Is Computer Integration Effective?

Computer technology in the classroom has taken quite a leap of progress between 1983 and 2004. However, despite the fact that computers are now much more prevalent, and despite the many purchases of hardware and software, development of technological infrastructure, computer labs and centers, etc. by many school districts, there has been hardly any progress made to decrease the lingering ratio(4:1) of students to computers since 2004 or to show a definite yield in academic benefits (Picciano, 2011). Although a significant amount of money is invested yearly on technology, many teachers still admit to being occasional users and nonusers, and even among those who claim to be regular users of technology, there has not been full integration into basic instruction. The question therefore remains: Why do schools continue to spend so outrageously on technology? The reason is partly that such expenditure may be regarded as current research activity that will eventually lead to future benefits. It was interesting to discover from the chapter that computer-assisted instruction has been around for such a long time, and that it was specially developed for teaching basic skills such as reading, writing, and arithmetic. The first instructional software was developed in 1959 by Patrick Suppes, one of the founders of what is today one of the largest text book publishers, Pearson Education Technologies. That was followed a few years later by the development of discovery learning software by Seymour Pappert, in the late 1960s. Although both these software types were applauded and appreciated by technology educators, according to the author, there is still no clear evidence that instruction has been positively affected by the introduction of technology (Picciano, 2011, pp 94-95). Today, after many years of computer access in the classroom, combined with more sophisticated software and instructional tools, internet/World Wide Web access and an increasing number of technologically-trained teachers, the successful integration of curriculum and technology remains a challenge. Many classroom computers, particularly in the primary setting, continue to be used as incentives for student performance, ‘center’ activities, or as an additional ‘tool’ for special students. There are a few cases of integrated learning systems: a combination of hardware, software, curriculum and management systems packaged together and marketed by a single supplier. However, because of cost it impossible for schools and school districts to acquire these systems. We continue to await with great anticipation the bright and fascinating future of ‘total integration’. In the meantime educators should do the best that they can with the tools that that they have now at their disposal. Technology can be used for enhanced instructional delivery. Also, when merged with proper classroom management, it can add significant value to the instructional process (Hall, 2008). A few of many approaches that may be implemented for improving teaching and learning include anchored inquiry, project-based learning, and brain-based learning. Anchored inquiry teaches students to use technology as a basis for problem-solving, which is critical for developing well-learned and independent students. Project-based learning not only enables students to take theory and change it into a practical outcome, but instruction is often student-directed and involves hands-on student engagement: a key to student motivation and success. The newer and less familiar method of brain-based learning involves determining how the brain works in order to access the student’s ability to acquire knowledge. The brain-based method is also likely to be most effective because it functions on a per individual basis, making it possible for each student to be evaluated on the basis of his/her abilities; or strengths and weaknesses, and that could result in a more accurate, more appropriate instructional planning that will be most likely to meet the educational needs of each child. References Hall, D. (2008). The technology director's guide to leadership: The power of great questions. Washington, DC: International Society for Technology in Education. Picciano, A. G. (2011).Educational leadership and planning for technology. New York: Pearson.