Docstoc

Filling the Digital Divide/Research Thesis

Document Sample
Filling the Digital Divide/Research Thesis Powered By Docstoc
					Filling the Digital Divide

Christine Kowalski




June 14, 2012
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                            2




                         Filling the Digital Divide
                           Christine G. Kowalski
                         National-Louis University




                               June 14, 2012
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                      3



Table of Contents

Abstract………………………………………………………………………………………………………...........4

Chapter 1: Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………….5

Chapter 2: Literature Review………………………………………………………………………………9

Chapter 3: Methodology…………………………………………………………………………………….11

Chapter 4: Results……………………………………………………………………………………………..14

Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations…………………………………………………..28

References…………………………………………………………………………………………………………31

Appendix…………………………………………………………………………………………………………...36
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                        4



                                     Abstract




This research paper examines the progress of William F. Finkl Academy Elementary
School in Chicago in closing the Digital Divide in a low-income neighborhood. This
paper used two publications written by the mayor’s advisory of the City of Chicago
on closing the Digital Divide, The City That Networks and Digital Excellence Action
Agenda 2009 as a yardstick for measuring progress. Using surveys, observations
and interviews to collect qualitative and quantitative data, trends were analyzed
and the school’s overall progress in closing the gaps in the Digital Divide were
assessed.
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                                    5


                                    Chapter 1: Introduction

        In 2007, the City of Chicago commissioned a report on closing the Digital
Divide in Chicago. The mayor’s advisory council was created to “make
recommendations to help ensure universal digital access and to improve
community, educational, economic and other outcomes.” This council identified five
key drivers (Table 1) that would promote and achieve digital excellence in Chicago
in the aptly named publication, The City That Networks.


Key Driver                                            Explanation

Effective Network Access                              High-speed, reliable, affordable and
                                                      available everywhere
Affordable Hardware                                   Capacity to connect to the Internet and
                                                      tap into the full range of its visual and
                                                      other resources
Suitable Software                                     Meets the needs of individuals, families,
                                                      businesses and communities
Digital Education                                     Provides the training and technical
                                                      support for users to become comfortable
                                                      and proficient
Evolving Mind-Sets                                    Value learning, connecting and
                                                      communicating through technology and
                                                      that recognize the business and other
                                                      opportunities of expanding Internet
                                                      participation.
Table 1 Five Key Drivers for The City That Networks



       In 2009, the City of Chicago published the Digital Excellence Action Agenda
2009 that reiterated and elaborated on 2007’s The City That Networks five key
drivers stratagem. The action agenda outlined objectives and actions that K-12
educators and institutions should strive to meet. These action items include:
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                                 6


Action Items

            1. Provide relevant technology professional development opportunities to
            enhance teaching and learning experience

            2. Use technology to expand the availability of relevant data to the
            educational community

            3. Encourage digital literacy and twenty-first century skill development for
            the educational community

            4. Expand the use of digital media distribution throughout the educational
            community

            5. Expand access to online instructional resources to the educational
            community

Table 2 Action Items Digital Excellence Action Agenda 2009

Using these two publications as my yardstick, I went forth to research my own
school’s progress in closing the Digital Divide. I really thought I understood what the
Digital Divide was all about. According to Wikipedia, the Digital Divide “refers to
any inequalities between groups, broadly construed, in terms of access to, use of, or
knowledge of information and communication technologies.” These would include
inequalities like different socioeconomic classes and racial demographics which
prevent children and families from accessing the Internet and computing
technologies. These technologies provide opportunities for higher learning.
According to Banister and Fischer, “…research overwhelmingly demonstrates that
students of marginalized populations remain on the lower end of access to and
innovative use of current digital technologies. Accordingly, advocates of social
justice point to the disparities of resources and quality learning opportunities
experienced by students in poverty, including their exposure to dynamic technology
integration in teaching and learning.”
        As a proponent of social justice in public education, my initial perception of
the Digital Divide had been firmly rooted in the idea that higher-end technologies
would eventually “trickle-down” to poorer demographics once new technology had
been put in place. I had never even considered that the absence of professional
development could play a factor within the Digital Divide since up-to-date
technology had always been missing from the equation.
        Throughout the course of my teaching career, I have always been on the
cutting edge of technology. Because technology has always been so important in the
way I teach my students, I made some presumptions that other teachers thought it
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                            7


equally important and were honing their technology skills as well. Through various
research, I discovered that this was not the case. In fact, the findings were quite the
opposite of my initial presumptions.
        In this research paper, I intend to take a look at how my school is doing in
bridging the Digital Divide. William F. Finkl Academy is a P-8 grade public
elementary school located on the south side of Chicago. We are part of the Chicago
Public Schools District 299 and are considered a neighborhood and feeder1 school.
Our student body is currently comprised of 635 students. Our faculty consists of 25
full-time classroom teachers, three specials teachers, five special education teachers
and four teacher assistants. The following table lists some of our school
demographics:
Hispanic students                             92.9%

African-American students                   5.7%
Other students of mixed racial and ethnic   1.4%
groups
Low-income students                         98.1%
English Language Learners                   35%
Special Education/Disabilities              12%
Table 3 Demographics



William F. Finkl Academy was built in 1992. The computer lab was built in 2001
and it housed 30 PC units running Windows 2000. A classroom was converted to
accommodate 30 individual PC stations with hard-wired LAN jacks at each station.
Those same stations still exist today and resemble office cubicles with enough room
for the PC, hardware accessories and desk space to accommodate books and writing
materials. Wi-Fi was installed in the building in 2002 allowing for wireless Internet
access in classrooms that were never retrofitted for hard-wired LAN connections.
By 2003, each classroom had at least two computers in the room. One computer
was used by the teacher for data analysis, and the other was used by students. I
began my tenure as Media Specialist at Finkl Academy in 2004. Working closely
with administration, a complete overhaul of the lab began, and by 2006 brand new
Dell PC’s running Windows XP had replaced the aging computers. In 2010, we
opened a wireless laptop lab to accommodate teachers and students working on
technology projects that required more time than their slotted Technology period in
the PC lab. This was especially helpful to students who didn’t have home computers.

1   Feeder schools accept students from other, overcrowded neighborhood schools.
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                         8


Currently, we are in the midst of another overhaul, gradually swapping in newer
Windows 7 PC’s for our aging workhorse XP units in the PC lab. The challenge we
now face is the lack of uniformity among platforms. While gradual swap outs may
be economically beneficial in the short term, many students and teachers have
become frustrated by the different platforms.

       On the surface, one would presume that a Digital Divide does not exist at
Finkl Academy. After all, we have a full-time technology program in operation, two
functioning labs that run daily, and multiple computers, projectors, SmartBoards
and Elmos in classrooms. Why can’t Finkl Academy make more headway in closing
the Digital Divide? What elements are missing in a school such as Finkl Academy?
Using surveys, observations and interviews, I will be assessing my school's progress
in providing technology access and education to the low-income community we
serve. My research will examine answers to the following questions:
            Are teachers providing quality “opportunities for use”2 which extend
               beyond the computer lab?
            Is the school providing effective network access to the Internet,
               affordable hardware and suitable software for teachers and students?
            Are the school and the district providing professional development
               opportunities in technology for teachers?




2   Banister and Fischer, 2010, p. 3
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                            9


                           Chapter 2: Literature Review

        The Digital Divide originated in the 1990s and was used by the Clinton
administration as a way to describe the haves and the have-nots in America. It is a
term that describes the discrepancy between people who have access and resources
to use new information and communication tools, such as the Internet, as opposed
to people who do not have the resources to access technology. These discrepancies
commonly exist between people living in rural vs. urban settings, educated vs.
uneducated individuals, socio-economic classes and, on a global scale, with less
industrialized nations. According to the Pew Internet and American Life Project
2012, nationally, these groups make up the missing populations of people who do
not use the Internet:
     52 % of adults 65 and older (compared to 21% aged 50-64)
     30% of African-Americans
     29% of English speaking Hispanics
     55% of those without a high school diploma
     35% of households with less than $30, 000 annual income
     62% of people with disabilities
These descriptors define the majority of the population of students and parents that
make up the school community where I work. Keeping these statistics in mind, I set
out to research how my school was coping with the Digital Divide.
        My research kept uncovering a common theme. The computer, the actual
hardware, is not the divider (Amiel, 2006). It isn’t the lack of computer hardware
that is causing the real Digital Divide. Instead the divide can be attributed to the
lack of proper training, education and preparation (Park, Sinha and Chong, 2007).
Grant programs such as E-Rate, Title I and No Child Left Behind have filled many
lower income schools with computer hardware, network infrastructure, Wi-Fi
connectivity and software. So why does the Digital Divide still persist? One group of
researchers equated the problem to a question once asked by Dr. Martin Luther
King Jr., “What does it profit a man to be able to eat at an integrated lunch counter if
he doesn’t have enough money to buy a hamburger?” (Chapman, Maters and
Pedulla, 2010). Similarly, what good does all the technology serve if teachers and
administrators are not properly trained in the use of, and integration of, technology
in the curriculum?

        What does it profit students to have technology access if both
        they themselves as well as those instructing them do not have
        the training or capacity to utilize this technology efficiently?
        Differences in technology access among schools cannot be
        solved by funding alone. Instead, future research must focus
        on looking at differences in technology skills and utilization in
        high need versus non-high need schools as a bigger picture.
        (Chapman, Masters and Pedulla, 2010, p. 248)
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                          10



The idea of simply filling classrooms with computer hardware is a superficial
gesture. The ideal is for the technology to become a tool in the classroom and not
the means to an end. In order for that to happen, teachers must be at the reins of
implementation and lesson planning (Sun and Metros, 2011). Proper
implementation and integration of technology can only happen at the front end of
planning and not as an afterthought at the back end when administrative mandates
demand the dust be wiped off the computers in the classroom.

         The Digital Divide has become a denial of experiences that have shown to
increase employment and educational opportunities for low-income students
(Banister and Reinhart, 2011). Researchers have gone even further to state that
teachers who are committed to social justice can only fully grasp what sort of
reform is needed in teaching practices in order to fully integrate technology into the
curriculum. These teachers wanted to empower their students with technological
skills (Banister and Reinhart, 2011).

       Other startling elements found within the Digital Divide concern culture and
race. In the United States where U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services are all
Internet based, most Spanish-speaking households have no access to computers
(Ono and Zavodny, 2008). The only access to computers can be found at a child’s
neighborhood public school -- a school that is most likely located in a low-income
area where ELL or ESL students may not be on the receiving end of an integrated
technology curriculum.

       Banister and Fischer’s (2010) study was the most thought provoking piece of
research on the Digital Divide. How could two schools located only miles apart, both
within the same socio-economic background, be so technologically different?
Students at one school were thriving in a technology-rich environment while
students at the other school were enduring a widening Digital Divide. The
researchers found that beyond access, the Digital Divide is really about the
“opportunity for use”.3 How were teachers using the technology in a meaningful
way? How were computers and networks being maintained? Through their
research, the authors recommended that updated and maintained equipment be
present in all schools. In addition, they called for strong teacher professional
development, tech support and instructional best practices.




3   Banister and Fischer, 2010, p. 3
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                          11




      Computers utilized for more constructivist activities such as
      research, project development, or collaboration demonstrate
      challenging experiences for students. Oftentimes, students lacking
      the most resources receive little or no quality opportunities for use
      in their school settings. As these practices persist, students are being
      denied experiences that have been shown to increase their chances
      for meaningful employment and educational opportunities (Banister
      and Fischer, 2010, p. 3).


The technological success of this rural school of 600 students was rooted in their
technology-rich environment -- an environment occupied by confident and properly
trained teachers providing an integrated curricular approach to technology. The
technological failure of the urban school was due to the lack of professional
development for teachers and a poorly run technology department (Banister and
Fischer, 2010).

       Before I completed my research regarding the Digital Divide, I was of the
opinion that the lack of hardware, software and Internet access were to blame for
the gaps between the haves and the have-nots. However, the consensus of the
authors I researched came to a far different conclusion. They pointed the blame at
the lack of strong professional development for the entire school staff, not the lack
of technology. This made me reevaluate just how important a role professional
development played at Finkl Academy.
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                        12


                             Chapter 3: Methodology

        This research was conducted at William F. Finkl Academy. One hundred and
one students were surveyed in grades 5-8 using an online questionnaire that I
created through Google docs. Students who participated were almost evenly
divided across gender lines with a 49% female and 51% male contributor ratio.
Participating students followed demographic profiles found in Table 3. The surveys
took approximately 30 minutes to complete. These surveys provided me with
quantitative data measuring their technology skills and interests based on ISTE-
NETS standards.
        I created a second survey that collected quantitative data from classroom
teachers on staff. Thirty surveys were passed out to classroom teachers in PK-8th
grade but only 20completed surveys were returned. Returned teacher surveys were
completed by teachers with a range of experience from less than five years through
more than 25 years. The purpose of these surveys was to gain an understanding of
the technologies teachers are comfortable with at Finkl, their opinions about
technology in the curriculum and their technical needs. The surveys addressed five
of the key drivers found in The City That Networks (Table 1) and all the action items
from the Digital Excellence Action Agenda 2009 (Table 2). This data was inputted
into Microsoft Excel and analyzed for trends.
        Qualitative data was collected in the form of observations and interviews.
The observations of K-4 classrooms using technology in the classroom provided a
better idea of how teachers used technology with their students outside of the
computer lab. I also examined if the skills they learned in the lab transferred to
daily classroom computer use specifically addressing the five key drivers in Table 1.
Finally, I interviewed three staff teachers who have been employed at Finkl since it
opened in 1992. These teachers actually witnessed the evolution of technology at
the school and their opinions added credence to my research. The first teacher had
21 years’ experience and taught Kindergarten, while teachers two and three had 23
years of experience and taught 4th and 7th grades respectively.
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                           13


                Method                     Source                        Timeframe
        1.      Surveys                        1. Ten classrooms         May 8-15
                                                   from 5th-8th grades
                                                   at Finkl Academy
                                               2. Twenty teachers
                                                   on staff at Finkl
                                                   Academy (40 were
                                                   passed out, 20
                                                   were returned)
        2.      Observations               Six K-4 classrooms at         May 16-23
                                           Finkl Academy
        3.      Interviews                 Informal interviews with      May 8-15
                                           3 teachers employed at
                                           Finkl since it opened in
                                           1992
Table 4 Qualitative and Quantitative Data Collection
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                          14


                                   Chapter 4: Results

       The purpose of this research was to assess my school’s progress in closing
the Digital Divide by exploring answers to the following three questions by
surveying, observing and interviewing students and teachers at William F. Finkl
Academy:

                Are teachers providing quality, integrated technology “opportunities
                 for use”4 in and out of the computer lab?
                Is the school providing effective network access to the Internet,
                 affordable hardware and suitable software for teachers and students?
                Are the school and the district providing professional development
                 opportunities in technology for teachers?

Surveys:

        Student surveys were used to collect quantitative data on their technological
skills and knowledge of content area. Student surveys took place in the computer
lab over a week’s time. Students answered 20 questions which asked them to rate
their experience, knowledge and skill level within the six ISTE-NETS standards:
Social, Ethical and Human (identifying web bias and citing sources), Research Tools
(internet search engines, databases), Problem Solving and Decision-making
(organizing information, brainstorming), Technology Communication Tools (Skype,
blogging, wikis and web sites), Technology Productivity Tools (desktop publishing,
word processing, presentations), and Basic Operations (turning on the computer,
connecting peripherals). Students were prompted to read the question and choose
one of the following answers: “I don’t know how to do this at all”, “sometimes I need
help to do this”, “I feel comfortable complete this by myself” or “I can teach this to
others”.




4   Banister and Fischer, 2010, p. 3
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                          15



                  Social, Ethical and Human
 45.00%
 40.00%
 35.00%                                           41.50%
 30.00%                               33.50%
 25.00%
 20.00%
 15.00%                     22%
                                                              Social, Ethical and
 10.00%
  5.00%                                                       Human-
              4.25%
  0.00%
              I don't Sometimes Completing Teach it to
            know how need help on my own others
           to do this at
                 all
Graph 1 Identifying web bias and citing sources




                           Research Tools
 45%
 40%
                                                  41%
 35%
                                      35%
 30%
 25%
 20%
                         19%                                  Research Tools
 15%
 10%
  5%
             6%
  0%
        I don't know Sometimes Completing Teach it to
          how to do need help on my own     others
          this at all
Graph 2 Internet search engines and informational databases
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                      16



              Problem Solving and Decision
                        Making
 45%
 40%
 35%                                 39%
 30%
 25%
 20%                     26%                    25%
 15%                                                      Problem Solving and
 10%                                                      Decision Making
  5%        10%
  0%
           I don't    Sometimes Completing Teach it to
         know how need help on my own        others
        to do this at
              all
Graph 3 Organizing information and brainstorming ideas




          Technology Communication Tools
 45.00%
 40.00%
                                               42.00%
 35.00%
 30.00%
 25.00%
                                    27.00%
 20.00%
                         21.50%
 15.00%
 10.00%                                                  Technology
  5.00%       9.50%                                      Communication Tools
  0.00%




Graph 4 Skype, blogging, wikis and web sites
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                                 17



                  Technology Productivity Tools
 40.00%
 35.00%
 30.00%                                          34.00%

 25.00%                              29.00%
                         27.00%
 20.00%
 15.00%                                                          Technology Productivity
                                                                 Tools
 10.00%
             10.00%
  5.00%
  0.00%
              I don't    Sometimes Completing Teach it to
            know how need help on my own        others
           to do this at
                 all
Graph 5 Desktop publishing, word processing, and presentations




                           Basic Operations
 50%
 45%
 40%                                                  44%
 35%
 30%
                                        31%
 25%
 20%                                                                Basic Operations
 15%                      20%
 10%
  5%
             5%
  0%
        I don't know Sometimes      Completing     Teach it to
          how to do   need help     on my own        others
          this at all
Graph 6 Turning on the computer, connecting peripherals

        Teacher surveys were conducted to gain a better understanding of how
technology was used and dispersed throughout the school. To truly assess my
school’s progress in closing the Digital Divide, I needed to collect quantitative data
about how teachers used technology, how they felt about technology and if they
were receiving enough training. Teacher surveys were divided into four parts. The
first part of the survey asked about general technology usage. Questions asked
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                         18


teachers to rate their proficiency at a specific technology competency as well as the
importance it has in their classroom. Table 5 tabulates the averages of their
responses based on a 1-5 scale. Level of Proficiency: 1-very weak, 2-moderately
weak, 3-adequate, 4-moderately strong, 5-very strong. Level of Importance: 1-none,
2-minor, 3-average, 4-strong, 5-necessary.

Competency                                             Proficiency    Importance

Learning how to use a new software                     2.8            3.6
Using the internet for general searching               4.4            4.8
Searching for content specific instruction on the      4.4            5
internet
Acting as a guide for students when researching        4              5
on the internet
Troubleshooting problems that occur when               2.6            4
using tech
Using software productivity tools                      3.8            5
Teaching/sharing with others how to use tech           3.4            4
Integrating tech into daily lessons                    3              3.6
Using tech in support of curriculum standards          3.4            3
Designing activities that will integrate tech          2.6            3.2
Locating learning opportunities for tech skills        2.2            3.2
Creating and maintaining web pages                     1.2            2.6
Recognizing the ethical use of technology              3.6            3.4
Table 5 Competencies




        The next section of the teacher survey asked teachers about specific
technologies they used in their classrooms and the frequency with which they used
them. Items were divided into three sections: software usage, Internet usage and
hardware usage. Teachers were asked to respond what their frequency of use was
in the following measures: never, yearly, monthly, weekly or daily. Results were
tabulated and expressed in the following graphs 7, 8 and 9.
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                                   19



                                                  Software Usage
                        20


                        18                                                Word Processing


                        16                                                PowerPoint

                        14
                                                                          Desktop Publishing
  Number of Responses




                        12
                                                                          Inspiration
                        10


                         8                                                Test Preparation


                         6                                                Spreadsheets

                         4
                                                                          Web Design
                         2
                                                                          Management programs for student
                         0                                                data
                             Never   Yearly   Monthly    Weekly   Daily
                                              Software

Graph 7 What kind of software do you use and how often?
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                               20



                                           Internet Usage
 20

 18
                                                                          School Web Site
 16
                                                                          Internet for personal research
 14

 12                                                                       Internet for developing lesson
                                                                          plans/ideas
 10
                                                                          Email communication
  8
                                                                          Internet search engines
  6

  4

  2

  0
          Never         Yearly       Monthly       Weekly         Daily
Graph 8 How often do you use the Internet and in what capacity?
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                         21



                                         Hardware Usage
 25



 20
                                                                                   Computer

                                                                                   VCR/VHS Tapes
 15
                                                                                   DVD Player

                                                                                   Projector
 10
                                                                                   SmartBoard

                                                                                   Digital Cameras
  5                                                                                (still)
                                                                                   Digital video
                                                                                   cameras
                                                                                   ipods

  0
          Never           Yearly         Monthly         Weekly            Daily
Graph 9 What kinds of hardware do you use and how often do you use them?
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                                                   22


       Section three of the teacher survey asked questions about teacher opinions
and attitudes toward technology. The questions specifically asked for honest
opinions about different technologies, their role in education and the future of
technology in the classroom. Teachers were presented with statements about
students and their Internet and technology usage and were asked to respond with
one of the following measures: strongly disagree, disagree, agree and strongly agree.
The results were tabulated in graphs 10 and 11.


                                        When using the Internet...
 abundance of unrealiable sources is disturbing

                   plagiarism is a bigger problem

                      there is more collaboration

                students go to inappropriate sites

                    students are more motivated

             there are more discipline problems

     students create products that show higher
                 levels of learning

                                                      0       2       4      6       8        10   12        14   16       18
                          students
                                                                                                                abundance
                           create        there are                      students go
                                                          students are                            plagiarism is     of
                       products that       more                              to     there is more
                                                             more                                   a bigger    unrealiable
                        show higher      discipline                    inappropriat collaboration
                                                           motivated                                problem      sources is
                          levels of      problems                          e sites
                                                                                                                disturbing
                          learning
     Strongly disagree        0              4                 0            3             0             0              1
     Disagree                  4             16                0            12            4             3              5
     Agree                     4             0                 4            5             8             17             9
     Strongly agree            12            0                16            0             8             0              5

Graph 10 Using the Internet with instruction
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                     23



                         Technology is unreliable

  Technology is useful in managing student data,
           such as attendance and grades
  I learn new technologies best by figuring them
                      out myself
 Technology is a good tool for collaboration with
      other teachers when building unit plans

      Technology has left many teachers behind
                                                                                    Strongly Agree
 There is too much technological change coming                                      Agree
  too fast without enough support for teachers
           School systems expect us to learn new                                    Disagree
            technologies without formal training                                    Strongly Disagree
    Students are more knowledgeable than I am
             when it comes to technology

    Technology has changed the way that I teach

  Most technology would do little to improve my
                  ability to teach
 Electronic media will replace printed text within
                    five years

                                                     0   5   10   15   20      25
Graph 11 I believe statements



       The last section of the teacher survey asked teachers to rate which
technological items were most in need. On a scale of 1(less urgent) to 5(more
urgent, teachers considered whether software, hardware, Internet access or
professional development was the highest priority. Results were averaged for each
item.
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                      24


I need…..                                    Less Urgent…………………………More Urgent
                                                1………………………………………………...5
More time to learn to use software                           3.2
More time to integrate technology into                       3.6
my curriculum
More training to use technology                              4.4
More support from administration when                        4.2
it comes to my technology needs
More technical support to keep                               3.4
computers and software running
Access to more student computers                             3.4
More curriculum-based software                               3.4
More reliable access to the internet for                      3
students
More opportunities to collaborate with                       4.6
colleagues on how to use technology in
my discipline
Faster access to the internet                                 2
More interaction with my media                                4
specialist/instructional technology
specialist for technology needs
Options for professional development in                      4.8
the areas of technology
Tools to help me stay current on new                         4.8
technological trends
More equipment to integrate technology                       4.4
in my classroom
Help aligning the integration of                             4.4
technology with the implementation of
state standards
Parents to support my efforts to integrate                    4
technology in the classroom
Table 6 Teacher Technology needs




Observations:

      Classroom observations took place in six classrooms ranging from
Kindergarten through 4th Grade and during lessons in the following content areas:
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                          25


Reading, Math, Social Studies and Writing. Observations lasted for thirty minutes
and concentrated on:
    Observing if any type of technology was present in the classroom
    Observing if any type of technology was used during the lesson
    Observing how the teacher integrated the technology into his/her lesson

Collecting this qualitative data helped me to analyze if the “opportunities of use”
idea is being used outside of the computer period and lab. Our school also uses
Webb’s Depth of Knowledge charts for lesson planning. Depth of Knowledge is the
degree of depth or complexity of knowledge that standards and assessments
require. There are four DOK indicators for lesson activities: 1-Recall, 2-Skills
practice, 3-Strategic thinking, 4-Extended thinking. Technology was present in
every classroom. Each classroom had one computer for the teacher as well as 1 or 2
computers used for student center5 work. Elmos and projectors were located in
each classroom except for both Kindergartens who shared a SmartBoard. The
largest technology-to-student ratio was 32:1 in second grade. The smallest ratio
was 15:1 in 1st Grade where the teacher worked with a smaller group of students
and accessed the Internet.


Class   Site   Activity Subject            DOK     Tech in       Notes
                                           level   use
K       105    Whole     Reading           1       None       Observed during
               group                                          story
                                                              time/computer in
                                                              class used for
                                                              ‘centers’
K       103    Whole     Math              2       SmartBoard Teacher and
               group                                          student activity at
                                                              SB/counting using
                                                              finger touch/1
                                                              computer present
                                                              for teacher and
                                                              student use-
                                                              centers
1       108    Small     Reading           2       Projector/ Small group work
               group                               computer   with interactive
                                                              story
                                                              maps/presented
                                                              through
                                                              ReadWriteThink-

5Stations around the classroom that the teacher sets up for students to work in
either small group or individual activities.
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                      26


                                                               complete on
                                                               worksheet
2        104    Whole       Math             1    Projector    Whole group
                class                             Elmo         activity with
                                                               Elmo/math
                                                               workbook page on
                                                               Elmo/students
                                                               come up to fill in
                                                               answers on screen
3        207    Whole       Social Studies   1    Computer/    Whole class
                class                             projector    research on
                                                               money/foreign
                                                               currency
4        116    Whole       Writing/Project 2     Computer/    Whole class
                class                             Projector    demonstration on
                                                               writing/creating
                                                               PIE graphics later
                                                               in lab/Persuade,
                                                               Inform/Entertain
Table 7 Classroom Technology Observations




Interviews:

Interviews were conducted over a one-week period with three teachers who have
been working at Finkl Academy since the day it opened. Five questions were
prepared in advance based on the action items found in Table 2. Interviews were
conducted one-on-one ranging from 30-60 minutes. Teacher 1 was a Kindergarten
teacher who has been teaching for 21 years. Teacher 2 was a 4th Grade teacher who
has been teaching for 23 years. Finally, Teacher 3 is a 7th Grade teacher who has
been teaching for 23 years. I chose these three teachers because they collectively
witnessed the evolution of technology at Finkl Academy.
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                           27


                       Teacher 1             Teacher 2            Teacher 3
1. Does the school     -They provide PD’s    -The only            -It has gotten
provide relevant       but they are never    technology PD’s      better over the
technology             in technology. We     I’ve been to is      years but I never
professional           never get the         when they roll out   see notifications
development            choice to choose      a new system         about tech PD’s.
opportunities to       the PD’s we want      through CPS.         They only ever sign
enhance teaching       to go to.             Gradebook, Impact    me up for Reading
and learning                                 all had PD’s. How    PD’s.
experience?                                  to use equipment?
                                             I rely on you for
                                             that.
2. Does the school     -Yes. And we have     -Yes. Sometimes I    -Yes. It seems like
use technology to      a lot of support      feel like there is   all we deal with is
expand the             helping us figure     too much emphasis    data!”
availability to        out spreadsheets      on data and not
relevant data of the   and data from         enough emphasis
educational            DiBELS.               on teaching.
community?


3. Does the school     - Wouldn’t say they -I don’t think         -Yes, it is definitely
encourage digital      encourage it but it encourage is the       encouraged. There
literacy and           is expected. There  right word. Push       would be no
twenty-first century   would be no way I   maybe? So many         conceivable way of
skill development      could get through   new programs and       getting through the
for the educational    the day without     initiatives are        day without
community?             using technological thrown at us that      technology.
                       skills. I’m just    you literally have     Grades,
                       lucky that I can    to have 21st           attendance, lesson
                       figure stuff out on century skills to      planning are all
                       my own.             keep everything        internet based.
                                           straight.
4.Does the school      -Yes. I think we    -Yes. We have          -Yes. But I wish
expand the use of      are a lucky school  definitely come a      the equipment
digital media          to have 2 labs and  long way from the      were more up to
distribution           the computers that days of Title I         date. We just got
throughout the         we have. I know of trailers in the         Elmo’s! How long
educational            schools around this school yard with       have they been out
community?             area with nothing. Apple IIe’s running     for? I mean,
                       Even today.”        Reader Rabbit.         shouldn’t we be
                                                                  trying to buy
                                                                  iPads?
5. Does the school     -I think CPS buys a   -I don’t think so.   -CPS tends to buy
expand access to       lot of resources      Any resources I      resources that
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                                   28


online instructional     without really            use, I have found     teachers don’t
resources to the         testing to see if it is   on my own online.     need. Ironically
educational              worth it. It can be       Anything CPS          many of the
community?               very wasteful. The        offers is usually a   resources aren’t
                         best resource they        waste of time (and    even created by
                         purchased were all        money).               teachers. Just so
                         the databases for                               much waste.
                         research.
Table 8 Teacher Interviews
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                           29


                   Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations

        Is Finkl Academy closing the Digital Divide? The data derived from
observations, surveys and interviews indicates that the school is definitely moving
forward in closing the gap but still requires improvements in key driver and action
agenda items. This study identified four out of the five key drivers in Table 1 as
strengths that Finkl has achieved in digital excellence. These strengths include:
effective network access, suitable software, digital education and evolving mindsets.
The one weakness discovered was affordable hardware. The study also identified
Finkl moving forward on action items in Table 2, especially items 2, 3 and 4 where
participants in the study identified data, digital literacy and media distribution as
strengths. The weaknesses uncovered included items 1 and 5 which promote
teacher professional development and online instructional resources made available
to staff.

        Student surveys indicated strong trends which revealed the student body of
Finkl Academy was receiving a digital education providing the training and technical
support for users to become comfortable and proficient with technology. A majority
of students indicated that they were comfortable completing ISTE NETS skill items
on their own or able to teach skills to others. Upon further analysis of raw survey
data, trends indicated that students who answered “I don’t know” or “I sometimes
need help completing this” were relatively new to Finkl Academy having spent less
than two years at the school (Graph 1-6, Graph 12).

        Teacher surveys indicated that teachers were indeed using technology on a
daily basis in their classrooms either incorporating it in lessons or actively using it
for data collection, lesson planning or word processing. In Table 5, teachers
indicated that the Internet, acting as a guide for students on the Internet, and using
productivity tools were important skills in the classroom. Internet usage far
outweighed software usage. Hardware usage was restricted to computer and
projector use. While teacher use of technology is definitely moving in the right
direction, the data suggested that teachers were using technology primarily for data
collection, student management and research. True “opportunities for use”6 were
mistaken for technology use.

       Simply using a computer and a projector during a lesson does not constitute
true integration. Students are not creating products outside of the computer lab and



6   Banister and Fischer, 2010, p. 3
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                          30


teachers are simply using computers as demonstration tools. This type of
integration can only come about through quality professional development.

        Teacher “I believe” statements and “I need” statements (Graph 11 and Table
6) indicate that teachers feel that professional development in technology is
urgently needed. Teacher response trends specify that technology is changing too
quickly and they are not receiving enough training. A majority of teachers believed
that the district is not providing formal training for individual teachers and that
student knowledge of how to use technology exceeds theirs. Teachers want the
options for professional development specifically in the areas of technology and
more help in integrating technology to standards. Teachers rated faster Internet
access and software on the low end of the urgency list, recognizing the fast, reliable
Wi-Fi and internet connections throughout the school, along with the myriad of
programs the school has provided for teacher and student use.

        Teacher observations (Table 7) provided more evidence that teachers were
not providing quality “opportunities for use”7 in the classroom. On a positive note,
teachers are using technology in their lessons. Unfortunately, using computers and
projectors as demonstration tools is a far cry from students interacting and
producing technology products demonstrating 21st Century skills. Observed
lessons were rated with a DOK level. DOK (Depth of Knowledge) is what Finkl
Academy uses as performance indicators in observations and lesson plans.
Observed lessons stayed within DOK levels 1-2 (recall, skill/concept practice) and
did not move into levels 3-4 (strategic thinking, extended thinking). With the
district’s current push into common core standards and unit planning, teachers
need to use technology in order to move students into knowledge and skill set levels
which go beyond recall level. Students must be able to use concepts and skills and
move into problem-solving mindsets.

       Teacher interviews reiterated the need for more professional development
and the need for the school to purchase updated equipment. Participants in the
interviews remembered a time at Finkl when no technology was present and agreed
that the school has made great gains in promoting digital literacy among faculty and
students. But they were also in agreement that more emphasis is placed on data
management than true integration of technology in lessons. Teachers agreed that
the need for more professional development is needed.




7   Banister and Fischer, 2010, p. 3
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                          31


        My recommendations for Finkl Academy would be to focus on providing
professional development for teachers in integration of technology. Creating in-
house courses and training modules would increase teacher integration of
technology into individual lessons on a daily basis. It would also provide students
with more opportunities for higher-level thinking activities that are mandated by
district standards. Professional development will aid teachers’ understanding of
how to move beyond using technology as demonstration tools and in turn move
technology out of isolation in the computer lab and into day-to-day activities. This
will also aid in moving students who responded “I don’t know how to do this” and “I
need help in completing this” toward being able to complete projects and activities
on their own in a faster amount of time. Since the correlation was made between
the amount of time students spend at Finkl and their technology skills, it stands to
reason that exposing new students with no technological background to as much
technology as possible in the classroom will increase their tech skills faster. Relying
on the single forty-minute computer period per week places newer students at a
disadvantage in completing integrated projects.

       Through professional development activities, teachers would acquire better
educational resources to facilitate technology integration. Conversations need to be
started across grade clusters specifically focusing on technology integration. In
doing so, teachers will be better prepared to close the Digital Divide.
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                              32


                                       References

G Amiel, T. (2006). Mistaking Computers for Technology: Technology Literacy and
the Digital Divide. AACE Journal, 14(3), 235-256.
       The researcher ‘s main focus of research was to show that the computer is
       not the ‘divider’ in the Digital Divide. Through personal experiences and
       summarized research, the author found that the debate over the Digital
       Divide must focus on people not devices. Well-trained teachers, expert
       support and social resources from the community will increase students’
       ability to comprehend the significance and role of tech tools in their lives and
       community. This article helped to frame my own field study by helping me
       understand that no matter how much monies or how many devices are
       acquired for a school, without good teaching, the Digital Divide still persists.

Banister, S., & Fischer, J. (2010). Overcoming the Digital Divide: The Story of an
Urban Middle School. Mid-Western Educational Researcher, 23(2), 2-9.
       This research centered on an intriguing question. How could 2 schools, miles
       apart, both within the same socio-economic background, be so
       technologically different? Students at one school were thriving in a
       technologically rich environment while students at another school were
       enduing a widening ‘Digital Divide’. The researchers found that beyond
       access, the Digital Divide is really about the ‘opportunity for use’. How were
       teachers using the technology in a meaningful way? How were computers
       and networks being maintained? Through research completed, the authors
       called for not only up to date and maintained equipment to be present in
       schools but for good teacher professional development, tech support and
       instructional best practices. This article helped me to realize I needed to
       observe and collect data about teachers and their uses of technology in the
       classroom or was that solely left to me?

Banister, S., & Vannata Reinhart, R. (2011). TPCK for Impact: Classroom Teaching
Practices that Promote Social Justice and Narrow the Digital Divide in an Urban
Middle School. Computers In The Schools, 28(1), 5-26.
       This study is a continuation of the last article where the researchers took
       their classroom observations and turned them into numerical data. Using
       methods of measure called LSP (Long Stop Protocol), QSP (Quick Stop
       Protocol), the researchers used complex formulas of assessing good tech
       teaching, lesson planning and integration. Though somewhat complex and at
       times disturbing ‘data’ (can good teaching really be reduced to a
       mathematical formula?), the researchers provide compelling evidence for
       proper teacher training in technology. This article helped me frame my
       research questions.


Chapman, L., Masters, J., & Pedulla, J. (2010). Do Digital Divisions Still Persist in
Schools? Access to Technology and Technical Skills of Teachers in High Needs
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                           33


Schools in the United States of America. Journal Of Education For Teaching:
International Research And Pedagogy, 36(2), 239-249.
       The authors of this article questioned if the Digital Divide still persisted in
       schools. From the beginning, they insisted they were not intent on
       answering the question so much as trying to correlate whether Title I schools
       were more technologically advanced (hardware and skill wise) than non-
       Title I schools. Through their research they discovered that even the poorest
       schools that purchased new equipment with Title I and E-Rate funds lacked
       basic technology skills. They had the tools but not the skills. The authors
       called for better teacher training, technology professional development for
       staff and highly qualified technology educators to work on staff. They used a
       great quote from Dr. Martin Luther King, “What does it profit a man to be
       able to eat at an integrated lunch counter if he doesn’t have enough money to
       buy a hamburger?”

City of Chicago. (n.d.). The City That Networks. The City that Networks. Retrieved May
21, 2012, from
www.cityofchicago.org/dam/city/depts/doit/supp_info/DEI/CityThatNetworks.pdf

City of Chicago. (n.d.). Digital Excellence Action Agenda. City of Chicago. Retrieved
May 21, 2012, from
http://www.cityofchicago.org/dam/city/depts/doit/supp_info/DEI/Digital_Excellence_Ac
tion_Agenda_2009.pdf

Jackson, L. A., von Eye, A., Biocca, F. A., Barbatsis, G., Zhao, Y., & Fitzgerald, H. E.
(2006). Does Home Internet Use Influence the Academic Performance of Low-
Income Children?. Developmental Psychology, 42(3), 429-435.
       The authors of this article tried to correlate home internet usage among low-
       income students and their respective academic performance. This study
       intrigued me because their results seemed to indicate that reading scores
       actually went up on standardized tests when students increased their
       internet usage to school and home. One of my sub questions in my study
       questions whether correlations between standardized test scores and
       internet usage can be made. The authors conducted their own research over
       an entire school year, gathering standardized test scores, GPA’s and
       conducting surveys on Internet usage across gender, racial and age lines.

Mckenzie, J (1999). The technology in my life survey. Retrieved October 22, 2007,
from The Educational Technology Journal Web site: http://fno.org/techlife.html


Ono, H., & Zavodny, M. (2008). Immigrants, English Ability and the Digital Divide.
Social Forces, 86(4), 1455-1479.
        Using their own research and summarizing research by other authors, Ono
        and Zavodny examined IT access in the United States between natives and
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                           34


       immigrants, concluding that immigrants, especially those with limited
       English capabilities are less likely to have access to and use a computer and
       the internet. The immigrant-native gap is larger among Spanish speaking
       households. I chose this article because the student population at my school
       is 98% Hispanic, 35% of which are ELL. This article addressed some
       interesting statistics and concluded that a better ability to speak English is
       associated with more access to the internet and technology.

Park, E., Sinha, H., & Chong, J. (2007). Beyond Access: An Analysis of the Influence of
the E-Rate Program in Bridging the Digital Divide in American Schools. Journal Of
Information Technology Education, 6387-406.
       The authors of this article examined the effects of the E-Rate program and
       technology access in low-income American schools. The findings reiterated
       much of the previous research already mentioned. Completing their own
       research, the authors found that E-Rate funded schools to improve their
       infrastructures, build networks and servers and put computers in the
       classroom. E-Rate aided schools financially to install technology in the
       classroom but the lack of technology savvy teachers still left many schools
       behind more affluent ones. This article provided some interesting statistics
       on how the Digital Divide actually widened after the ‘first wave’ of grants
       rolled out. As the E-Rate application system became more complex (and no
       schools had tech savvy teachers on staff) poorer, low-income schools,
       regardless of urban or rural setting, just stopped applying.

Student Technology Survey Questions. (n.d.). Californiaschools.net Web Sites. Retrieved
 June 13, 2012, from http://californiaschools.net/ud/year3/studenttech.htm

Sun, J., & Metros, S. E. (2011). The Digital Divide and Its Impact on Academic
Performance. Online Submission,
         The authors of this article tried to examine the relationships (if any) between
         technology usage, socio-economic status and academic performance.
         Summarizing many different types of research, the authors found that real
         positive measurable data can be found between technology usage and
         math/science scores. These authors reiterated that teaching, and not blindly
         installing computers in the classroom is the key to closing the divide. Quality
         technology teaching and professional development is paramount in
         instructing students in higher level digital skills needed to work and live in
         the 21st century.

Zickuhr, K., & Smith, A. (2012, April 13). Digital Differences. Pew Internet and
American Life Project. Retrieved May 21, 2012, from
http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Digital-differences/Main-Report/Internet-
activities-Those-already-online-are-doing-more.aspx
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE   35
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                                    36


                                                                   Appendix

A: Graph 12 Student Surveys


                                          How Long Have Students Been At Finkl?

                                     more than 4 years
 I have been at Finkl Academy for:




                                               3 years



                                               2 years



                                                1 year



                                       less than a year




                                                          0   10     20       30   40   50   60
Graph 12 Length of time at Finkl Academy
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                       37



B: Interview Tool-Action Agenda Questions

   1. Do you think the school provides relevant technology professional
      development opportunities to enhance teaching and learning experiences?




   2. Do you think the school uses technology to expand the availability to relevant
      data to the staff?




   3. Do you think the school encourages digital literacy and twenty-first century
      skill development for the staff?




   4. Do you believe the school expands the use of digital media distribution
      throughout the staff?




   5. Do you believe the school expands access to online instructional resources to
      the staff?
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                                                          38


C: Observation Tool – Using Technology in the Classrooms

Setting and Circumstances:

Grade Level___________                                   Observation Length____________________

Site______________________________________________

Ratio of students to device_______________________________________


Activity:   ____Individual _____Small Group _____Whole Class _____Student Presentation ______Teacher Presentation

Curriculum areas addressed:                ____Math ____Science ____Reading ____Writing ____Social Studies ___Other

DOK Level: ___________________________
Technologies in use: ____Computer ___Internet ____Camera ___IWB ____Other

Software in Use:_____________________________________________________________________



Notes:
     FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                           39

     D: Tech Survey-2012

     Introduction
     The purpose of this survey is to gain a better understanding of the technological
     skills and knowledge of the teachers at Finkl Academy. Additionally, a second
     purpose is to understand your technological needs.

     As a result of this survey I hope to gain an understanding of the technologies you are
     comfortable with and the experiences, which help you, become proficient at using
     technology.
     Section 1: General Technology Use in Education
     The questions in this section ask about general technology use. Please read each
     statement and rate your skill and the importance you place on each of the tasks by
     circling the number that corresponds to your response.

            Level of Proficiency                       Level of Importance
            1 Very weak                                1 None
            2 Moderately weak                          2 Minor
            3 Adequate                                 3 Average
            4 Moderately strong                        4 Strong
            5 Very strong                              5 Necessary


                     Competency                           Proficiency           Importance
Learning how to use a new piece of software.            1 2 3 4 5             1 2 3 4 5
Using the internet for general searching                1 2 3 4 5             1 2 3 4 5
Searching for content specific instruction on the       1 2 3 4 5             1 2 3 4 5
internet
Acting as a guide for students when researching on      1   2   3    4   5    1   2   3    4   5
the internet
Troubleshooting problems that occur when using          1   2   3    4   5    1   2   3    4   5
technology
Using software productivity tools (word processing,     1   2   3    4   5    1   2   3    4   5
database, spreadsheets, presentation tools, etc.)
Teaching or sharing with others how to use              1   2   3    4   5    1   2   3    4   5
technology
Integrating technology into daily lessons               1   2   3    4   5    1   2   3    4   5
Using technology in support of curriculum standards     1   2   3    4   5    1   2   3    4   5
Designing activities that will integrate technology     1   2   3    4   5    1   2   3    4   5
Locating learning opportunities needed to advance       1   2   3    4   5    1   2   3    4   5
my technology skills
Creating and maintaining web pages                      1   2   3    4   5    1   2   3    4   5
Recognizing the ethical use of technology               1   2   3    4   5    1   2   3    4   5
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                     40


Section 2: Specific Technology Use in the Classroom
The questions in this section ask about the specific technologies you use in your
classroom and the frequency with which you use them. Please read a description of
each technology and rate the amount of time you spend working with that
technology in your classroom by placing an x in the appropriate box.

      Technology Description           Never      Yearly    Monthly     Weekly      Daily
SOFTWARE
Word Processing
PowerPoint
Desktop Publishing
Inspiration
Test Preparation (Scantron)
Spreadsheets
Web Design
Management programs for student
data (IMPACT)
INTERNET
School Web Site
Internet for personal research
Internet for developing lesson
plans/ideas
Email communication
Internet search engines
HARDWARE
Computer
VCR/VHS tapes
DVD Player
Projector
SmartBoard
Digital cameras (still)
Digital video cameras
i-pods
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                          41



Section 3. Opinions and Attitudes Toward Technology

The questions in this section ask for your honest opinions about different
technologies, their role in education, and the future of different technologies. Place
an x in the appropriate box.

             Statement                  Strongly      Agree     Disagree     Strongly
                                         Agree                               Disagree
When using the internet…
Student create products that show
higher levels of learning
There are more discipline problems
Students are more motivated
Students go to inappropriate sites
There is more student collaboration
Plagiarism becomes a bigger
problem
The abundance of unreliable
sources is disturbing
I believe…
Electronic media will replace
printed text within five years
Most technology would do little to
improve my ability to teach
Technology has changed the way
that I teach
Students are more knowledgeable
than I am when it comes to
technology
School systems expect us to learn
new technologies without formal
training
There is too much technological
change coming too fast without
enough support for teachers
Technology has left many teachers
behind
Technology is a good tool for
collaboration with other teachers
when building unit plans
I learn new technologies best by
figuring them out myself
Technology is useful in managing
  FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                     42


  student data, such as attendance
  and grades
  Technology is unreliable




  Section 4. Areas of Improvement / Technical Needs
  The questions in this section are designed to determine what your technology needs
  are both school-wide and in your classroom.

                                           Less Urgent ……………………..……..More
   Urgent
I Need…                                       1      2         3        4         5
More time to learn to use software            1      2         3        4         5
More time to integrate technology into
                                               1     2         3        4         5
my curriculum
More training to use technology                1     2         3        4         5
More support from administration
                                               1     2         3        4         5
when it comes to my technology needs
More technical support to keep
                                               1     2         3        4         5
computers and software running
Access to more student computers               1     2         3        4         5
More curriculum-based software                 1     2         3        4         5
More reliable access to the internet for
                                               1     2         3        4         5
students
More opportunities to collaborate with
colleagues on how to use technology in         1     2         3        4         5
my discipline
Faster access to the internet                  1     2         3        4         5
More interaction with my media
specialist/instructional technology            1     2         3        4         5
specialist for technology needs
Options for professional development
                                               1     2         3        4         5
in the areas of technology
Tools to help me stay current on new
                                               1     2         3        4         5
technological trends
More equipment to integrate
                                               1     2         3        4         5
technology in my classroom.
Help aligning the integration of
technology with the implementation of          1     2         3        4         5
state standards
Parents to support my efforts to               1     2         3        4         5
  FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                                                 43


integrate technology in the classroom
  E: Raw Data from Student Surveys

  Summary See complete responses
  I am a
   Male   52 51%
   Female 49 49%
  I am in
   5th Grade   38 38%
   6th Grade   0 0%
   7th Grade   34 34%
   8th Grade   29 29%
  I have been at Finkl Academy for:
   less than a year (new)   15 15%
   1 year                   9 9%
   2 years                  11 11%
   3 years                  14 14%
   more than 4 years        52 51%
  I use a variety of technology tools (such as websites, computers, SMART phones, digital cameras) for
  school projects
    I don't know how to do this at all                                       4 4%
    I sometimes need help to do this                                         28 28%
    I feel comfortable doing this by myself                                  23 23%
    I know this well enough that I could show someone else how to do this    46 46%
  I correctly give credit (citation) for technology sources of information (such as text, image, movie, sound,
  music or internet web sites).
    I don't know how to do this at all                                       4 4%
    I sometimes need help to do this                                         27 27%
    I feel comfortable doing this by myself                                  39 39%
    I know this well enough that I could show someone else how to do this    31 31%
  I identify the possible bias of a website (bias means opinions, point of view) and check the authenticity of
  an online source before using it (authenticity means truthfulness or trustworthiness)
    I don't know how to do this at all                                       4 4%
    I sometimes need help to do this                                         32 32%
    I feel comfortable doing this by myself                                  31 31%
    I know this well enough that I could show someone else how to do this    34 34%
  I use technology tools to brainstorm ideas or organize information.
   I don't know how to do this at all                                        6 6%
   I sometimes need help to do this                                          25 25%
   I feel comfortable doing this by myself                                   40 40%
   I know this well enough that I could show someone else how to do this     30 30%
  I use the internet to search for information, compare resources, and summarize the information to create
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                                                44


presentations on classroom projects.
 I don't know how to do this at all                                        6    6%
 I sometimes need help to do this                                          19   19%
 I feel comfortable doing this by myself                                   37   37%
 I know this well enough that I could show someone else how to do this     39   39%
I follow our school's Acceptable Use Policy. (Acceptable Use Policy means the written rules for how
technologies may be used)
 I don't know how to do this at all                                        4    4%
 I sometimes need help to do this                                          19   19%
 I feel comfortable doing this by myself                                   27   27%
 I know this well enough that I could show someone else how to do this     51   50%
I can define a problem, develop questions for investigations, search for relevant resources, and assess the
accuracy of the information I find on the internet.
 I don't know how to do this at all                                        9    9%
 I sometimes need help to do this                                          30   30%
 I feel comfortable doing this by myself                                   35   35%
 I know this well enough that I could show someone else how to do this     27   27%
I use multiple searching techniques including search engines like Google, and other sources like
Encyclopedia Britannica, and CPS databases.
 I don't know how to do this at all                                        6    6%
 I sometimes need help to do this                                          19   19%
 I feel comfortable doing this by myself                                   32   32%
 I know this well enough that I could show someone else how to do this     44   44%
I plan and manage my work activites to develop a solution and complete a project.
 I don't know how to do this at all                                        5 5%
 I sometimes need help to do this                                          23 23%
 I feel comfortable doing this by myself                                   42 42%
 I know this well enough that I could show someone else how to do this     31 31%
I use the internet to communicate with my family or friends.
 I don't know how to do this at all                                        4 4%
 I sometimes need help to do this                                          14 14%
 I feel comfortable doing this by myself                                   26 26%
 I know this well enough that I could show someone else how to do this     57 56%
I create electronic products like power points, word documents or web pages to share with various
audiences in school and out of school.
 I don't know how to do this at all                                        15 15%
 I sometimes need help to do this                                          29 29%
 I feel comfortable doing this by myself                                   29 29%
 I know this well enough that I could show someone else how to do this     28 28%
I select the most appropriate technology tools for a specific task for example knowing which tool (like
Powerpoint, Publisher, Excel, or Word) would be best to create a product for school.
 I don't know how to do this at all                                        5 5%
FILLING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE                                                                              45


 I sometimes need help to do this                                      25 25%
 I feel comfortable doing this by myself                               33 33%
 I know this well enough that I could show someone else how to do this 38 38%
I practice safe behavior for myself on the Internet.
 I don't know how to do this at all                                      5 5%
 I sometimes need help to do this                                        9 9%
 I feel comfortable doing this by myself                                 37 37%
 I know this well enough that I could show someone else how to do this   50 50%
I can connect technology equipment like a mouse, keyboard, flash drive, digital camera or iPod to the
computer.
 I don't know how to do this at all                                      3 3%
 I sometimes need help to do this                                        20 20%
 I feel comfortable doing this by myself                                 24 24%
 I know this well enough that I could show someone else how to do this   54 53%
I use a computer to create documents for homework.
 I don't know how to do this at all                                      7 7%
 I sometimes need help to do this                                        18 18%
 I feel comfortable doing this by myself                                 39 39%
 I know this well enough that I could show someone else how to do this   37 37%
I know how to use Web 2.0 tools (Penzu, Prezi, Google docs or 280slides) for school projects or
homework.
 I don't know how to do this at all                                      9    9%
 I sometimes need help to do this                                        26   26%
 I feel comfortable doing this by myself                                 31   31%
 I know this well enough that I could show someone else how to do this   35   35%
I use Web 2.0 tools at home because I don't have the more expensive kinds of software like MS Office or
Movie Maker.
 I don't know how to do this at all                                      25 25%
 I sometimes need help to do this                                        32 32%
 I feel comfortable doing this by myself                                 30 30%
 I know this well enough that I could show someone else how to do this   14 14%

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:23
posted:6/18/2012
language:English
pages:45