School Technology Integration Myths and Misconceptions

In 1983, the National Commission on Excellence in Education released the report, A Nation at Risk, that identified technology education as one of the solutions to regaining America's former leadership in industry and science. It also proclaimed technology as the solution to educational achievement gaps between low income and affluent communities. Though in 2001 No Child Left Behind renewed the push for more technology, the narrowing of the achievement gap has not been solved by the presence computer education due to inequities in how technology is taught and used in schools..

Original Hopes for Computers in Schools

According to Margolis's research of literature, reported in the book Stuck in the Shallow End, technology has been viewed as the solution to educational crises ranging from creating engaging curricula to closing the social equity gap. School districts, individual states, and the federal government have all devoted funds to making technology available to all students so they can learn basic computer skills and how to use technology for a variety of educational purposes.

Technology policies now include provisions for purchasing computers, wiring schools, maintaining technology staff, and technology integration throughout the curriculum. Elementary age students are taught keyboarding; middle and high school students take classes to learn how to use basic applications. Some high school students have access to specialized software in classes such as video production, electronics, graphic arts, and computer science. Margolis's research uncovers evidence that access to technology does not guarantee access to engaging curricula or a narrowing of the achievement gap.

How Technology Fails Some Students

It is a misconception that technology is a guaranteed method for creating engaging curricula. Margolis provides a glimpse of how often technology based lessons are frequently cut-and-paste or built upon following specific directions, and how rare it is to find technology classes where students are required to use higher order thinking skills or solve real-world problems. She includes in her book conversations with students who explain how uninteresting these classes can be and how they would welcome more of a challenge.

Margolis's work also shows that the view that technology will narrow the achievement gap is a myth. Frequently, low preforming schools, which are commonly found in low income area, feel pressured to provide more opportunities for students to improve test scores, resulting in schools adopting, “scripted, test-prep curriculum rather than the creative, problem-solving thinking skills required for the twenty-first century,” (p 125). Not all students in poor economic areas have access to computers at home; and, especially in cities and rural areas, may have long commute times and not be able to stay after school or arrive early to use the available technology. Furthermore, higher level computing classes which offer more than basic skill development, are not offered in many schools, and when they are these classes frequently are restricted to a small group of students.

Though technology has been pushed as the solution to engaging students and lessening the achievement gap, the myths and misconceptions behind this view are beginning to emerge. Margolis's book provides an intimate view into how technology is integrated into the curriculum of different schools and summarizes research that shows the potential is there, but changes still need to occur before technology can truly reduce the achievement gap.

Reference : Margolis, J. Stuck in the Shallow End. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2008.

End-of-Course Evaluations - Creating Realistic Tools That Provide Objective Feedback

How are Evaluation Responses Treated ?

A trend of negative responses should trigger awareness that something may be wrong. This can be used to corroborate administrative evaluations of the instructor. The evaluation documents, however, must never be used as an instrument of fear and intimidation. They can be successfully used to alter teaching methodologies that might better conform to curricular goals.

Read on 

Often, student “comments” sections provide the richest feedback. If students universally hated a particular reading, it might be time to replace it. If the instructor did not employ technology or utilize on-line tools like Blackboard, instructors may wish to redesign instructional formats.

Updating Course Evaluations Regularly

Schools and institutions using the same evaluation tool from year to year fail to take into account changing student demographics. It is also a lazy way of advertising, “We have a system of end-of-course evaluations.” The evaluation document must be subject to yearly review by appropriate institutional committees in order to retain integrity and objectivity. Only then will the evaluation become a useful barometer for instructors and department heads.

End-of-Course Evaluations

Many high schools and almost all colleges and universities facilitate end-of-course evaluations that focus on the instructor and the scope of the subject matter covered. In many cases, such evaluations are mandatory under regional accreditation guidelines and must be archived as part of the on-going self-evaluation of the institution. Not all evaluation documents, however, are constructed to elicit objective responses.

Problematic Questions on Course Evaluations

Frequently, students are asked to grade the instructor. Questions such as, “how knowledgeable was the instructor in this course” and “was the instructor fair” are far too subjective and relative. For such questions, students often have no basis for comparison. Further, students anticipating a final grade lower than expected will respond with hostility, giving an unfair picture of the overall instruction. As one department chair told a new adjunct professor, “Don’t be affected by the atrocities you supposedly committed in your classes.”

Some institutions use standardized evaluations that address everything from text books to labs. Many classes, such as English, History, and Psychology, do not have labs. Invariably, however, students will attempt to answer lab-based questions. Whenever possible, course evaluations need to be tailored to the specific subject area.

On-Line Evaluations Work Best

It can be argued that evaluations given out to students during one of the last class sessions ensure a higher degree of compliance than on-line evaluations. Web based evaluations, however, provide a greater opportunity for detailed feedback and the results can be graphed and compared to other similar classes. Some institutions offer rewards for compliance. For example, institutions may offer book store credits or gift cards if a certain threshold of compliance is attained by individual classes.

Using Course Evaluations in Lower Grades

Ideally, good evaluation responses are tied to student maturity. This is not possible in any grade under the junior year in high school. Evaluations depend on higher level thinking, conceptual processing, and the ability to compare and contrast. Younger students generally are not able to fulfill these characteristics and will fall back on subjective responses.