Achievement from IT
Running head: TECHNOLOGY AND STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT
Does Instructional Technology Improve Student Achievement?
Carrie Pilant
Angelo State University
1
Achievement from IT
2
Does Instructional Technology Improve Student Achievement?
Computers are the talk of controversy in every aspect. In Education, it
really becomes a problem. Some people argue the government spends too
much of their funds toward technology and that it does not pay off. On the other
side of the spectrum, experts say it is absolutely imperative children have
instructional technology integrated into their classrooms. The question becomes
“do computers really benefit the future generation”? This report examines the
questions, “How effective are computers?” and “Do school aged children benefit
from computers in the classrooms?” This paper will investigate prior published
literature and research studies on the topic.
Background
“Computers and the Internet currently dominate educational technology”
(Ely, 2002, p.3). The Association of Educational Communications and
Technology (AECT) officially define educational (or instructional) technology as
“the theory and practice of design development, utilization, management and
evaluation of processes and resources for learning” (Ely, 2002, p.2). The
Commission on Instructional Technology 1970 gives an alternate definition on
technology and instructional design in To Improve Learning. It states,
“Instructional Technology is more than the sum of its parts. It is a systematic way
of designing, carrying out, and evaluating the total process of learning and
teaching in terms of specific objectives, based on research in human learning
and communication, and employing a combination of human and nonhuman
resources to bring about more effective instruction” (Ely, 2002, p.2).
Achievement from IT
3
Previous research has demonstrated students are highly motivated by
computers and technology, and this motivation creates an increase in test scores
and performance ratings. One company named Plato Learning, Inc. developed
teaching software and had incredible results. Florida’s Lakeland High School
showed an increase in student scores on the Florida High School Competency
Test (FHSCT) after using the program. The school identified a positive
relationship between the program and test scores. At Lawrence High School in
Indianapolis, 406 students failed either math or the English components on their
state mandated competency exam (ISTEP – Indiana Statewide Testing for
Educational Progress). After implementation of an extensive remediation
program in 1998-1999, only 74 of those students continued to fail the exam.
That showed a dramatic difference. Another example of a success rate from this
particular company was a high school in Carrollton, Texas. Turner High School
improved their Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) scores to 83% in
2000, up from 69% in 1998 (Bennett, 2002). Although these success stories
relate to high school level students, software companies continue to excel in
programs of student achievement at all levels.
School districts opt to provide software programs for their schools;
however, usually there is not a structured curriculum for these programs. The
teachers commonly are not being required to implement instructional technology
in their classrooms. Many veteran teachers do not teach using computer
instruction because training has been limited. These issues must be sorted out
to have successful technological students.
Achievement from IT
4
There are many software programs available to motivate and catch
student’s interest as well as heighten learning. Nevertheless, research is limited
on the amount of software and technology that is helpful for students.
Teachers
One important goal for teachers is getting students motivated to learn.
Once students are motivated, they are open and willing to start processing
knowledge. Teachers need to understand that computers can be powerful allies
to process this knowledge. The success of instructional technology depends a
lot on the teacher. Teachers need to have a great deal of training and staff
development for success on integrating technology into the classrooms.
Computers would definitely change the role of the teacher, but would
never downgrade them. An important concept to realize is that teachers can
interact with students whether or not there are computers present during
instruction. Interaction between teacher and student is crucial, but computers
and technology can help aid that interaction. It is significant to understand that
computers should never replace the teacher in any situation. Some software
programs can directly instruct students in any given assignment, but teachers still
need the lead role during instructional time.
Computers can also help build independence in learning, which is
excellent assistance for the teacher. The possibility that computerized education
would eliminate teachers frightens them, but “computerization would actually
enhance their position” (Bennett, 2002, p.624). Fortunately, teachers who have
Achievement from IT
5
shied away from the computer instruction in the past, now opt to take advantage
of new training opportunities (Ely, 2002).
In regards to future teachers, Halpin (1999) investigated the most effective
approach for integrating computer training in teacher education. The results
indicated “the integration of computer literacy training into method courses did
provide future teachers with the confidence to transfer their computer skills into
their classrooms based on their own exploratory experiences” (p.133).
Conflict of Technology
Hopson, Simms, and Knezek (2001) conducted research on the effect of
higher-order thinking skills while using the integration of technology. Higherorder thinking skills were defined as those skills students use at the analysis,
synthesis, and evaluation levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy.
Students were selected from a suburban North Central Texas school
district. They were grouped into treatment and comparison groups. The
treatment groups consisted of students from 6 different campuses who enrolled
in the technology-enriched classroom magnet program in the 1996-1997 and
1997-1998 school years. The students who applied for the program were
randomly selected to participate in the study. The students who were not
accepted into the magnet program and from comparable campuses without
technology-enriched curriculum made up the comparison groups.
Treatment Group 1 were 6th grade students (20 male, 16 female) who had
been in the program for one year five months. Fifth grade students (20 male, 23
female) who had been in the program for five months formed Treatment Group 2.
Achievement from IT
6
Sixth grade students (21 male, 22 female) enrolled in social studies classes at
the middle school were selected for Comparison Group 1. A computerscheduling program randomly assigned them. Fifth grade students (23 male, 21
female) that were randomly assigned at a comparable elementary school made
up Comparison Group 2.
The researchers used a posttest and quasi-experimental design. The
groups were given the Ross Test of Higher Cognitive Processes and the
Computer Attitude Questionnaire. The treatment groups were provided access
to a computer and were instructed using the district’s fifth grade curriculum in a
technology-enriched environment. The treatment teachers were trained to teach
this curriculum. The comparison groups were instructed in traditional classroom
settings and were only exposed to technology through on-campus computer labs.
The results clearly stated that both the fifth and sixth grade students
scored significantly higher in the evaluation level of the Ross Test. However,
performance on the test for the analysis and synthesis levels of Bloom’s
Taxonomy remained the same between the two groups. Despite the mediocre
scores on the Ross Test, students had more positive attitudes toward motivation
and creativity after the study was completed. Teachers indicated that the
technology-enriched classroom differed with the traditional classroom in several
ways. Learning was more student-centered and less teacher/textbook driven. It
facilitated cooperative learning groups and student participation.
One primary role of technology is to motivate and lead learners to new
ways of problem-solving and independent thinking. The potential for
Achievement from IT
7
collaboration among learners is an added feature, one that blends
technology protocols with human interaction among people seeking
educational goals. Such collaboration provides the means for social
interaction that is sometimes thought to be absent from the independent
and isolated use of computers (Ely, 2002, p.4).
Bennett (2002) wrote an article about the future of computer technology in
K-12 education. He stated that computers take away the interaction between
teacher and student. It was necessary for that interaction to take place for
successful classroom experiences. The National Assessment of Educational
Progress pointed out the lack of advancement during a five-year period when
schools acquired a large number of computers in hopes that it would improve
education. However, one explanation was that teachers had not learned how to
integrate technology into their curriculum. Despite this explanation, Bennett
frowned on too much computer instruction.
Butzin (2001) conducted a study comparing standardized test scores in
reading and mathematics for second and fifth-grade students. One school
implemented Project CHILD (Computers Helping Instruction and Learning
Development) and the other did not. The purpose of this study was to determine
how Project CHILD students compared to students in traditional self-contained
classrooms. The researcher asked the question whether results would differ
when computers are used in transformed learning environments, which are
“subject-specialty teaming, activity-based learning stations and multigrade/
multiyear approach to instruction” (Butzin, 2001, p. 368). There had been a
Achievement from IT
8
number of growing concerns about technology and its effects in the classroom.
Many critics believed that billions of dollars are being wasted in instructional
technology. The outcome of this study helped shape the instructional technology
in Education.
The study consisted of two similar technology-rich elementary schools in
Miami-Dade County, Florida. Both schools extensively used instructional
technology. One school used Project CHILD instructional model as its
framework and was labeled as “PC” (Project CHILD). The other school was
designated as “non-PC” because it did not follow CHILD’s framework. Project
CHILD was developed to create customized classrooms where instructional
technology would be the norm. It was a comprehensive computer-integration
model for grades K-5 that used computers along with hands-on learning stations
in the classroom.
Each PC classroom contained a computer station with at least three
computers, a textbook station for written work, and several stations for hands-on
work. CHILD took a three-teacher team from cross-grade clusters (K-2 or 3-5),
with each teacher in the cluster focusing on one specialty: reading, writing, or
mathematics. The children spent one hour a day in each of the cluster
classrooms, and the rest of the day in their designated homerooms.
The students participated in the study for three years. The total number of
students that participated in the PC school was 974. The school was
characterized with a specific interest in promoting cultural diversity in high-tech
surroundings. The Non-PC school had 1,201 students in the study with that
Achievement from IT
9
same characteristic. Both schools had reported higher than average
standardized test scores. They had similar demographics and approximately 5
students per computer. In the PC school, 110-second graders and 94 fifth
graders were analyzed for the results. The Non-PC school, 188-second graders
and 188 fifth graders were analyzed. Scale scores were used rather than
percentile scores.
The researcher in this study was the developer of Project CHILD, and
collected the standardized test scores for the two schools participating in the
study. The tests scores were identified as second- and fifth-grade students who
participated in Project CHILD for the full three-year cycle. A t-test was conducted
to determine the differences between the PC and Non-PC schools.
“Significant differences were obtained in mathematics applications (Grade
2), reading comprehension (Grade 5), mathematics computation (Grade 5) and
mathematics application (Grade 5)” (Butzin, 2001, p. 371). The results are
clearly stated that the PC group scored significantly higher.
The findings of prior and current studies strongly supported computerbased learning, but showed, however, that many variables can affect
instructional technology. Most teachers still have difficulty integrating computers
in their classroom, and inservice training remains sparse. The number of
computers in a school may also be a limitation. Traditional learning
environments are not designed to adapt to computer-enhanced learning. The
researcher suggested the attention should be on transforming the traditional
classroom to an active learning classroom.
Achievement from IT
10
Conclusion
I recommend that school administrators and educators accept our everchanging world and require the introduction of computers into the classrooms. I
agree that computer-based learning has many positive results and that teachers
need more training and workshops to feel confident when teaching computer
instruction. Students learn more in less time when they receive computer-based
instruction. The student achievement rate is increasing as software programs
and computerized instruction are being introduced into the classrooms.
In modern life, it is important that Americans know that computers are
apart of everyday living. The fact is the future is upon us, with the growing age of
technology. Teaching students technology at a young age builds adequacy,
confidence and motivation to learn.
Achievement from IT
11
References
Bennett, F. (2002). The future of computer technology in k-12 education. Phi
Delta Kappan, 621-625.
Butzin, S.M. (2001). Using instructional technology in transformed learning
environments: An evaluation of Project CHILD. Journal of Research on
Computing in Education, 33 (4), 367-373.
Ely, D.P. (2002). Trends in educational technology (5th ed.). (Report No.
IR021884). Washington, DC: Department of Education. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED477511)
Halpin, R. (1999). A model of constructivist learning in practice: Computer
literacy integrated into elementary mathematics and science teacher
education. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32 (1), 128138.
Hopson, M.H., Simms, R.L., & Knezek, G.A. (2001). Using a technologyenriched environment to improve higher-order thinking skills. Journal of
Research on Technology in Education, 34 (2), 109-119.