Technology+and+Equity+in+Schools

 Technology and Equity in Schooling Page created by Amira Abdel-Aal, Katelyn Burke & Megan Dunlap

**"New technologies are widely viewed as having the potential to either alleviate or exacerbate existing inequalities."**

A social issue that has permeated the United States' education system is an existing movement to improve the inequality in the system. Both socioeconomic status (SES) and race have been identified as contributing factors to a "gap" in graduation rates, admittance to universities, and nationwide test scores. The study took particular interest in the Latino community, and its increasing presence in the education system-- especially in New York, Texas, and California-- and their presence in the education gap.

Information and communication technology ( [|__ICT__] ) has recently become a notable part of the aforementioned issue of inequality in education. The study detailed on this page documents the manner in which students' academic instruction within varying SES communities was improved by ICT. Methods Findings Discussion Conclusion ||
 * ~ Table of Contents ||
 * < Research to Date

= __Research to Date __ =
 * Access to technology at home:**
 * The U.S. National Telecommunications and Information

Administration (1999, 2000, 2002)- Noted how technology was unevenly distributed based on race, income and education and that these rates are gradually decreasing as more people purchase personal computers.


 * How technology is used is as important as who has access to it:**
 * Becker, H. J. (2000). Who’s wired and who’s not? Future of Children, 10(2), 44-75- suggests that home computers do not level out inequalities completely in terms of student learning. In this study it was shown that high-SES students with home computers were more likely to complete their homework than low-SES students.
 * Attewell, P., & Battle, J. (1999). Home computers and school performance. Information Society, 15(1), 1-10.- showed that home computers raised achievement for high-SES students more than low-SES students.


 * Quality, Quantity and Accessibility to technology at school:**
 * Cuban, 2001- gaps between quantity and quality between high-SES and low-SES schools are gradually being closed.


 * How Technology is Utilized by Different Groups of Students:**
 * Schofield and Davidson’s (2004) - internet access is provided as a reward for high achieving students, these perpetuates the inequalities seen in schools between different student groups
 * Becker’s (2000) - High-SES students use computers for science and research while low-SES students use computers to access drilling programs for math and English.
 * Wenglinsky (1998) and Warschauer (2000) - low-SES students or students of Hispanic or Black decent use technology for more remedial or vocational tasks while high-SES students or students of white or Asian decent use technology for academically rich tasks.

 Education Week (Dividing Lines, 2001) states:  “Inequities in the availability of computer technology and Internet access still exist. But rather than one single, gaping divide, what the nation’s schools are grappling with is more a set of divides, cutting in different directions like the tributaries of a river.  And, increasingly, those inequalities involve not so much access to computers, but the way computers are used to educate children.”
 * All in all: the issue of inequality of education has many contributing factors **

=__**Methods **__=
 * Investigate availability or access to new technologies within a few CA public schools
 * A qualitative survey was used. This can include field-based observations, interviews, questionnaires, artifact collection and numerical aggregates of equipment or demographics of the target population
 * 4 researchers gathered research from 64 classrooms over the scope of 7 months in 2001-2002
 * Two units of interest were used 1) teacher and class 2) school
 * Through these methods significant patterns of use and access were found in the schools and from school to school


 * Sites and participants: **
 * Low and high SES
 * The comparison group was chosen from a higher SES area in California
 * More low SES schools were included in the study because the individuals funding the project were more interested in this demographic
 * 8 schools were chosen total, 5 were low SES
 * 40% of the students in the 5 low SES schools were on free or supplemental lunch programs, 44% were Hispanic students, 31.4 of the students are ELL, all fell in the bottom 40% on the states academic performance index, teachers: have on average 4 years fewer teaching experience, 5x as many teachers were hired who did not have their credentials
 * The high SES have lower than 13% of their students on a lunch supplement program, fewer than 13% Hispanic students, about 10.3% are ELL, in the top 20% of the states academic performance index


 * Participants: **
 * Teacher from science, math, language arts, and social studies
 * 64 teachers total
 * Teachers had to be using tech in their instruction and be a willing participant
 * Students in the classrooms completed surveys and worked in discussion groups

**Data Collection:**
 * Throughout 5-15 days of school

**Observation****:**
 * Two 50 minute periods on average
 * 115 hours overall

**Adult interviews:** **Student questionnaires****:**
 * Interview time for each teacher ranges from 50-90 minutes
 * Semi-structured interviews focusing on the use of technology in the classroom and their reflection of technology and equity
 * Word use by teachers was also analyzed to determine if the participating teachers consider themselves to be active technology users and part of the technology generation
 * Students from one of each of the participating teachers’ classrooms were asked 15 questions.[[image:http://edtech2.boisestate.edu/kappesg/images/students.jpg width="275" height="213" align="right"]]
 * 12 of the questions were in regards to demographics (ethnicity, SES level)
 * 3 questions were open ended and asked the students about how technology is used in the classroom

**Student Interviews****:**
 * Small group interviews
 * 6/8 of the schools
 * Questioned: what students did with computers outside of school, if computers helped them learn and improved their grades

**Artifacts** **:**
 * Technology policy was explored for each school

**Data Analysis****:**
 * Used the formal and systematic process of pattern matching that identifies patterned actions across time. These patterns are used to compare large data sets.
 * Domain analysis was then used to refine the data. This organizes data in culturally defined categories such as classrooms.
 * Within each domain taxonomic analysis was used to compare relationships between factors within a domain
 * Due to the restrictions of the sample (schools all in southern California), the ‘generalizability’ of this study is limited.

**__Findings - High-SES vs. Low-SES Schools: __** This study reported that on average, the numbers of computers and of Internet computers per students were relatively comparable. The earlier gaps regarding computer availability are narrowing, and in fact, low-SES schools tend to have a slightly better student-computer ratio on average than the high-SES schools (See Table 1).



The key differences between the low- and high-SES schools surrounded the idea of the way the technology was being integrated and used in the schools.
 * Big Idea:**

Table 2 outlines the similarities and differences of how technology was used in the following subject areas: science, mathematics, language arts, and social studies. Subject area differences included greater amounts of research and analysis in mathematics and language arts by students in high-SES schools and greater amount visual representations (e.g. PowerPoint and video) in social studies by students in the low-SES schools. It is important to note that the level of usage of technology was also determined by the level of classes students took where technology can be of great benefit. For example, students in high-SES schools took more advanced math classes, where technology was used for enhancement of the lessons. On the other hand, students in low-SES schools needed more individualized instruction and remedial work, where technology was not used as much. This study divided the similarities and differences between low- and high-SES schools into three overall patterns of technology: 1) "performativity," 2) "workabilitiy," 3) "complexity."

Performativity
Lyotard (1984) coined the term to describe the state of affairs in postindustrial societies, such as the United States. It now refers to anything that contributes to maximizing the optimal performance of a system.

The issue of performativity was found at all schools. Both low- and high-SES schools focused on the completion of the technology tasks as an end in themselves, without paying attention to the relationship of these tasks to relevant learning goals. More emphasis on mastering the hardware or software functions was placed, than on the underlying learning outcomes, and the content of the end product. This problem appears to have a greater effect on students in low-SES schools.
 * Definition (in educational context):** Situations in which teachers are going through the motions or ticking off checklists of skills without paying attention to larger issues of knowledge construction and purposeful learning.

Example: completing an Internet-based research assignment -
 * Low-SES Schools:**
 * Aimlessly worked their way through the list of sites returned by the search without any consideration of the relevance of any of the sites listed.
 * Cut and pasted text from the Web pages they visited into a Word document as they were instructed to do so.

The students in this sample were not developing any of the cognitive or information literacy skills such as: evaluating the quality of the search results and interpreting and synthesizing information located on the Web pages. The teachers at these schools did not intervene. In addition, there was a greater tendency to teach basic computer tasks in class due to the teachers' uncertainty about students' home computer access.

Example: completing a PowerPoint presentation - Grading rubric was partly based on the animation and overall aesthetics of the presentation. Thus, the purposed of this assignment and grading rubric was not to teach students to develop an effective presentation but rather to check off that they had mastered the various features of the PowerPoint software program.
 * High-SES Schools:**


 * Workability **


 * Definition (in educational context):** The extent in which existing digital networks actually function for teaching and learning, and whether or not they could be accessed and used easily.


 * Workability Issues:**
 * Robustness of the new technologies and hardwired networks in the school were not always reliable.
 * Design flaws of where power outlets were placed and how labs were designed.
 * Location of computers were usually in classrooms dedicated to business study courses. This established an association of technology as belonging mainly to business studies rather than to an open culture of computing that includes all subject areas.


 * High-SES schools** tended to invest more in professional development, hiring full-time technical support staff and developing lines of communication among teachers and staff. This encouraged more widespread teacher use of new technologies. **Low-SES schools** had less success in creating support networks that made technology workable.

//Interconnected Technological Support://
 * __Workability at Dalea (High-SES School)__**
 * 12 full-time teachers who received technological support training
 * 1 media specialist who had a free period specifically allotted to help teachers set up and implement the use of technology in their classrooms
 * 1 full-time technology expert who's sole role was to maintain and update the Dalea's school website
 * Each of the above-mentioned faculty members were given a large amount of student aids who could assist them and other teachers in technological support situations

//Communication and Coordination:// Due to the fact that there was a strong network of staff with enough human resources instead of just one individual expert, the lines of communication were clear and solidified. Technological issues and new were addressed in a timely and well-coordinated way. Each department had a “go-to” tech expert to report and address any questions to. These tech experts were also subject-matter experts in the particular content area. So, not only were the helpful with technology issues, they were able to provide support that integrated the content matter with the technology.

Bergenia indicated a much greater difficulty in being able to use the computers for instruction than did the teachers at Dalea.
 * __Workability at Bergenia (High-SES School)__**

//Communication, Coordination, and Technological Support:// It's computer labs are managed by diverse groups who at the time of study, appeared to have poor lines of communication with each other.
 * Internet connections installed for more than 5 months before teachers were told students could go online.
 * Lab monitors did not seem to be familiar with what software had been loaded on the computers in each lab.
 * Computer lab scheduling confusions.
 * Lab monitors did not know to what extent the students were allowed to use the computers and for what uses.
 * There was no consistent availability of resources due to school building renovation and construction program.
 * No network of facilitators to offer pedagogical support to teachers of how to best use the technology confidently.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 22px; line-height: 32px;">**Complexity**
** In the research sample within the eight schools, many teachers still found it a complex undertaking to actually integrate computers in their teaching. ** ** Factors that contributed to this complexity: **
 * 1) **[[image:TestPressure.png width="257" height="223" align="right"]]High-stakes testing:** Teachers in all participating schools, and especially in the low-SES schools where student test scores are lower, reported that they feel agreat deal of pressure to focus instruction on covering standards-based curriculum material and raising test scores. Teachers often felt torn betweendoingtechnology integrated projects and teaching to the standards to prepare for state testing. Research to date indicates that low-SES schools tend to devote substantially more classroom time to explicit test-taking preparation than do high-SES schools (McNeil, 2000).
 * 2) **Differential home computer access:** In **high-SES schools**, 99% of students had home access to computers, with 97% having Internet access. Because of this known fact, teachers assumed that students could learn and practice a range of computer skills at home, which would allow them to use class time to address more important academic material. As a result, teachers also more regularly assigned homework that involved computer use. On the other hand, in **low-SES schools**, an average of 84% of students had computer access, with 72% having Internet access at home. As a result, teachers tended to underestimate how many of their students had home computers, and rarely ever assigned homework that involved the use of computers. Therefore, teachers often spent nonacademic computer time to teach basic computer skills (e.g., having students input text) than did teachers at more affluent schools.
 * 3) **English language learners:** The low-SES schools in this study had an average of about 30% English language learners (three time the percentage in the high-SES schools, and many classes included students of mixed English language ability. Teachers noticed limitations that English language learners faced when using the Internet. They were regularly unable to key in URLs and search term correctly or interpret the results of online searches. Another key difficulty teachers observed was the incorrect use of the grammar checker in Microsoft Word. Many English language learners would automatically accept the system grammar changes without understanding why or what was being suggested. As a result, some of the corrections made in the final product of their assignments often had interpretation errors.

**__<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">Discussion __**

<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10pt; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">There are multiple factors that shape the use of technology that worsen the inequities in education. The researchers found no evidence that supports the notion that technology lessens the inequality seen within the schools examined during the study. However, the manner in which homework was assigned, the importance placed on test prep, and the tech support programs each determined the amount of help that technology in low-SES schools offered for students in their academic upbringing.

<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10pt; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">In high-SES schools, teachers are more likely to assign homework that requires the use of a computer based on the fact that students are more than likely to have access to the necessary technology. On the other hand, low-SES students were found to be less likely to use the Internet for schoolwork, as opposed to more automatic pursuits like checking email and social networking sites. This is best highlighted in the “Performativity” section of the findings.

<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10pt; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">To put it simply, it is not the availability of technology in low-SES schools that will fix the problem. It is the mindset of how to use them academically that will best benefit the students AND the schools. <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 10pt; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">It should be noted that the technological and the social aspects of life are intertwined, and not separate from one another.

=__<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif;">Conclusion __=

<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Cultural, language and economic differences among schools and the communities that surround them help to define the microcosm of the American educational system. Interestingly, this interrelated web of interaction is seen most clearly within California. Moreover, technology-- ICT in particular-- is a prominent element within the context of equity in schools. Faculty within lower SES schools are found to pay more attention to academic basics, such as beginning math and reformative literacy, especially when dealing with technology in the classroom. This focus has left a disparity in the effort spent using technology in a more demanding manner alongside instruction with the ultimate goal of enhancing time spent in class, for both the teacher and the students.

<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Cultural, language and economic differences among schools and the communities that surround them help to define the microcosm of the American educational system. Interestingly, this interrelated web of interaction is seen most clearly within California. Moreover, technology-- ICT in particular-- is a prominent element within the context of equity in schools. Faculty within lower SES schools are found to pay more attention to academic basics, such as beginning math and reformative literacy, especially when dealing with technology in the classroom. This focus has left a disparity in the effort spent using technology in a more demanding manner alongside instruction with the ultimate goal of enhancing time spent in class, for both the teacher and the students.

<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">A three-part remedy is suggested:
 * 1) <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Address the issues of inequity within education by ensuring that both high- and low-SES schools have a greater amount of experienced staff members.
 * 2) <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Teachers must pay more attention to using technology to facilitate research and inquiry, and less attention to teaching basic skills of programs such as Internet Explorer and Microsoft Word.
 * 3) <span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Schools must address the unequal access to home computers for students by encouraging them to use public computers that can be found in centers, like libraries.

The United States is taking an important first move toward overcoming the “[|digital divide]” within the education system: the study noted that the amount of computers in low- and high-SES schools is becoming more and more regulated. Yet, this is only the beginning. Students who do not have computers at home need more support, while teachers need to receive mentoring from their peers.

Warschauer, M., Knobel, M., Stone, L. (2004) Technology and equity in schooling: Deconstructing the digital divide. //Educational Policy 18//(4). 562-588.