Information technology is playing an ever expanding role in every aspect of our lives, our work, our study, our recreation, our communication, our shopping, our politics, our news, our entertainment, our play, ………... ……. so how do we prepare our students to participate safely and meaningfully in this technology rich environment? This is a question being tackled in schools across the globe.
1 to 1 Laptops in education Yew Chung International School of Beijing
iLearn The Yew Chung International School of Beijing was on the verge of embarking on a 1 to 1 Laptop pilot project however the plan was halted mid-step to more closely consider the school’s approach IT in the classroom.
The iLearn project has been a part of the early stages of this process of enquiry and analysis …….
…. the outcome of this process is yet to be seen and is set to continue beyond the completion of the
iLearn project …..
Definitions of 1 to 1 Laptop Programs vary widely but most provide one laptop per child with wireless internet connection throughout the school and an integration of the laptops into daily classroom teaching and learning activities. Penuel, WR 2006, Implementation and effects of One-to-one computing initiatives: A research synthesis, Journal of Research on Technology in Education, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 329-348
© School of Computer and Information Science Project Fair Day November 2008
Year 6 Teacher
es ra
bl
Sue Tyerman Student:
Philip Williams
ve
Sam Batemen
Supervisor:
el i
iLearn cis08144
Client:
D
Project title and code
1.To facilitate a process of enquiry and investigation into the implementation of a 1 to 1 Laptop Program. 2.Report - literature review and lessons learnt.
University of South Australia School of Computer and Information Science Project code: cis08144
iLearn 1 to 1 Laptop Initiatives: A summary of findings from the iLearn project by Philip Williams Project Coordinator
“We must prepare our children not for the world of the past, not for our world, but for their world. The world of the future�, John Dewey (date unknown, approx. 1940)
1. Background The iLearn project began as a 1 to 1 laptop implementation pilot project in a Year 6 classroom at the Yew Chung International School of Beijing. Plans changed and the project was instead set the task of facilitating the exploration 1 to 1 Laptop Projects - the benefits, the logistics, costs and underlying principles. This exploration took the form of participation in a range of information gathering activities for Yew Chung staff, a focus group amongst the Year 6 teachers and a review of current literature. This report is a culmination of this process and was written to pull together all the lessons learnt to help build a basis for ongoing investigation of information technology possibilities for the school beyond the completion of iLearn project. This report does not seek to replicate the information already widely available online and in published literature, rather, to highlight relevant information and commonly emphasised themes. References are provided along with a supplementary Bibliography for readers who would like to access original sources.
2. Introduction 1 to 1 laptop initiatives continue to expand across the world at a rapid rate on large as well as small scales (Penuel, 2006). The states of Maine and Texas in the US have invested in state wide initiatives while Brazil has undertaken a country wide initiative that eventually seeks to place the Classmate PC laptop into the hands of 108,000 school students hand in 1
coming years (Microsoft, 2008). Australia has also recently unveiled a 1.2 billion dollar Digital Education Revolution initiative that in many circumstances will involve 1 to 1 laptop initiatives across the nation (Australian Government, 2008). The “one laptop per child� (OLPC) program is seeking to distribute their cutting edge laptop computers throughout Africa, Thailand, Libya and beyond with wireless internet connection (One Laptop Per Child, 2008). Clearly both national and state governments, businesses and schools across the world are recognising the imperative to assist children to become technology literate. In a world where technology is becoming increasingly integrated into every aspect of our lives, it is evident that we need to prepare students with the necessary skills and tools to be able to participate safely and effectively in a technology rich environment. The need for students to engage with information technologies (IT) as lifelong learners is fundamental to developing higher order skills necessary to analyse, adapt and integrate the flood of emerging technologies in our modern environment. There is little doubt that the technology available to our children when they enter the workplace will be vastly different to currently available resources, so how do we prepare students to face these challenges with confidence and key competencies they will need? In whatever direction schools and educators decide to advance, it is crucial that the issues outlined in this report are considered carefully and that subsequent directions are chosen as a result of well informed decisions. How is IT being incorporated into education? What conclusions can be drawn from the available literature? How rigorous have the studies been in this field and what does this mean for the future? These are questions that have formed the basis for investigation and analysis for this paper.
3. 1 to 1 Laptop Initiatives: a Definition With 1 to 1 programs being applied in schools throughout the world, definitions of the scope, objectives and details of these programs vary tremendously however there are three key elements that have emerged as the most consistent aspects of these programs (Penuel, 2006, Alberta Education, 2006): i. One laptop per student and teacher. ii. Wireless internet connection to the internet throughout the school. iii. Integration of the laptops into the classroom for the completion of academic activities.
4. Leadership Without exception, there is a unanimous assertion from the literature that a strong and cohesive leadership at all levels is essential for the successful implementation of 1 to 1 laptop programs (Alberta Education 2006). A comprehensive and systematic approach is fundamental and can only be achieved through a leadership that supports each phase of the process. Alberta Education (2006) define leadership comprising of principals, librarians, technology coordinators and teacher leaders. This support is necessary, in part, because for many teachers and administration staff, 1 to 1 programs involve steep learning curves as they seek to integrate technology that they are not necessarily familiar with. A cohesive leadership draws a strongly articulated vision that is clear and compelling for learner outcomes. A combined vision and clear understanding of roles couched in an environment of support and professional training is a key role for the leadership.
2
5. Planning Timeframes A period of at least 6 months is a generally accepted length of time to permit satisfactory planning and preparation before any new technology is introduced into the classroom (2008, pers. comm. 23 Sept). Zucker (2005) advocates for a planning period of one year or more to allow for adequate staff professional education and preparation. Many schools have also opted for providing teachers with laptops and relevant software up to six months before implementation in the classroom so that teachers become comfortable with incorporating the technology into their own lives before they are required teach their students the same skills (Alberta Education, 2006). Logistical issues such as battery charging and computer storage must be carefully considered to minimise possible hinderances to classroom usage. Zucker (2005) also emphasised the need to allow sufficient time for the change to occur and allowing time for teachers to capture a vision for what the possibilities are for their classroom. Evaluation and monitoring An important part of the planning process is for schools to consider those areas that need monitoring and evaluation. Consideration of how this monitoring and evaluation will take place ensures that a process of reevaluation and development is built into the overall process. These areas of evaluation must be relevant and specific to the school and the school!s priorities. Evaluating cost-benefits can be difficult but comparing benefits to the investment can guide development priorities and maximise outcomes for the students. Zucker (2005) advocates for funding that considers the long term and also incorporates planning for change. Areas that should be addressed in the planning process include (Alberta Education 2006): Learning goals Vision Leadership Professional learning Communication Evaluation Situational awareness Security Parent education Deployment Technical support Implementation Infrastructure Curriculum Vendor partners Facilities Funding Legislation Maintenance. Numerous tools are available online and in print to aid in this process (see Bibliography).
3
6. Meeting Outcomes and Objectives The educational goals are indeed the final aim and point of any program within the school environment. With a focus on the learning outcomes, the technology becomes a tool, a vehicle for learning rather than an object of learning in itself. Certainly technology literacy is vital for students but in the majority of situations, this literacy is in the context of a much broader learning outcome. Educational goals for students in today!s world require a seamless integration of curriculum and technology (Learning Point Associates, 2005). Apart from the three key elements that most commonly define 1 to 1 initiatives, schools quickly diverge in regard to the objectives and outcomes from these programs. Academic achievement, equity of access and economic competitiveness have been cited as the focus for a number of programs while others have focussed more on reforming instructional practices (Penuel 2006). Zucker (2005) includes improving student achievement through specific interventions. The Alberta Education research synthesis (2006) also highlights improvements in student motivation, engagement and interest in learning activities. In reforming teaching methods, programs have aimed to introduce a learner centred approach that is differentiated, problem based, project based and demanding high order thinking skills (Penuel 2006). NETS for students highlights the use of IT for data processing, problem solving, collaboration and fundamentally, a positive attitude to technology that fosters lifelong learning (Learning Point Associates, 2005). Far from being an end in itself, the technology is a tool that can be integrated into most aspects of student learning.
7. Curriculum, multimedia and software Transition phase Studies investigating how the laptop computers are actually used in the classroom and at home have listed writing, taking notes, completing homework, organising daily activities, communication and research via the internet as the most common activities. Word processing software, web browsers, email accounts and chat programs are the most commonly used software applications for these tasks. Of note, much of the literature highlighted that many of the classrooms and schools studied were still in a transition phases as teaching practices and school infrastructure was in the process of accommodating the new approaches and IT tools (Penuel 2006). This finding reflects the infancy of these programs which only began appearing in the mid 1990s but have only more recently been expanding at current rates post-2000. In 2001, only 19 studies of laptop projects had been carried out (Penuel et. al. 2001). Curriculums, school missions and education objectives are being overhauled across the globe to better encapsulate a learning environment which has a greater responsiveness to the current technology rich environment that students are emerging into and already participating in. Software and multimedia Classrooms that are implementing a project based approach are using a broader array of software and hardware tools in their learning. Rather than the basic word processing tools, students are accessing design and multimedia tools, data analysis tools and various presentation software to expand their ability to interact with the learning material and present their achievements. Learner centred approaches have also been found to 4
significantly increase the usage of IT in the classroom e.g.. iNtegrating Technology for inQuiry (NTeQ) model (Morrison, Lowther, & DeMuelle, 1999). Curriculum focus A key issue frequently raised in discussions about 1 to 1 laptop computers is the need for the initiatives to be curriculum driven (2008, pers. comm. 17 Oct). All the tools, methods and infrastructure must be focussed on student learning. Easy to use applications and easily accessed technology is vital for keeping the focus off the technology itself and on to the learning objectives. The curriculum can then incorporate the technology rather than turning student and teacher attention onto the technology itself. Software applications used in the business, private and education settings include the following broad categories (Alberta Education 2006): Graphic organisers Presentation Web authoring Photo editing and graphics Digital video editing Multimedia authoring E-mail and conferencing Word processing Spreadsheets Databases
8. Professional Development IT uptake in the classroom The day to day uptake of the available technology is to a very large extent governed by teachers! beliefs surrounding the technology and its use in education. Teachers who are supported in an environment that fosters risk-taking and allows for mistakes is vital along side support to evolve pedagogical repertoires with technology (Alberta Education 2006). This support can be formal and informal, offering professional development that provides teachers with the skills and knowledge equipping and empowering them with an understanding of the role of IT in education. Teachers who understand the diversity of IT tools available to them in the classroom are more likely to use the laptops (Penuel 2006). Furthermore, teachers who have a belief in the ability of students to engage in extended project based assignments involving student collaboration are also more likely to incorporate the laptops into the learning environment. Teachers who feel that they have access to the necessary quality resources are also more likely to make use of the technology in the classroom (Alberta Education 2006). Staff training and support Considering these aspects of IT usage, it is clear that teachers must be provided with the support and training to develop a pedagogy that fosters more effective use of the technology. It is also clear that there needs to be an acknowledgement that the teaching profession is undergoing a large process of adaption and integration that is still in the early stages. Teachers require positive support that fosters a refinement of teaching practices, but is also sensitive to the need for a period of transition as new technologies and methods are brought into daily practices. Most new 1 to 1 initiatives have incorporated formal training programs on a large scale which are as vital as the technology itself 5
(Alberta Education 2006). Content specialists are often assigned to assist teachers with the integration process. Of particular note too is the regularly cited benefits of collegiate support which can have a large influence on daily access and integration of IT resources. This has been recognised as an area needing development in the future as schools seek to foster the informal support networks throughout the school environment. Such an approach appears to greatly facilitate teachers in managing the daily pragmatics of using the laptop computers so fundamental to the effective implementation of 1 to 1 initiatives. In fact, a number of studies have found that fostering the role of the students themselves as the first line of technical support has yielded sometimes unexpected yet extremely valuable learning opportunities. Student who have shown particular interest in particular aspects of the use and maintenance of the laptop computers have become key resources for teachers and other students (Penuel 2006). This outcome has fostered a strong community approach within the school that mirrors the working environments the students will be emerging into once they have completed their studies.
9. Infrastructure and connectivity Initiatives vary widely in scale. In some instances, school children throughout an entire state are provided with a laptop computer with wireless internet connection while other schools have adopted pilot projects within individual classrooms or grade levels. Even though the issues faced by each rollout vary widely, the need for programs to address the needs of local teachers and develop specific and individual goals is universal.
10. Technical support The potential for hardware, software and network breakdowns to significantly jeopardise the success of a 1 to 1 laptop program can not be over emphasised (Alberta Education 2006). The timely supply of this support is vital to ensure that the interruption to the workflow of the student is minimised. Many programs emphasise a multitiered approach which builds expert knowledge amongst students and teachers in the first instance where many problems can be solved rapidly and provide learning opportunities in themselves rather than building a reliance on “the experts�. School based technical support is also vital with facility to go beyond the school if the problems become larger.
11. Desktop PC vs laptop Clearly many of the tasks that can be performed on a laptop, in theory, can be equally well or better performed on a desktop PC however it is at this point that the goals and objectives of the IT program need to be carefully considered. A decision based on this conclusion alone fails to consider the broader pragmatics and potential learning outcomes available in a laptop environment. It can be adequately argued that either a desktop or the laptop option are viable options for a classroom however a number of issues must be considered. Portability Firstly, what does the portability of the laptops offer the students? Laptop computers offer the ability to integrate IT into the classroom setting by imbedding the technology in the workflow of the students. That is, rather than turning to the desktop computers to access IT resources, the laptops can be taken to where the learning opportunity is taking place. If it is in a group work setting or when attending to the teacher or during individual activities, 6
the laptops can become as imbedded in the students activities as pen and paper. In such an environment, the laptops become one of a number tools accessed during a learning event rather than the focus. With file sharing capabilities, images and information can be rapidly shared amongst other students and incorporated in presentations. It is the portability of the computers that facilitate this seamless integration of the technology into the workflow of the classroom and beyond the classroom. Projects and continuity Beyond the classroom, projects, resources and tools available to the student through the computers are readily available wherever the student travels within the school or at home (if the laptop program incorporates students taking the computers home). To some extent, this transportability is available when using desktop PCs via file transport options (such as USB drives) however the seamless integration into the workflow of the student is complicated by added steps and potential interruptions significantly reducing the likelihood that the technology will be utilised. Penuel (2006) highlighted that one of the key factors in the utilisation of technology in the classroom was the reliability of the technology. If problems were encountered, uptake was greatly reduced. Laptops are not infallible however they offer a greater facility for incorporation in the daily activities of the students. Russell, Bibell and Higgins (2004) in their study comparing 1-to-1, 2-to-1 and 4-to-1 programs found that the 1 to 1 programs facilitated a wider array of usage, less large group instruction and a greater use across the curriculum at school and at home. Computer lab These arguments are made assuming that the desktop PCs are available within the classroom throughout the school day however when the PCs are located in a computer lab and accessed for one or two lessons a week, the divide becomes even more pronounced (Kozma, 1991). Scheduling lessons and maintaining continuity of lessons with the curriculum needs at the time of access to the lab are difficulties that severely limit the integration of IT into the curriculum. Embedded technology The literature also highlights the ubiquitous presence of laptops. That is, the technology available in a laptop is ever present and thus becomes a natural adjunct to other forms of learning rather than a separate learning environment (Penuel 2006). Thus, rather than removing the student from their usual learning environment as in the case of computer labs and even desktop computers overtaking and replacing other more physical tools such as pen and paper, laptop computers become simply another tool available to students. Researchers have thus argued that laptop computers allow the technology to become a “personal device� rather than a more removed item (Vahey & Crawford, 2002). With the increasingly mobile nature of technology in all aspects of our lives, such an approach to education appears to be a logical conclusion. Equity of access Issues of equitability of access are frequently cited as important features of 1 to 1 laptop computer initiatives. A more general access for all students with support provides opportunity for all students to participate in learning opportunities facilitated by the technology (Russell, Bebell & Higgin, 2004). The ability for students to network or participate in computer simulations at one time can transform learning environments. For example, ready file sharing in the classroom can facilitate collaboration and assist children to keep on task. For students with learning 7
needs or children with English as a second language, the ability to readily access a wider variety of learning tools within the classroom can be an invaluable resource for teachers trying to differentiate lessons and broaden teaching styles. Access to laptops in the classroom at the students! desk or wherever the learning event is taking place can assist teachers to draw these children into the class experience without isolating them to desktop PCs or even further removed to an IT lab. It is certainly true that the interactive whiteboards offer many of these advantages however to include the laptops in the learning situation provides opportunity for that event to be personalised and differentiated to a higher level. Conclusion In conclusion, it can be said that a laptop can offer all the features offered by a desktop PC but the reverse is not as evident. The desktop computer does offer the safety from damage that can be subjected to laptops however this has not been highlighted in the literature or in personal communication with those involved in 1 to 1 laptop programs as a significant issue. The key is participation, the imbedding of the technology into the workflow of the students in the same way a pencil, a book, a ruler or paper is a part of a students learning experiences.
12. Costs Analysing the costs of implementing a 1 to 1 laptop program is complex and specific to the context of the school considering such a program (Alberta Education 2006). Many factors need to be taken into consideration - factors that not only affect the initial layout for early implementation but also the ongoing maintenance of the IT infrastructure. Staff training and development also need to be factored in to the equation. As daunting as these figures may be, effective implementation is contingent upon an adequately planned, prepared and resourced program. Cost cutting in key areas can result in a significant reduction in the overall cost-benefit analysis (Consortium for school networking, 2001). The final cost of introducing a laptop program cannot be calculated until key decisions are made regarding factors such as the creation of a wireless network, how may students and classrooms will be involved in the program, purchasing of laptops covered by the school, families or a combination and community support possibilities. Alberta Education (2006) also highlight the less obvious but vital component of vendor selection. Key questions arise such as whether the vendor will be a true partner beyond the selling of the hardware and infrastructure. This partnership entails assistance with appropriate planning and development, after sales support and training, supply of servicing and parts and a recognition of the practical aspects of technology integration.
13. Benefits Research Findings from outcome studies of 1 to 1 laptop initiatives have been largely positive particularly in relation to computer literacy and writing (Penuel 2006, Alberta Education , 2006). Improvement in writing skills were attributed to higher scores for meaning, style and form suggesting that these improvements were substantial (Alberta Education, 2006). Academic improvements were also reported for students at risk, students with disabilities and gifted students (Alberta Education, 2006). These studies also suggested shifts in education to more constructivist and inquiry-based teaching practices. A study by Gulek & 8
Demirtas (2005) also indicated significant increases in grade point average across all areas of learning with results supported by longitudinal analysis. They also asserted that student work was greater in length and higher quality. Core subjects Results of studies that examine outcomes for core subject areas however are not clear considering the difficulties in adequately correlating positive results to specific teaching methodologies. Studies have asserted positive outcomes for professional development and skill acquisition for teachers. Research challenges Despite the immense volume of literature available regarding 1 to 1 laptop programs, very few studies can be described as rigorous and conclusive. For example, the research synthesis carried out by Penuel (2006) initially found 245 articles of which only four could be described as quasi-experimental studies with pre-test/post-test designs with comparison groups and only seven others used comparison groups. Fundamental challenges facing researchers in this field and the limited number of rigorous studies have made it difficult to form firm conclusions regarding the effectiveness of 1 to 1 laptop programs from these studies however that is certainly also not a reason to postpone initiatives. Difficulties in researching the implementation of 1 to 1 initiatives is in fact consistent with past research on other educational technology reforms (Penuel 2006). Firstly, the rapidity of progress of emerging technologies inevitably result in a lag time between the introduction of new IT into the classroom and the completion of effective research. Therefore, the incorporation of IT into the curriculum of students is often based on the pragmatics of the world environment they are growing up in. As important as research is to the refinement and analysis of teaching methodologies for best practice, the need to make decisions based on the real-world needs of students is equally valid. Conclusion The tools used in the work place and at home are tools that students must become proficient with or they are at risk of being left vulnerable to a global environment that is ever expanding beyond their ability to interact and contribute in safe, respectful and meaningful ways. A number of studies already referred to and listed in the reference list below have brought together the results from research of 1 to 1 laptop initiatives and offer useful insights into the value of such programs (Penuel 2006; Alberta Education 2006; Apple Computing, 2005).
14. Concerns Concerns surrounding 1 to 1 initiatives have largely focussed on a lack of adequate professional development or technical support and the sustainability of these programs while costs and competing educational priorities are also highlighted. Therefore, concerns regarding 1 to 1 programs very often relate to teacher training, a supportive school environment and school policies rather than the technology itself (Blumenfeld et al., 2000). In Maine, a number of commonly raised concerns were the potential for distraction, inappropriate or non-educational laptop use and technology failure. These are issues that students will need to learn to deal with in their future personal and working lives and therefore managing these issues in a constructive manner in the controlled environment of the classroom offers a unique learning opportunity for students. 9
Damage and theft were not generally reported to be significant concerns in most 1 to 1 programs however effective technical support is also highlighted as key to minimising technical hitches (Alberta Education, 2006). As part of an effective program, students are taught to handle the technology as the first point of connection with the laptop computers. Occupational health and safety to handle the technology as the first point of connection with the laptop computers is an essential consideration early in any program. Of great concern too is back care for children with the extra weight of carrying a laptop computer (Cardon, De Bourdeaudhuij and De Clercq, 2002; Rateau 2004; Hough et al. 2006). These are concerns that should be considered for any student carrying backpacks and school books regardless of the addition of laptop computers. A number of suggestions have been suggested to minimise the risks of injury resulting from carrying school bags, see Table 1 (Rateau 2004). Table 1: Key points for backpack use and safety (adapted from Rateau 2004) Do
Don!t
Pack the heaviest items in the middle of the backpack
Lean forward when carrying a backpack.
Consider smart backpack alternatives
Carry more than 5 - 15% of one!s total body weight.
Report symptoms of pain or numbness and tingling in arms.
Let the backpack fall below hip level
Make frequent trips to locker
Carry a backpack using only one strap
Use the larger muscle groups of the legs and arms when picking up a loaded backpack
Forget to perform exercises to condition the back muscles.
15. Precedents in China Dulwich Beijing International School Shanghai Community International School Shanghai Concordia International School Dulwich Shanghai International School Nanjing International School Suzhou Singapore International School (soon) Guangzhou Utahloy International School Beijing BISS International School (soon) Western Academy of Beijing Beijing City International School 10
Canadian International School of Beijing
16. Conclusion The world of information technology is rapidly changing and shows no signs of slowing. Educators have naturally brought this technology into the classroom to enhance student learning environments and educational outcomes. Research has suggested that students provided with individual laptops in the classroom: Spend more time in collaborative work, Engage in more project-based instruction, Show improved writing quality and length, Have greater access to information, Show improved research skills, Spend more time doing homework, Show greater ability to direct their own learning, Report a greater reliance on active learning strategies, Readily engage in problem solving and critical thinking, Consistently show deeper and more flexible use of technology, Improve grade point averages across English language arts, mathematics, and writing. The need for careful planning and training are frequently cited as fundamental for a successful IT program. The need to clearly define goals and objectives is vital and must be followed up by carefully orchestrated structures and resources that support these aims. Most crucial is a well supported and maintained infrastructure that provides a solid basis to develop and support key teaching practices and methodologies contributing to a well formed pedagogy. A strong and cohesive leadership is vital for effectively drawing together all these components of a successful 1 to 1 laptop program for students and teachers.
11
References Alberta Education 2006, One-to-One mobile computing: literature review, pp. 1 - 65. Accessed November 2 2008, <http://education.alberta.ca/media/528965/litreview.pdf>. Apple Computing, 2005, Research: What it says about 1 to 1 learning, Accessed November 2, 2008, <http://www.ubiqcomputing.org/Apple_1-to-1_Research.pdf> Australian Government, Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations 2008, Digital Education Revolution, Accessed November 2, 2008, <http:// www.digitaleducationrevolution.gov.au/>. Blumenfeld, Fishman, Krajcik, Marx & Soloway 2000, Creating usable innovations in systemic reform: Scaling up technology-embedded project-based science in urban school, Educational Psychologist, Vol. 35, No. 3, pp. 149â&#x20AC;&#x201C;164. Cardon, G, De Bourdeaudhuij, I and De Clercq, D 2002, Knowledge and perceptions about back education amongst elementary school students, teachers and parents in Belgium, Journal of School Health, Vol. 72, No. 3, pp. 100 - 106. Consortium for school networking, 2001, Taking TCO to the classroom, Accessed November 2, 2008, <http://www.classroomtco.org/tco2class.pdf>. Gulek, J. C. & Demirtas, H. (2005). Learning with technology: The impact of laptop use on student achievement. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, Vol. 3, No. 2. Available from http://www.jtla.org Hough, PA, Nel, M, Smit, JE, Malan, E, van der Watt, M, Deacon, AF, Grobler, L and Bester, AM 2006, The influence of carrying a school bag on the developing spine, Children!s Health Care, Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 339 - 348. Kozma, RB 1991, Learning with media, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 61, 179â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 212. Learning Point Associates, 2005, NETS for Teachers: Achievement Rubric, Accessed November, 2 2008, <http://www.ncrel.org/tech/nets/nets-t-rubric.pdf>. Learning Point Associates, 2005, NETS for students: Achievement Rubric, Accessed November, 2 2008, <http://www.ncrel.org/tech/nets/p-12rubric.pdf>. Microsoft 2008, Latin American primary and secondary education roadmap, Accessed November 2, 2008, <http://www.microsoft.com/latam/educacion/roadmap/k12/EN/ 4_Portable.aspx>. Morrison, GR, Lowther, D, & DeMuelle, L 1999, Integrating computer technology into the classroom. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall. One Laptop Per Child 2008, One laptop per child, Accessed November 2, 2008, <http:// laptop.org/>. 12
Penuel, WR 2006, Implementation and effects of one-to-one computing initiatives: a research synthesis, Journal of Research on Technology in Education, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 329 - 348. Penuel, WR, Kim, DY, Michalchik, V, Lewis, S, Means, B, Murphy, B, et al. (2001). Using technology to enhance connections between home and school: Aresearch synthesis. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Rateau, MR 2004, Use of backpacks in children and adolescents: a potential contributor of back pain, Orthopaedic Nursing, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 101 - 105. Russell, M., Bebell, D., & Higgins, J. (2004). Laptop learning: A comparison of teaching and learning in upper elementary classrooms equipped with shared carts of laptops and permanent one-to-one laptops. Boston: Technology and Assessment Study Collaborative, Boston College. Vahey, P., & Crawford, V. (2002). Palm Education Pioneers program: Final evaluation. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Zucker 2005, Starting school laptop programs:Lessons learned, One-to-One computing evaluation consortium: policy brief, pp. 1 - 6. Accessed November 2 2008, <http:// www.genevalogic.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2006/08/Lessons_Learned_Brief.pdf>
13
Bibliography Adelman, N, Donnelly, MB, Dove, T, Tiffany-Morales, J, Wayne, A, & Zucker, AA 2002, The integrated studies of educational technology: Professional development and teachers! use of technology, Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Barrios, T, et. al. 2004, Laptops for Learning: Final Report and Recommendations of the Laptops for Learning Task Force, Retrieved November 5, 2008, <http://etc.usf.edu/L4L/ index.html> Beauvois, M. H. 1997, Computer-mediated communication: Technology for improving speaking and writing, In M. Bush & R. Terry (Eds.), Technology-enhanced language learning, Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Co. Bebell, D, Russell, M, & O!Dwyer, L 2004, Measuring teachers! technology uses: Why multiple-measures are more revealing, Journal of Research on Technology in Education, Vol. 37, No. 1, pp. 45–64. Berger, C. (1984). Learning more than facts: Microcomputer simulation in the science classroom, In D. Peterson (Ed), Intelligent school house: Readings on computers and learning, Reston, VA: Reston Publishing Company. Bonifaz, A, & Zucker, AA 2004, Lessons learned about providing laptops to all students, Newton, MA: Education Development Center, Accessed November 5, 2008, <http:// www.neirtec.org/laptop/>. Bosco, J, 2006, Tools, Culture, and Education: Past – Present – Future, Global Summit 2006, Retrieved November 5, 2008, <http://www.educationau.edu.au/jahia/webdav/site/ myjahiasite/users/root/public/globalsummit/JBosco_GS2006.pdf> Brumfield, R 2006, Teacher development key to tech success: Survey confirms importance of professional development to tech integration, eSchool News, July 21, 2006, Accessed st November 5, 2008, < http://www.eschoolnews.com/news/showstoryts.cfm? Articleid=6450> . California Department of Education (2003). California Standardized Testing and Reporting Stanford 9 – CAT/6 linking study. Cetron, MJ & Davies O 2001, Special report: Fifty trends now changing the world. Bethesda, MD: World Future Society. Choi, BS & Gennaro, E 1987, The effectiveness of using computer simulated experiments in junior high students! understanding of the volume displacement concept. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 24, pp. 539 – 552. 14
Fisher, D & Stolarchuk, E 1998, The effect of using laptop computers on achievement, attitude to science and classroom environment in science, Proceedings from Western Australian Institute for Educational Research Forum, Accessed November 4, 2008, from <http://education.curtin.edu.au/waier/forums/1998/fisher.html>. Furger, R 2004, Laptops for All: Using Technology to Go Beyond Traditional Curriculum, Edutopia: The George Lucas Educational Foundation Online. Accessed November 4, 2008, <http://www.edutopia.org/laptops-all>. Gardner, J, Morrison, H, & Jarman, R 1993, The impact of high access to computers on learning, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, Vol. 9, pp. 2 -16. Garza, TJ 1991, Evaluating the use of captioned video material in advanced foreign language learning, Foreign Language Annals, Vol. 14, pp. 239 - 258. Geban, O, Askar, P, & Ozkan, I 1992, Effects of computer simulations and problem solving approaches on high school students, Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 86. No. 1, pp. 5 - 10. Goldberg, A, Russell, M, & Cook, A 2003, The effect of computers on student learning: A meta-analysis of studies from 1992 to 2002, Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, Vol. 2, No. 1. Gonzalez-Bueno, M 1998, The effects of electronic mail on Spanish L2 discourse, Language Learning and Technology, Vol. 1, pp. 55 - 70. Grignano, D 2004, 12 Tips for Launching a Wireless Laptop Program, techLEARNING; Oct 15, 2004; Retrieved November 5, 2008, <http://www.techlearning.com/shared/ printableArticle.jhtml?articleID=49901145> . Gulek, C. 2003, Preparing for high-stakes testing, Theory Into Practice, Vol. 42, No. 1, pp. 42 - 50. Guthrie, JT & Wigfield, A 2000, Engagement and motivation in reading, In M.K. Kamil, P.T. Mosenthal, P.D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research, Volume III, pp. 403 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 422, Mahwah, NJ: Earlbaum. Hanna, BE & de Nooy, J 2003), A funny thing happened on the way to the forum: Electronic discussion and foreign language learning, Language Learning and Technology, Vol. 7, pp. 71 - 85. Harris, W & Smith, L 2004, Laptop use by seventh grade students with disabilities: Perceptions of special education teachers, University of Maine, Maine Education Policy Institute (Report No. 2). Haydel, AM & Roeser, RW 2002, On the links between students! motivational patterns and their perceptions of, beliefs about, and performance on different types of science assessments: A multidimensional approach to achievement validation, National Center for Research and Evaluation, CA: Los Angeles, Report No. 573. 15
International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE), National Educational Technology Standards (NETS) 2005, Essential Conditions for Implementing NETS for Administrators; Copyright ISTE 200-2005, Retrieved November 5, 2008, <http://cnets.iste.org/ administrators/a_esscond.html> International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE); National Educational Technology Standards (NETS); Technology Standards for School Administrators Framework, Standards, and Performance Indicators; National Educational Technology Standards for Administrators, Copyright Jameson, R 1999, Equity and access to educational technology, Thrust for Educational Leadership, Vol. 26, No. 9, pp. 28 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 31. Jonassen, D 1991, Evaluating constructivist learning, Educational Technology, Vol. 36, No. 9, pp. 28 - 33. Lehman, J 1994, Secondary science teachers! use of microcomputers during instruction, School Science and Mathematics, Vol. 94, pp. 413 - 420. Lemke, C, Martin, C, 2003, One-to-One Computing in Maine: A State Profile, December 15, 2003, Accessed November 5, 2008, <http://www.metiri.com/NSF-Study/MEProfile.pdf> Lemke, C, Martin, C, 2004, One-to-One Computing in Indiana: A State Profile; March 3, 2004, Accessed November 5, 2008, <http://www.metiri.com/NSF-Study/INProfile.pdf> Lemke, C, Martin, C, 2004, One-to-One Computing in Michigan: A State Profile; April 7, 2004, Accessed November 5, 2008, <http://www.metiri.com/NSF-Study/MIProfile.pdf> Lemke, C, Martin, C, 2004, One-to-One Computing in Virginia: A State Profile; May 12, 2004, Accessed November 5, 2008, <http://www.metiri.com/NSF-Study/VAProfile.pdf> Loader, D 1993, Reconstructing an Australian School, The Computing Teacher, Vol. 20, No. 7, 12, pp. 14-15. Maine Learning Technology Initiative, Suggestions for a Principal Who is New to the MLTI (Based on: Successful Strategies for MLTI), Accessed November 5, 2008, <http:// www.mainelearns.org/ovc/story_files/New_Principal_MLTI.doc> Marzano, RJ, Marzano, JS & Pickering, DJ 2003, Classroom management that works: Research-based strategies for every teacher, Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
16
McLester, S 2004, Learn More About Laptops, techLEARNING; Oct 15, 2004; Accessed November 5, 2008, <http://www.techlearning.com/shared/printableArticle.jhtml? articleID=49901145> Means, B, & Haertel, GD, eds. 2004, Using technology evaluation to enhance student learning. New York: Teachers College Press. Mitchell Institute; Great Maine Schools Project: One-to-One Laptops in a High School Environment, Piscataquis Community High School Study, FINAL REPORT; February 2004; Accessed November 5, 2008, <http://www.mitchellinstitute.org/Gates/pdf/One-toOne_Laptops_Report.pdf> Moulton, J, One-to-One Leadership – Brick or Life Preserver?, Edutopia: The George Lucas Educational Foundation; Accessed November 5, 2008, <http://www.edutopia.org/ community/spiralnotebook/?p=85> Muir, M, Knezek, G, & Christensen, R 2004, The Power of One-to-One: Early Findings from the Maine Learning Technology Initiative, Learning and Leading with Technology; Vol. 32, No. 3, Copyright 2004 International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). Njoo, M & de Jong, T 1993, Exploratory learning with a computer simulation for control theory: Learning processes and instructional support, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 30, pp. 821 - 844. Parschal, RT, Weinstein, T & Walberg, HJ 1984, Effects of homework: A quantitative synthesis, Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 78, pp. 97 - 104. Penuel, WR 2005, Research: What it says about 1-to-1 learning. Cupertino, CA: Apple Computer, Inc., Accessed November 5, 2008, <http://www.ubiqcomputing.org/Apple_1to-1_Research.pdf>. Robinett, C, Leight, M, Malinowski, C, & Butler, J 2005, K-12 One-to-One Computing Handbook, Center for Digital Education, Accessed November 5 2008, <http:// www.centerdigitaled.com/>. Rockman et. al. 1997, Report of a laptop program pilot: A project for Anytime Anywhere Learning by Microsoft Corporation Notebooks for Schools by Toshiba America Information Systems. San Francisco, CA: Rockman et al. Rockman et al. (1998). Powerful tools for schooling: Second year study of the laptop program – A project for Anytime Anywhere Learning by Microsoft Corporation Notebooks for Schools by Toshiba America Information Systems. San Francisco, CA: Rockman et al. Rockman et al. (2000). A more complex picture: Laptop use and impact in the context of changing home and school access – the third in a series of research studies on Microsoft!s Anytime Anywhere Learning program.San Francisco, CA: Rockman et al. 17
Rockman, Saul, 2004, Getting Results with Laptops, techLEARNING, Accessed November 5, 2008, <http://www.techlearning.com/shared/printableArticle.jhtml?articleID=49901145> . Rowe, HAH 1993, Learning with Personal Computers, Melbourne: The Australian Council for Educational Research. Russell, M, Bebell, D, Higgins, J 2004, Laptop Learning: A Comparison of Teaching and Learning in Upper Elementary Classrooms Equipped With Shared Carts of Laptops and Permanent 1:1 Laptops; Technology and Assessment Study Collaborative; Boston College, Accessed November 5, 2008, <http://www.bc.edu/research/intasc/PDF/ Andover1to1.pdf> . Shears, L (Ed) 1995, Computers and Schools. Melbourne: The Australian Council for Educational Research Ltd. Silvernail, D & Lane, D, 2004, The Impact of Maine!s One-to-One Laptop Program on Middle School Teachers and Students: Phase One Summary Evidence; Maine Education Policy Research Institute, Accessed November 5, 2008, < http://mainegovimages.informe.org/mlte/articles/research/ MLTIPhaseOneEvaluationReport2004.pdf#search=%22David%20Silvernail%22> Swan, Karen, et al, 2005, Uses and Effects of Mobile Computing Devices in K-8 Classrooms, Journal of Research and Technology, Vol. 38. No. 1. Underwritten by Hewlett Packard, Intel Corporation, Microsoft; 1:1 Computing: A guidebook to help you make the right decisions; a special section of Technology and Learning published as a 44 page brochure, November 2005, Copyright 2005 CMP Media LLC, Integrated Marketing Solutions; Accessed November 4 2008, <http:// download.microsoft.com/download/8/d/c/8dc3ebfe-6849-4534-a4b7-846a8c327874/ HP1to1Guide.pdf>. Underwritten by Hewlett Packard, Intel Corporation, Microsoft; 1:1 Computing: A guidebook to help you make the right decisions; a special section of Technology and Learning published as a 44 page brochure, November 2005, Copyright 2005 CMP Media LLC, Integrated Marketing Solutions; Retrieved November 2, 2008, <http:// download.microsoft.com/download/8/d/c/8dc3ebfe-6849-4534-a4b7-846a8c327874/ HP1to1Guide.pdf> st
Underwritten by Gateway; One-to-One Laptop Initiatives: Providing Tools for 21 Century Learners, Copyright 2004, Center for Digital Education <http://www.centerdigitalgov.com/ >.Retrieved August 2006 (requires free registration), <http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/html/itp/ K12WhitePaperHiResFinal05.pdf> Warschauer, M 2005, Going One-to-One; Educational Leadership, Learning in the Digital Age, Vol. 63, No. 4. 18
Dewey, J, Progressive education in the 1940s, Accessed November 8, 2008, <http:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=opXKmwg8VQM> Zucker, AA 2004, Developing a research agenda for ubiquitous computing in schools, Journal of Educational Computing Research, Vol. 30, No. 4, pp. 371 - 386.
19