When Computers Go to School potx

First, fac-ulty and students’ comments suggest the potential ways that information technology can beused to enrich teaching and learning, and the innovative uses of the technology develo

This PDF document was made available from www.rand.org as a public service of the RAND Corporation.

6

Jump down to document

Visit RAND at www.rand.orgExplore RAND EducationView document details

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non-commercial use only Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents for commercial use.

Limited Electronic Distribution Rights

For More Information

CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS

CIVIL JUSTICE

EDUCATION

ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT

HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE

U.S NATIONAL SECURITY

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research organization providing objective analysis and effective solutions that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors around the world.

Purchase this documentBrowse Books & PublicationsMake a charitable contributionSupport RAND

This product is part of the RAND Corporation technical report series Reports may include research findings on a specific topic that is limited in scope; present discus-sions of the methodology employed in research; provide literature reviews, survey instruments, modeling exercises, guidelines for practitioners and research profes-sionals, and supporting documentation; or deliver preliminary findings All RAND reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure that they meet high standards for re-search quality and objectivity.

When Computers Go

to School

How Kent School Implemented Information Technology to Enrich Teaching and Learning

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research organization providing objective analysis and effective solutions that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors around the world RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.

R® is a registered trademark.

© Copyright 2004 RAND Corporation

All rights reserved No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from RAND.

Published 2004 by the RAND Corporation

1700 Main Street, P.O Box 2138, Santa Monica, CA 90407-2138

1200 South Hayes Street, Arlington, VA 22202-5050

201 North Craig Street, Suite 202, Pittsburgh, PA 15213-1516

RAND URL: http://www.rand.org/

To order RAND documents or to obtain additional information, contact

Distribution Services: Telephone: (310) 451-7002;

Fax: (310) 451-6915; Email: order@rand.org

ISBN: 0-8330-3555-X The research described in this report was funded by Kent School through the generosity of

an anonymous donor.

Preface

Kent School, a private college preparatory school in New England that was founded byclergy of the Episcopal church almost 100 years ago, is a pioneer in the use of informationtechnology for instruction and learning Few academic institutions had undertaken a tech-nology program of comparable scope when Kent initiated its program in 1996, so there werefew precedents to guide Kent safely past the pitfalls inherent in using a new technology Ac-cordingly, some missteps were taken during the first two years of the program—not an un-usual experience for pioneering organizations What is unusual is the speed with which Kentanalyzed the situation, marshaled its resources, made midcourse corrections, and persevered.Equally noteworthy is Kent’s willingness to share its experiences so that they may serve toguide and benefit other educators

This report synopsizes key findings of a longitudinal study, commissioned by KentSchool, of the use of information technology for teaching and learning at Kent The reporthas two purposes It aims to serve as a convenient summary of the full report (which was de-livered to Kent) for use by the Headmaster, the Technology Committee, and other members

of the faculty It also aims to share with the educational community at large some of the sights Kent gained about the use of technology for teaching and learning

in-From these insights can be drawn two main themes that are likely to be of interest toeducators who are pursuing the academic applications of information technology First, fac-ulty and students’ comments suggest the potential ways that information technology can beused to enrich teaching and learning, and the innovative uses of the technology developed bythe Kent faculty may have practical applications in other educational settings Second, thisstudy posits that the degree to which faculty and students integrate information technologyinto their activities is likely to depend in large measure on the way the technology is imple-mented

The RAND Corporation Quality Assurance Process

Peer review is an integral part of all RAND research projects Prior to publication, thisdocument, as with all documents in the RAND monograph series, was subject to a qualityassurance process to ensure that the research meets several standards, including the following:The problem is well formulated; the research approach is well designed and well executed;the data and assumptions are sound; the findings are useful and advance knowledge; the im-plications and recommendations follow logically from the findings and are explained thor-oughly; the documentation is accurate, understandable, cogent, and temperate in tone; theresearch demonstrates understanding of related previous studies; and the research is relevant,objective, independent, and balanced Peer review is conducted by research professionals whowere not members of the project team

RAND routinely reviews and refines its quality assurance process and also conductsperiodic external and internal reviews of the quality of its body of work For additional de-tails regarding the RAND quality assurance process, visit http://www.rand.org/standards/

Contents

Preface iii

Tables ix

Summary xi

Acknowledgments xiii

CHAPTER ONE Introduction 1

Kent School’s Experience with Technology Illuminates the Debate 1

Kent School and Its Technology Program 2

Methodology of This Study 3

Organization of This Report 3

CHAPTER TWO Kent Used Information Technology to Enrich Teaching and Learning 5

Faculty and Students Reported That Information Technology Enriched Teaching and Learning When It Was Used Well 5

Presentations of Course Material During Class Were Better Organized, Easier to Understand, and More Engaging 6

Classroom Exercises Had Greater Educational Impact 6

Homework Was More Engaging and More Effective 7

The Technology Motivated and Helped Students “Do My Best” 8

“Class Was Always in Session,” Providing Additional Opportunities to Teach and Learn 9

Kent Faculty Developed Innovative Uses of Technology for Their Courses 10

Technology Was Used to Bridge Spatial and Cultural Distance 10

Technology Helped Students Learn from Each Other 11

Technology Helped Students Assess their Comprehension of Course Material 11

Technology Helped Students Discover Their Creative Talents 11

Technology Was Used to Make a Point (Again, and Again, and Again) 12

When Computers Go to School

viii

Information Technology Was Integrated into Courses in Numerous Ways 12

Even Though the Technology Could Be Used to Enrich Teaching and Learning, Some of the Faculty Were Hesitant to Adopt It 13

CHAPTER THREE Implementation Influenced Integration 15

Theoretical Rationale to Posit That Implementation Influenced Integration 16

The Role of “Efficacy Information” 16

The Role of “Implementation Practices” 16

Use of Technology at Kent Was Consistent with the Self-Efficacy Concept 17

Revised Implementation Practices Encouraged Technology Use That Had Been Hindered by Some of the Initial Practices 18

Advertising Communicated Information About Personal Benefits and Costs 18

Learning to Use the Technology Was Not Trivial 19

Hardware and Software Shaped Individuals’ Personal Experiences with Technology 21

User Support Exacerbated Or Mitigated the Cost of Using the Technology 23

A Snapshot of Faculty Use of the Technology During the “Initial” and “Subsequent” Periods 25

Some Additional Considerations 26

Faculty Influenced Students’ Use of the Technology 26

Technophiles Appear to have Enjoyed a Special Motivator 27

“New” Faculty and Students Had More Experience with Information Technology 27

“Returning” Faculty and Students Reported That Their Technical Proficiency Had Increased 28

CHAPTER FOUR Conclusions 31

Implementation Is an Ongoing Activity 32

Adequate Resources Are Available to Remedy Unexpected Situations 32

Judicious Allocation of Resources Increases the “Bang from a Buck” 32

APPENDIX A The Internet Was Used to Bridge Spatial and Cultural Distance 35

B Information Technology Was Used to Enhance the Guidance Provided on Students’ Coursework 37

C Kent’s Internal Website Provided Novel Benefits for Teachers and Students 39

References 41

Tables

2.1 Students’ Report of the Impact of Technology on Education, by Academic Level

(2000–2001) 9 3.1 Frequency of Use of Technology During Class (2000–2001) 17 3.2 Faculty’s Principal Academic Uses of the Technology 25 3.3 Students’ Average Hours per Week Using the Technology for “Required” and

“Optional” Activities (2000–2001) 27 3.4 Students’ Self-Assessed Technical Expertise 29

Summary

The members of Kent School’s Technology Committee envisioned information technologybeing used to enhance or extend the learning process when they recommended in 1995 thatthe school initiate its technology program Since then, the school’s experience with informa-tion technology has taught two broad lessons The technology can be used to enrich teachingand learning However, the degree to which faculty and students integrate it into their aca-demic activities depends on its being implemented appropriately

Typically, faculty reported that the technology helped them “energize” or “engage”students both during class and outside it They reported that the technology provided richresources that they used to illuminate lessons and develop “authentic” learning exercises fortheir students Further, they reported that information technology reduced the investment oftime and effort in activities that are peripheral to the learning process Students’ commentswere consistent with those of the faculty

Kent’s experience demonstrates the importance of sound implementation practices tothe successful integration of the technology into teaching and learning—it was found thatthe benefits of information technology are not likely to be obtained simply by putting com-puters into the hands of faculty and students Some specific findings from Kent’s experiencefollow:

• Proactive communication informed individuals of the true benefits to be gained fromthe technology and the true cost they would incur to use it

• Training reduced the time and effort required to learn to use the technology fully

success-• Equipment was upgraded and, as a result, it was easier to use and more reliable thanformerly

• User support was enhanced to minimize the costs individuals incurred when nents of the technology malfunctioned or were damaged

compo-Implementation at Kent is an ongoing activity It aims to anticipate and proactivelyaccommodate both technological advances and the evolving needs and preferences of facultyand students

Although the overall advance of information technology can be predicted, not everysituation affecting its use can be foreseen Fortunately, Kent could draw on a reserve of hu-man, technical, and financial resources to remedy problems before the negative outcomescompounded To make corrections quickly and relatively inexpensively, and to limit thenumber of individuals who might be subjected to negative experiences with the technology,schools less favored than Kent might consider (1) scaling back technology programs that

When Computers Go to School xii

would otherwise commit all available resources and thus provide a reserve that could be used

to address unforeseen situations or (2) starting with a pilot program that would flush out anticipated problems—and limit their scope so that they could be corrected with fewer re-sources—before initiating a fullscale program

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Richardson W Schell, Headmaster and Rector of Kent School, thestudents, faculty, and staff for their support of this study and their participation in it Theconscientious efforts of participants to thoroughly and thoughtfully communicate their per-ceptions of Kent’s use of educational technology were evident in comments made at focusgroups, stated in interviews, and written on the surveys I appreciate their efforts, courtesy,time, and help

I am also indebted to M Willard Lampe, II, former Academic Dean, and Thomas K.Roney, Chair of the Mathematics Department and Chair of the Technology Committee,who coordinated, respectively, activities related to the first and second phases of this study.Their assistance and advice were invaluable in helping the study achieve its goals AdamFischer, Director of Information Services and Technologies, who led the revised implemen-tation activities that are described in this report made central contributions to the research.Other members of the faculty and staff gave generously of their time to further the study.Their efforts, insights, and contributions are greatly appreciated, and I hope that they willexcuse me for not acknowledging them individually

The study and this report benefited substantially from the comments and suggestions

of colleagues at the RAND Corporation, in particular, Susan Gates, Sheila Kirby, EileenMiech, Abby Robyn, and Brian Stecher

Introduction

There is no universal agreement whether schools should invest in information technology forteaching and learning On one hand, authorities such as the President’s Committee of Advi-sors on Science and Technology, Panel on Educational Technology, have integrated informa-tion technology into their vision of a curriculum that would help individuals acquire newknowledge, develop critical thinking skills, and solve existing and new problems creatively(President’s Committee, 1997) It has been posited that technology can facilitate learning byenhancing students’ ability to experiment, practice, and experience the real world (e.g., Pa-pert, 1996) Further, the ability to use information technology well will affect individuals’personal productivity and economic well-being and, in the aggregate, the nation’s competi-tive position (President’s Committee, 1997; Castro, 1998) The popularity of computers inschools suggests that these and similar arguments have resonated with educators; for exam-ple, in 2000, 98 percent of all public schools had access to the Internet, 77 percent of theclassrooms had access to the Internet, and one computer with Internet access was availablefor every seven students (Cattagni and Farris, 2001)

On the other hand, respected scholars have asked, “Is Spending Money on ogy Worth It?” (Cuban, 2000), and many have concluded that it is not One position seems

Technol-to be that investments in technology are not prudent because it is underused—when indeed

it is used at all (see Cuban, 2000, 2001; Costlow, 2001) To this point, great expectationshave existed for educational technology since at least the early 1980s (see Lesgold and Reif,1983), but relatively few successes with it have been reported Although that position doesnot foreclose the possibility that technology might someday be used effectively in education,

a less sanguine perspective questions whether technology would be a boon to education.More specifically, it questions whether students can cope with a richness of information re-sources and whether technology-mediated applications will render the curriculum banal andproduce individuals of shallow intellect largely by externalizing and homogenizing thoughtand by eliminating introspection (see Turkle, 1995; Birkerts, 1994) In this vein, it has alsobeen asserted that technology will routinize the educational process and deskill educators(Noble, 1998)

Kent School’s Experience with Technology Illuminates the Debate

Kent School’s experience suggests that information technology can be used to enrich ing and learning for both faculty and students However, successful integration of the tech-

teach-2 When Computers Go to School

nology into education does not necessarily follow when computers are put into the hands ofteachers and students Individuals’ motivation to integrate the technology into their activitiesappears to be influenced substantially by the way the technology is implemented

Kent’s experience suggests guidelines for implementing the technology, which othereducators may find informative Initially, Kent’s implementation practices resulted in someunintended outcomes—a finding that is not surprising because Kent pioneered an ambi-tious, new application of educational technology, largely on its own, with few mentors toguide its efforts What is surprising is the speed with which Kent evaluated the progress of itstechnology program, marshaled its resources, revised its implementation practices, and perse-vered to achieve results that, in general, faculty and students reported were successful Con-sequently, Kent’s experience is a particularly valuable source of insights; the early periodwarns of potential pitfalls, and the subsequent period suggests practical guidelines for soundimplementation strategies

Kent School and Its Technology Program

Kent School is a private college preparatory school in New England It enrolls approximately

550 students, male and female, in grades 9 through 12 Approximately 93 percent of thestudents are “boarders” who live on campus during the academic year Typically, Kent stu-dents come from environments where education is valued highly and where it is taken forgranted that they will enroll at a college or university and earn at least a bachelor’s degree.Typically, the students’ parents are affluent, but the school grants a number of scholarships,which introduce a measure of socioeconomic diversity into the student body The studentbody also is diverse with respect to ethnicity, race, religious background, and geographicaldistribution (students come to Kent from all regions of the United States as well as Canada,Latin America, Europe, the Middle East, India, and Asia)

Kent’s faculty includes approximately 75 members, more than half of whom holdone or more advanced degrees including the doctorate Classes are small, usually having 8 to

12 students The curriculum honors traditional educational values and includes courses inGreek, Latin, and theology, which reflects Kent’s heritage as a school founded by clergy ofthe Episcopal Church almost 100 years ago

Although Kent embraces tradition, it is not a newcomer to information technology

In 1966, faculty and students were connected to General Electric’s computer-timesharingfacility The following year, Kent arranged for its faculty and students to use DartmouthCollege’s computer facilities and the recently developed “BASIC” programming language,which members of the faculty used to design programs for mathematics and languagecourses In the late 1960s, the school acquired a mini-computer In the late 1970s and early1980s, stand-alone personal computers began to appear around the campus In 1995, Kent’sTechnology Committee advised the headmaster that information technology could providestudents with experience “important not just to their future productivity, but to their veryunderstanding of their world and its possibilities” (Kent Technology Committee, 1995) Thecommittee made the following recommendation:

The Committee intends that technology at Kent School should serve the curriculum

and the community Technology acquisitions should be driven by identifiable

cur-ricular goals to enhance or extend the learning experience Technology

improve-Introduction 3

ments should enable students (and teachers) to become more active agents of their

own learning The technology we choose to incorporate should improve

communi-cation within the school community and between the community and the world.

Shortly after the committee presented its recommendation, in 1996 Kent embarked

on a program to integrate information technology into teaching and learning To that end,the school installed a computer network and equipped all faculty and students with laptopcomputers that they could carry with them to class, the library, etc., and connect to the net-work from almost anywhere on campus, which gave them ready access to email, shared fold-ers, and the Internet Two years after its inception, Kent invited the RAND Corporation toreview and comment on the program

Methodology of This Study

This study uses an “exploratory case study” research design (Yin, 1989) Experimental gies were not appropriate because all faculty and students had equal access to the technologywhen the study began Data were collected mainly during academic years 1998–1999 and2000–2001 Core data about participants’ use of the technology and their attitudes toward itwere gathered through surveys that were administered, respectively, during winter term 1998and winter term 2000 The surveys, each of which consisted of approximately 10 pages ofquestions about an individual’s use and perceptions of information technology, asked facultyand students to estimate quantities (e.g., hours on specified tasks), check applicable items onlists, mark choices on Likert scales, and write brief descriptions or comments The facultysurveys included faculty-specific questions and, likewise, the student surveys were tailored totheir use of the technology Over 75 percent of the faculty and students completed each ofthe surveys

strate-Survey data were illuminated by interviews of faculty and technology departmentstaff, focus groups of students selected at random from representative groups (e.g., year inschool, gender, native English-speaking or not, and boarder/day student status), observations

of classes, and observations of technology department operations Self-reported measureswere, where possible, triangulated with other sources (e.g., individuals’ estimates of their use

of email were compared in the aggregate with system-maintained logs of message volume).Data were analyzed in the aggregate (i.e., data were not identified by individual) using,largely, simple descriptive statistics Analyses of the data with respect to certain dimensions(e.g., whether students’ native language was English, whether they lived on campus) are notdiscussed in this report because differences are not statistically significant and do not appear

to be germane to the issues covered here Socioeconomic data were not collected to protectthe privacy of students receiving scholarships Information about the initial years of Kent’stechnology program, (i.e., before this study began) was gathered mostly from commentswritten on the questionnaires and expressed during interviews and focus groups; it was sup-plemented in part by data from archival sources

Organization of This Report

Chapter Two, with the aim of addressing the question whether information technology can

be used to benefit teaching and learning, summarizes the uses and benefits of the technologythat were reported by Kent faculty and students Several of the examples are innovative and

4 When Computers Go to School

may be of particular interest to other educational institutions Details are provided in the pendices about three of them: the integration of Kent’s intranet into the curriculum; an ap-plication that helped students bridge spatial and cultural distance; and an application thatenabled an instructor to devote more time to the substance of students’ work by reducing themanual effort required to correct their assignments

ap-Chapter Three reports that even though, in general, faculty and students expressedpositive opinions about the technology, many of them were hesitant to integrate it into theiractivities The chapter summarizes data about their use of the technology and posits a theo-retical rationale to explain their behavior The data suggest that information technology isnot likely to be used well, if indeed it is used at all, unless it is implemented in ways that areresponsive to the intended users’ perceived needs

Chapter Four reviews lessons learned at Kent that may be particularly helpful to cators who would like to integrate information technology into teaching and learning

of a calculator into which they keyed the data.

Faculty and Students Reported That Information Technology Enriched

Teaching and Learning When It Was Used Well

The references to faculty and students that follow in this report are based on their responses

in the surveys (which were completed by approximately 60 members of the faculty and proximately 450 students during each of the two data collection periods, academic years1998–1999 and 2000–2001) and their comments during interviews (with faculty) and focusgroups (with students) The references describe the opinions reported by the majority of thefaculty and students (except where noted) and omit specific percentages and numbers forbrevity

ap-Typically, faculty and students reported that information technology enriched struction and learning when it was used well There was general consensus that informationtechnology made positive contributions by effecting one or more of the following improve-ments relative to traditional methods of teaching and learning:

in-• presentations of course material during class were better organized, easier to stand, and more engaging

under-• classroom exercises had greater educational impact

• homework was more engaging and more effective

When Computers Go to School

6

• the technology motivated and helped students “do my best”

• “class was always in session,” which provided additional opportunities to learn

Presentations of Course Material During Class Were Better Organized, Easier to

Understand, and More Engaging

Faculty reported that students appeared to be more engaged and to understand lessons betterwhen instructors used the technology to supplement their lectures Faculty stated that pro-jecting an outline of the lesson during class helped students “stay on the same page” (whichwas true figuratively for classes in general and true literally in classes using multiple texts, forexample, to compare several translations of a work) Students’ comments were congruentwith the perceptions of the faculty Students reported that classes were better organized wheninstructors used the technology, and good organization, they stated, helped them follow thelesson, enabled instructors to cover more material during class, reduced the number of excur-sions on distracting tangents, and made more class time available to discuss the course mate-rial Students commented that instructors often were able to explain topics more clearlywhen they supplemented their lecture with graphics, audio, and video instead of simplywriting or drawing illustrative material on a classroom whiteboard They reported that it wastedious to watch instructors write or draw on the board; in fact, it was somewhat annoyingwhen “a lot of time” was used to write or draw on the board because the time could havebeen used more effectively by the instructor to explain the lesson more fully or by the class todiscuss it at greater length They commented that visual materials (particularly with colorand graphics) “grab a student’s attention and keep you more focused because you are in-terested.”

Faculty used presentation materials in a variety of ways Some displayed the materialsand expected students to take notes as they had done when instructors delivered instruction

in the traditional manner Some gave a copy of the presentation to students at the start of theclass because, they stated, it enabled students to focus on the lesson instead of concentrating

on taking detailed notes Some emailed a copy of the presentation to students who were sent from class

ab-Faculty reported that technology-mediated presentations took more time and effort

to prepare than traditional lecture materials, but, once prepared, they were easier to update,revise, and supplement They also reported that technology made it relatively easy to weavevisual and sound objects seamlessly into their lectures Their perception is consistent withfindings of other studies: Students’ comprehension increased as additional senses (aural, vis-ual, and tactile) were involved in the learning process, but instructors tended not to incorpo-rate images and sound into lessons before information technology was introduced largely be-cause traditional audiovisual equipment was difficult to operate while simultaneouslydelivering a lecture and being attentive to a classroom of students (see Devin and Robyn,1997)

Classroom Exercises Had Greater Educational Impact

Faculty reported that the technology enabled them to conduct classroom exercises that weremore effective than traditional exercises For example, before the technology program, stu-dents in English Department courses wrote essays by hand during class, submitted them atthe end of the period, and then, one or more days later, received their work with theteacher’s comments written on it In contrast, the use of laptop computers and word proc-

Kent Used Information Technology to Enrich Teaching and Learning 7

essing facilitated an iterative process in which instructors reviewed students’ essays as theywere being written, made suggestions that prompted students to revise their work, and re-peated the suggestion/revision cycle during the class period One member of the English De-partment faculty explained: “It changes students’ approach to writing if they can be involvedmore actively and see their work being changed, e.g., for subject-verb agreement.”

Science Department faculty reported that technology increased the educational value

of laboratory experiments and enabled students to conduct experiments formerly not ble When students collected data manually, the underlying principles were obscured at timesbecause the measurements tended to be imprecise, relatively few data points could be re-corded, and errors sometimes were made in calculations and graphing When electronic in-struments were introduced into the courses, students were able to collect precise data fornumerous observations and then transfer the data directly to their laptops for analysis andgraphing Using the technology, less time and effort were needed to conduct experimentsthan formerly A member of the Science Department faculty explained: “Data are quicklygathered in labs using [the recording instrument] Time is then spent on analyzing what thedata mean.” Faculty observed that some students completed the assigned exercise andthen—on their own initiative—repeated it with variations to address questions that occurred

feasi-to them during the original procedure, e.g., “What will happen if I [changed this tion]?”

condi-Homework Was More Engaging and More Effective

Faculty and students reported that information technology minimized manual labor thatthey deemed was incidental to the educational value of assignments For example, studentsreported that word processing software greatly facilitated the process of writing papers be-cause it enabled them to revise and format their work easily, access a thesaurus readily, andbenefit from automatic spelling and grammar checking They reported that the Inter-net—and particularly the advantage of being able to access it from their rooms—enabledthem to do research for assignments faster, more thoroughly, and more conveniently thanwhen they used traditional reference materials; further, the Internet usually provided infor-mation that was current and from primary sources, unlike some reference materials How-ever, students usually added, to use the Internet well they had to learn appropriate searchtechniques and learn to evaluate websites’ reliability and credibility (skills that, in general,students reported that they learned at Kent)

Typically, faculty reported that the technology, principally the Internet, offered richinformation resources that could be used to develop homework assignments, providing

“authentic” experiences for the students Faculty observed that students tended to pursuethese assignments more vigorously than traditional coursework, and students reported thatthe assignments were more interesting than traditional exercises Some of these assignmentsincorporated a sense of playfulness, which has been found to be an effective educationalmethod (see Martocchio and Webster, 1992; Perry and Ballou, 1997) For example, students

“went to Paris” to do homework for a French course One of their assignments was to plan atrip to the movies—in Paris—for the coming weekend They selected a film by readingmovie reviews in the Internet edition of a Paris newspaper Then they found the theater(s) atwhich it was playing, show times, and admission prices Having selected the movie, theater,and performance, students then went to the Métro website to determine the subway linesthey would take to the theater, the train schedule, and the fare During class, students dis-

When Computers Go to School

Faculty and students reported that technology reduced the “turnaround time” forhomework, i.e., the interval between completing an assignment and receiving the instructor’scomments on it Both faculty and students stated that teachers’ comments were more valu-able when the work was fresh in a student’s mind Generally, instead of waiting for class tomeet, students submitted assignments as soon as they completed them (by attaching them toemail or dropping them in a shared folder) and faculty returned them in like manner Fac-ulty also reported that this method eliminated the need to collect and distribute homeworkduring class, which made more time available for instruction and discussion Typically, fac-ulty typed their comments on students’ work that was submitted electronically, and somefaculty and students observed that typed comments differed in substance from handwrittencomments Consistent with this observation, some of the faculty reported that it was easier totype a comment than write it; as one stated, “My typed comments are more comprehensivethan ones I write by hand because it is easier for me to type than write.” (This topic is revis-ited in this chapter.)

The Technology Motivated and Helped Students “Do My Best”

Faculty reported that the technology “generates more extended effort, more polished work,and develops the ability to articulate ideas.” They cited the benefits of tools such asgrammar and spelling checkers, thesauri, and dictionaries, but the central theme of theircomments was that word processors enabled written assignments to be edited and revisedeasily, and this encouraged students to refine their ideas, articulate them more clearly, andargue them more persuasively Students concurred “You’d settle for a sentence rather thanretype it Now I edit and change my work.” “It helps me do my best.” Students stated thatcomputers “make you want to strive to do your work more thoroughly.” One expressed theidea this way: “there is no excuse not to improve your work because revisions can be made soeasily.”

Faculty and student’s comments contained three related subthemes Approximately 5percent of the students volunteered that the technology, especially the Internet, enabledthem to pursue knowledge independently, which most of them stated—or implied—thatthey might not have done had more effort been required Two students commented:

The web gives me the opportunity to research something that I may have missed in

class When I hear something that interests me, but I don’t want to force the class

into a tangent, I’ll look it up on the Internet It gives me the chance to explore and

learn things because the Internet is so convenient.

Whenever I get a question in my mind, I look up the Internet and find my answers

rather than having to keep the question in my head a long period of time and then

forget about it.

The second subtheme suggested that the technology changed the way some studentsdeveloped an assignment, which may have implications for the substance and exposition of

Kent Used Information Technology to Enrich Teaching and Learning 9

their work (this study did not explore those implications) For example, approximately 4 cent of the students commented that instead of organizing their thoughts formally beforewriting a paper or essay (e.g., by preparing an outline), they preferred to let their ideas “flow”and then refine what they had written

per-The third subtheme concerned the possibility that students who had different levels

of academic achievement may have integrated the technology differently into their work In 2000–2001, 77.5 percent of the students who responded to the survey questionabout the impact of the technology (n = 431) assessed that information “technology has had

school-a positive impschool-act on my educschool-ation” (which is up from 66.0 percent in 1998–1999) Giventhe caveat that this study was not designed to test hypotheses about the relationship betweentechnology and academic achievement, it is interesting to observe that this opinion was held

by a larger percentage of the students who ranked their academic achievement in the firstquartile (highest grades) than by students who ranked their academic achievement in otherquartiles The data are summarized in Table 2.1 The “Percent of Quartile” column showsthe percentage of students in each quartile who judged that technology had a positive impact

on their education The “Average Assessment” column shows the mean average of those dents’ assessments of the impact of the technology (p = 0.06) using a scale that ranged from

stu-7, strongly positive impact, to 1, strongly negative impact

Table 2.1 Students’ Report of the Impact of Technology on Education, by Academic Level (2000–2001)

% of Quartile

Average Assessment

“Class Was Always In Session,” Providing Additional Opportunities To Teach and Learn

Faculty used the technology to supplement the typical face-to-face faculty-student sions held during classes, office hours, and study halls A member of the faculty commented,

discus-“I use email to establish a one-on-one conversation with each of my students, which ties thewhole course together and, in essence, tears down the walls of the classroom—class is always

in session.” Students reported that it was helpful to ask questions anytime about assignments,course material, extracurricular activities, etc., knowing that their questions would be read atthe instructor’s convenience and would not interrupt the instructor’s activities In2000–2001, 83 percent of the students reported that they used email to communicate withfaculty (up markedly from 32 percent in 1998–1999) Students commented: “I can ask ques-tions anytime and don’t have to wait for the next class.” “[You send a message and] 20 min-utes later, there is a response that helps you.” “I can get help from faculty without leaving myroom.”

Some of the faculty integrated email (and, later, shared folders) into coursework Insome instances, communication was bidirectional (teacher-student); for example, students inseveral courses kept journals and emailed their daily entries to their instructor, which the in-structor reviewed and returned while the experience was fresh in the students’ minds, with

When Computers Go to School

10

encouragement and direction that was intended to guide the students’ work the followingday In other instances, communications were multidirectional, that is, faculty used the tech-nology to facilitate discussion among students; typically, faculty participated in these discus-sions to stimulate the discussion and refocus students’ attention when they embarked ontangents or pursued faulty lines of reasoning The following entry in a “class journal” illus-trates one instructor’s use of the medium to extend class beyond the temporal and spatialconfines of the classroom:

I am very pleased with your journal entries this time round A couple very good

points were made First of all, I am pleased that you are struggling to decide which

character [in the reading assignment] is the most believable or trustworthy This is

important because [the two main characters] both have slightly different ideas about

what actually happened I suspect that the real truth lies somewhere in the middle.

We will discuss [this situation more fully] in class For right now, it is enough to

know [the instructor specified the issue] think about this for our next class

dis-cussion.

Approximately 10 percent of the faculty reported that they asked students to use themedia to comment briefly on material to be covered during the next class, e.g., identify thecentral themes Some of these instructors commented that they read these comments togauge their students’ understanding of the material, which helped them tailor the lesson tothe students’ specific needs more efficiently than if they waited to assay the students’ com-prehension while they were delivering the lesson during class Some noted that these assign-ments tended to encourage students to come to class prepared Pertinent to that observation,the “Just-In-Time Teaching” (JITT) method—which is used at some colleges and universi-ties and requires that students submit “warm up” exercises (e.g., quizzes on the current day’slesson) to their professor before class via email or a shared folder—is said to encourage stu-dents to read the assigned material before class, reflect on it, and be prepared to discuss it re-sponsibly during class (see Novak and Patterson, 1998)

Kent Faculty Developed Innovative Uses of Technology for Their Courses

Among the innovative uses of information technology that were developed by Kent faculty,five appear to have unique potential to benefit teaching and learning in ways that are likely

to be of special interest to educators They are described below The first four suggest thatinformation technology can be used to encourage students to participate more actively intheir education The fifth indicates that the technology can help teachers devote more oftheir time to the substance of their students’ work by assisting them with the time-consuming tasks required to address the routine errors in students’ work

Technology Was Used to Bridge Spatial and Cultural Distance

Lisa Durkee Abbott (who graciously consented to be identified by name and to write a scription of her project for this report) used email to bridge the distance, spatial and cultural,between her English 2 students and a group of high school students in New Mexico Theseemail exchanges enabled Kent students to gain insights into the content of a novel that waslargely “unfamiliar and even unbelievable” for them but not for the students in New Mexico

de-Kent Used Information Technology to Enrich Teaching and Learning 11

The project generated enthusiasm among students and caused them to read the course rial more attentively and to think about the concepts more deeply than they might have doneotherwise Subsequently, because of their classmates’ experiences, other students were eager

mate-to enroll in the course and participate in the project Ms Durkee Abbott’s description of thisproject is included as Appendix A

Technology Helped Students Learn from Each Other

One instructor asked students to read chapters of a novel and submit a concise analysis (viaemail or dropped in a shared folder) by the morning of the day the chapters would be dis-cussed in class The instructor downloaded the students’ work that morning before class, re-viewed it, and selected one students’ work, which the instructor projected onto a whiteboard

in the classroom Students were asked to suggest ways the author’s ideas might be expressed

to better advantage and to identify grammatical and spelling errors As students made tions, the instructor used a marker to edit the text on the whiteboard At the same time, theauthor updated the copy in his or her laptop (and used it later as the introduction to a longerpaper) Some of the edits were self-explanatory (e.g., spelling corrections) Other edits be-came points of discussion; they were lined out or erased and replaced, perhaps several times,

sugges-as the instructor sugges-asked “what if we ?” and guided the clsugges-ass along their intellectual ney When the instructor’s goal was reached, the edited version and the original version werecompared to show students the results of their collective efforts

jour-This instructor’s innovative use of the technology provided opportunities for dents to learn from each other, which has been said to break “the unavoidable monotony ofpassive lecturing, and, more important, the students do not merely assimilate the materialpresented to them; they must think for themselves and put their thoughts into words” (Ma-zur, 1996, p 14) As with the in-class writing exercises described above, students were able toexperience the process of transforming a composition As with other applications describedabove, there was a “playful” dimension that appeared to be effective; in this instance, the in-structor made a game of proposing improvements and finding errors and awarded one pointfor each substantive comment

stu-Technology Helped Students Assess Their Comprehension of Course Material

Several instructors developed internal websites that enabled students to test their knowledge

of the course material interactively The tests were not factored into students’ grades, butteachers reported that students, particularly students who tended to earn higher grades, usedthe self-tests regularly to solidify course concepts and prepare for examinations Faculty re-ported that the self-tests provided information that helped them identify students whoneeded additional help and topics that needed further explanation When this study ended,the Technology Department was developing a template that would help faculty, particularlythose who had modest technical skills, create web-based self-tests in a variety of questionformats (e.g., multiple choice, true/false, “click the location of on the map above”)

Technology Helped Students Discover Their Creative Talents

A member of the Art Department faculty stated that computer-mediated tools enabled dents to “make art” in a new medium (digital space) without being limited by their mechani-cal skill The technology enabled students, even those “who grew up thinking they can’tdraw,” to discover their creative talents and explore aesthetic issues through “problem solv-

When Computers Go to School

12

ing” by, first, creating compositions and, then, manipulating the images, colors, and grounds and creating special effects The instructor noted: “I want them to understand thepower of images [in advertising, films, political campaigns].” The instructor reported that thetechnology “energized” students and motivated them to work more diligently than formerly(which echoes comments made above, e.g., the technology motivated students to “do mybest”); “[they] are less willing to settle for ‘less than perfect.’ Manipulation of the workswithout physical constraints and the ability to achieve stunning results increase students’ de-sire to do more.”

back-Technology Was Used to Make a Point (Again, and Again, and Again)

A member of the faculty used the technology to reduce dramatically the considerable timethat was required to explain routine errors in students’ coursework and, as a result, was able

to devote more time to the substance of the students’ work The instructor explained thatstudents make typical errors as a course unfolds, so teachers write the same comments nu-merous times on many papers and, for some students, many times on the same paper Typi-cally, because of time pressures, an instructor’s comments are detailed the first time a prob-lem appears in a student’s work, then the comments are abbreviated at subsequent instances

of the error Occasionally, students misunderstand the shorter comments

To address this situation, the instructor developed a library of detailed commentsabout typical errors The appropriate comment could be inserted – with one keystroke – intostudents’ papers (which were submitted electronically) wherever one of these errors occurred.The instructor reported that students benefited because comments were more complete thanformerly, and, because the process saved considerable time, the instructor was able to providemore detailed guidance about the substance of the students’ work (The instructor also ob-served that repetition provided emphasis, and, to illustrate the point, related that a studentsaid when seeing that a comment had been made many times in his paper, “I guess you reallymean it.”) Appendix B contains more information about this innovation

Information Technology Was Integrated into Courses in Numerous Ways

Kent faculty integrated information technology into their courses in many ways, only a few

of which are described above Among other applications, faculty:

• wrote an etextbook that students downloaded to their computers (which students ported was more engaging than a traditional textbook)

re-• illustrated the variety and evolution of theological concepts by augmenting lectureswith examples of great religious art and music and recordings of contemporary relig-ious leaders’ speeches/sermons

• designed an Internet “treasure hunt” that encouraged students to collect interestingfacts about geometry

• used “real time” information from Wall Street researchers and analyses of daily ket activity to examine the American economy

mar-• developed a web-based system that helped students collect and organize research for amajor project (the project aimed to help them appreciate the preparation required toargue a case before the United States Supreme Court; it culminated with teams of

Kent Used Information Technology to Enrich Teaching and Learning 13

students presenting their arguments to a formal session of a moot court, where ticing judges and lawyers—some having Supreme Court experience—presided)

prac-• supplemented lectures with software that enabled students to observe mathematics inmotion (which students reported enabled them to grasp the concepts more effectivelythan by studying diagrams in a textbook)

• created a multimedia presentation for a music course that integrated visual material(e.g., lecture notes, musical scores, and pictures of featured musical instruments,composers, and performance venues) and aural material (e.g., excerpts from composi-tions and samples of the sounds made by various musical instruments)

• enabled students to create web pages that collectively described a medieval nity and, in the process, de-mystified websites and helped students develop criticalskills for evaluating information on the web (as one student who had taken thecourse explained, “Anyone can put anything on the Internet”)

commu-• added voice notations to students’ work, so the instructor’s comments literally spoke

to the students

The “Kentranet,” Kent’s internal website, which was introduced during academicyear 1999–2000, facilitated some of the applications described above and presented addi-tional opportunities to integrate information technology into courses Faculty were able topost course syllabi on Kentranet web pages along with assignments, reference material, sup-plementary material, review questions, practice quizzes, and links to complementary web-sites An architect of the Kentranet described it as “a way to have the teacher sitting next tothe students as they do their work outside the classroom.” More information about the Ken-tranet is included in Appendix C

Even Though the Technology Could Be Used to Enrich Teaching and

Learning, Some of the Faculty Were Hesitant to Adopt It

One might have assumed that the applications described above would have motivated faculty

to incorporate the technology eagerly into their courses However, when the study began,approximately half of the faculty were found to be hesitant to use information technologyother than for basic applications such as word processing, and when the study ended, al-though their use of the technology had increased, approximately one-fourth of the facultystill were using it in relatively limited ways The next chapter posits a theoretical rationale toexplain individuals’ motivation to integrate the technology into their activities