2010 Literature Review

1. 2010 Literature Review

2. Contents

3. It is the way laptops are used in learning that brings about improvements in achievement. (Silvernail & Gritter, 2007)

4. Increasingly authors are questioning whether standardised testing is appropriate when assessing 21st Century Skills. • Most standardised tests assess basic skills tests using multiple choice answers. This does not address 21st century skills. (Silvernail, 2005, p.3) • Skills inherent to technology and laptop use do not align with standardised testing (Holcomb, 2009) • Henrico County (USA) is developing assessment tools for 21st Century skills. Limitations of standardised testing

5. Increasingly authors are questioning whether standardised testing is appropriate when assessing 21st Century Skills • Most standardised tests assess basic skills tests using multiple choice answers. This does not address 21st century skills. (Silvernail, 2005, p.3) • Skills inherent to technology and laptop use do not align with standardised testing (Holcomb, 2009) • Henrico County (USA) is developing assessment tools for 21st Century skills. Limitations of standardised testing

6. Increasingly authors are questioning whether standardised testing is appropriate when assessing 21st Century Skills • Most standardised tests assess basic skills tests using multiple choice answers. This does not address 21st century skills. (Silvernail, 2005, p.3) • Skills inherent to technology and laptop use do not align with standardised testing. (Holcomb, 2009) • Henrico County (USA) is developing assessment tools for 21st Century skills. Limitations of standardised testing

7. Increasingly authors are questioning whether standardised testing is appropriate when assessing 21st Century Skills • Most standardised tests assess basic skills tests using multiple choice answers. This does not address 21st century skills. (Silvernail, 2005, p.3) • Skills inherent to technology and laptop use do not align with standardised testing (Holcomb, 2009) • Henrico County (USA) is developing assessment tools for 21st Century skills. Limitations of standardised testing

8. Despite these limitations, standardised testing is uncovering improvement in the academic achievements of students in one-to-one laptop programs, as shown in the following studies: Improved Achievement in standardised test

9. laptops did increase the scores of the laptop students over the non-laptop students, particularly in the areas of literacy response and analysis and in writing strategies. (Suhr, Hernandez, Grimes, Warshauer, 2010) • Improvements occurred in the second year after teething problems were overcome (Suhr, Hernandez, Grimes, Warchauer, 2010) • Unprecedented improvement in Maths, English and Science results (Bebell & Kay, 2010) Improved Achievement in standardised test

10. laptops did increase the scores of the laptop students over the non-laptop students, particularly in the areas of literacy response and analysis and in writing strategies (Suhr, Hernandez, Grimes, Warshauer, 2010) • Improvement occurred in the second year after teething problems were overcome (Suhr, Hernandez, Grimes, Warchauer, 2010) • Unprecedented improvement in Maths, English and Science results (Bebell & Kay, 2010) Improved Achievement in standardised test

11. laptops did increase the scores of the laptop students over the non-laptop students, particularly in the areas of literacy response and analysis and in writing strategies (Suhr, Hernandez, Grimes, Warshauer, 2010) • second year after teething problems were overcome (Suhr, Hernandez, Grimes, Warchauer, 2010) • Unprecedented improvement in Maths, English and Science results. (Bebell & Kay, 2010) Improved Achievement in standardised test

12. Maine One-to-One laptop study • Over 16,000 students • In 2000 (the year the program commenced) 29.1% of 8th grade met the Maine Educational Assessment writing proficiency standard. • In 2005 (five years in) 41.4%met this standard Improved Achievement in standardised test

13. Maine One-to-One laptop study • Improved achievement is not consistent • In the same one-to-one laptop school different subjects can perform differently • The same subjects can perform differently in different one-to-one settings Improved Achievement in standardised test

14. Maine One-to-One laptop study • Improved achievement is not consistent • In the same one-to-one laptop school different subjects can perform differently • The same subjects can perform differently in different one-to-one settings Improved Achievement in standardised test

15. Maine One-to-One laptop study • Improved achievement is not consistent • In the same one-to-one laptop school different subjects can perform differently • the same subjects can perform differently in different one-to-one settings Improved Achievement in standardised test

16. Further analysis of Maine results (Silvernail, 2005) • The “best use” group was identified. These students used laptops to draft, perform multiple edits then final product • The “non use” group was also identified – those who never used the laptop for writing • The average student in the “best use” laptop group scored better than approximately 75% of the non-use group • There was no statistical difference between those who took the test online and those who hand–wrote their answers Improved Achievement in standardised test

17. Further analysis of Maine results (Silvernail, 2005) • The “best use” group was identified. These students used laptops to draft, perform multiple edits then final product) • The “non use” group was also identified – those who never used the laptop for writing • The average student in the “best use” laptop group scored better than approximately 75% of the non-use group • There was no statistical difference between those who took the test online and those who hand–wrote their answers Improved Achievement in standardised test

18. Further analysis of Maine results (Silvernail, 2005) • The “best use” group was identified. These students used laptops to draft, perform multiple edits then final product) • The “non use” group was also identified – those who never used the laptop for writing • The average student in the “best use” laptop group scored better than approximately 75% of the non-use group • There was no statistical difference between those who took the test online and those who hand–wrote their answers Improved Achievement in standardised test

19. Further analysis of Maine results (Silvernail, 2005) • The “best use” group was identified. These students used laptops to draft, perform multiple edits then final product) • The “non use” group was also identified – those who never used the laptop for writing • The average student in the “best use” laptop group scored better than approximately 75% of the non-use group • There was no statistical difference between those who took the test online and those who hand–wrote their answers Improved Achievement in standardised test

20. It is critical for schools to understand that simply providing each student with a laptop is not enough. How teachers choose to use the laptop is very important. (Holcomb, 2009) Implications of the research for laptop use and student achievement

21. “the biggest challenge however is helping teachers to develop the expertise required to harness the power of the technology” (Mouza, 2008, p.3)

22. Research is revealing that it is the way the laptops are used in learning that makes the difference. (Holcomb, 2009; Silvernail & Gritter, 2007) • In a study of one-to-one laptop programs running in three technology high schools it was found that the lack of time for professional development, especially for teacher collaboration, was a barrier to effective integration of computers into learning. (Drayton, Falk, Stroud, Hobbs, & Hammerman, 2010) Importance of Professional Learning

23. Research is revealing that it is the way the laptops are used in learning that makes the difference (Holcomb, 2009; Silvernail & Gritter, 2007) • In a study of one-to-one laptop programs running in three technology high schools it was found that the lack of time for professional development, especially for teacher collaboration, was a barrier to effective integration of computers into learning. (Drayton, Falk, Stroud, Hobbs, & Hammerman, 2010) Importance of Professional Learning

24. Teacher beliefs about pedagogy affect their classroom implementation of laptops. • Drayton et al. (2010) give the example in one high school in which one science teacher believed that focusing on information transfer was the primary focus of teaching while another in the same school believed that discovery was the focus. They found that “inquiry oriented teachers deployed technology to support and expand enquiry; more traditional teachers likewise used the technology according to their values, in conducting a teacher centred classroom” (Drayton et al., 2010, p. 48) Laptop Integration and and teacher pedagogical beliefs

25. Beliefs in pedagogy affect the individual implementation of laptops • Drayton et al. (2010) give the example in one high school in which one science teacher believed that focusing on information transfer was the primary focus of teaching while another in the same school believed that discovery was the focus. They found that “inquiry oriented teachers deployed technology to support and expand enquiry; more traditional teachers likewise used the technology according to their values, in conducting a teacher centred classroom” . (Drayton et al., 2010, p. 48) Laptop Integration and and teacher pedagogical beliefs

26. Initially benchmarked implementation levels of technology in the classrooms. • The study by Drayton et al. (2010) found that teachers who believed in a teacher-centred style of pedagogy use technology in ways which can be seen to be equivalent to the lowest levels of the LoTi scale while those who believed in an inquiry approach utilised the technology to expand inquiry in ways equivalent to higher levels. Levels of Technology Implementation (LoTiScale) Integration and Inquiry

27. Initially benchmarked implementation levels of technology in the classrooms • The study by Drayton et al. (2010) found that teachers who believed in a teacher-centred style of pedagogy use technology in ways which can be seen to be equivalent to the lowest levels of the LoTi scale while those who believed in an inquiry approach utilised the technology to expand inquiry in ways equivalent to higher levels. Levels of Technology Implementation (LoTiScale) Integration and Inquiry

28. Research indicates the need for a shift from professional learning with a focus on technology proficiency to a focus on laptop pedagogy. • As pedagogical beliefs can determine the level to which the one-to-one laptops are integrated into learning in the classroom, professional learning must include processes by which teachers regularly discuss their pedagogical and educational values. (Drayton et al., 2010) Implications for professional learning Integration and Inquiry

29. Research indicates the need for a shift from professional learning with a focus on technology proficiency to a focus on laptop pedagogy. • As pedagogical beliefs can determine the level to which the one-to-one laptops are integrated into learning in the classroom, professional learning must include processes by which teachers regularly discuss their pedagogical and educational values. (Drayton et al., 2010) Implications for professional learning Integration and Inquiry

30. “Perhaps the most important finding from our analysis is that technology leadership has greater leverage on desired outcomes than does technology infrastructure and expenditures” (Anderson & Dexter, 2005, p. 73)

31. “Schools setting ambitious goals and aiming for excellence seem more likely to use laptops well than ones without ambitious goals and a supportive school culture” (Zucker & Hug, 2007) • These researchers found that higher levels of technology integration were found in schools where leaders set the directions for change and developed supportive policies and collaborative cultures. Shared Vision

32. “Schools setting ambitious goals and aiming for excellence seem more likely to use laptops well than ones without ambitious goals and a supportive school culture” (Zucker & Hug, 2007) • These researchers found that higher levels of technology integration were found in schools where leaders set the directions for change and developed supportive policies and collaborative cultures. Shared Vision

33. Those teachers who were willing to take more risks were found to be more willing to integrate technology and saw student achievement in terms of their more intrinsic motivation and engagement in learning. (Howard, 2009) • The researcher found that the primary area of teacher concern was risk to student achievement. Those less willing to take risks were less willing to integrate technology into their teaching. They saw achievement in terms of quantifiable results such as test scores. Knowledge that one-to-one laptop programs improve student achievement may help them to see this as less risky. School Culture

34. Those who were willing to take more risks were found to be more willing to integrate technology and saw student achievement in terms of their more intrinsic motivation and engagement in learning (Howard, 2009) • The researcher found that the primary area of teacher concern was risk to student achievement. Those less willing to take risks were less willing to integrate technology into their teaching. They saw achievement in terms of quantifiable results such as test scores. Knowledge that one-to-one laptop programs improve student achievement may help them to see this as less risky. School Culture

35. School culture can either foster collaboration and innovation or stifle them. Where a school culture emphasises accountability and security over taking risks, teachers are driven away from innovation. (Drayton et al., 2010) • Where implementation was left in the hands of the individual teachers in one school, integration was at a lower level than in another school where innovations were tested and shared among teachers. Drayton et al. (2010) School Culture

36. School culture can either foster collaboration and innovation or stifle them. Where a school culture emphasises accountability and security over taking risks, teachers are driven away from innovation. (Drayton et al., 2010) • Where implementation was left in the hands of the individual teachers in one school, integration was at a lower level than in another school where innovations were tested and shared among teachers. Drayton et al. (2010) School Culture

37. “very few principals have themselves used computers in any meaningful way with children” This led these authors to point strongly to the necessity for distributed leadership of planning for success to occur. Flanagan & Jacobsen, 2003, p. 127 • “One key component of a successful implementation of one-to-one laptop computers is leadership in many forms, one of the most important being a Leadership Team” Moulton, 2006, p. 1 Distributed Leadership

38. “very few principals have themselves used computers in any meaningful way with children” This led these authors to point strongly to the necessity for distributed leadership of planning for success to occur. Flanagan & Jacobsen, 2003, p. 127 • “One key component of a successful implementation of one-to-one laptop computers is leadership in many forms, one of the most important being a Leadership Team”. Moulton, 2006, p. 1 Distributed Leadership

39. leaders need to be enthusiastic, build a shared vision, keep the focus on that vision, distribute the leadership of the initiative and lead the leadership team, lead the planning, foster a collaborative school culture in which teachers are comfortable to innovate, provide time for collaboration and discussion and provide appropriate and timely professional learning for teachers. Implications of the research for leaders

40. This can bring about great difficulties for teachers when they find themselves not only working in a change paradigm but also as the computer engineer Simpson & Payne, 2005

41. Lei (2010) found that extra technical support is a critically important condition for success of such projects. • Importantly, this need for support does not diminish as the laptop program matures (Lei, 2010, Newhouse 2008). Technical support

42. Lei (2010) found that extra technical support is a critically important condition for success of such projects • Importantly, this need for support does not diminish as the laptop program matures. (Lei, 2010, Newhouse 2008) Technical support

43. Research findings validate decision made and implemented by the DER-NSW program around: • technology support as critical for the success of the programs • charging of laptops at home • wireless access points in every classroom • fast internet access • technical support needs do not diminish as the program matures Technical support

44. In one study (Shapley et al., 2010) it was found that student use at home for home learning and homework was the strongest predictor of students reading and mathematics test scores. Computers at home

45. “Higher implementing schools reported that committed leaders, thorough planning, teacher buy-in, preliminary professional development for teachers, and a commitment to the transformation of students learning were keys to their successful implementation and technology immersion” Shapley et al., 2010

46. One-to-one laptop programs can bring about improvements to student learning. • Improvements in student achievement are related to the way laptops are used in learning • Professional learning is essential for successful integration • Teacher pedagogical beliefs largely determine the degree and type of integration that occurs in the classroom • Professional learning must include processes by which teachers regularly discuss their pedagogical and educational values Conclusions and key implications

47. One-to-one laptop programs can bring about improvements to student learning • Improvements in student achievement are related to the way laptops are used in learning • Professional learning is essential for successful integration • Teacher pedagogical beliefs largely determine the degree and type of integration that occurs in the classroom • Professional learning must include processes by which teachers regularly discuss their pedagogical and educational values Conclusions and key implications

48. One-to-one laptop programs can bring about improvements to student learning • Improvements in student achievement are related to the way laptops are used in learning • Professional learning is essential for successful integration. • Teacher pedagogical beliefs largely determine the degree and type of integration that occurs in the classroom • Professional learning must include processes by which teachers regularly discuss their pedagogical and educational values Conclusions and key implications

49. One-to-one laptop programs can bring about improvements to student learning • Improvements in student achievement are related to the way laptops are used in learning • Professional learning is essential for successful integration • Teacher pedagogical beliefs largely determine the degree and type of integration that occurs in the classroom. • Professional learning must include processes by which teachers regularly discuss their pedagogical and educational values Conclusions and key implications

50. One-to-one laptop programs can bring about improvements to student learning • Improvements in student achievement are related to the way laptops are used in learning • Professional learning is essential for successful integration • Teacher pedagogical beliefs largely determine the degree and type of integration that occurs in the classroom • Professional learning must include processes by which teachers regularly discuss their pedagogical and educational values. Conclusions and key implications