Technology is a vital component of education, but its success in improving learning outcomes depends on how it is used, as well as the students’ economic status.
A Stanford University report, Using Technology to Support At-Risk Students’ Learning, identified significant inequalities in technology access and implementation between affluent and low-income schools.
Low-income teens are noticeably less likely to own computers and use the Internet than their peers. Only three per cent of teachers in high-poverty schools said their students have the digital tools necessary to complete homework assignments, compared to 52 per cent of teachers in more affluent schools.
Last year, the U.S. Federal Communications Commission reaffirmed that access to broadband is necessary to be a productive member of society. In June, a federal appeals court upheld the commission’s authority to regulate the Internet as a public utility. The ruling, however, doesn’t help anyone who simply cannot afford access to the Internet.
As many as one in five Americans remains without digital access.
Canada, on the other hand, continues to be one of the most “wired” countries in the world and is second among G8 countries.
With nearly 87 per cent of Canadian households connected to the Internet, up from 80 per cent in 2010, Canada ranks 16th globally in terms of Internet usage in 2013, behind Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Netherlands and Finland, but well ahead of the U.S., Japan and Singapore.
But socio-economic distinctions that influence learning opportunities exist in Canada as well as in the U.S
According to Statistics Canada, while 95 per cent of Canadians in the highest income quartile are connected to the Internet, only 62 per cent in the lowest income quartile have Internet access.
With broadband costing on average $35 to $55 per month, 25 per cent of all households and 50 per cent of those making less than $20,000 lack this service at home.
Poverty, generally defined in Canada as a level of income about 60 per cent of the average household income, often places constraints on the family’s ability to provide other material resources for their children.
A new industry report shows that 95,000 Canadians gave up on cable last year. Ironically, this might result in even higher access costs as Internet providers try to maintain profits.
So there is a possible relationship between family affluence, Internet cost and access, and student learning success. But access to a computer and the Internet, by itself, does not guarantee student achievement. Internet access is important, but how the Internet is used by students is just as important.
A report by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development found that in countries where it is more common to surf the Internet at school, reading skills declined between 2000 and 2012.
“I think the surprising part was the fact that the very heavy computer users did perform poorly,” said Ron Owston, dean of the faculty of education at York University.
Owston said he’d like to see more detail about what students were doing online, because it’s important to know if that time was spent researching an assignment or scrolling through Facebook. His research indicates when students use word processors instead of writing by hand, they write more and their writing skills are notably better.
The OECD report also found that learning outcomes improved when technology was present only if the computers or iPads helped students study or practise skills they learned in class.
Owston said the lesson for Canadian schools is if the role of technology in the classroom is expanded, teachers, students and parents need to learn how to appropriately employ it. It can’t be a student free-for-all.
Research has indicated certain important conditions for success, especially with at-risk students who are learning new skills. Successful computer learning should be interactive, rather than “drill and kill.”
One study of at-risk high-school students found they learned significantly more using an interactive instructional environment to study quadratic functions than those who studied the same concepts via traditional lecture, note-taking, and drill and practice.
The authors of the study concluded that an interactive environment that involves all students in high-level thinking skills and promotes problem solving versus a more drill-practice approach produced significantly better results.
Most important, all these studies required the right blend of an effective teacher and the technology.
Geoff Johnson is a retired superintendent of schools.
