How should your state use EdTech Stimulus Funds?
If you live in the United States, how do you think your state department of education should use forthcoming federal stimulus funds earmarked for educational technology? If you live outside the U.S. how do you think leaders in the states should use these funds, to model best-practices for ICT in the classroom? If the upcoming dollars follow past procedures for EETT funds, half of state disbursements will likely be distributed according to a formula based on SES. The other half will be distributed in each state according to a state-specified competitive grant process.
According to Hilary Goldman, writing on her blog in the ISTE Community Ning:
The U.S. Department of Education plans to post the state applications for the State Stabilization Fund on Tuesday. [March 31, 2009] In addition, the Dept. will post a State Stabilization Fund FAQ web-page on Tuesday that will be comprised of questions that have been submitted so far from schools, districts and states across the country. Additionally, Title I and IDEA funds will likely flow to the states next week too and a FAQ will be posted for these programs too.
On Thursday, April 2, 2009, Goldman and ISTE CEO Don Knezek will co-host a free webinar for ISTE members titled “So The Stimulus Passed…Now What?” Panelists for the webinar will include:
- David Byer of Apple, Chair of ISTE’s Public Policy and Advocacy Committee
- Deborah Rigsby of the National School Boards Association
- Davis Brock of Elmore County Public Schools in Alabama
This discussion will be timely given the announcement of the state stimulus fund application two days earlier.
From what I have observed of recent TitleIID grant award winners here in Oklahoma, the most common ways for school leaders to spend new educational technology funds today in my state are:
- Purchasing new desktop computers to replace aging systems in school computer labs.
- Purchasing additional electronic whiteboards and data projectors for teacher classrooms.
- Purchasing electronic response systems for classroom teacher use.
- Purchasing laptops for mobile computing labs which can be checked out and moved into different classrooms as requested.
While some states in the United States have a variety of 1 to 1 learning initiatives underway, here in Oklahoma we only have a handful of school districts (about 1 percent) exploring one to one learning. The state of Maine, under the leadership of then-governor Angus King, implemented the Maine Learning Technology Initiative (MLTI) in 2002 starting with 7th and 8th grade classrooms. On March 11, 2009, Maine announced it is extending the MLTI to all high school students in the state, becoming the first state in the nation to “provide them statewide at the high school level.” How long will it take for other states, including yours, to follow the lead of Maine when it comes to 1 to 1 computing?
The Apple Classrooms of Tomorrow (ACOT) Research in the 1980s concluded that teachers can progress through a series of stages as they learn to integrate technology into the curriculum.* Initially, teachers learn to “adopt” technology to support traditional instruction. Later, with support for project-based and inquiry-led approaches to instruction, teachers can move into the “appropriation” and “invention” levels of technology integration.
NCLB, the standards movement, and high-stakes accountability have created learning cultures in many U.S. schools today which do not support inquiry or project-based learning. Our need for transformational school change is apparent, however, not only when we consider our need to embrace 21st century skills, but also when we examine the multiplicity of issues involved with school dropout issues. As we consider the ways new educational technology funds should be spent in our respective U.S. states in upcoming months, I encourage leaders to consider supporting TRANSFORMATIONAL uses of technology in the classroom rather than uses which merely ACCOMMODATE or support traditional, teacher-directed instruction. It is essential we provide every student and teacher in our classrooms today, in grades three and up, with a portable, wireless, Internet-capable computer. These devices must be capable of not only “receiving” information and media, but also permitting students to create, communicate, and collaborate in natural and fluid ways. The Sugar operating system developed for OLPC is an exemplary open-source (free) operating system offering these functionalities. Hopefully, in the coming months, we’ll see multiple U.S. states embrace 1 to 1 computing and leverage the learning capabilities offered by netbooks and operating systems like Sugar. It is difficult to think outside the box if you live each day within the confines of a school district bureaucracy, but that type of innovative thinking is EXACTLY what we need in our current economic and historical context. Our students and teachers not only need access to computer HARDWARE for digital learning, they/we also need access to high quality digital curriculum. The fact the state of Texas continues to force school districts like Irving ISD to waste at least $4.6 million on paper textbooks which sit unused in district warehouses is atrocious. Irving ISD has been and continues to be a national leader in 1:1 computing, but leaders in the Texas legislature have remained beholden to the powerful textbook industry and lobby when it comes to textbook purchasing. As citizens and educational advocates, we must speak out and make our voices heard. We need to empower learners in our schools of all ages with digital tools and digital curriculum. Laws like those in Texas denying school districts local autonomy to utilize funds allocated for instructional materials in sensible ways which best meet the needs of students as well as teachers must be changed.
How do you hope your state will competitively offer opportunities for schools to use educational technology stimulus funds? If you live outside the United States, how would you like to see your national government leverage available dollars to support educational technology / ICT?
* Note: Original ACOT research results have apparently been taken offline by Apple for some reason. A new ACOT2 project (Apple Classrooms of Tomorrow – Today) has been launched, but links to older research materials do not appear to be available in archived form. :-(
6 Comments
Jeff Johnson
Saturday, 28th March 2009 at 4:16 pm
In addition to the likely uses described here, I hope schools find a way to use these funds to improve accountability for using the technology already in place. Ongoing, sustainable professional development and permanent technology integration support structures rank near the top of my list.
Carolyn Foote
Saturday, 28th March 2009 at 4:21 pm
Wes,
I agree that the money should be spent on more transformational uses! As per your textbook example, why couldn’t some of the money fund a pilot project to bring more textbooks online?
But more in keeping with your post, I agree that implementing something like 1:1 laptop programs could drive significant change. After visiting the Science Leadership Academy and seeing their program in action, it became clear to me how transformative that is.
(Although the curriculum clearly has to transform to include the use of the laptops, and the laptops aren’t the point, the learning is.)
I would also hope that some of the funds are spent on a variety of professional development measures which in the end, would benefit schools across each state.
Something like the professional learning community work that SherylNussbaum-Beach and Will Richardson are doing for example.
Lastly, wouldn’t it be amazing for the expenditures to also incorporate “green” concepts?
The states do need a coherent and forward-thinking plan to use the money wisely and effectively.
A. Mercer
Sunday, 29th March 2009 at 5:19 pm
I just don’t know if it’ll be enough. On the way to CUE, I had a CTAP director do a back of the envelope of what we’d need to get every teacher a laptop and projector in California, and it was almost the whole amount enchilada. Even if you take the projector out of there, teachers getting laptops are pretty necessary if you want them to effectively learn how to use tech in the classroom. This suggests money will be spread really thin.
Jill Ed205
Thursday, 2nd April 2009 at 1:14 pm
I think this is a great blog that forces everyone who reads it to look deeper into educational technology in our schools today. I agree with the 1:1 laptop ratio in schools. I read an acticle about how schools in Maine are integrating this into there schoools and i honestly think it is a great addition for our students. I feel more schools should be making plans to do this as well. With the way technology is advancing in our world today i feel it is benificial for our youth to have a 1:1 laptop ratio in their school. Chlidren go to school to learn and prepare themselves for a successful future. As i previously stated, tecchnology is advancing greatly in todays society. For this reason i feel it is our responsibility as educators and administraotrs to make sure our students know how to properly use computers and internet to further their education. If we dont teach them now, when are they going to learn. Not all families can afford a computer in their home, and not all parents know how to use computers and different resources on computers and internet. Therefore, if we dont teach them in the schools where are they going to get the knowledge to do something such as search the web for a research project for school. I feel our states need to really think about how to use the stimulus money for the best interest of our students.
A. Mercer
Monday, 6th April 2009 at 12:09 am
Look at the ISTE Webinar on ARRA, look at Don Knezek’s letter telling us how to prepare for the funds coming down. 1-to-1 and project-based learning would be lovely, but the bottom line is when we ask for these funds, we are going to have to be able to assert the following:
1. It will save and/or create jobs (buy stuff, OLPCs would meet that).
2. It will improve student achievement (the obvious bottom line will be NCLB)
3. Close the achievement gap (ditto)
4. Prep for college (that’s easier to do with project-based learning).
5. Improve teacher effectiveness (hmm, if the teacher is already effective I think giving them a laptop will improve this, but if not, it won’t)
6. Improve low-performing schools. My perspective from a Program Improvement school is that IWBs are MUCH more popular for this, than one-to-one programs and more likely to be jumped on. I just thank god we’ve moved away from computer based test-prep systems as the answer because at least there is the possibility of creative teaching with the IWB.
7. Decrease drop out rates. My own feeling is that school needs to be seen as relevant to these drop outs. One-to-one could do that, but there is no guarantee of this.
Look, they want this money to be leveraged to the hilt, Mr. Knezek suggests that we work to fold EETT and other requests into Title 1 and IDEA plans. That means you need to convince your Special Ed dept and Categorical folks that this is in their interest. They will want numbers, they will want proof, and they will want to see it with low-performing, poor, and special education kids. Are we prepared for that?
JIM ADAMS
Tuesday, 2nd February 2010 at 1:30 pm
I feel the best use of funds would be for each te3acher to have a laptop this would enable them to have their work at home to assess data and allow for explicit planning. The next pressing issue would be smartboards in each room and student response remotes. Combine this with professional development where all teachers know how to use and ffind available resources.
Leave a Comment