Math, Science, and Technology in RI Schools

Educational Technology in the Schools of RI

Thanks to legislative funding, Rhode Island public education was an early leader in school technology in the early 1980s. State support for educational technology in schools was jettisoned in the early nineties due to the banking crisis in Rhode Island. A variety of recent national studies from various sources have documented that RI ranks near the bottom in many categories related to technology in schools – with connectivity being a notable exception (Coley, Cradler, and Engel 1997; Education Week, 1997b, 1998, 1999; Milken Exchange on Education Technology 1999b, Solmon 1998). While the exact ranking of RI within these kinds of efforts can be disputed, it is true that RI has not yet experienced the massive state investments in educational technology that have been the case in many other states. (A profile of the current status of technology in RI schools has been provided by the SALT Administrator Survey completed in the spring of 2000 by building principals – see the Appendix for a summary.) Many states aggressively investing in educational technology have comprehensive state plans that have been created and are being implemented under direct leadership from either the Governor’s office or the state legislature (Milken Exchange on Education Technology 1999). With 328 public school buildings and around 8,000 classrooms in RI, it takes about $8 million dollars to add just one relatively high-end computer per classroom – exclusive of professional development, connectivity, and maintenance costs. Despite its costs, it appears that demand for computers in education is growing exponentially, prompting even Newsweek to issue a special theme publication called KIDS ONLINE, 2000 Edition with a Parents’ Guide to Learning (Newsweek 2000).

Federal funds for technology in schools became available in 1995 through the Goals 2000 initiative. RIDE used Goals money to fund the development of a statewide technology plan and three associated planning documents for school districts working with the Center for Educational Leadership and Technology (RIDE 1995; cf. McNabb, Valdez, Nowakowski, and Hawkes, 1999, McNabb 1999). This state plan will be completely rewritten this coming year using federal dollars and once again in collaboration with the Center for Educational Leadership and Technology. Schools need guidance about the ever-broadening range of computing options and their relative merits (thin clients, client-server systems, palm-held applications, freeware, systems integration, connectivity options, etc.). For many purposes a high-end desktop machine provides a low return on investment and a much broader array of devices need to become ubiquitous in schools. Business participants are urged to volunteer to participate in these important deliberations.

The Basic Education Plan (BEP), a document whose provisions are still in force within RI districts, specifies that all “college-bound” students must complete a ½ unit in computer literacy in order to graduate from high school (RIDE 1989: 13). It makes no explicit graduation requirement for the non-college bound student. The BEP also includes, however, a section of requirements regarding Computer Studies (pp. 50-58) which require districts to provide computer studies at both the elementary and secondary level with a focus on: 1) a basis knowledge of how computers work, 2) common computer terminology, and 3) the development of ability to use the computer as a tool, to accomplish a variety of tasks. It requires a written curriculum guide, measures of continuous student progress, integration of language arts skills with the subject matter, articulation and coordination among grade levels, a written program evaluation plan, and student evaluation in the program at least every two weeks.
Research on the impact of the use of educational technology on student learning, teacher planning and teaching, and student motivation has been quite mixed (Coley, Cradler and Engel 1997; Valdez et al., 1999). How technology is used has dramatic effects on whether it improves student achievement. The manner in which teachers are exposed to computers and their uses also seems to make a major difference in how teachers both view and use computers in the context of classroom instruction (McKenzie 1999, 2000; Rodes, Wang 2000). There are many wonderful examples in the literature and online about how powerful technology can be in classroom learning contexts once it becomes readily accessible, usable, scalable, and functional (e.g., Mueh 2000, Hickman 2000). Much work remains to be done to make the existing computer culture more inviting for certain user groups, including girls (American Association of University Women Educational Foundation 2000). The AAUW study based on group research with more than 70 girls, 900 teachers, and an extensive literature review came to the following conclusions:

1.  Computer technology – Girls find programming classes tedious and dull, computer games too boring, redundant and violent, and computer career options uninspiring.

2.  Electronic games – Girls have clear and strong ideas about what kinds of games they would design; games that feature simulation, strategy, and interaction. These games, in fact, would appeal to a broad range of learners – boys and girls alike.

3.  Computer fluency – Gender equity cannot be measured by how many girls send e-mail; use the Internet, or make PowerPoint presentations. Rather, gender equity means using technology proactively, being able to interpret the information that technology makes available, understanding design concepts, and being a lifelong learner of technology. These abilities apply across the whole range of subjects and careers, not just computer science.

4.  Teacher education – The ‘drive by’ approach to teacher training focuses on the technical properties of hardware; it does not emphasize educational applications or innovative uses of computer for each subject area.

5.  The high-tech workplace – The fact that women, who make up half the workforce, account for only 20 percent of those with information technology credentials, it is a clear sign that we have to make computers and technology relevant across the job market to women.