Thursday - Mar 22, 2012
If you’re a student or parent of a student, you’re likely to be at least somewhat aware of the push to include technology in education. Whether at middle school or graduate school, the presence of interactive whiteboards, tablets, and online lectures is greater every year. And while there’s still plenty of debate about the effectiveness of education technology in and out of the classroom, the fact remains that education institutions are plowing ahead with their goal to make education more modern.
Yet in the background — at least in the United States — the cries of frustration of those least able to take advantage of the ed-tech revolution are at times drowned out by the voices of those who stand to gain the most from it. In the end, students in low-income households or in situations where Internet access is not available face more challenges, especially when teachers increasingly expect students and parents to be participating in Internet-based activities outside of school.
Students are now assigned online homework like writing blogs, while parents at some schools are expected to complete registration forms or manage student progress reports online. Some schools have talked about adding mandatory online courses for high school students. Even digital textbooks — which may require Internet to access or to further research topics contained within — are making appearances in schools. Those who don’t have readily-available Internet access are at a greater disadvantage.
“The policy of providing digital textbooks is the direction schools should take,” University of Texas professor and social-media researcher Dr. S. Craig Watkins recently told the Orlando Sentinel, “but it is flawed if it assumes all students have equal access to the Internet.”
The voices of those most in favor of ed-tech seemingly make this assumption at times, relegating those students who don’t have Internet access to spend extra time in an often crowded computer lab at the school; use a family member’s, friend’s, or business’ Internet connection (assuming students have an Internet-enabled device); go to a library (many of which are struggling with public demand for their computers); or work with teachers on an alternative. This often has the effect of eating up even more time out of the student’s — and sometimes the parent’s — busy schedule.
This all leads me to the next logical question: how many people in the U.S. are still without Internet access? According to the Orlando Sentinel story, “11 percent of Florida households with school-age children still lack Internet access.” And across the country? According to a U.S. Department of Commerce report (PDF) released in November 2011, 71 percent of Americans had home Internet access in 2010. The report also noted that only about 46 percent of households with annual household incomes less than $25,000 reported having any kind of Internet access at home. According to the Census Bureau, there were 30.5 million households earning less than $25,000 annually, so that means roughly 16 million households were without Internet access. (It’s not clear how many of those had school-age children.) All of this number crunching is to point out that a non-trivial number of low-income households likely don’t have Internet access at home.
Assuming many of those households have students in them, it’s not unrealistic to believe that many of them are getting left behind in primary schools’ push to become more tech-friendly. If educators in this realm continue to expand online requirements for students, it’s clear to me this problem must be addressed, including somehow making Internet access as commonplace as telephony. How common is the phone? Last year the U.N. declared cellular/mobile phones “de facto ubiquitous,” reporting more than 5 billion people globally as having some sort of mobile phone service.
As Internet-connected smartphones continue to replace older phones, it’s worth asking if all this concern about student Internet access is overblown. Despite the increasingly present connection that comes with today’s smartphones, they certainly don’t make for a long-term replacement of a desktop or laptop. Imagine being required to type a grammatically correct 500-word blog post on a smartphone. It doesn’t sound appealing. Eye strain, screen size, slow download speeds, and lack of a mobile application variant also tend to work against students. And while some schools are handing out iPads and laptops like candy — again showing that in many cases the lack of an Internet-connected device isn’t the problem — those devices likely don’t come with home Internet access.
It’s unrealistic to expect educators to back down from tech at this point, so what can be done to make Internet access as common as phone access? The U.S. government has been trying to address that issue, though not without controversy.
“The future of American education undoubtedly includes a laptop on every desk and universal Internet access in every home,” said U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan at a recent conference in Austin, Texas. “We will do all we can at the federal level to support the use of technology in education,” he added.
The U.S. government has been working on that universal Internet problem, as I talked about last November. Yet despite the government’s attempts to regulate Internet service providers (ISPs), update its funding policies, and promote temporary affordable Internet service to low-income families, concerns of whether or not the federal government should even be involved with the expansion of broadband persist. Some argue such a task should be left up to state and local governments, though such arguments often fail to address who would then handle ISPs’ anti-competitive behavior.
While solutions to universal Internet in the U.S. are difficult to find, it’s not difficult to see that many low-income households with school-age children are at a disadvantage. As teachers continue to adopt technology and create online assignments, the have-nots are left to spend more time finding solutions to a process many of us take for granted: accessing the Internet. This leads me to one conclusion: until Internet access becomes as common as phone service, educators must remain flexible with their integration of technology in the classroom.
Photo via Brad Flickinger, Flickr Creative Commons
Thursday - Oct 27, 2011
It’s easy to see how reading the daily headlines would lead someone to believe that incorporating technology into education is a vital maneuver in modern education reform. “Technology in the classroom aids in learning,” “Technology sparks learning,” and “Technology changing how students learn” are some of the resounding refrains heard across the news wires, praising the adoption of education technology.
But not everyone is buying into the idea, with some likening the infiltration of computers, tablets, and other mobile devices into the education sphere to a colorful Band-Aid on an unduly large problem.
Take for example the authors of a recently released National Education Policy Center report, one that paints a picture of the failings of online schools due to lack of oversight, lax accreditation, and greedy commercial and corporate interests. With “nearly one in every 50 students in the U.S.” obtaining all or some of their education from online sources in 2007, and 27 U.S. states hosting online schools (which get most of their content and services from five private companies), the report’s authors claim that more must be done to ensure the quality of online education, especially in the face of rapid ongoing change.
At the end of the report the authors make four key recommendations to state legislatures:
1. Authenticate the source of students’ work using in-person exams or more rigorous credentials.
2. Apply fiscal and instructional regulations to K-12 virtual schools, focusing for example on teacher certification status and adjusted accounting practices.
3. Conduct audits to ensure actual costs are reported, providing a more accurate funding system by the state.
4. Create and maintain a list of agencies that give accreditations to K-12 virtual schools, ensuring the accreditation process is vigorous.
The National Education Policy Center’s recommendations are welcomed by many in the education industry, including those who question whether the traditional classroom setting should be hastily abandoned for the virtual school.
“We are concerned that in their eagerness to embrace the virtual school model, policymakers and some educational leaders are overstating its success and ignoring the tremendous advantages a classroom environment provides for students,” said David R. Colburn, director of the Reubin Askew Institute, and Brian Dassler, KIPP Renaissance High School principal, in an opinion piece for the St. Petersburg Times.
“There is no question that technology can be a great asset to students with learning deficiencies and an excellent supplement to classroom learning for all students,” they said. “As the technology is refined and expanded, virtual learning may offer more substantial advantages to students and teachers.”
Despite their optimism, they went on to caution state legislatures and school policymakers about buying too deeply into the hyped promise of the online learning environment.
This line of thinking falls in stark contrast to the methodology of a school in the United States’ Silicon Valley, which is home to numerous technology corporations. Last week the New York Times highlighted the Waldorf School of the Peninsula, one of many such schools that questions the idea that technology will save the modern classroom.
Far from taking online classes, the Waldorf schools don’t even incorporate technology, focusing instead on more traditional low-tech instructional methods. The fundamental belief stated by the school is that kids will easily learn how to use technology later in life, so why not focus on the more human and engaging elements of personal teaching.
Granted, this sort of take on technology in education seems almost as extreme as one that endorses stuffing every bit of tech possible into a class. Like most things in our lives, approaching some sort of balance seems like a more reasonable approach. The authors of the NEPC report subtly preach this balance by offering realistic suggestions on how to better a growing online education industry, despite believing that same industry has “zero high-quality research evidence” of being an “adequate replacement for traditional face-to-face teaching and learning.”
Even higher education students like Kinsey Streib at Purdue University are being realistic about the role of technology in education.
“Admittedly, some technology inhibits the learning experience,” Streib recently told the Exponent. “However, it is a pertinent teaching tool in modern education.”
In the end, diving head-first into technological classroom solutions — or shunning them completely — doesn’t seem like an appropriate education solution. State legislatures should make some conservative reforms, while at the same time scientists should do more quality research on learning methodologies that include technology. From there we can evaluate in what ways educators can best integrate technology into the classroom and better gauge the effectiveness of privatized online education, all without tripping over ourselves in a mad dash to educational uncertainty.
Photo via popofatticus, Flickr Creative Commons
Thursday - Sep 15, 2011
Distance and online education isn’t a novel idea in the United States. In fact, some may be surprised to discover e-learning began as early as the 1960s. Since then schools, universities, academies, and nonprofit organizations have taken to the Internet to disseminate and teach knowledge to people around the world. While this type of education must often still be purchased, some public schools and universities are expanding their online offerings.
Take Stanford University for example, which plans on offering three free introductory online courses this fall on weighty topics like artificial intelligence, databases, and machine learning. The online classes won’t consist of a boring lecture, but rather they will contain interactive multimedia presentations broken up into digestible 15-minute chunks.
Cambridge University’s Lynne Harrison likes the idea, telling The Independent: “A good lecturer will change the tempo after 15 minutes, and the Internet allows that to happen more naturally. The technology that Stanford has put in place makes lectures more watchable, and we’re looking at doing a similar thing for our free online courses launching next spring.”
Stanford isn’t the first U.S. university to offer free online material, however. Open Yale Courses has been offered by Yale University since December 2007, spanning 20 different departments. MIT recently celebrated ten years of offering its OpenCourseWare, which covers a broad range of departments and topics.
However, online schooling (free or not) has had its fair share of challenges in the U.S., ranging from the stigma placed on it to the relatively slow placement of necessary Internet infrastructure. Two stories from earlier this week highlight the problems rural and remote areas of the country are dealing with in expanding online education.
The Houston Chronicle posted a story on Sunday about Alaska’s Learning Network and the challenges the school consortium faces in providing students in remote areas with online classes. The network includes about 140 students spread across 20 different schools in two school districts, all receiving vital online courses. Many of those courses are required to qualify for the heavily-pushed Alaska Performance Scholarship (APS), which provides an important source of funds to high school students intending to go to university.
Federal Recovery Act money has gone towards establishing the network, also covering the cost of helping school districts add classes required for the APS. Yet funding concerns continue to threaten the program, which is currently running on a one-year startup grant. Ensuring those in even the more remote parts of Alaska can access the network is another vital issue, as many portions of rural Alaska still grapple with reliable Internet connectivity.
Another part of the U.S. struggling with high-speed Internet access — necessary for streaming multimedia and digital downloads associated with most online courses — is Idaho. In a New York Times story published on Tuesday, a somewhat bleak picture of Idaho’s rural Internet speeds was painted.
“Without broadband, especially in rural areas, kids might not reach their full potential,” Jonathan Adelstein, administrator of the fed’s Rural Utilities Service, told the Times. “And we can’t expect to be competitive in a global economy.”
Rural Utilities Service is apparently one of many entities involved in a $25 million project to establish high-speed broadband to rural Idaho. But simply adding more broadband service may not be enough. The cost of broadband service is often prohibitive to rural citizens, making it more difficult to access online education. The Idaho Education Network attempts to offset this problem by offering high-speed Internet to all the state’s public schools, also allowing businesses and residents to access that service at the schools. Yet cuts in education funding have forced the program to cut back this service at some schools.
While many questions loom concerning online education (who pays for unprofitable broadband infrastructure to rural areas? what are the consequences of removing the social experience?) there is no doubt that it’s increasing in popularity and necessity. With the current U.S. education crisis being hotly debated, it’s not difficult to imagine that popularity and necessity growing even further. And so will the growing pains, especially for rural America.
Photo via D’Arcy Norman, Flickr Creative Commons
