To+The+Fifth+Power

toc Technology and Equity in Schooling: Deconstructing the Digital Divide

** Study By: MARK WARSCHAUER, MICHELE KNOBEL, and LEEANN STONE **

WikiPage By: Katie Flynn, Joseph Gassner, Lindsey Gatfield, Katie Quinlan, and Diane Wu

flat

I. Intro & Research to Date

 * The U.S. suffers from enormous achievement gaps according to race and socio-economics.
 * Increases in information and communication technology brings a new dimension to the inequality- Potential to alleviate or exacerbate existing inequity depending on distribution.
 * US National Telecommunications and Information Administration (1999, 2000, 2002) identified inequitable distribution based upon race, income and education.
 * Most studies account only for computer ownership, a statistic which is narrowing.- Home ownership of computer on its own doesn’t equate to academic achievement (low-SES vs high-SES – how computers are used).
 * Schofield and Davidson - Internet and computer usage are often used as a reward to most advanced students.

Global Distribution of Internet Providers (2007) II. Method -Data Analysis: Analyzed data using pattern matching, domain and taxonomic analysis, I-statement analysis, and content analysis.
 * Observations: Took detailed field notes on times when technology was being used in the classroom.
 * Adult Interviews: Interviewed teachers (and a couple administrators) about their personal experience and attitudes towards using technology.
 * Student Questionnaires: Questioned students regarding their demographic and how technology was used at their school (open-ended tech questions).
 * Student Interviews: Asked small groups of students about their computer use outside of school, whether they thought computers enhanced their learning, and what their plans were for after they graduated from high school.
 * Artifacts: Researchers collected items from the school, including technology policies, technology grant proposals, school and teacher websites, lesson handouts with assignment rubrics, and statistics and survey data.
 * Pattern Matching: Identifying patterns across time and constructing comparisons.
 * Domain Analysis: Used to identify the ways in which teachers and students defined particular social practices involving new technology use.
 * Taxonomic Analysis: Shows relationship between included terms within a domain and facilitates comparisons.
 * I-Statement Analysis: Looks at how teachers regarded themselves in terms of technology as passive users, active users, or users surrounded by constraints.
 * Content Analysis: Used to make justified inferences from student questionnaire responses, as well as from artifacts taken from school.

III. Findings
**High-SES and low-SES schools were found to have the same amount of computers, but differ in how they use them.**
 * High- and Low-SES schools in the study had comparable numbers of computers and internet connected-computers, with the low SES schools actually having a slightly better ratio of students to computers than the high-SES schools.
 * A more important question is how the technology is integrated into the schools' curriculum. A breakdown of the use of computers and internet by subject is below:
 * Science:
 * Use of technology was similar in both high- and low-SES schools. Teachers used computers for simulations, data analysis, and PowerPoint presentations
 * Students in low-SES schools occasionally conducted internet-based research, but were limited to perfunctory tasks such as looking up the definition of "biology"
 * Mathematics:
 * High-SES students carried out statistical analysis using computers
 * Low-SES students used computers for individualized instruction and visualization programs (example: geometry)
 * Language Arts:
 * Both groups used Microsoft PowerPoint and wrote essays
 * High-SES students used computers to also plan, edit, and analyze their compositions and conduct internet research, while low-SES students did not
 * Social Studies:
 * Both groups carried out internet research
 * Low-SES schools also created PowerPoint and video presentations


 * Summary of findings:
 * High-SES schools conducted greater amounts of research and analysis in mathematics and language arts, while low-SES schools did a greater amount of visual presenting (PowerPoint and video) in social studies
 * Courses that were only offered to high-SES students used more sophisticated technology
 * In mathematics, students in high-SES schools were less likely to be in need of remedial technology programs because they were typically in the more advanced math classes
 * There is a greater emphasis on research and analysis in high-SES schools than in low-SES schools, despite an equal availability of computers and internet access.




 * There are three overall patterns of technology access and use that can highlight differences between the low-and high-SES schools. These patterns are "performativity," "workability," and "complexity," and they help to identify the challenges faced by low-SES schools in integrating technology into the classroom.
 * **Performativity:**refers to situations in which teachers are "going through the motions" or ticking off skill "checklists" without considering the goals of knowledge construction and purposeful learning for their students.
 * Both low- and high-SES schools exhibited a pattern of performativity, with teachers often focused on the completion of technology-based tasks, or the mastery of a technology function, rather than the relationships that the tasks had to the relevant learning goals.
 * Students noticed an emphasis on performativity of their tasks in both schools: pointing out that using technology improved grades, such as when a student earned extra points just for typing an assignment.
 * The problem of performativity was common at all of the schools studied, but did have a greater effect on the students in low-SES schools (for example, teachers of low-SES students may feel it more important to teach basic computer skills in class because of the potential for their students' limited home access to computers.
 * One result of the commonplace performativity in both high- and low-SES schools is that very few students will need remedial training in computer skills to succeed in a globalized and increasingly interconnected world. Instead, teachers should emphasize what students can do with, or have learned from technology in order to prepare them well for the future.


 * **Workability:**Teachers, admistrators, and students in both low- and high-SES schools had concerns about whether and to what extent the existing digital networks actually functioned for teaching and learning, that is, whether they could be accessed and used easily.
 * Biggest concern: teachers feel they cannot rely on new technologies to work when they needed them
 * Number of computers, kicking out plugs with multiple computers attached, lack of knowledge to troubleshoot problems
 * High-SES Schools: offered great deal of teacher support, including technical support
 * Low-SES Schools: lack of communication between teachers and adminstrators, no technical support, shared computer lab


 * **Complexity:**Even in situations when the machines were accessible and useable/ workable, many teachers still found it a complex undertaking to actually integrate computers in their teaching.There were several factors that contributed to this complexity:
 * 1) High-stakes testing
 * 2) Differential home computer access
 * 3) English Language Learners

IV. Discussion and Conclusions

 * Found no evidence to suggest that technology is serving to overcome or minimize educational inequities!! FOUND the OPPOSITE - it's possible that it amplified the existing inequalities.
 * Placing computers and internet connections in low SES schools, does little to address the serious educational challenges faced by these schools ---> emphasis on provision of equipment draws attention away from other important resources and interventions
 * The USE of TECHNOLOGY in education cannot be viewed in isolation from these broader contexts (vast economics, cultural, linguistic differences).
 * Nearly five times as many teachers in the low-SES schools in the study, lacked full credentials as compared to the high-SES schools.


 * Left less time and energy that could be devoted to enhancing instruction through academically rigorous use of technology

**BIGGEST DIFFERENCES AFFECTING INSTRUCTION** = larger number of English language learners in low-SES vs high-SES

**How to Bridge the Gap!**
 * 1) Ensure that low-SES and high-SES schools have higher numbers of well-trained and experienced teachers, staff, and administrators. As well as extra funding for the large number of English language learners and the extra resources
 * 2) Teachers need to turn away from mastery of programs such as PowerPoint and Internet Explorer and pay more attention to using technology for scholarship, research, and inquiry.
 * 3) Need better approach for addressing unequal access to home computers. (EX: check-out basis, public library)


 * Narrowing the gap in numbers of computers in high- and low-SES schools, is an important first step toward helping overcome a digital divide in education.

media type="custom" key="20391476"[|To the fifth power's poll]