Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract
Has the National Education Technology Plan associated with the No Child Left Behind
legislation mandated by the US government in 2001 had a positive impact on student learning?
Is the use of technology in the classroom improving the quality of education provided to today’s
students, and is there evidence to support those findings? To answer these questions I researched
and analyzed over 20 research-based reports and documents. As a result of my research, one can
conclude that when technology is properly and effectively incorporated into direct curriculum
instruction by skilled teachers it has a positive effect on student success in the classroom and in
meeting the requirements of NCLB.
John T. Crescitelli
May 6, 2008
1
Technology’s Impact on Student Learning 2
Introduction
The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation of 2001 changed the landscape of
education in the United States. The push toward national standards and accountability to assure
all students are proficient in all subject areas placed undeniable pressure on students, teachers
and school departments. With NCLB came the introduction of the National Education
Technology Standards, which provide protocols that schools must follow to incorporate
But is technology integration having a positive effect on student learning, and is this
integration helping to address the needs of NCLB? Although some research points to less-than-
favorable indications, there is an overwhelming amount of research that indicates the use of
technology in k-12 public education is indeed having a positive effect on student learning and
success. This paper focuses on four areas that have shown positive growth due to technology
Attitude and Motivation
Today’s k-12 students are technologically advanced, often more than their parents and
teachers. They interact in a world with cell phones, instant messaging, blogging and wiki. They
create interactive communication through such mediums as MySpace, Facebook and YouTube.
They download, file share and interact over the computer in a natural and intuitive way.
A school that does not embrace technology is surely not meeting the child at point of
need. Motivation and attitudes toward school suffer when students feel their school is not in
touch with the realities of 21st century. This is especially prevalent with students who have not
Technology’s Impact on Student Learning 3
classrooms often feel less threatened and more empowered in a technology-rich classroom
(Stratham & Torell, 1996). Teaching is no longer focused on the teacher as the primary
distributor of information. Kids are looking for a more interactive learning experience; they
generate their own each and every day using technology while outside the classroom. Students
now have the ability to find a year’s worth of subject matter in several minutes searching the
internet. The classroom environment must keep pace with the changing demands of its learners.
Current research contends that computer use in schools increases students’ motivation
and attitudes toward both themselves as learners and their overall learning experience (Sivin-
Kachala & Bialo, 1994). Kulik (Kulik, 2003) found that when students use computers in school
and receive proper instruction they learn more and have a more positive outlook on school,
The key to this success, however, does center on the teacher. Only when the educator
properly incorporates technology into instruction, does attitude and self concept (and ultimately
success) improve (Kulik, 2003). The computer application must directly relate to the actual
curriculum for students to understand its connectedness to their lives and their learning. If the
level of technology is merely drill and memory activities, student involvement dissipates, higher-
Differentiation of Instruction
teachers with unprecedented challenges meeting the requirements of NCLB. Lessons that meet
Technology’s Impact on Student Learning 4
state and federal education standards while reaching all students at point of need can prove to be
difficult. Attaining adequate yearly progress goals for the learning-challenged subgroups
demands skilled teachers who can authentically integrate technology into class lessons.
demonstrates strongest growth in academic achievement (Marston, Deno, Dongil, Diment, &
Rogers, 1995). Additionally, (Marston, et al., 1995) the research asserts that when computer-
engagement and academic success improve. Computer-assisted instruction that is well structured
allows the gifted or skilled student opportunities to explore topics deeper while the teacher
focuses on assisting others (Coley, Cradler, & Engel, 1997). This allows the teacher the
flexibility to facilitate and monitor learning for some students while providing direct instruction
significant growth in both reading and mathematics skills (Zollman, Oldham, & Wyrick, 1989).
Development of HigherOrder Thinking Skills
The development of higher-order thinking skills is another area that demonstrates the
complex problems using technology results in improved cognitive development and helps
students become stronger independent, analytical thinkers (Coley, Cradler, & Engel, 1997).
Properly integrated computer lessons challenge all students to apply their understandings further
and empower them to be more discriminate thinkers. Students who are routinely exposed to
more academic lecture and less computer investigation are less likely to become critical thinkers
(Marston, Deno, Dongil, Diment, & Rogers, 1995) (Coley, Cradler, & Engel, 1997).
Technology’s Impact on Student Learning 5
Cognitive skills improve when students are challenged to investigate problems using
technology. The utilization of online tools to assemble and analyze information helped students
improve research, note-taking and writing skills (Peck & Dorricott, 2000). The Center for
Applied Special Technology further contends that computer-based inquiry enhances thinking and
When students are given the proper tools and targeted guidance, then all students gain equal
The difficulty with evaluating higher-order thinking skills, however, is that they are often
lecture-based classroom setting, too narrow in focus to properly assess and score open-ended
inquiry questions that require research, analysis and presentation (Fulton, 1998). Inquiry-based
learning requires time to gather, synthesize and work with information; timed tests simply don’t
fit this learning style. State and national tests need to be reassessed and revamped to
Effect on Overall Academic Performance
Superintendent for the Liverpool Central School District in New York, recently reported that her
school system was scrapping their laptop program because the school system felt the use of
technology was not improving student achievement (Bobkoff, 2008). She argues that the use of
technology has not changed graduation or dropout rates and that there is no evidence of
There is significant national research to prove the contrary. The key, however, is the
level of training and involvement of the teacher. Ms. Patterson does not report on the level of
instruction her teachers received nor does she reflect on the way the technology is being used in
her school system. The knowledge and instructional methods used by the teacher has a direct
“Students whose teachers were high-level users of technology in the classroom scored
significantly better than did students whose teachers were low-level users of technology in the
classroom” (Middleton & Murray, 1999). The computer-assisted instruction must be content-
further focuses on the level of teacher involvement. Students whose teachers receive proper
technology training showed significant gains in math scores in both grades 4 and 8. Conversely,
if teachers were not well-trained and used computers only for skill and drill, performance scores
In West Virginia, studies show that technology integration directly affected improved test
scores. Technology was thoughtfully integrated into the current curriculum and aligned with
objectives and assessment tools. Because the technology was directly related to regular
classroom instruction and aligned appropriately, effective gains in test scores were made (Mann,
Shakeshaft, Becker, & Kottkamp, 1998). The focus, again, is on the computer enhancing the
current curriculum in an authentic way due to the skill of the classroom teacher.
Technology’s Impact on Student Learning 7
Conclusion
What do we know about the impact of technology on student learning? The reports and
analyses are clear: When teachers are properly trained and using technology to enhance the
Students’ perceptions of their own learning and of themselves as learners are enhanced in
skills are improved. Reading, research, synthesis, analysis and writing skills all improve in the
computer-assisted classroom. Several studies also point to improved math scores at various
grade levels.
reevaluated and redesigned as we progress in addressing NCLB. How can standardized tests be
altered to assess technology’s impact on higher-order thinking skills? In what ways can
assessment and evaluation change in the future to meet both the needs of the National Education
Technology Plan and No Child Left Behind? The goal of NCLB is to make stronger, more
critical thinkers of our students. Assessment must therefore be revamped to accurately and
Future research must also be conducted to evaluate today’s teachers in order to assess the
level of training and reinforcement they need during this shift in their educational practices.
Paradigm shifts are hard in education, and transitioning to the student – not the teacher -- as the
center point of learning is significant. The success of today’s students relies on teachers shifting
change will not come without a full assessment of where we’re at today and what needs to be
According to national research, the positive influences of technology are evident. With
proper focus and supporting budgets, all school systems can appropriately utilize technology to
enhance learning for all students and meet the stated intentions of the No Child Left Behind
legislation.
Technology’s Impact on Student Learning 9
Cited References
Bobkoff, D. (2008, April 11). The best of our knowledge. Retrieved April 13, 2008, from WAMC
Newsroom:
http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/wamc/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=125410
8
Brush, T. (1997). The effects on student achievement and sttitudes when using integrated learning
systems with cooperative pairs. Educational Technology Research and Development.
Campbell, D., Peck, D. L., Horn, C. J., & Leigh, R. K. (1987). Comparison of computer‐assisted instruction
and print drill preformance: A research note. Educational Communication and Technology
Journal , 95‐103.
CAST. (1996, Oct. 16). Texas Center for Educational Technology. Retrieved April 19, 2008, from The Role
of Online Communications in Schools: http://www.tcet.unt.edu/research/rlonline.htm
CEO Forum on Education and Technology. (2001, June). Retrieved April 23, 2008, from CEO Forum on
Education and Technology: http://www.ceoforum.org/downloads/report4.pdf
Clements, D., & Nastasi, B. K. (1999). Metacognition, learning, and educational computer environments
in information technology. Childhood Educational Annual.
Coley, R., Cradler, J., & Engel, P. (1997). Computers and classrooms: The status of technology in U.S.
schools. Princeton: Educational Testing Service, Policy Information Center.
Cotton, K. (1991, May). Computer‐Assisted Instruction. Retrieved April 16, 2008, from Northwest
Regional Educational Laboratory: http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/5/cu10.html
Fulton, K. (1998). A framework for considering technology's effectiveness. Indiana Department of
Education.
Kulik, J. (2003). Effects of using instructional technology in elementary and secondary schools: What
controlled evaluation studies say. Arlington: SRI International.
Lehrer, R., Erickson, J., & Connell, T. (1994). Learning by designing hypermedia documents. Computers in
Schools , 227‐254.
Mann, D., Shakeshaft, C., Becker, J., & Kottkamp, R. (1998). West Virginia story: Achievement gainsfroma
statewide comprehensive instructional technology program. Santa Monica: Milken Exchange on
Educational Technology.
Marston, D., Deno, S. L., Dongil, K., Diment, K., & Rogers, D. (1995). Comparison of reading intervention
approaches for students with mild disabilities. Exceptional Children , 20‐37.
Technology’s Impact on Student Learning 10
Middleton, B., & Murray, R. K. (1999). The impact of instructional technology on student academic
achievement in reading and mathematics. International Journal of Instructional Media.
Peck, K., & Dorricott, D. (2000). Technology in an inclusive setting. Retrieved April 22, 2008, from
Merician: http://www.ncsu.edu/meridian/2000wint/inclusive/lit2.html
Robertson, E. B., Ladewog, B. H., Strickland, M. P., & Boschung, M. D. (1987). Enhancement of self‐
esteem through the use of computer‐assisted instruction. Journal of Educational Research , 314‐
316.
Schacter, J. (1999). The impact of education technology on student achievement. Santa Monica: The
Milken Family Foundation.
Sivin‐Kachala, J., & Bialo, E. (1994). Report on the effectiveness of technology in schools, 1990‐1994.
Washington D.C.: Software Publishers Association.
Stratham, D. S., & Torell, C. R. (1996). Computers in the classroom: The impact of technology on student
learning. Boise, ID: Army Research Institute.
Student Learning. (2005). Retrieved April 2008, from Center for Applied Research in Educational
Technology: http://caret.iste.org/
Waxman, H. C., Lin, M.‐F., & Michko, G. M. (2003). A meta‐analysis of the effectiveness of teaching and
learning with technology on student outcomes. Naperville: Learning Point Associates.
Wenglinsky, H. (1998). Does it compute? The relationship between educational technology ans student
achievement in mathematics. Princeton: Educational Testing Service.
Zollman, A., Oldham, B., & Wyrick, J. (1989). Effects of computer‐assisted instruction on reading and
mathematics achievement of chapter 1 students. Columbus: Resources in Education.