STEPHEN'S
ECLECTIC
ON-LINE LIBRARY Home > Library >> Kutno commentary
|
COMMENTARY BY PROFESSOR K Stephen Kutno, Ph.D. In President Bush's Fiscal Year 2002 budget introduction, the very first promise he made about the new budget was: "It will revitalize our public schools by testing for achievement, rewarding schools that succeed, and giving more flexibility to parents of children in schools that persistently fail."President Bush has proposed that federal funding of technology be allocated based on proven solutions--school districts must demonstrate the ways in which instructional technology programs have enhanced student achievement in order to qualify for federal funding. And they would be competing for fewer dollars: Bush's proposal consolidates nine education technology programs into one $817 million block grant ($55 million less than in 2001). This budget reflects the goals outlined in the president's education plan, "No Child Left Behind," in which he calls for accountability and high standards, measured by annual testing of all students in grades 3-8 in both math and reading. These proposals make accountability critical not just to success, but also to survival. Education is not easy. There is no single factor that can guarantee equitable outcomes for the children in American public schools. "Take two pills, you'll be reading in the morning" is a pipe dream at best. Regardless of the policies and technologies adopted, schools have not found the panacea to appease the public's demand for "improved" schools. "Getting schools wired" seems to be the latest initiative with less-than-spectacular results. Simply placing thousands of dollars of equipment in classrooms around the country does not necessarily lead to improved academic performance or better scores on standardized tests. Unless all that wiring is accompanied by quality software and services, professional development, and clearly defined goals, chances are good that the hoped-for improvements in test scores and student achievement won't materialize. In the new "prove it works" environment, this lack of measurable improvement means funding for future initiatives is at stake. We need to encourage all to understand that when properly applied, technology is a tool to facilitate learning, not a magic elixir. It cannot replace teachers, cure learning disabilities, solve discipline problems, or immediately raise test scores. But what it can do is very powerful. Technology can provide an individualized learning experience, identify individual strengths and weaknesses, and integrate various information sources into a single curriculum. Technology enables teachers to determine where their classroom activities converge with their state's educational standards and tests. It provides access to extensive resources without the limitations of time or geography. It promotes community by facilitating communication and provides a forum to make all of a student's work publishable. The use of computers helps bolster a child's self-confidence in relation to technology, and helps students become familiar with the tools of the world outside the classroom. Ironically, most of the benefits of technology can't be immediately measured by standardized assessments. Yet, these very assessments may be used as the measure of whether or not technology investments are effective. After all, what other measures do we have that provide standardized, timely, quantifiable results? Our best chance of saving technology from cost-cutting measures is to be more informed in the ways technology can facilitate teaching and learning. The newness of the available tools and applications means we must advocate more time for professional development and training. If teachers become comfortable using technology to inform what they do, it will eventually have a positive impact on the measures, standards, and scores that policymakers value most. Let's get the right tools into the right hands and train the users the right way. Only then will we realize lasting results. |
Stephen Shipman | July 11, 2001