Technology Reading #5 – High Access and Low Use of Technology

Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H., & Peck, C. (2001). High access and low use of technology in high school classrooms: Explaining an apparent paradox. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 813-834.

Abstract:  Most policy makers, corporate executives, practitioners, and parents assume that wiring schools, buying hardware and software, and distributing the equipment throughout will lead to abundant classroom use by teachers and students and improved teaching and learning. This article examines these assumptions in two high schools located in the heart of technological prog- ress, Northern California’s Silicon Valley. Our qualitative methodology in- cluded interviews with teachers, students, and administrators, classroom observations, review of school documents, and surveys of both teachers and students in the two high schools. We found that access to equipment and software seldom led to widespread teacher and student use. Most teachers were occasional users or nonusers. When they used computers for classroom work, more often than not their use sustained rather than altered existing patterns of teaching practice. We offer two interrelated explanationsfor these challenges to the dominant assumptions that guide present technological policy making.

• RQs
  1. With abundant access to information technologies, did the national patterns of infrequent and limited teacher usage of computers emerge?  If so, why?
  2. Did teachers who used computers in their classrooms for instruction typically maintain existing practices?  If so, why?
• Units = 2 high schools located in the hot-bed of technology – The Silicon Valley
  • Schools – both similar
    • Modestly affluent area
    • Racially and socioeconomically diverse student populations
    • Per pupil expenditure of ~ $5200
    • Abundant in technology resources based on national standards (from a hardware/software/Internet standpoint though it doesn’t mention too many specifics)
      • 4 – 5 students per computer (NA is 6)
      • 17 – 22 computers in a classroom (not every classroom, NA is 17)
      • 8 – 12 computers in a lab (NA is 21)
      • 64 – 80% Internet connectivity in classroom (NA is 44%)
      • 80 – 100% Internet connectivity in lab (NA is 54 -55%)
      • 100% of teachers have email (NA is 39%)
  • Students
    • Middle-range SAT scores
    • Aspire to higher education
  • Teachers
    • Mostly White
    • Some Latino
• Treatment = observational research study, no treatment applied
• Observations (methods)
  • Interviewed 21 teachers and 26 students that volunteered to be part of the study
  • Shadowed 12 students and 11 teachers in both schools through and entire school day.
  • Surveyed 1/4 of the student body of one school and 1/3 of the other.
  • Reviewed teacher sign-up data for media centers and computer labs.
  • Examined accredidation reports, proposals for launching reforms, grants seeking tech funds, and newspaper articles written about the schools.
  • Results of surveys and
• Settings
  • Student outcomes
    • Most students had access to computers at home and that use was frequent and spanned many applications.
    • Interviews of 33 student volunteers reported serious to occassional use of computers and other technologies in English and social studies classes and in tech-heavy classes for word processing, Internet searches, and completing projects.  For the majority of their academic classes, they reported liitle or no use of computers, but some use of videos, TV programs, and overhead projectors.
    • Based on surveys, there were students for whom technology use created computer competence for them and increased their self-confidence and motivation to do well in school, called “open door” students.  They were predominantly male and from varied ethnic backgrounds and primarliy self-taught computer users who learned from using computers at home and whose expertise far exceeded that of their classmates.  They along with “tech gods” used their technological experience and expertise to help teachers and students, which helped to ease the demand on overburdened and understaffed technology support team (which between both schools consisted of 2 people, one of whom taught 3 classes).
  • Teacher outcomes
    • Most teachers had access to computers at home and that use was frequent and spanned many applications
    • Teachers reported they largely used computers to prepare for class.
    • Teachers in both schools take their students to the media centers where they were sufficient machines to accommodate the entire class.  A few teachers (25% in one school and 32% in the other) in 3 departments (English, science, and social studies) accounted for 60 – 70% of all machine use in the media centers.  And thus, almost 2/3 to 3/4 of teachers who taught academic subjects in both schools were nonusers of the media center resources.
    • Within departments, a pattern was seen where one or two teachers were heavy users of computers, a few were occassional/rare users, and the rest were non-users.
    • Data gathered showed general lack of usage among teachers in classrooms, labs, and media centers.
    • In interviews with 21 teachers, 13 (60%) said use info tech changed their teaching practices.  They planned more efficiently, communicated with colleagues more often via email, and secured info over the Internet.  They saw students’ direct access to info as a great enhancement to teaching.
    • Only 4 of the 13 said they modified their classrooms in major ways.  Organized different, lectured less, relied on text less, gave students more independence, and acted more like a coach.  They became more student-centered in their teaching and made changes to their pedagogy.
    • Based on shadowing, most teachers used the basic teacher-centered instruction practice – lecturing, conducting a discussion, reviewing homework, working on assignments, and occassionally using overhead projectors and videos.  Even in computer based classes, teacher-centered instruction was the norm.
• Findings
  • General lack of usage among teachers in classrooms, labs, and media centers.  With access so high, the teachers in this study did not do much better than the national average of 2 of 10 teachers as serious users of technology, 4 of 10 as occassional users at least once per month.  This is bad because back in the 80’s, when all this tech wasn’t available, the national average for teachers as serious users was 1 in 10. 
  • Few fundamental changes in the dominant mode of teacher-centered instruction occurred.
  • Most teachers adapted technology to fit familiar practices of teacher-centered instruction.
  • Don’t know whether the classroom changes that occurred were due to technologies or whether they emerged as part of a gradual shift in their beliefs about teaching and tech provided a vehicle.
  • Reasons for low use:
    • Teachers don’t have the time to find and evaluate software.
    • Computer and software training was seldom offerred at convenient times.
    • Generic training available was irrelevant to teachers’ specific needs.
  • Teachers’ age, experience, and gender were not factors as there was little difference between veteran and novice teachers with or without previous tech experience, male or female.
  • Two ideas to explain the anomalies (mere speculation):
    • “Slow revolution” explanation – individuals and companies need decades to learn how to use and manage the new technology.  Increasing numbers of teachers will embrace integration of technology over time.
    • Historical context of high schools and their structures. (Much more likely.)
      • Embedded patterns of departments, 50 minute periods, diverse curricula, and other established practices are taken for granted and never really questioned by policy makers, practioners, researchers, etc.
      • Individual time constraints of teachers makes it difficult to find the time to integrate technology.
      • Teachers primarly responsibilities of covering material (and in the case today, high stakes testing) and other teaching demands.
      • Teachers good at integrating tech leave for or teaching positions or better jobs.
      • Defects of technology!  It needs to be reliable and it just isn’t there, causing a lack of confidence in technology.
      • Fundamental changes are required in how schools are organized, how time is allocated, and how teachers are prepared.
• Take-away
  • I wish this study was much bigger, but it does give some good insight into the gap between high access and low use of technology in school systems.
  •  TPCK anyone???????