Disabilities to have Equal Access
validated by NCES’s review procedures and NCES Statistical Standards.
Percent of Students
21%
20% 16%
9%
4%
0%
Internet access Internet access Internet access Internet access Internet access
available available but available and available and available and
not used at all used to a small used to a used to a large
extent moderate extent extent
8 0%
Statistical Standards. Limitations of data and planned improvements:
The data are self-reported on feelings of preparedness rather than objective
6 0% 5 0% measures of teachers’ actual classroom practice. The resources required, in
40 % terms of cost and burden, to regularly gather data other than self-report data
4 0% 30 % G on teacher preparedness for a Nationally representative sample are
G O
20% A prohibitive. Planned improvements: None.
G O
2 0% A L
O
A L
0% L
1 99 8 19 99 20 00 20 01
Ye ar
Percentage of Students Who Use Computers in Percentage of Students Who Use Computers in
100% Mathematics Instruction Writing Instruction
GOAL: 100% 96%
91%
80% Continuing GOAL: GOAL:
Percentage of Students
Percentage of Students
60%
42%
40%
40%
19%
20% 14% 20% 15%
12%
0%
0%
1978 1996 1978 1996
1978 1996 1978 1996
Grade 8 Grade 11
Age 13 Age 17
Source: National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 1978 and 1996. Frequency: Every 4 years per subject. Next Update: 2000 for
1999 data. Validation procedure: Data validated by NCES review procedures and NCES Statistical Standards Limitations of data and
planned improvements: Questions yielding this data do not fully capture the extent to which computers are regularly used in classrooms to
support instruction. For mathematics, NAEP asks students if they have ever studied math through computer instruction. For writing, NAEP asks
students if they use a computer to write stories or papers. Planned improvements: None.
How ED’s Activities Support the Achievement of this Objective. In addition to specific program
initiatives, the Office of Educational Technology held a National conference in July 1999 on “Evaluating
the Effectiveness of Technology,” which will be followed up by a series of regional conferences starting
in the summer of 2000. We are also funding work on the design of new evaluations and longitudinal
studies that are National in scale, as well as the development of prototype assessment tools that
incorporate the use of technology with a better understanding of the new skills that technology-using
students need.
■ Technology challenge programs. Financial support for leveraging state and local initiatives for
effective use of educational technology.
Through the Technology Literacy Challenge Fund (TLCF), support grants to local districts to
expand efforts to train teachers, purchase computers, connect classrooms to the Internet, and
acquire, where necessary, high-quality educational software and online learning resources.
Encourage states and local districts to devote at least 30 percent of their TLCF allocations to
provide training and support to enable teachers to use technology efficiently in their classrooms.
Provide evaluation tools and encourage states and districts to evaluate progress toward achieving
the four National education technology goals and to evaluate the impact of education technology
on student achievement.
Use the Technology Innovation Challenge Grants appropriation to continue and expand
partnerships among educators, business and industry, and other community organizations to
develop and demonstrate innovative applications of technology for effective use in the classroom.
Build on the successes and lessons learned from this program and the Star Schools program in the
Next Generation Technology Innovation program proposed to replace it.
■ Teacher preparation for 21st century classrooms.
Use the Preparing Teachers to Use Technology program to make grants to teachers’ colleges,
other educational organizations, and consortia to help ensure that prospective teachers are
prepared to integrate technology effectively into teaching when they enter the classroom.
The Department of Education (ED) recognizes that, in addition to its oversight of the many Department
programs described above, assistance and support from other Federal agencies is also important.
Increase school and community access to educational technology. The Department is cooperating
with numerous agencies on an ongoing basis and encouraging the effective use of technology. ED is
cooperating in this area with the White House National Economic Council, the White House Office of
Science and Technology Policy, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Labor, and the
Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Improve data collection. The Department provides support for the Census Bureau’s Current
Population Survey (CPS) to make possible the inclusion of questions on computer and Internet access
at home.
Encourage research. The Department, the National Science Foundation, and the National Institute
of Child Health and Human Development jointly fund an interagency research initiative that focuses
on the use of information and computer technologies in improving school readiness for reading and
mathematics, initial teaching of reading and mathematics, and teacher preparation in reading,
mathematics, and science. With the National Science Foundation, the Department cosponsored a
study of educational technology and instructional practice.
Increase Internet access. The Department collaborates with the Schools and Libraries Division at
the Federal Communications Commission for effective implementation of the Universal Service rate
for educational access for schools and libraries (the E-rate).
The digital divide between low- and high-poverty schools is closing slowly, but the digital divide between
low- and high-income homes is larger than that between schools—and it persists. Lack of access to and
use of computers in the home for children of low-income families exacerbates inequalities stemming from
lower rates of access to computers in high-poverty schools.
Although the recent GAO report Telecommunications Technology: Federal Funding for Schools and
Libraries found no duplication among Department programs, we believe that a continued focus on
strengthening the focus on equity, professional development, and effective implementation among the
various educational technology programs within the Department is needed. In particular, given the rising
level of interest in online advanced placement courses and online postsecondary degree programs,
stronger connections are needed between the K-12 and postsecondary education communities in the area
of distance learning. The Office of Educational Technology meets on a regular basis with all relevant
program offices to ensure that connections are made and continuity is maintained.