Upload
mathew-stapp
View
218
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Technology Promoting Student Excellence:
A preliminary analysis of the first year A preliminary analysis of the first year of New Hampshire’s 1:1 laptop programof New Hampshire’s 1:1 laptop program
Damian Bebell
Lynch School of Education
Boston College
Full evaluation report and PowerPoint slides will be
available for download at :www.intasc.org
History of Educational Technology
Purported Benefits• Motivate and Engage students• Increase resources and information• Exposure to technology (21st century skills)• Improve teaching (lesson plans, communication)• Movement towards student centered classrooms• Streamline record keeping• Special Needs/Accommodations• Differentiate Instruction/learning
Trends in Educational Technology
• In the late 80’s a trend emerged that technology was good for students – so that they will be prepared for the technology jobs/skills of the future
• Current thinking is that technology is a vehicle for improved student learning of traditional curriculum
Student : Computer Ratios
• Standard Metric of technology access– National Student:Computer Ratios
• 125:1 = 1983• 9:1 = 1995• 6:1 = 1998• 4:1 = 2003Source: Market Data Retrieval, 1999; Education Week, 2004
Technology is sharedTechnology is shared
Use is sporadicUse is sporadic(lots of research)(lots of research)
Movement towards 1:1 technology
• Each teacher and student has full access to a computer (usually laptop)
• Previous research suggests:– Equity issues disappear– Technology becomes the relied upon tool students use
for research, writing, and presentation– Classroom management is simplified– Students are more engaged enthusiastic
Current 1:1 laptop programs
• Maine Learning Technology Initiative (2002)– All 7th and 8th grade students and teachers in 239 middle
schools – Apple iBooks, wireless classrooms,teacher training, support,
and professional development– 1,000 flowers blossoming philosophy
• Henrico County, VA (2002)– Apple iBooks in Grades 6th-12th– 20,000+ students– No systemic research or evaluation
• Massachusetts (3 Berkshire middle schools)• Andover, MA (Toshiba laptops--parent purchase)
Current 1:1 laptop programs (2)
•Michigan–Cross platforms–Looking into less expensive technology (i.e. Palms)
•Sedgwick, KS (2002)–Apple iBooks in middle school
•Texas•Florida•Georgia•Vermont
New Hampshire Question:
• Would the initial positive findings from Maine’s 1:1 laptop program generalize to six New Hampshire middle schools?
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
Photo taken from: http://www.state.nh.us/governor/ (1/28/04)
History of TPSE
Fastest roll out of a 1:1 technology program ever!!!
History of TPSE (2)
"Technology must be heavily leveraged in a way to enhance the classroom experience and excite the student's passion for learning,”
In a perfect world, this would mean each of
the participating student would be excited each morning in anticipation of coming to school and no student would ever want to leave after school ends.”
Benson’s Philosophy:
Source:: http://www.state.nh.us/governor/
History of TPSE (3)
• Improve educational teaching, learning and achievement
• Use an interactive instructional practice
• Bridge the significant digital divide
• Create a highly educated, technology-savvy workforce
1:1 laptops would…
Source: Benson PowerPoint 9/2/03
TPSE Timeline (3)
9/2/03: Program announced10/15/03: Competitive material submitted10/03: 24 private organizations donate over
$1.2 million to fund the program (no public funds)
11/3/03: Participating schools announced12/03: Installation of technology
» Teachers receive laptops» Teacher training
January 5-6, 2004: iBooks distributed to 7th grade students
Participants
6 New Hampshire middle schools selected from approximately 20 applications
•Armand R. Dupont School (Allenstown, NH) •Indian River Middle School (Canaan, NH) •Haverhill Cooperative Middle School (N. Haverhill, NH) •Paul School (Sanbornville, NH) •Thornton Central School (Thornton, NH) •Winnisquam Regional Middle School (Tilton, NH)
400+ students400+ students 40 teachers40 teachers
Program Characteristics
• Apple iBook laptops for teachers and students• Software• Digital cameras and digital video cameras• Wireless school wide networks• Printers• Teacher training• Technology support
Study Design/Methodology
Try and capture the initial impact/effect of the the laptop program (Jan. 04)
Convince stakeholders that research and evaluation was an important component of the initiative
PRE/POST DesignPRE/POST DesignPre
Survey
Post Survey
Follow Up Web Survey
Teacher Survey
Jan. 04 May/June 04
Oct. 05
Student
Survey
Jan. 04 May/June 04
---
Study Design/MethodologySpring 2004 Student Surveys (n=862 both pre and post)1. Measures of technology use in school2. Technology use at home3. Across subject area4. Personal comfort level with technology
Spring 2004 Teacher Surveys (n=47 both pre and post)1. Measures of technology use in school2. Measures of technology use beyond the classroom3. Across subject area4. Personal comfort level with technology5. Demographic Information6. Attitude toward technology
Study Design/MethodologyFall 2004 Teacher Survey Follow Up (n=32)
Capture teachers perceptions about the specific impacts of the 1:1 program on students, teaching and learning
•Collected Online•http://corvus.bc.edu/nhteacherfollowup/NH_teacher_followup.cfm
•Survey items adapted from teacher survey measures created for use in Maine
•Specific focus on how technology has impacted different groups of students
•Traditional students•High Achieving Students•At-Risk or Low Achieving Students
Study Design/MethodologyNo systematic examination of achievement…yet
– First need to measure impact and level of us– No shared assessment in NH at the 7th grade– Need previous measures of student achievement– Individual student data– Difficulty in getting comparison groups to participate– Teachers perception of technology impact on
achievement
Today’s presentation focuses on Today’s presentation focuses on the immediate (1st six months) the immediate (1st six months) impact of the laptop programimpact of the laptop program
Student Level Results/Findings
Estimated # of 7th grade
Students
Pre (1/04) Responses
Post (5/04) Responses
Dupont 63 61 58
Haverhill 71 73 47
Indian River 118 100 96
Paul 80 64 61
Thornton 28 27 28
Winnisquam 175 114 134
Student survey response rate
Students used technology in school substantially more across all six 1:1 settings
How often do you use technology in your classroom? (Q1A)
1 2 3 4 5
Total
Wiinsquam
Thornton
Paul
Indian River
Haverhill
Dupont
Pre Post
Pre 2.28 1.67 3.93 2.17 1.93 2.4 3.22Post 4.68 4.71 4.52 4.85 4.38 4.85 4.9
Total WiinsquamThornton Paul Indian River HaverhillDupont
15 min or less
15 -60 minNever 1-2 hrs 2+ hrs
Students used technology in school substantially more in English/Language Arts
How often do you use a computer in Reading/ELA? (Q3A)
1 2 3 4 5
Total
Wiinsquam
Thornton
Paul
Indian River
Haverhill
Dupont
Pre Post
Pre 2.32 1.44 4.04 2.54 2.11 2.92 2.62Post 4.39 4.29 4.15 4.75 4.65 3.88 4.36
Total WiinsquamThornton Paul Indian River HaverhillDupont
15 min or less 15 -60 minNever 1-2 hrs 2+ hrs
Students used technology in school substantially more in Social Studies
How often do you use a computer in Social Studies? (Q3B)
1 2 3 4 5
Total
Wiinsquam
Thornton
Paul
Indian River
Haverhill
Dupont
Pre Post
Pre 1.74 1.32 1.26 1.19 1.97 1.77 2.62Post 4.12 4.15 4.08 4.68 3.36 4.16 4.36
Total WiinsquamThornton Paul Indian River HaverhillDupont15 min
or less15 -60 minNever 1-2 hrs 2+ hrs
Students used technology in school substantially more in Math
How often do you use a computer in Math? (Q3C)
1 2 3 4 5
Total
Wiinsquam
Thornton
Paul
Indian River
Haverhill
Dupont
Pre Post
Pre 1.24 1.07 1.89 1.08 1.27 1.26 1.38Post 3.3 3.02 3.19 3.54 4.38 4.59 4.09
Total WiinsquamThornton Paul Indian River HaverhillDupont15 min
or less15 -60 minNever 1-2 hrs 2+ hrs
Students used technology in school substantially more in Science
How often do you use a computer in Science? (Q3D)
1 2 3 4 5
Total
Wiinsquam
Thornton
Paul
Indian River
Haverhill
Dupont
Pre Post
Pre 1.68 1.27 1.96 1.27 1.34 2.31 2.6Post 4.11 4.05 3.19 3.34 4.6 4.24 4.16
Total WiinsquamThornton Paul Indian River HaverhillDupont15 min
or less15 -60 minNever 1-2 hrs 2+ hrs
Students used technology for wide variety of tasks
How often do you a computer in school to:
1 2 3 4 5
find information on theinternet
edit papers using acomputer
write first drafts
play computer games
create Hyperstudio orPowerpoint presentation
solve problems
create graphs or tables
analyze data
work withspreadhseets/databases
take a test or quiz
Sending and receivingemail
Pre Mean
Post Mean
15 min or less
15 -60 minNever 1-2 hrs 2+ hrs
How often does your teacher use a computer for each subject? (Q7)
0 1 2 3 4 5
Reading/ELA
Social Studies
Math
Science
Mean PreMean Post
Teachers use of technology as reported by the students
15 -60 minNever 1-2 hrs 2+ hrs
R
15 min or less
Students use of technology at home
How often do you use your home computer to: (Q12)
1 2 3 4 5
play games
search the 'net for school
chat/instant message
search the 'net for fun
write papers for school
download/play mp3/music
computer program
create/edit digital photos or movies
create/maintain web sites
Total PreTotal Post
15 min or less
15 -60 minNever 1-2 hrs 2+ hrs
How well are you able to:
1 2 3 4
find information on theInternet
write papers using acomputer
create multimediapresentations
record and analyze datausing a spreadhseet
communicate using email
Pre
Post
Not Well Very Well
Students reported technology skills
Pre/Post SY (03/04) Teacher Results
Teacher survey response rate less sure than student survey
Typically Math, Science, English/language Arts, or Social Studies teachers completed the survey, however around 10% of respondents were not primary classroom teachers
Teacher Pre/Post Beliefs and Confidence Measures
How important are computers in your teaching? (Q3)
1 2 3
Post
Pre
Series1 1.68 2.44Post Pre
How confident are you when using computers? (Q4)
1 2 3
Post
Pre
Series1 1.68 2.04
Post Pre
1=Very Important 2=Somewhat Important 3=Not Very Important
1= Very Confident2=Somewhat Confident3=Not Very Confident
Teachers Use of Technology
1 2 3 4 5
make handouts using computer
create test, quiz or assignment
perform research and lessonplanning using the web
communicate with teachers, parentsand administrators via email
adapt an activity to student specialneeds
deliver instruction with computer
use a computer to present info toclass
use a computer to help student betterundertstand a concept
creat WebQuest or build the webinto a lesson
access studnets via computer
use a computer to modelrelationships/functions
create/maintain web sites
prepare or maintain IEPS
PrePost
Pre 3.84 3.68 3.08 2.68 2.08 1.84 1.76 1.71 1.6 1.6 1.52 1.4 1.28Post 4.5 4.5 4.5 4 3.86 4.36 4.14 4.09 3.36 3.23 3.36 1.86 1.57
make handouts
using computer
create test, quiz or
assignment
perform research
and lesson planning
communicate with teachers, parents
adapt an activity to student special
deliver instruction
with computer
use a computer to present info to
use a computer to help student
creat WebQuest or build the web
access studnets
via computer
use a computer to model relationshi
create/maintain web
sites
prepare or maintain
IEPS
R
Once or twice a year
Several times per year
Never Several times per month
Several times per week
1 2 3 4 5
reports and termpapers
pictures/art work
graphs or charts
stories or books
multimedia projects
web pages, etc.
videos or movies
Pre
Post
Pre 1.88 1.88 1.56 1.48 1.46 1.16 1.16
Post 3.45 2.68 2.82 1.95 3.09 1.57 2.5
reports and term papers pictures/art work graphs or charts stories or books multimedia projects web pages, etc. videos or movies
How often do teachers assign students to create the following products using technology?
Once or twice a year
Several times per year
Never Several times per month
Several times per week
Also observed changes in teachers beliefs towards learning and technology?
Increase in the belief that students interact with each other more
while working with computers
Students work harder when using computers
Technology allows students to create better looking finished products
Overwhelming agreement among participating teachers that :
Students are more willing to write second drafts when using a computer
Students develop a deeper understanding of the material when using technology
Teacher Survey Follow Ups (Oct. 04)
32 teachers across the six schools responded to an online follow up survey (n=32 in all cases)
My goals for students have changed
18.8
37.5
25.0
15.6
3.1
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree StronglyDisagree
Teacher Survey Follow Ups (Oct. 04)
The school climate has changed
15.6
65.6
18.8
0.0 0.00.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree StronglyDisagree
My role in the classroom has changed
12.5
62.5
9.412.5
3.1
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree StronglyDisagree
Teacher Survey Follow Ups (Oct. 04)
Student acheivement has improved
15.6
50.0
31.3
3.10.0
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree StronglyDisagree
Teacher Survey Follow Ups (Oct. 04)
My understanding of how people learn has changed
6.3
40.6
37.5
12.5
3.1
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
45.0
Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree StronglyDisagree
My beliefs about teaching and learning have changed
6.3
56.3
18.815.6
3.1
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree StronglyDisagree
Teacher Survey Follow Ups (Oct. 04)
My computer skills have improved
56.3
43.7
0.0 0.0 0.00.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree StronglyDisagree
Teacher Survey Follow Ups (Oct. 04)
The delivery of curriculum in my classes has changed
21.9
65.6
12.5
0.0 0.00.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree StronglyDisagree
I have had adequate professional development opportunities
9.4
50.0
25.0
15.6
0.00.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree StronglyDisagree
Teacher Survey Follow Ups (Oct. 04)
Students have greater freedom of choice with regard to their individual learning style
21.9
53.1
21.9
3.10.0
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree StronglyDisagree
The school has developed effective policies and procedures for the laptop program
34.4
50.0
9.46.3
0.00.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree StronglyDisagree
Teacher Survey Follow Ups (Oct. 04)
My ability to assess and evaluate student work has improved
15.6
21.9
40.6
18.8
3.1
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
45.0
Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree StronglyDisagree
Teacher Survey Follow Ups (Oct. 04)
Participation in class
3.10
3.1
12.56.3
34.4
84.4
93.8
62.5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Declined 3.1 0 3.1
No Effect 12.5 6.3 34.4
Improved 84.4 93.8 62.5
Traditional studentsAt-risk/low achieving
studentsHigh achieving
students
Teacher Survey Follow Ups (Oct. 04)
Motivation
3.16.3
3.13.1
15.6 15.6
93.8
81.3 81.3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Declined 3.1 6.3 3.1
No Effect 3.1 15.6 15.6
Improved 93.8 81.3 81.3
Traditional studentsAt-risk/low achieving
studentsHigh achieving
students
Teacher Survey Follow Ups (Oct. 04)
Engagement/interest level
3.1 0 3.16.3 3.1
15.6
90.696.9
81.3
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Declined 3.1 0 3.1
No Effect 6.3 3.1 15.6
Improved 90.6 96.9 81.3
Traditional studentsAt-risk/low achieving
studentsHigh achieving
students
Teacher Survey Follow Ups (Oct. 04)
Ability to work independently
3.10
3.1
2528.1
43.8
71.9 71.9
53.1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Declined 3.1 0 3.1
No Effect 25 28.1 43.8
Improved 71.9 71.9 53.1
Traditional studentsAt-risk/low achieving
studentsHigh achieving
students
Teacher Survey Follow Ups (Oct. 04)
Ability to retain content material
3.10
3.1
46.9
40.6
5050
59.4
46.9
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Declined 3.1 0 3.1
No Effect 46.9 40.6 50
Improved 50 59.4 46.9
Traditional studentsAt-risk/low achieving
studentsHigh achieving
students
Teacher Survey Follow Ups (Oct. 04)
Quality of work
3.10
3.1
21.9 21.9
34.4
7578.1
62.5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Declined 3.1 0 3.1
No Effect 21.9 21.9 34.4
Improved 75 78.1 62.5
Traditional studentsAt-risk/low achieving
studentsHigh achieving
students
Teacher Survey Follow Ups (Oct. 04)
Interaction with teacher
6.30
6.3
15.612.5
34.4
78.1
87.5
59.4
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Declined 6.3 0 6.3
No Effect 15.6 12.5 34.4
Improved 78.1 87.5 59.4
Traditional studentsAt-risk/low achieving
studentsHigh achieving
students
Teacher Survey Follow Ups (Oct. 04)
Interaction with other students
3.10
3.19.4
15.621.9
87.584.4
75
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Declined 3.1 0 3.1
No Effect 9.4 15.6 21.9
Improved 87.5 84.4 75
Traditional studentsAt-risk/low achieving
studentsHigh achieving
students
Teacher Survey Follow Ups (Oct. 04)
Quality of student writing
3.10
3.1
34.4 34.431.3
62.565.6 65.6
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Declined 3.1 0 3.1
No Effect 34.4 34.4 31.3
Improved 62.5 65.6 65.6
Traditional studentsAt-risk/low achieving
studentsHigh achieving
students
The Rise and Fall of 1:1 Computing
•The cost of going 1:1 is great •$40 million in Maine, •$1.2+ million in NH•Over $25 million in VA
•There is a climate of great pressure on schools to demonstrate that money spent is directly and positively impacting students
•Current definition of impacting students is increased performance as measured by a standardized test (accountability at all levels, AYP, etc)
The Rise and Fall of 1:1 Computing (2)
It is estimated that the measurable impact of educational technology investments can take 4+ years
Stakeholders expect to see measurable differences in student scores given their investments (typically not very patient)
Rise and Fall of 1:1 Computing
Research/Evaluation is costly (time and money)
Methodological ChallengesGood accurate measures of technology “use” (STEP 1)Valid measurement of student achievement
Issues with paper based tests for high-tech students(Russell, 1999; 2001; 2002)Measures of prior achievement
IDEAL QUESTION:What kind of technology use leads to what kind of achievement gains (for x kind of student)?
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
Laptop flop; Maine results should give pause to NH
MAINE'S two-year-old experiment with laptop computers in the classroom has flopped as measured by student test scores. Now maybe this nonsensical trend will fizzle out and we can get back to spending time and money on educating students instead of buying them expensive tools that don't help them learn the basics. Maine has laid out $37.2 million on a four-year experiment that provides laptop computers to all students in grades 7 and 8…Manchester Union Leader August 12, 2004 Page A16