Cost Of Technology

Brewer 1 Tina Brewer Issue # 3 Due: 10/7/08 The Cost of Infusing Technology, the $100,000 Answer! A. Background Information In today’s world, technology is just as common as reading a book. No one really thinks about it, nor do they realize the huge impact that it plays in our daily lives. Our students have to be prepared to become competitive contributors in today’s society. That being said, it is a must that students gain a grasp on technology early on and ensure that they receive proper education. Furthermore, it is important to note that technology alone is not as beneficial as having qualified teachers that can properly integrate it into their lessons/curriculums; thus increasing student engagement, parental involvement and academic achievement (EdTech Action Network). According to EdTech Action Network, there is significant data that suggest technology has become a fundamental aspect in our educational systems. Infusing technology into educational systems has allowed for improved learning and achievement, aiding teachers in becoming “highly qualified” and supplying administrators with more accurate information to enhance decisions made and policies put into practice. With that being said, it is also important to note that the federal government has been very proactive in this issue as well. An example of a government initiative is the Examining Education through Technology Program. The primary goal of the EETT program is “to

Brewer 2 improve student academic achievement through the use of technology in elementary and secondary schools.” It was authorized by Title II, Part D, of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), to provide formula grants to states for promoting the use of educational technology to improve student achievement (Bakia, Mitchell & Yang, 2007). The monies are to increase the use of technology in schools and to cut cost and promote professional development for teachers/administrators, etc. According to John Bailey, the EEFT program encourages schools to ally their educational needs and goals with the technological solutions they are attempting to place inside the schools (Delisio, 2003). B. Justification Positive effects have been found in mostly all areas of instruction. The importance and benefits of technology has been unveiled in our school systems with the following data:  In Massachusetts: It was reported that 4th grade students who frequently utilized technology at school to edit papers had higher totals in English/language arts test scores and higher writing scores on the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) than students who did not. (O’Dwyer, Russell, Bebell and Tucker-Seeley, 2005)  In Georgia: 6-12th grade students that utilized an interactive software to learn pre-algebra and algebra scored higher on standardized state math

Brewer 3 tests than those students in traditional classrooms alone (What Works Clearinghouse, 2004).  In Oklahoma: It was reported that 9th grade students who used interactive software to learn algebra earned higher course grades. Also, attendance and retention in the classes improved for those students. Specifically the research states that “students using this software performed 30% better on questions from the Third International Mathematics and Science Study, demonstrated an 85% better performance on assessments of complex mathematics problem solving and thinking, have a 70% greater likelihood of completing subsequent geometry and algebra II courses and achieved 15% -25% better scores on the SAT and Iowa Algebra Aptitude Test” (Ringstaff & Kelley, 2002).  In Mississippi: students at Shaw High School are part of the 1st Things 1st initiative; this initiative relies on technology as a means for training teachers, assessment, system leadership and parent involvement. Just 3 years into the 1st Things 1st implementation: Shaw met NCLB Adequate Yearly Progress in all areas; the students significantly increased their pass rate on exit exams in math and language arts and performed better than state average on all mandatory assessments.  In studies focusing on reading and language arts, technology has been revealed to provide a learning advantage in the areas of phonological awareness, vocabulary development, reading comprehension and spelling (Sivan-Kachala & Bialo, 2000).

Brewer 4  A learning advantage has been found in students who created multimedia presentations on social studies subjects (Sivan-Kachala & Bialo, 2000).  Kindergartners who have used technology have benefited greatly in improved conceptual knowledge, reading vocabulary, reading comprehension, and creativity (Sivan-Kachala & Bialo, 2000).  Educational technology has also had significant positive effects on achievement for special need populations; Speech recognition is an especially valuable tool for the learning disabled (Sivan-Kachala & Bialo, 2000). E. Estimated Budget ($100,000) 1. SMART boards (http://education.smarttech.com/ste/en-us/)         

Maximizes the use of a minimum number of computers in a classroom Useful for constructivist teachings Ability to engage students in the learning process Interactive Allows teachers instant access to other electronic sources More accessible for full class lecturing Upgrades for SMART boards are free Specific model: SMART board 600i for educators Approximately $3,200 for the SMART board, projector, mount, cable and laptop (plus or minus approximately $1300 if using current laptops) o Purchase 15 = $ 28,500 if current laptops used o Purchase 10 = $ 32,000 with new laptops

2. Inspiration Software (www.inspiration.com)  Research shows that students’ performance increased overall in subject areas (science, social studies, math, etc)  Increase in reading comprehension skills and recalling of information  Enhances critical thinking in students  Students with disabilities scored higher on test after utilizing the software  Supports students thinking and learning processes as a whole  Increase communication skills

Brewer 5  improve social interaction between students, and facilitate group work and collaboration among peers  Assess and share prior knowledge  Aligns with the No Child Left Behind Act  School districts can purchase the software with grant monies from: o Federal funding under Title I part A, Title II part A, Title II part D, Title III and Title V part A o Microsoft Settlement Funding Program o Inspired Teachers Program  Inspiration 20 computer license: includes 1 hybrid (Win/Mac) installation CD for installation on a twenty computers, 1 Getting Started Guide and a copy of The Thinking Classroom Using Inspiration to Meet Curriculum Standards for $895.00 < will purchase 10 bundles = $8,950> o Additional package of 20 computer license = $640.00  Will purchase 10 additional packages = $6,400  The Thinking Classroom: Using Inspiration to Meet Curriculum Standards School-Wide Edition: includes a printed and an electronic copy on CD of The Thinking Classroom: Using Inspiration to Meet Curriculum Standards teacher resource book so it may be easily shared by teachers in your school for $199.00 <will purchase 40 of these = $7,960> Running Tab = approximately $55,310 3. Digital Curriculum Flash Drives  Allows to students to work on assignments they started at school at a friends house or local library if student does not have a computer in their home; thus partially decreasing the digital divide among students  Can come with pre-loaded interfaces based on the schools need & usage  Easy access/retrieval to information for students  USB Flash drive case holders o $3.99 per holder (www.bestbuy.com) o Will purchase 1 for each student = $3,192  2gb USB Flash drive for each student (approx 800 students in the school) o $14.99 per drive (www.bestbuy.com) o Will purchase 1 for each student = $11,992 Running Tab = approximately $70,494 4. Professional Development  Training is necessary in any implementation of new technologies  Allow teachers to learn to properly utilize the technology in a way that is most beneficial to students/classroom  If a continuous effort can aide in effective usage of technology in the classroom to enhance learning

Brewer 6  Training will result in teachers being able to connect technology directly to student learning  Teachers learn to become facilitators not just lecturers  According to the Public Education Network, funding for professional development is often fragmented: monies come from federal, state, local and private sources often resulting in lack of resources being readily available for teachers  Due to the No Child Left Behind Act, teachers are required to participate in continuous professional development (Highly Qualified Teachers)  Part of the monies available for professional development should be used to encourage current teachers to strive to become National Board Certified (ODE, 2008). o Meaning the school district should: provide monies to candidates applying for National Board Certification = $2,200 per candidate o Recognizing National Board Certified teachers with an annual stipend of $2,500 for up to 10 years  Membership in International Technology Education Association (ITEA) o 1st time member receives $10.00 off the membership cost o 2 year membership for entire school =$310 or $160 for 1 year  The membership includes: reduced rate to attend the annual conference, Technology Teacher Journal, access to TIDE portal, Idea Garden Listserv, information about monies (scholarships, grants) for the advancement of technology in schools and discounts on other educational publications  ITEA annual conference (March 26-28, 2009 in Louisville, KY) o Conference Registration = $279 o Meals Functions = $155 o Workshops allotment = $200 o Social event = $75 o Hotel = $150 per night o Reimbursement Total (i.e. food, gas mileage) = $200  The total to attend the conference per teacher = $1209 o Allowing up to 20 teachers to attend the conference with the school covering the full cost = $24,180 o Including cost of membership = $24,490 (2yr) or $24,340 (1yr) Final tab = $94,834 D. Future It is important to remember, that technologies will continue to transform. Meaning educational technology tools and their implementation must continue to transform as well. Technological change occurs rapidly; new opportunities are

Brewer 7 continually arising for inventive uses of technology in education. This calls attention to the need for ongoing educational technology planning, evaluation and modifications of current implementations and professional development.

Brewer 8

Works Cited Bakia, M., Mitchell, K., & Yang, E. (2007). . In State Strategies and Practices in Educational Technology: Volume I - Examining the Enhancing Education through Technology Program. Retrieved October 2, 2008, from ERIC Digest Web site: http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0 000019b/80/29/e5/90.pdf Delisio, E. R. (2003, April). Technology Integration, Assessment, and No Child Left Behind. In Education World. Retrieved October 4, 2008, from http://www.education-world.com/a_tech/ tech171.shtml EdTech Action Network. (n.d.). Why Technology in Schools? In EdTech Action Network . Retrieved October 6, 2008, from http://www.edtechactionnetwork.org/technology_schools.html eTech Ohio Technology for Learning . (2008). Retrieved October 5, 2008, from http://www.etech.ohio.gov/ Institute for the Advancement of Research in Education (IARE). (2003). Graphic Organizers: A Review of Scientifically Based Research. In Inspiration. Retrieved October 7, 2008, from http://www.inspiration.com/sites/default/files/documents/DetailedSummary.pdf O'Dwyer, L. M., Russell, M., Bebell, D., & Tucker-Seeley, K. R. (2005, January). Examining the Relationship Between Home and School Computer Use and Students' English/Language Arts Test Scores. In The Journal of Technology, Learning and Assessment . Retrieved October 3, 2008, from http://escholarship.bc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1053&context=jtla Ohio Department of Education. (2008). National Board Certification . In Ohio Department of Education Retrieved October 8, 2008, from http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ ODEDetail.aspx?page=3&TopicRelationID=1223&ContentID=4096&Conte nt=54663 Public Education Network. (2005). Teacher Professional Development. Retrieved October 3, 2008, from http://www.publiceducation.org/pdf/Publications/Teacher_Quality/Teacher_ Prof_Dev.pdf

Brewer 9 Ringstaff, C., & Kelley, L. (2002). The Learning Return on Our Educational Technology Investment: A Review of Findings from Research. Retrieved October 3, 2008, from WestEd Web site: http://www.wested.org/online_pubs/learning_return.pdf Sivan-Kachala, J., & Bialo, E. R. (2000). 2000 Research Report on the Effectiveness of Technology in Schools. Retrieved October 2, 2008, from Software Information Industry Association Web site: http://www.sunysuffolk.edu/Web/Central/InstTech/projects/iteffrpt.pdf U.S. Department of Education. (1996, June). Benefits of Technology Use. In Getting America's Students Ready for the 21st Century — Meeting the Technology Literacy Challenge, A Report to the Nation on Technology and Education. Retrieved October 5, 2008, from http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/os/technology/plan/national/benefits.ht ml What Works Clearinghouse. (2007, March). I CAN Learn Pre-Algebra and Algebra. What Works Clearinghouse Intervention Report. In What Works Clearinghouse. Retrieved October 4, 2008, from http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/00000 19b/80/3a/4a/70.pdf www.bestbuy.com