Professor Dr. Richard C. Hunter
University of Illinois at UrbanaChampaign
4th Annual International Education Conference
Tarlac State University, Tarlac City, Philippines
May 16-20, 2012
Paper: Leadership and Technology in
Public Education in the United States
•
Thank-you for attending this session.
•
Also, thanks to the conference organizers for giving me
this opportunity to present my research.
•
This is my first visit to the Philippines.
•
This is a beautiful country, which is filled with extremely
friendly people.
•
Why did I elect to write this paper on technology?
•
•
•
I am not an extremely technologically sophisticated person.
This is not the primary line of my research.
I had a five book series contract with a major publisher and
a colleague convinced me to co-author one of the books on
technology.
My Professional Higher Education
Background
• Before discussing my paper, I would like to review some of
my experiences in higher education, which are primarily
the result of serving as a tenured full professor at two
research one institutions in the United States.
•
•
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, where I currently
teach courses in educational administration and advise
master’s and doctoral students. Also, I was a former head of
the department at this institution.
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where I: taught
educational administration courses, advised master’s and
doctoral students and was program chair.
My Professional Higher Education
Background
•
•
In these roles, I have written several co-edited books
and many book chapters, journal articles, monographs,
and conference proposals.
The primary focus of my research is on urban
education.
Professional Public School Background
My public education experience has primarily been in
urban public school districts and includes being a/an:
• Classroom teacher, assistant principal, and principal.
•
Associate director for education with DODEA.
• Superintendent of schools for three large school
districts city public school districts:
• Richmond, Virginia; Dayton, Ohio; and Baltimore,
Maryland.
My Interest in Technology
• My interest in technology grew out of my work
experiences discussed in the previous slides. These
experiences helped me arrive at these
understandings:
•
•
Technology is very powerful.
This is evident in the military, business, industry, and in
our daily lives.
• And, it is even true for higher education and public
education.
• Technology has led to increased productivity in many
businesses and industries.
My Interest in Technology
•
While working in public education, I have witnessed several
changes and received several recognitions for my interest in
technology.
• Personally, I witnessed the impact of technology in
management.
• Steve Jobs, Apple; Bill Gates, Microsoft; and John Kettering at
IBM and NCR.
• And, anticipated it would also influence public education.
• I conducted research on the use of computers, Control Data
system.
• Computer on my desk.
My Interest in Technology
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Leadership awards from a national organizations.
Several awards from local educational and community
groups.
Later work with DODEA.
This is evident in the military, business, and industry.
It is even true for higher education and public education.
Today, in the United States we are outsources work to
places, such as India.
Again, I began to understand the immense power of
technology.
My Interest in Technology
• Technology has led to increased productivity in
many businesses and industries.
• We have been undergoing efforts to reform
public education in the United States and
elsewhere.
• Larry Cuban (2001) says “the more we change the
more we stay the same”.
Background on Leadership
• In my paper, which is available in conference
publications, I discuss selected theories of leadership
to create a framework for my recommendations:
•
Kowalski (2003) indicated that leadership is the
process of influencing others.
•
McGregor’s (1978) theory x and y describes the
attitudes of workers about their work.
•
Burns (1978) presented concepts on transactional and
transformational leadership.
•
Sergiovanni’s stresses the need for moral leadership.
Importance of Visioning
•
In the paper, I discuss the importance of visioning, which
also supports my recommendations.
•
•
•
•
•
Daft (1999) said “that visions link the future with the past
and that a vision is not just a dream, but an ambitious view
of what a school or organization could become.”
Senge (1990) indicated that leaders of learning cannot learn
apart for the organization and they must empower the
organization to learn.
Starratt (1993) indicated that a collective vision is used to
provide direction for the school.
Matthews & Crow (2003) maintains that visions must be
developed with all stakeholders.
My experience with ESP3 in Richmond.
Background on Technology
• Glennan & Melmed (1996) indicated that between 1983
and 1995 the student to computer ratio, nationwide
was reduced from 125 to 9.
• Grunwald (2004) reported over 8 in 10 homes, with
children, had a computer connected to the Internet.
• Roberts (2004) said, “in 1994, slightly more than onethird of schools and just 3% of classrooms had access to
the Internet. Today, all elementary and secondary
schools and over 92% of classrooms are connected”.
Background on Technology
• Avci (2001) reminded us the primary use of
technology in schools is for instruction and
management.
• Tooms, et al (2004) indicated there are four phases of
computer technology in public education:
• Phase one in the 1960s, focused on the use of
mainframes, primarily for administrative tasks.
• Phase two in the 1970s, involved the use of
personal computers for administration tasks.
• Phase three in the 1990s, involved the Internet
and provided a different level of communication.
• Phase four-is still evolving and is represented by
wireless technology and hand held computers.
Evaluation of Technology
•
Research on the use of technology in public schools is mixed
and overall it is seems to not be very promising.
• Norton, et al (2003) reported that the impact of technology
over the past 25 years on education had been essentially
zero.
• Bielefldt (2005) reported no significant effect on math and
reading achievement.
• Cuban (2000) indicated computing in K-12 education had not
produced positive results, as relates to student
achievement.
• NCREL’s (n.d.) synthesis of research on technology and
student outcomes revealed a small, positive, significant
(p<.05) effect, when compared to traditional instruction.
Evaluation of Technology
•
The Massachusetts Department of Education’s (1998) review of
the Milken Report, indicated that under the right conditions
students may experience increased test scores by using
computer techn0logy.
•
Johnson (2004) indicated today’s students are text messaging and
sending digital photographs to each other on cell phones.
•
Kuttan & Peters (2003) revealed home Internet access for
households in the United States earning $49,000 annually
increased from 29.9% in 1998 to 46.1% in 2000.
Problems With Technology
• Cuban (1999) reported the structure for teaching has
not changed overtime and limits the use of
technology in instruction.
• Beem (2002) said it is difficult for schools to keep up
with technology.
• Zhao & Frank (2003) presented several factors that
have slowed the integration of computer technology
into classroom instruction. They are presented on
the next slide:
Problems With Technology
•
•
•
•
The process for teachers to integrate computer
technology in their classrooms takes time, and time is
something teachers do not have much of.
Schools are slow to implement change.
Schools are social organizations and some at odds with
the use of computer technology.
Teachers believe direct teaching or lectures is the best
way to impart knowledge to students.
Problems With Technology
•
•
•
Many teachers do not hold positive attitudes about the
use of technology in instruction.
The constant changing nature of technology works
against its being effectively integrated into classroom
instruction.
The unreliable nature of computer technology and the
structure of short classes does not facilitate teachers
investing large amounts of time preparing lessons
which integrate computers into instruction.
Costs of Technology
•
How much are we spending on computer technology in
schools?
•
•
•
Hurst (2005) says we have spent millions of dollars in the
United States on computer technology in public education.
Technology Counts (2005) U.S. schools spend an average of
$103 per pupil on educational technology. The state of New
York spends the most, and Mississippi spends the least.
Trotter (2005) reported the largest expenditures for
technology was awarded by the United States Congress,
who allocated $14.3 billion by 2004-2005.
Relating to the Costs of Technology
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Strengthen leadership.
Use budget innovations.
Improve teacher training.
Expand broad Internet access.
Use more digital content.
Integrate data systems.
Harmonize goals with other technology
grants.
Leadership for Technology
• Fullan (2001) provided four ways to view the
complexity of leadership in schools. They are:
•
•
•
•
Changes are more complex, than most realize.
It is a difficult dilemma to decide what to do.
Administrators need to act differently in various
phases of the change process.
Advise received by computer experts should be viewed
as only guidelines and not as absolutes.
The Author’s Recommendation
• The author makes several recommendations about
what should be done to improve computer usage in
classroom instruction in public schools. They are:
•
•
•
Develop a long-range vision for a school district,
regarding its efforts to integrate computer technology
into student instruction.
Expand professional development for teachers,
curriculum specialists, and principals to assist them
with modeling and supporting teacher efforts to
integrate computers into their classrooms.
Create Cyber schools.
The Author’s Recommendations
•
•
•
Create a department, whose primary mission it is to
integrate computer technology in the curriculum of the
school district.
Develop partnerships with business, industry, employee
unions, parent groups, and community leaders to obtain
resources and support for the costly implementation of the
vision for integrating computer technology in the district’s
instructional program.
Form a consortium of school districts, local colleges and
universities, business leaders, and others who would
become a ‘think tank’ and would keep abreast with changes
in technology and the development of applications for
integrating technology into the classrooms.
The Author’s Recommendations
•
•
•
•
Develop a plan to upgrade the district’s computer
technology infrastructure.
Provide technical assistance personnel that are
assigned to schools.
Seek an understanding with employee unions
regarding the development of ways to alter the
traditional instructional paradigm, such as creating
longer instructional periods by using block scheduling,
etc.
The author knows this will be very expensive and
recommends priorities be established, as to which
strategies will be pursued.
The Author’s Recommendations
•
•
Create a demonstration or laboratory school that
would be able to show how the new technologies can
be integrated into the instructional program.
Provide funds for release time for teachers and
professional development on how to use the
technology in their instruction.
Conclusion
Educators have a tremendous challenge to achieve greater
integration of computer technology in schools, while at the same
time they improve student achievement. These values are not
mutually exclusive and need to be worked on together. The
shortage of funds and the ongoing need to constantly upgrade to
the technology infrastructure are indeed serious problems to
overcome. Nevertheless, we will not make progress until we
develop a bold vision. Also, we must overcome the many obstacles
that are impeding our progress. The recommendations presented
by the author are very costly and intimidating, but they are not
impossible. We need a bold vision and a multifaceted approach
with long-range, mid-range, and short-range goals. These goals will
help to harness the imagination of our stakeholders and provide
the resources needed. If schools are to become more productive,
they will need to use technology to achieve this, as business and
industry has done.
Thank-you again for this opportunity to speak with you and now I
will entertain questions from the audience.