1:1 Computing in schools
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

1:1 Computing in schools

on

  • 1,732 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,732
Views on SlideShare
1,712
Embed Views
20

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
27
Comments
0

1 Embed 20

http://pdhpe1to1.wordpress.com 20

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

1:1 Computing in schools Presentation Transcript

  • 1. One to OneComputers in Schools 2010 Literature Review 1
  • 2. Student Achievement Professional Learning andLaptop Pedagogy Leadership and Technology IntegrationTechnical Support Conclusions and key implications 2
  • 3. Student AchievementIt is the way laptops are used in learning that brings about improvements in achievement. (Silvernail & Gritter, 2007) 3
  • 4.  Increasingly authors are questioning whether standardised testing is appropriate when assessing 21st Century Skills. Most standardised tests assess basic skills tests using multiple choice answers. This does not address 21st century skills. (Silvernail, 2005, p.3) Skills inherent to technology and laptop use do not align with standardised testing (Holcomb, 2009) Henrico County (USA) is developing assessment tools for 21st Century skills. 4
  • 5.  Increasingly authors are questioning whether standardised testing is appropriate when assessing 21st Century Skills Most standardised tests assess basic skills tests using multiple choice answers. This does not address 21st century skills. (Silvernail, 2005, p.3) Skills inherent to technology and laptop use do not align with standardised testing (Holcomb, 2009) Henrico County (USA) is developing assessment tools for 21st Century skills. 5
  • 6.  Increasingly authors are questioning whether standardised testing is appropriate when assessing 21st Century Skills Most standardised tests assess basic skills tests using multiple choice answers. This does not address 21st century skills. (Silvernail, 2005, p.3) Skills inherent to technology and laptop use do not align with standardised testing. (Holcomb, 2009) Henrico County (USA) is developing assessment tools for 21st Century skills. 6
  • 7.  Increasingly authors are questioning whether standardised testing is appropriate when assessing 21st Century Skills Most standardised tests assess basic skills tests using multiple choice answers. This does not address 21st century skills. (Silvernail, 2005, p.3) Skills inherent to technology and laptop use do not align with standardised testing (Holcomb, 2009) Henrico County (USA) is developing assessment tools for 21st Century skills. 7
  • 8.  Despite these limitations, standardised testing is uncovering improvement in the academic achievements of students in one- to-one laptop programs, as shown in the following studies: 8
  • 9.  laptops did increase the scores of the laptop students over the non- laptop students, particularly in the areas of literacy response and analysis and in writing strategies. (Suhr, Hernandez, Grimes, Warshauer, 2010) Improvements occurred in the second year after teething problems were overcome (Suhr, Hernandez, Grimes, Warchauer, 2010) Unprecedented improvement in Maths, English and Science results (Bebell & Kay, 2010) 9
  • 10.  laptops did increase the scores of the laptop students over the non- laptop students, particularly in the areas of literacy response and analysis and in writing strategies (Suhr, Hernandez, Grimes, Warshauer, 2010) Improvement occurred in the second year after teething problems were overcome (Suhr, Hernandez, Grimes, Warchauer, 2010) Unprecedented improvement in Maths, English and Science results (Bebell & Kay, 2010) 10
  • 11.  laptops did increase the scores of the laptop students over the non- laptop students, particularly in the areas of literacy response and analysis and in writing strategies (Suhr, Hernandez, Grimes, Warshauer, 2010) second year after teething problems were overcome (Suhr, Hernandez, Grimes, Warchauer, 2010) Unprecedented improvement in Maths, English and Science results. (Bebell & Kay, 2010) 11
  • 12. Maine One-to-Onelaptop studyOver 16,000 studentsIn 2000 (the year the programcommenced) 29.1% of 8th grade metthe Maine Educational Assessmentwriting proficiency standard.In 2005 (five years in) 41.4% metthis standard 12
  • 13. Maine One-to-Onelaptop studyImproved achievement is notconsistentIn the same one-to-one laptopschool different subjects can performdifferentlyThe same subjects can performdifferently in different one-to-onesettings 13
  • 14. Maine One-to-Onelaptop studyImproved achievement is notconsistentIn the same one-to-one laptopschool different subjects can performdifferentlyThe same subjects can performdifferently in different one-to-onesettings 14
  • 15. Maine One-to-Onelaptop studyImproved achievement is notconsistentIn the same one-to-one laptopschool different subjects can performdifferentlythe same subjects can performdifferently in different one-to-onesettings 15
  • 16. Further analysis of Maineresults (Silvernail, 2005)The “best use” group wasidentified. These students usedlaptops to draft, perform multipleedits then final productThe “non use” group was alsoidentified – those who never usedthe laptop for writingThe average student in the “bestuse” laptop group scored better thanapproximately 75% of the non-usegroupThere was no statistical differencebetween those who took the testonline and those who hand–wrotetheir answers 16
  • 17. Further analysis of Maineresults (Silvernail, 2005)The “best use” group wasidentified. These students usedlaptops to draft, perform multipleedits then final product)The “non use” group was alsoidentified – those who never usedthe laptop for writingThe average student in the “bestuse” laptop group scored better thanapproximately 75% of the non-usegroupThere was no statistical differencebetween those who took the testonline and those who hand–wrotetheir answers 17
  • 18. Further analysis of Maineresults (Silvernail, 2005)The “best use” group wasidentified. These students usedlaptops to draft, perform multipleedits then final product)The “non use” group was alsoidentified – those who never usedthe laptop for writingThe average student in the “bestuse” laptop group scored better thanapproximately 75% of the non-usegroupThere was no statistical differencebetween those who took the testonline and those who hand–wrotetheir answers 18
  • 19. Further analysis of Maineresults (Silvernail, 2005)The “best use” group wasidentified. These students usedlaptops to draft, perform multipleedits then final product)The “non use” group was alsoidentified – those who never usedthe laptop for writingThe average student in the “bestuse” laptop group scored better thanapproximately 75% of the non-usegroupThere was no statistical differencebetween those who took the testonline and those who hand–wrotetheir answers 19
  • 20. It is critical for schools tounderstand that simply providingeach student with a laptop is notenough. How teachers choose to usethe laptop is very important. (Holcomb, 2009) 20
  • 21. Professional Learning and Laptop Pedagogy“the biggest challenge however is helping teachers to develop the expertise required to harness the power of the technology” (Mouza, 2008, p.3) 21
  • 22.  Research is revealing that it is the way the laptops are used in learning that makes the difference. (Holcomb, 2009; Silvernail & Gritter, 2007) In a study of one-to-one laptop programs running in three technology high schools it was found that the lack of time for professional development, especially for teacher collaboration, was a barrier to effective integration of computers into learning. (Drayton, Falk, Stroud, Hobbs, & Hammerman, 2010) 22
  • 23.  Research is revealing that it is the way the laptops are used in learning that makes the difference (Holcomb, 2009; Silvernail & Gritter, 2007) In a study of one-to-one laptop programs running in three technology high schools it was found that the lack of time for professional development, especially for teacher collaboration, was a barrier to effective integration of computers into learning. (Drayton, Falk, Stroud, Hobbs, & Hammerman, 2010) 23
  • 24.  Teacher beliefs about pedagogy affect their classroom implementation of laptops. Drayton et al. (2010) give the example in one high school in which one science teacher believed that focusing on information transfer was the primary focus of teaching while another in the same school believed that discovery was the focus. They found that “inquiry oriented teachers deployed technology to support and expand enquiry; more traditional teachers likewise used the technology according to their values, in conducting a teacher centred classroom” (Drayton et al., 2010, p. 48) 24
  • 25.  Beliefs in pedagogy affect the individual implementation of laptops Drayton et al. (2010) give the example in one high school in which one science teacher believed that focusing on information transfer was the primary focus of teaching while another in the same school believed that discovery was the focus. They found that “inquiry oriented teachers deployed technology to support and expand enquiry; more traditional teachers likewise used the technology according to their values, in conducting a teacher centred classroom” . (Drayton et al., 2010, p. 48) 25
  • 26.  Initially benchmarked implementation levels of technology in the classrooms. The study by Drayton et al. (2010) Level Category found that teachers who believed in a teacher-centred style of 0 Non-use Integration and Inquiry pedagogy use technology in ways 1 Awareness which can be seen to be equivalent to the lowest levels of the LoTi 2 Exploration scale while those who believed in 3 Infusion an inquiry approach utilised the technology to expand inquiry in 4A Integration (mechanical) ways equivalent to higher levels. 4B Integration (routine) 5 Expansion 6 Refinement 26
  • 27.  Initially benchmarked implementation levels of technology in the classrooms The study by Drayton et al. (2010) Level Category found that teachers who believed in a teacher-centred style of 0 Non-use Integration and Inquiry pedagogy use technology in ways 1 Awareness which can be seen to be equivalent to the lowest levels of the LoTi 2 Exploration scale while those who believed in 3 Infusion an inquiry approach utilised the technology to expand inquiry in 4A Integration (mechanical) ways equivalent to higher levels. 4B Integration (routine) 5 Expansion 6 Refinement 27
  • 28.  Research indicates the need for a shift from professional learning with a focus on technology proficiency to a focus on laptop pedagogy. Level Category As pedagogical beliefs can 0 Non-use Integration and Inquiry determine the level to which the 1 Awareness one-to-one laptops are integrated into learning in the classroom, 2 Exploration professional learning must include 3 Infusion processes by which teachers 4A Integration (mechanical) regularly discuss their pedagogical and educational values. 4B Integration (routine) (Drayton et al., 2010) 5 Expansion 6 Refinement 28
  • 29.  Research indicates the need for a shift from professional learning with a focus on technology proficiency to a focus on laptop pedagogy. Level Category As pedagogical beliefs can 0 Non-use Integration and Inquiry determine the level to which the 1 Awareness one-to-one laptops are integrated into learning in the classroom, 2 Exploration professional learning must include 3 Infusion processes by which teachers 4A Integration (mechanical) regularly discuss their pedagogical and educational values. 4B Integration (routine) (Drayton et al., 2010) 5 Expansion 6 Refinement 29
  • 30. Leadership and technology integration “Perhaps the most important finding from our analysis is that technology leadership has greater leverage ondesired outcomes than does technology infrastructure and expenditures” (Anderson & Dexter, 2005, p. 73) 30
  • 31.  “Schools setting ambitious goals and aiming for excellence seem more likely to use laptops well than ones without ambitious goals and a supportive school culture” (Zucker & Hug, 2007) These researchers found that higher levels of technology integration were found in schools where leaders set the directions for change and developed supportive policies and collaborative cultures. 31
  • 32.  “Schools setting ambitious goals and aiming for excellence seem more likely to use laptops well than ones without ambitious goals and a supportive school culture” (Zucker & Hug, 2007) These researchers found that higher levels of technology integration were found in schools where leaders set the directions for change and developed supportive policies and collaborative cultures. 32
  • 33.  Those teachers who were willing to take more risks were found to be more willing to integrate technology and saw student achievement in terms of their more intrinsic motivation and engagement in learning. (Howard, 2009) The researcher found that the primary area of teacher concern was risk to student achievement. Those less willing to take risks were less willing to integrate technology into their teaching. They saw achievement in terms of quantifiable results such as test scores. Knowledge that one-to- one laptop programs improve student achievement may help them to see this as less risky. 33
  • 34.  Those who were willing to take more risks were found to be more willing to integrate technology and saw student achievement in terms of their more intrinsic motivation and engagement in learning (Howard, 2009) The researcher found that the primary area of teacher concern was risk to student achievement. Those less willing to take risks were less willing to integrate technology into their teaching. They saw achievement in terms of quantifiable results such as test scores. Knowledge that one-to- one laptop programs improve student achievement may help them to see this as less risky. 34
  • 35.  School culture can either foster collaboration and innovation or stifle them. Where a school culture emphasises accountability and security over taking risks, teachers are driven away from innovation. (Drayton et al., 2010) Where implementation was left in the hands of the individual teachers in one school, integration was at a lower level than in another school where innovations were tested and shared among teachers. Drayton et al. (2010) 35
  • 36.  School culture can either foster collaboration and innovation or stifle them. Where a school culture emphasises accountability and security over taking risks, teachers are driven away from innovation. (Drayton et al., 2010) Where implementation was left in the hands of the individual teachers in one school, integration was at a lower level than in another school where innovations were tested and shared among teachers. Drayton et al. (2010) 36
  • 37.  “very few principals have themselves used computers in any meaningful way with children” This led these authors to point strongly to the necessity for distributed leadership of planning for success to occur. Flanagan & Jacobsen, 2003, p. 127 “One key component of a successful implementation of one- to-one laptop computers is leadership in many forms, one of the most important being a Leadership Team” Moulton, 2006, p. 1 37
  • 38.  “very few principals have themselves used computers in any meaningful way with children” This led these authors to point strongly to the necessity for distributed leadership of planning for success to occur. Flanagan & Jacobsen, 2003, p. 127 “One key component of a successful implementation of one- to-one laptop computers is leadership in many forms, one of the most important being a Leadership Team”. Moulton, 2006, p. 1 38
  • 39. for leaders leaders need to be enthusiastic, build a shared vision, keep the focus on that vision, distribute the leadership of the initiative and lead the leadership team, lead the planning, foster a collaborative school culture in which teachers are comfortable to innovate, provide time for collaboration and discussion and provide appropriate and timely professional learning for teachers. 39
  • 40. Technical supportThis can bring about great difficulties forteachers when they find themselves not only working in a change paradigm but also as the computer engineer Simpson & Payne, 2005 40
  • 41.  Lei (2010) found that extra technical support is a critically important condition for success of such projects. Importantly, this need for support does not diminish as the laptop program matures (Lei, 2010, Newhouse 2008). 41
  • 42.  Lei (2010) found that extra technical support is a critically important condition for success of such projects Importantly, this need for support does not diminish as the laptop program matures. (Lei, 2010, Newhouse 2008) 42
  • 43. Research findings validatedecision made andimplemented by the DER-NSW program around:  technology support as critical for the success of the programs  charging of laptops at home  wireless access points in every classroom  fast internet access  technical support needs do not diminish as the program matures 43
  • 44.  In one study (Shapley et al., 2010) it was found that student use at home for home learning and homework was the strongest predictor of students reading and mathematics test scores. 44
  • 45. Conclusions and key implications “Higher implementing schools reported that committed leaders, thorough planning, teacher buy-in, preliminary professional development for teachers,and a commitment to the transformation of students learning were keys to their successful implementation and technology immersion” Shapley et al., 2010 45
  • 46.  One-to-one laptop programs can bring about improvements to student learning. Improvements in student achievement are related to the way laptops are used in learning Professional learning is essential for successful integration Teacher pedagogical beliefs largely determine the degree and type of integration that occurs in the classroom Professional learning must include processes by which teachers regularly discuss their pedagogical and educational values 46
  • 47.  One-to-one laptop programs can bring about improvements to student learning Improvements in student achievement are related to the way laptops are used in learning Professional learning is essential for successful integration Teacher pedagogical beliefs largely determine the degree and type of integration that occurs in the classroom Professional learning must include processes by which teachers regularly discuss their pedagogical and educational values 47
  • 48.  One-to-one laptop programs can bring about improvements to student learning Improvements in student achievement are related to the way laptops are used in learning Professional learning is essential for successful integration. Teacher pedagogical beliefs largely determine the degree and type of integration that occurs in the classroom Professional learning must include processes by which teachers regularly discuss their pedagogical and educational values 48
  • 49.  One-to-one laptop programs can bring about improvements to student learning Improvements in student achievement are related to the way laptops are used in learning Professional learning is essential for successful integration Teacher pedagogical beliefs largely determine the degree and type of integration that occurs in the classroom. Professional learning must include processes by which teachers regularly discuss their pedagogical and educational values 49
  • 50.  One-to-one laptop programs can bring about improvements to student learning Improvements in student achievement are related to the way laptops are used in learning Professional learning is essential for successful integration Teacher pedagogical beliefs largely determine the degree and type of integration that occurs in the classroom Professional learning must include processes by which teachers regularly discuss their pedagogical and educational values. 50
  • 51.  Teachers need time for discussion and the sharing of ideas/resources. Leadership is crucial for successful integration School leaders must build a shared vision, keep the focus on that vision, lead the planning, provide time for collaboration and discussion and provide appropriate and timely professional learning for teachers Leaders must foster a collaborative and supportive school culture Distributed leadership and a whole school approach are most effective 51
  • 52.  Teachers need time for discussion and the sharing of ideas/resources Leadership is crucial for successful integration. School leaders must build a shared vision, keep the focus on that vision, lead the planning, provide time for collaboration and discussion and provide appropriate and timely professional learning for teachers Leaders must foster a collaborative and supportive school culture Distributed leadership and a whole school approach are most effective 52
  • 53.  Teachers need time for discussion and the sharing of ideas/resources Leadership is crucial for successful integration School leaders must build a shared vision, keep the focus on that vision, lead the planning, provide time for collaboration and discussion and provide appropriate and timely professional learning for teachers. Leaders must foster a collaborative and supportive school culture Distributed leadership and a whole school approach are most effective 53
  • 54.  Teachers need time for discussion and the sharing of ideas/resources Leadership is crucial for successful integration School leaders must build a shared vision, keep the focus on that vision, lead the planning, provide time for collaboration and discussion and provide appropriate and timely professional learning for teachers Leaders must foster a collaborative and supportive school culture. Distributed leadership and a whole school approach are most effective 54
  • 55.  Teachers need time for discussion and the sharing of ideas/resources Leadership is crucial for successful integration School leaders must build a shared vision, keep the focus on that vision, lead the planning, provide time for collaboration and discussion and provide appropriate and timely professional learning for teachers Leaders must foster a collaborative and supportive school culture Distributed leadership and a whole school approach are most effective. 55
  • 56. Click to open the 1:1 Computers in schools Literature Review document 56
  • 57.  Graffiti: http://www.flickr.com/photos/vaxzine/172651123 Chairs: http://www.flickr.com/photos/svet/4304374413 Cables: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mindfieldz/3241016661 Legs: http://www.compfight.com Links: http://www.flickr.com/photos/uqbar/114320354 57