I have been following the "Computers in schools" strand of discussion with
some interest. At each point that I thought I might jump in with a citation,
I would find someone right ahead of me. The range of people and studies
covered is now pretty impressive. However, since this is the area that I am
working in, I thought I'd go ahead and throw in some more resources and say a
little about the project I'm working on and what we are learning about the
way "the introduction of technology into the classroom" does or does not
"change classroom culture in productive ways" (the basis for Mike's original
query for citations).
I'm the director of a long-term ethnographic study for the Hanau Model School
Partnership, an NSF supported project studying technology infusion in a K-12
cluster of 4 schools at the army base in Hanau, Germany. The purpose of the
work is to integrate technology broadly (across all subject areas and grades)
and deeply (into the curriculum in meaningful ways). We've been working with
the site for two years now (next year will be the third and final year of the
project). The project is located at TERC, an educational research firm in
Cambridge, MA.
There are a set of research papers that we did as preliminary background
work for the project that are available on the Internet
(http://ra.terc.edu/alliance_resources_services/reform/tech-infusion/index.html)
These look at the issues of technology infusion and its relationship to
school reform; curriculum reform; professional development; and community
development. These papers have extensive bibliographies. There is also a
piece that reports on progress half-way into our project
(http://w/www.terc.edu/handson/f96/navigating.html)
I'd like to share a couple of things that we've been learning and to comment
on some of the earlier conversation on this topic. To date, most of the
studies on this topic focus on classroom culture as the signficant unit to
look at in dealing with technology integration--and for the stand alone
technologies (pre-networked computers) this makes sense. The ACOT work and
the Bruce and Rubin study are excellent examples of this era.
However, the newest wave of technology, which leans heavily on the use of
networked computers and telecommunications raises very important questions
about the unit we should be looking at when talking about the integration of
technology in instruction and curriculum. I would argue that the school is
becoming the prevailing unit. Technology infusion, as opposed to technology
integration, has the potential to draw all parts of the school together in
new and different kinds of relationship. Just how productive that experience
is, has much to do with the school culture that had existed and ways the
process is being introduced and supported.
What also seems to be different between technology infusion and earlier
technology integration work is that when everyone is a school is
involved--the "bleeding" that you get across classroom lines becomes really
significant. We've found very significant changes in classroom practice that
are closely related to changes that are occurring in the professional culture
that are a result of the fact that everyone in the school is talking about
technology and trying to figure out how to use it at the same time.
In regard to the earlier comment reiterating Cuban's prediction that HS will
be the most resilliant to change and the elementary schools will be more
open. I took that as gospel, but I've had to revise my ideas. In our case,
the HS was the fastest to move and some of the deepest changes were seen
there first. The speed with which the HS moved, however, had much to do with
the fact that the technology entered at the same moment as other important
changes were occurring. The move to block scheduling was critical in making
the possibilities of technology work in that school.
What I've related here is only a tiny taste of the many pieces I'm still
trying to sort through...but I wanted to share it because I think that the
new wave of technology may be shifting the notion of "classroom culture" and
where it begins and ends in significant ways.
Finally, there are a couple of studies that I didn't see mentioned that I
think are very interesting. The Center for Children and Technology released
a report "National Study Tour of District Technology Integration Summary
Report" (CCT Reports, Issue No. 14, December 1996) by Jan Hawkins, Robert
Spielvogel, and Erica Marks Panush, which is an excellent description of
serveral sites making interesting use of technology.
In regard to how we are conceptualizing educational technology, I think that
Hank Bromley's work at the State University of New York at Buffalo is of
great interest. I have also found the work of Stephen Kerr from the
University of Washington to be very helpful. Finally I requested a paper
from the last AERA conference that I highly recommend "Language and
Technology in Students' Everyday Lives" by Michele Knobel at Queensland
University of Technology. I don't have an email for her but the address is:
School of Language and Literacy Education, QUT-Kelvin Grove Campus, Victoria
park Road, KELVIN GROVE Q4059.
Judy Davidson Wasser
Senior Research Associate
TERC