UCEA 2007 - How national technology policy REALLY gets made

Friday was the first day of sessions at the UCEA convention. CASTLE sponsored a panel discussion on national K-12 educational technology policy, moderated by Drs. Sara Dexter (U. Virginia) and Matt Militello (U. Massachusetts-Amherst).

Listen to the podcast!

(73.9 Mb, 81 minutes)

Panelists

Hilary Goldman, Director of Government Affairs, ISTE

Dr. Mary Ann Wolf, Executive Director, SETDA

Doug Levin, Senior Director of Education Policy, Cable in the Classroom

Some main themes

In the mid– to late 1990s, there were LOTS of national funding initiatives aimed at K-12 ed tech – all were replaced by EETT, which is much smaller and more limited – today, EETT has declined from over $700 million to $272 million – in the past, the Bush administration has even attempted to zero out the EETT budget – Congress has saved the program but at increasingly lower levels

There is a perception that the job is done

Teachers have not been trained how to use technology to improve student learning outcomes

Educators are moving slow – lots of missed opportunities – extremely incremental change in a revolutionary environment

TPCK model – preservice teachers should not take separate ed tech classes – should be integrated with content-specific methods courses

We are finally starting to get research that is helpful for policy purposes – for example, the eMints program in Missouri and other states

The amount of education that people need is astounding – state and federal policymakers, education associations, the public – they make major assumptions about what is happening that just aren’t true

Example: because nearly all schools are wired, people truly think that means that all kids have access to the Internet – far from being true – only buildings and teacher computers are wired – every student is NOT wired and connected

Example: lots of money has been poured into student information systems – as a result, people think that teachers are getting data that informs their day-to-day instructional practice – again, this is far from true – in most districts, the data that are in these systems are not that granular

You have to use sexy vocabulary – the terms of art – that capture policymakers’ attention – right now it is global competitiveness

High school reform and other change efforts – technology is not specifically articulated as a component – it thus gets lost or left out

Ed tech policy is still fairly immature – we’re in our tweens

Groups like NEA, AFT, NSBA, AASA, NASSP, and NAESP are not knowledgeable about technology – they advocate for Title I, IDEA – they don’t advocate for ed tech

The Partnership for 21st Century Skills is trying to change the conversation rather than trying to figure out how to fit ed tech into existing paradigms / models / laws – this is a real herky-jerky process

There is not, and has not been, a systemic long-term research agenda, funded by policymakers, to answer key research questions about K-12 educational technology

What kind of research is needed to further the cause of K-12 educational technology?

Most education academics are naive about how policy gets made – don’t really understand the policy process – much educational research is not pertinent or helpful to policy conversations and the questions that are being asked by policymakers – we have to remember that ed tech is only one voice of many

ETAN – www.edtechactionnetwork.org – you don’t have to get to DC – can plug in your e-mail and zip code and get resources and information – just 12 letters can make a difference – meeting in local offices back home also make an impact – asking questions at local town halls sponsored by legislators

We were blessed in the 1990s with the folks that were in the U.S. Department of Education (US DOE) – there are lots of places where this can break down – there are not strong advocates there today – one place to focus advocacy efforts is the US DOE, not just legislators

Why has school leadership been left out of the ed tech policy conversation and policy efforts? – historically, efforts were focused on affecting the classroom, not on changing the system – promising levers appear to be 21st century skills, data-driven decision-making, and cybersafety

We could draft Title II legislation around professional development for administrators regarding technology leadership

[left to right: Sara Dexter, Matt Militello, Hilary Goldman, Mary Ann Wolf, Doug Levin]