Home > Research
> Reports
> The Road Ahead Background Papers (1997)
Projects: Road Ahead
(Project-Based Learning)
This document is a draft of one of several reports being prepared for The Road Ahead, a program of the National Foundation for the Improvement of Education (NFIE), a nonprofit foundation of the National Education Association (NEA). The Road Ahead is funded by Bill Gates, co-founder and CEO of Microsoft Corporation, from proceeds from his book by the same name. The program involves 22 school/community partnerships in 15 states using technology-based learning activities that extend beyond the traditional classroom and school day.
This draft is subject to review and revision and was prepared by staff of the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). All statements and opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent policies or positions of the NEA, NFIE, ISTE, or Microsoft Corporation.
Most teachers give some open-ended assignments that provide students with a degree of choice, and that extend over a considerable period of time. Such student activities are examples of project-based learning. The information technologies increase the versatility and value of project-based learning as a curriculum tool. Technology can help create a rich environment for individuals and teams to carry out in-depth projects that draw on multimedia and information resources from throughout the world.
·
Does
Cincinnati Need Another Bridge?
·
Characteristics
of Project-Based Learning
·
Research
Supporting Project-Based Learning
·
Benefits
of Project-based Learning
·
Project-Based
Learning and Information Technology
·
Instructional
Goals and Design of Projects
·
Hardware
and Software Considerations
Students of all ages have the knowledge, skills, and interest to work on authentic learning tasks.
When
The
The
Students have some choice of topic as well as the nature and extent of
content of the project. Students can shape their project to fit their own
interests and abilities. For instance, the
The teacher acts as a facilitator, designing activities and providing resources and advice to students as they pursue their investigations. However, the students collect and analyze the information, make discoveries, and report their results.
The context for the subject matter is larger than the immediate lesson. The
bridge across the
Students conduct research using multiple sources of information, such as books, online databases, videotapes, personal interviews (in-person or conducted via telecommunications), and their own experiments. Even if their projects are based on the same topic, different students may make use of considerably different sources of information.
The project usually cuts across a number of disciplines. Students are expected to draw upon a broad range of knowledge and skills, and to "stretch" their knowledge and skills. The bridge project was initially a study of geometric shapes, but incorporated statistics, charting, social studies, physics, language arts, and technology.
The project extends over a significant period of time, usually from several
class periods to an entire school year. (The
The project involves the design and development of a product, presentation,
or performance that can be used or viewed by others. Students may simply
present the results of their projects in class as reports or posters. Other
projects may extend beyond the school boundaries in the form of broadcasts,
publications, and public events. Students may create products of significant
and lasting value, such as environmental assessments or permanent information
displays. The
A team of people may work on the project. The team may be an entire class, several classes, or even several remote sites. In these cases, individuals or small groups work on different components of a large task, and their joint efforts are often coordinated through technology. Southgate Elementary involved its 4th, 5th, and 6th grades, which shared central computer databases for recording their investigations. Multi-site projects often rely on e-mail or videoconferencing.
The instruction and facilitation is guided by a broad range of teaching goals, and students may achieve additional (unforeseen) goals as they explore complex topics from a variety of perspectives.
Project-based learning is a versatile approach to instruction that can readily be used in conjunction with other approaches. Teachers who make extensive use of project-based learning are blending a number of educational ideas—each supported by substantial research. This section contains very brief summaries of some of the areas of educational research that underlie project-based learning.
Constructivism is a widely supported educational theory that rests on the idea that students create their own knowledge in the context of their own experiences (Fosnot, 1996). Constructivism focuses on students being actively engaged in "doing," rather than passively engaged in "receiving" knowledge. Project-based learning can be viewed as one approach to creating learning environments in which students construct personal knowledge.
Howard Gardner and David Perkins are the co-directors of Project Zero at
In his 1992 book, Smart Schools, David Perkins analyzes a number
of different educational theories and approaches to education. His analysis is
strongly supportive of
Inquiry-based learning, or discovery-based learning, often involves hypothesis generation and testing. The emphasis may be on discovering specific facts or on developing a higher-order understanding of the topic and ideas being explored. Students are encouraged to develop curiosity as a habit, and to approach all learning with a disposition toward questioning and systematic investigation. Research indicates that hands-on, inquiry-based instruction is generally more effective than traditional didactic presentation in improving problem solving ability in particular subject domains (Helgeson, 1992, p. 53). Project-based learning often makes use of inquiry-based teaching methods.
Project-based learning frequently includes teams of students engaged in cooperative learning and collaborative problem solving as they work to complete a project. Cooperative learning has been shown to be effective in improving academic and social skills; however, successful cooperative learning requires careful organization, and sometimes explicit training in collaboration and communication (Johnson, 1986; Johnson & Johnson, 1989). Project-based learning provides an authentic environment in which teachers can facilitate students increasing their skills in cooperative learning and collaborative problem solving.
One can draw a parallel between project-based learning and process writing. Many teachers are familiar with presenting writing as a process, and are aware that the steps of process writing—brainstorming, organizing ideas, developing a draft, obtaining feedback, revising, and publishing—are similar to those required in many other creative projects. In many cases, reports or computer-aided presentations created through process writing constitute a project's final product.
Additional support for project-based learning can be found in the various "standards" reports that have been developed by organizations such as the National Academy of Sciences and the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Such reports stress the need for students being engaged in authentic and multidisciplinary tasks—which are hallmarks of many project-based learning environments.
A search of the literature identifies thousands of articles on classroom projects. Most of these reports can be considered testimonials—--teachers telling how they make use of projects in their teaching and their perceptions of how successful this has been. Benefits attributed to project-based learning include:
Increased motivation. Accounts of projects often report that students willingly devote extra time or effort to the project or that previously hard-to-reach students begin to participate in class. Teachers often report improvements in attendance and decreases in tardiness. Students often report that projects are more fun and more engaging than other components of the curriculum.
Increased problem-solving ability. Research on improving students' higher-order cognitive skills emphasizes the need for students to engage in problem-solving tasks and the need for specific instruction on how to attack and solve problems (Moursund, 1995; Perkins, 1992). Many articles describe project-based learning environments in which students become actively and successfully engaged in posing and solving complex problems.
Improved library research skills. Most projects require
students to move beyond easily available printed information sources such as
textbooks, encyclopedias, and dictionaries. Information technologies include
excellent additional sources of information on computer disk, CD-ROM, and the
Internet. The project-based learning emphasis on independent research is in
keeping with the American Library Association's (
Increased collaboration. The necessity for group work in many projects requires students to develop and practice communication skills (Johnson & Johnson, 1989). Peer teaching, student evaluation, online information sharing, and cooperative learning groups are all aspects of the collaborative nature of projects. Current cognitive theories suggest that learning is a social phenomenon and that students will learn more in a collaborative environment (Wiburg, 1994).
Increased resource-management skills. Part of becoming an independent learner is taking responsibility for completing complex tasks. Well-implemented project-based learning gives students instruction and practice in organizing projects, and in allocating time and other resources such as equipment to complete tasks on schedule.
Projects are commonplace in formal technology classes in which students develop computer programs, databases, multimedia, or other products on the way to mastering the equipment and software. However, information technologies also facilitate project-based learning in science, language arts, fine arts, social studies, and other curriculum areas. For example:
A class of third graders is studying the civil rights movement in the
Sixth graders with learning disabilities use the KIDLINK list server to
collect sunrise/sunset observations from around the world—almost pole to
pole—on the day of the winter solstice. Although the students are in
Students at several elementary and secondary
A three-period course in an
As can be seen from these examples, information technologies can affect both the nature and content of project-based learning. In some cases, technology facilitates long-established techniques, as in the revision of text with a word processor during the writing process. In other cases, technology extends the scope of a project in ways that would otherwise be impossible, as when students gather simultaneous data from remote sites via telecommunications or publish their results in the form of videotape or a World Wide Web page.
The design of a learning project begins with the formulation of clear academic goals. Some of these will be specific to the subjects under study—understanding the structural strength of geometric shapes, the history of the civil rights movement, or the effects of mass and acceleration on moving bodies. Another set of goals has to do with the process of learning—the knowledge and skill to pursue complex tasks over a period of time, the ability to work in a team, or the ability to locate, retrieve, organize, and apply information gleaned from multiple sources.
Once the learning goals are established, teachers (or teachers and students working together) can begin to design and schedule activities. One time-tested set of project planning guidelines, developed by Al Rogers of the FrEdMail Foundation, comes out of educational telecommunications, where teachers have been developing multi-site projects for many years (Rogers, et al., 1990). Among other characteristics, successful projects:
·
Have
specific goals, tasks, and outcomes aligned with instructional objectives.
·
Have
specific beginning and ending dates, and intermediate deadlines.
·
Provide
examples of the kinds of writing or data collection that students will submit.
Teachers and students need to carefully inventory and allocate resources—time, prior knowledge and skills, technology, and information sources. This is particularly true when activities depend on sophisticated or scarce technology, or on collaboration with other classrooms or subject-matter experts from the community. Note that there may be written or unwritten rules that restrict resources. For example, there may be rules on how much help is allowed from parents and others.
As the student or team begins to understand the demands of the project and to determine the resources that are available, the next step is to begin to develop a plan of action. What tasks need to be accomplished? What resources are needed to accomplish these tasks? Can some of the tasks be done simultaneously, and which tasks must be completed before others can be started? In a large project, it is helpful to have milestones—specific tasks to be completed by specific times. What are the criteria to be used to measure successfully reaching a milestone?
Three activities, then, need to be done at the beginning of a project: careful specification of the project to be accomplished, including learning goals; identification of resources and limitations on resources; and developing a plan of action. These activities take place simultaneously, cyclically, and repeatedly throughout a project. The process of working on any one of these steps produces information and insights that may lead to rethinking one of the other steps.
A common pitfall for both teachers and students is to not allocate enough resources (especially time) to provide for unforeseen difficulties. What happens if a team member is ill? What happens if a particular task proves to be more difficult than anticipated? What happens if a needed piece of equipment is out for repair? A robust plan includes a "contingency fund" allocation of time and other resources.
It may be useful for the teacher to summarize project planning in a table of tasks and subtasks, resources needed, timelines for undertaking each job, and milestones that indicate the task's completion:
Description Resources Timeline Milestones Task 1 _________ _________ _________ Subtask 1.1 _________ _________ _________ Subtask 1.2 _________ _________ _________ Task 2, etc. _________ _________ _________
A similar table can be provided to students as a prompt and guide for doing their own planning.
Much of conventional instruction involves students carrying out relatively small tasks (textbook exercises, short essays, quizzes), and then receiving answers, discussion, and a grade from the teacher. As noted earlier in this document, project-based learning often involves real-world, authentic activities that may be partially guided by an individual's strengths and interests. One result is that students involved in a project are not all learning the same things at the same time. This can make the teacher's task of assessing student progress and providing feedback more complex than it is for other forms of instruction.
Methods of authentic assessment are well suited to the evaluation of such projects. Authentic assessment focuses on students' application of their knowledge—retrieving information from multiple sources and integrating it into well-reasoned arguments to support an idea; creating a work of art or music to enhance a presentation; designing and carrying out an experiment to test an hypothesis.
Authentic assessment involves a careful examination of products and performances. Increasingly, teachers are helping students learn to critique their own and one another's work. For instance, Vito Dipinto and Sandra Turner (1995) describe a three-part procedure in which seventh-grade students receive instruction in learning to evaluate their own hypermedia reports. Each student researches a mammal as part of the science curriculum, and presents their findings in the form of a HyperCard stack. The teacher first models use of an evaluation rubric—the things to look for in a successful project. A few students volunteer to have their stacks evaluated, and the class clusters around a single machine while the teacher critiques a stack on the extent and accuracy of its information, the mechanics of the writing, and the design of the presentation. Students then evaluate one another's work using a peer assessment feedback form. Finally, students write a short essay, guided by a set of questions, reflecting on what and how they learned during the project. The teacher's modeling, the assessment feedback form, and the discussion about the evaluation rubric provides the necessary scaffolding for students to complete their assessment tasks successfully.
A number of states and individual school districts now make use of portfolio assessment, in which the output of projects and other student work becomes part of an individual's record. Technology has helped facilitate the storage and evaluation of student products. Moersch and Fisher (1995) describe a computer application they designed to help both the teacher and the student to showcase examples of student work. The software contains scoring rubrics in which the teacher can check off skills and levels of mastery. The multimedia features of the computer are used to capture digital information (text, sound, graphics, video) that represents student work from non-computer projects as well as from computer-based activities.
Assessment will be addressed in more detail in another report in this series. Authentic assessment is an important component of continuing search for evaluation methods that are valid, reliable, and fair (Baker, 1993), and that will move the curriculum and pedagogy in directions that improve education. Robert Rothman's 1995 book Measuring Up discusses pros and cons of authentic assessment, summarizes the research literature, and gives a number of examples of major implementation efforts.
Technology-dependent projects require that hardware and software be available and properly configured. Such projects require that both teachers and students have sufficient knowledge and skills to take advantage of these tools. Time needs to be allotted for this basic training, or activities need to be selected in which new technology skills can be acquired as the project proceeds. If teachers expect to spend part of a project teaching information technology skills, they may need to limit the scope of other content.
Teachers sometimes feel that they cannot make use of information technologies in project-based learning because their schools or classrooms lack appropriate modern equipment. However, many teachers have overcome such difficulties. Telecommunications-based projects can be built around a single computer and modem. World Wide Web pages, currently a popular publishing medium for the output of projects, are constructed from ASCII text that can be created on any word processor. Multimedia writer Fred D'Ignazio has pointed out that many technology tools are already available in schools (D'Ignazio 1995–1996). Camcorders, still cameras, VCRs, television sets, and tape recorders can often be borrowed or obtained as gifts. These devices can support multimedia project-based learning that requires no use of computers. Such tools are often familiar to teachers and students from home use and may require little initial training. Digitizing adapters and conversion devices such as scanners can be added later to incorporate these different media into computer-based multimedia for the purposes of research, editing, and presentation.
Numerous specialized computer products can also support project-based learning. Multimedia authoring programs, available for most computer platforms, allow teachers and students to develop complex and visually attractive computer presentations and databases without the need for advanced programming skills. These applications are extremely flexible: Students can learn just a little about the software before undertaking projects that are both challenging and intrinsically rewarding. As they develop a need for more advanced features of the software, they can learn on their own, from fellow students, or with a modest amount of help from the teacher.
Electronic information-gathering tools have become more accessible in recent
years. Searching for Internet-based information formerly required the mastery
of arcane file transfer commands. The World Wide Web has made this activity
technically easy in classrooms that enjoy Internet access. CD-ROM drives, which
typically used to be housed at special workstations in the library, are now
standard equipment on new computers. The World Wide Web and CD-ROM technologies
allow students to find original source material from past and present—the
latest photographs from the Hubble Space Telescope, original drafts of the
Gettysburg Address in
Relatively few teachers are comfortable having their students work with sophisticated technology in multidisciplinary projects that extend beyond the teacher's area of expertise. They feel that they need additional professional development to take such a step. The lack of adequate professional development has been described as possibly the single greatest obstacle to teachers making use of educational technology (Office of Technology Assessment, 1995, p. 2). Some examples of professional development challenges include:
·
Learning
how to help students learn to function productively in a project-based learning
environment.
·
Learning
more about how to find or develop good projects that fit one's instructional
objectives and the available equipment resources.
·
Learning
how to provide effective feedback to students, both as they work on projects
and at the completion of a project.
·
Learning
how to work with students in a "high-tech" project-based learning
environment in which many of the students know more about the technology than
does the teacher.
These changes require commitment from teachers and support from the school over a period of time. Means and Olson (1995, p. 131) found that even after extensive professional development, traditional didactic forms of instruction can remain the norm in a school, primarily because of the many and varied demands on staff. Breivik and Senn (1994, p. 64) reported that for many of their correspondents, the transition from expository to resource-based learning took from three to five years.
There has been a great deal of research on professional development and its role as a change agent in education. It is one of the major keys to school renewal and school improvement. A separate report in this series focuses specifically on professional development for information technologies in education. Perhaps the single most important idea is that a new paradigm is taking shape, in which teachers view themselves as lifelong learners.
This new paradigm has two main components. First, every teacher has some responsibility for learning and for helping their fellow teachers to learn. Second, the paradigm recognizes the important knowledge and skills that students can bring to the learning environment. Students can learn from each other, and students can help teachers to learn. In summary, the paradigm is a community of scholars—students and instructors both filling dual roles as teachers and learners. Educators will need help and encouragement to learn alongside their students (Moursund, et al., 1995, p. 152).
Project-based learning is a well-established component of our educational system. It is an excellent vehicle for helping students learn to carry out authentic, multidisciplinary tasks in which they budget their time, make effective use of limited resources, and work with other people.
Information technologies bring new opportunities and challenges to project-based learning. There is a rising tide of computer facilities and connectivity in schools. In addition, many schools and school districts are placing considerable emphasis on technology-oriented professional development. This combination of improving facilities and increasing teacher knowledge supports the increasing use of information technologies in project-based learning.
Baker, E. (1993, December). Questioning the technical quality of performance
assessment. The School Administrator, 12–16.
A concise summary of some of the problems involved in implementing alternative
assessment.
Breivik, P.S. & Senn,
J.A. (1994). Information literacy: Educating children for the 21st century .
An in-depth discussion of the concept of information literacy: what it is, and
how to implement it in schools through collaboration between classroom teachers
and media center specialists.
D'Ignazio, F. (1995–96). Multimedia sandbox
(column). Learning and Leading With Technology.
This continuing series of articles explores a wide range of multimedia projects
that can be used in the classroom. In addition, there is a focus on free and
inexpensive pieces of equipment that can be used in developing multimedia
projects.
Dipinto, V. & Turner, S. (1995). Zapping the
hypermedia zoo—assessing students' hypermedia projects. Learning &
Leading With Technology ,
22(7), 8–11.
An account of a three-part assessment procedure for HyperCard
stacks involving teacher modeling, peer critique, and individual reflection.
Fosnot, C. T. (Ed.). (1996). Constructivism: theory, perspectives, and
practice.
The 13 chapters of this book are written by 14 researchers and practitioners of
constructivism. This book provides an excellent overview of both the theory and
practice of constructivism.
Gardner, H. (1995, November). Reflections on multiple intelligences: Myths
and messages. Phi Delta Kappan, 200–209.
A summary of interpretations and implementation ideas that have emerged in the
12 years since the publication of
Graumann, P. (1993, September). Project based
learning: Five teacher-tested ideas. Technology & Learning, 14
(1), 25.
Five educators share their successful project-based, hands on special programs
for elementary and high school students. The teachers' resources included
library CD-ROM databases, desktop personal computers, and video and audio equipment.
Students learned to use software for word processing, three-dimensional
modeling, and computer-aided design (CAD) presentations and slide shows.
Hands On! TERC Communications,
TERC has developed and coordinated numerous technology-based learning projects
over three decades. Hands On! is TERC's semiannual newsletter of hands-on math and science
learning. It is also available online at www.terc.edu/handson/handson.html.
Helgeson, S. L. (1992). Problem solving
research in middle/junior high school science education.
An extremely detailed literature review of research on problem solving,
highlighting both the possibilities and difficulties of improving higher-order
thinking.
Hoffman, D. (1995, March). Learning for the real world. Technology and
Learning, 22–29.
This installment of T&L's "What Works"
column looks on career-focused projects in six schools.
Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Social skills for successful
group work. Educational Leadership, 47(4), 29–33.
Johnson and Johnson are international leaders in cooperative learning. This
article makes a case for teaching communication skills as preparation for
cooperative learning.
Johnson, R. T. (1986). Comparison of computer-assisted cooperative,
competitive, and individualistic learning. American Educational Research Journal , 23
(3), 382-392.
In this study, computer-assisted cooperative learning was superior in terms of
promoting achievement, problem solving, interaction, and the perceived status
of female students.
Means, B. and Olson, K. (1995). Technology's role in education reform .
Summative report from a four-year study of nine schools implementing
technology-supported constructivist classrooms.
Moersch, C. & Fisher, L. M. (1995). Electronic
portfolios—some pivotal questions. Learning & Leading with Technology,
23(2), 10–15.
A discussion of the technical requirements and procedures for implementing
electronic student portfolios, with particular discussion of one commercial
portfolio software product, Electronic Portfolio.
Moursund, D. (1995). Increasing your
expertise as a problem solver: Some roles of computers .
An introduction to the theory and practice of getting better at solving
problems, with special emphasis on the roles of computers. Specifically
directed toward educators.
Moursund, D.; Bielefeldt,
T.; Ricketts, R.; and Underwood, S. (1995). Effective pactice:
computer technology in education.
A comprehensive summary and analysis of the research literature and other
information on effective uses of computer technology in K–12 education.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and
evaluation standards for school mathematics.
The NCTM is a very large professional society. Using federal and private
foundation grants, as well as internal resources, NCTM developed,
national standards for content, pedagogy, and assessment in mathematics.
National Foundation for the Improvement of Education. (1995). Touching the
future.
A teacher-developed guide for integrating technology into multicultural
education.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education
standards.
This document lays out a comprehensive national approach to science education,
with recommendations for curriculum, professional development, and assessment.
Examples of teaching units provide reference points for the overall theme of
promoting scientific literacy and inquiry skills.
Nix, D. (1995). Kids at the wheel—expressive learning and multimedia. Learning
& Leading with Technology
, 23(3), 16–19.
Account of an elementary social studies project in which students researched
and recreated "news" of important events of the civil rights
struggle.
Office of Technology Assessment,
A landmark report detailing the situation, needs, and possibilities of
classroom teachers in incorporating new technologies into education. The report
places particular emphasis on the need for professional development.
Perkins, David. (1992). Smart schools: Better thinking and learning for
every child.
This book analyzes strategies that teachers use in teaching and students use in
learning in our "conventional" educational system. It then points out
a number of ways to make substantial improvements in these processes, by having
teachers and students place much more emphasis on higher order cognitive
processes.
A seminal article that has been used since its publication as a standard for
planning telecommunications projects.
Rothman, R. (1995). Measuring up: Standards, assessment, and school
reform.
An examination of assessment as a major issue in school reform and in
educational standards. Presents a number of case studies that identify
successes, failures, and major difficulties in making changes to our
"traditional" modes of assessment.
Description of an ambitious thematic unit in which elementary students use
geometry simulations, videotape, and multimedia authoring tools to explore the
structure, use, and human impact of a proposed bridge across the
Special Interest Group for Telecommunications (SIG/Tel). (1995). Math pen
pals: Communication through numbers. T.I.E. News, 6(3),
6–7.
Math Pen Pals is one of a number of telecommunication projects honored in an
annual lesson plan contest sponsored by the Telecommunications SIG of the
International Society for Technology in Education.
Smith,
An excellent overview of the research literature on hypermedia. Examines high
school student use of hypermedia in a year-length, three-periods-a-day course
that covered
Wiburg, K. & Carter, B. (1994). Thinking with
computers. The Computing Teacher , 22(1), 7–10.
First of a two-part "Research Windows" column discussing recent
research on the effects of educational technology on improving problem solving.
Prepared for the National Foundation for the Improvement of Education by the International Society for Technology in Education. Copyright ©1997 NFIE. Subject to review and modification. Draft prepared by Dave Moursund, Talbot Bielefeldt, and Siobhan Underwood. Contact: Talbot Bielefeldt, Research Associate (talbot@iste.org).
Retrieved on
Related Paper from ISTE
Figure 1
EstablSTANDARDS for
Technology-Supported
Learning
Environments by Lajeane G. Thomas and Donald G. Knezek
The State Education Standard 2002
02
Traditional Learning Environments vs New Learning Environments
INCORPORATING NEW LEARNING
STRATEGIES
|
Traditional Learning Environments |
New Learning Environments |
|
Teacher-centered instruction Single-sense stimulation Single-path progression Single media Isolated work Information delivery Passive learning Factual, knowledge-based learning Reactive response Isolated, artificial context |
Student-centered learning Multisensory stimulation Multipath progression Multimedia Collaborative work Information exchange Active/exploratory/ inquiry-based learning Critical thinking and informed decision-making Proactive/planned action Authentic, real-world context |
Source: International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE),National Educational Technology
Standards for Teachers: Preparing Teachers
to Use Technology (
Project, 2002).
ALL CLASSROOM TEACHERS SHOULD BE
PREPARED TO MEET THE FOLLOWING STANDARDS:
I. TECHNOLOGY OPERATIONS
AND CONCEPTS
Teachers demonstrate a
sound understanding of technology
operations and concepts.
II. PLANNING AND
DESIGNING LEARNING
ENVIRONMENTS AND
EXPERIENCES
Teachers plan and design
effective learning environments and
experiences supported by technology.
III. TEACHING, LEARNING,
AND THE CURRICULUM
Teachers implement
curriculum plans that include methods and
strategies for applying technology
to maximize student learning.
IV. ASSESSMENT AND
EVALUATION
Teachers apply technology
to facilitate a variety of effective
assessment and evaluation
strategies.
V. PRODUCTIVITY AND
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
Teachers use technology
to enhance their productivity and
professional practice
VI. SOCIAL, ETHICAL,
LEGAL, AND HUMAN ISSUES
Teachers understand the
social, ethical, legal, and human
issues surrounding the use of
technology in PK–12 schools and
apply that understanding in
practice.
Source:
International Society for
Technology in Education (ISTE), National Educational Technology Standards
for Teachers (
This chart includes the standards, but not
the performance indicators, that go with each standard. For the complete
document, go online to cnets.iste.org/index3.html.
Figure 3
ISTE National
Educational Technology Standards for Teachers (NETS-T)
14 The State Education Standard | Summer
2002
STANDARDS for
Technology-Supported Learning Environments
technology standards
by Lajeane G. Thomas and Donald G. Knezek 2002
Mr. Banks, an elementary
school principal, greets his students as
they disembark from the
school bus. On the way to his office, he
walks through the teachers’
lounge to get a sense of the general mood
of the day as the teachers
sign in. After catching up on e-mail messages
for the morning, Mr. Banks finds
that he has time to drop in on
Mrs. Tenny’s fifth-grade class to observe her teaching. He grabs the
lesson plan that Mrs. Tenny had submitted for the day and a copy of
the standard teaching
evaluation form. He walks down the hall to her
classroom. As he enters, he sees the
children working in groups. The
objectives, written on the
blackboard, indicate that the students
are collaborating in groups
to conduct research on American Revolutionary
War heroes and that they
will develop multimedia reports and
presentations for sharing with the class
at the end of the week. While
walking around the room, he observes
students referring to the
computer-generated conceptual map they
developed earlier as a
guide for their reports,
using the Internet to find information about
their heroes, recording
citations for the resources they use, collecting
data and illustrations that
they will use in their multimedia presentations,
and discussing who will
complete which facets of their report
and presentation.
MEANWHILE, Mrs. Tenny is moving from group to group, a personal
digital assistant in her hand. She
answers questions posed by
the groups, suggests
possibilities for new sources, reminds students
of Internet search
techniques, and occasionally makes entries on the
hand-held device. As Mr. Banks surveys
the learning environment,
he sees a printer station
with reminders posted above it explaining
how to access the printer,
and instructions regarding the “Good
Citizen” checkpoints for
leaving the printer station ready for the next
users. He observes that the
bulletin board is filled with student work
related to the project the
students are working on, and that the room
with its five computers is
arranged so that the students can easily form
the clusters necessary for
working in teams. Thirty minutes have
passed, and Mr. Banks puts
away the unmarked evaluation form and
walks over to Mrs. Tenny, smiles, and whispers to her, “Thanks, I’ll
come back to evaluate
another time, when you are teaching.”
IT’S MONDAY.
Summer 2002 | National Association of
State Boards of Education 15
Mr. Banks is obviously a leader who is kind and
caring. He is “tuned in” to the needs
of his students and teachers—and uses
technology himself for administrative purposes. However, also obviously, he
has not yet revised his traditional view of
teaching to include teaching strategies associated with new learning
environments that have evolved to accommodate
integration of technology in the classroom. Mr. Banks seems to
appreciate what the students and teacher are
doing—but has not equated that with the criteria by which he should be
assessing and evaluating effective teaching and learning. If our educational
system is to address current needs for
effective use of technology to support learning, our
administrators—the principals, the district program directors,
and the superintendents—must recognize the new
tools and strategies for teaching, learning, and assessment and
value them as effective models for facilitating
improved student learning and significant pedagogical reform. With
the infusion of technology, tools change,
learning resources are different, and learning environments are transformed
dramatically. Supported by modern information
technologies, communication changes and decisions are made very
differently. Teachers and administrators who
understand technology and its roles in schooling and in society establish
new priorities and highly value new learnings.
16 The State Education Standard | Summer 2002
The “good news” is that many of today’s
administrators do understand technology and its
role in teaching and learning. And many others
realize that leadership development for education
administrators is absolutely critical for preparing
school leaders to understand how leadership can
best leverage technology to benefit student
learning and the multitude of important functions
required to support that central concern.
Establishing New Learning
Environments Supported with
Technology
Through the ongoing use of technology in
supporting content learning, students should be
empowered to achieve essential technology
capabilities. The key individual in helping students
develop these capabilities is the classroom
teacher. The teacher is responsible for establishing the
classroom environment and preparing the learning
opportunities that facilitate student use of technology
to learn, communicate, and develop knowledge
products.
Teachers must be prepared to empower
students with the advantages that technology can
bring. Schools and classrooms, both real and
virtual, must have teachers who are equipped with
technology resources and skills and who can
effectively teach the necessary subject matter content
while incorporating technology concepts and
skills. Real-world connections, primary source
material, and sophisticated data-gathering and
analysis tools are only a few of the resources that
enable teachers to provide rich and powerful
opportunities for conceptual understanding.
Traditional educational practices no longer
provide prospective teachers with all the necessary skills
for teaching students who must be able to
survive economically in the global workplace. Teachers
must prepare students to apply strategies for
solving problems and to use appropriate tools for learning,
collaborating, and communicating. As technology becomes
a supportive resource for teaching and
learning in the classroom, teachers move from
traditional teaching strategies to strategies proven by
research to promote more effective learning.
Teacher-centered instruction
Single-sense stimulation
Single-path progression
Single media
Isolated work
Information delivery
Passive learning
Factual, knowledge-based learning
Reactive response
Isolated, artificial context
VS
Student-centered learning
Multisensory stimulation
Multipath progression
Multimedia
Collaborative work
Information exchange
Active/exploratory/
inquiry-based learning
Critical thinking and
informed decisionmaking
Proactive/planned action
Authentic, real-world context
Source: International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE),National Educational Technology
Standards for Teachers: Preparing Teachers
to Use Technology (
Project, 2002).
Establishing New
Learning Environments Supported With Technology
Figure 1 above suggests that teachers plan
learning activities that devote less time
to the traditional learning activities found
in the left column and more time to the
corresponding strategies in the right column. The
strategies suggested as indicative
of New Learning Environments are described in
research studies as more effective
for improving student learning. Although the
strategies in the right column do not
specify use of technology, we know that technology
used effectively best enables educators
to achieve environments that support the
powerful learning strategies listed.
An understanding of how technology can
support these new learning strategies may
supply principals such as Mr. Banks with
knowledge of the types of classroom teaching,
learning environments, and experiences that are
facilitative of improved student
learning. This knowledge can influence decisions
administrators make regarding not
only teacher evaluation, but also a number of
other conditions over which the administrator
holds decision-making power.
ISTE National Educational Technology
Standards (NETS)
Key tools in determining these decisions
hinge on a knowledge and understanding
of what students and teachers should know and
be able to do. Performance
expectations for students and teachers are revealed
through sets of standards for subject
areas—math standards, language arts standards,
etc.—that policymakers, educators,
and parents are now familiar with. We believe
there must also be standards for
educational technology, and the International Society
for Technology in Education
(ISTE) has now identified educational
technology standards for students, teachers,
and administrators. The remainder of this
article presents an overview of these standards,
and then looks in more detail at a set of
“conditions” that policymakers and
administrators must consider to ensure that their schools
are able to successfully
implement these standards.
>>ISTE National Educational
Technology Standards for
Students (NETS-S)
The ISTE National Educational Technology
Standards for Students (NETS-S)
identifies six major standards and related
performance indicators, detailing what students
should know about and be able to do with
technology to support their learning,
communications, research, problemsolving,
and productivity (see Figure 2 at right).
Traditional Learning
Environments New Learning Environments
INCORPORATING NEW
LEARNING STRATEGIES
Summer 2002 | National
Association of State Boards of Education 17
I. BASIC OPERATIONS AND
CONCEPTS
• Students demonstrate a
sound understanding of the nature and
operation of technology systems.
• Students are proficient
in the use of
technology.
II. SOCIAL, ETHICAL, AND
HUMAN ISSUES
• Students understand the
ethical, cultural, and societal issues related to technology.
• Students practice
responsible use of technology systems, information,
and software.
• Students develop positive
attitudes toward technology uses that support
lifelong learning, collaboration,
personal pursuits, and productivity.
III. TECHNOLOGY
PRODUCTIVITY TOOLS
• Students use technology
tools to enhance learning, increase productivity,
and promote creativity.
• Students use productivity
tools to collaborate in constructing technology-
enhanced models, prepare
publications, and produce other
creative works.
IV. TECHNOLOGY
COMMUNICATIONS TOOLS
• Students use
telecommunications to collaborate, publish, and interact with
peers, experts, and other
audiences.
• Students use a variety of
media and formats to communicate information
and ideas effectively to
multiple audiences.
V. TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH
TOOLS
• Students use technology
to locate, evaluate, and collect information from
a variety of sources.
• Students use technology
tools to process data and report results.
• Students evaluate and
select new information resources and technological
innovations based on the
appropriateness for specific tasks.
VI. TECHNOLOGY
PROBLEM-SOLVING AND DECISION-MAKING TOOLS
• Students use technology
resources for solving problems and making
informed decisions.
• Students employ
technology in the development of strategies for solving
problems in the real world.
Source: International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE), National
Educational Technology Standards for Teachers (
NETS Project, 2000).
Figure 2
ISTE National
Educational Technology Standards for Students (NETS-S)
These “core” technology standards and
indicators for students are accompanied by four profiles listing performance
expectations of technology-literate students completing grades 2, 5, 8, and 12
(for
more information, visit www.iste.org and select
NETS).
>>ISTE National Educational Technology
Standards for Teachers (NETS-T)
For teachers to be able to prepare their
students for the applications of technology included in the student standards,
they must be well versed in the use of technology themselves. The ISTE National
Educational Technology Standards for Teachers
(NETS-T) provides standards and indicators
in six major categories
(see Figure 3 on
page 18).
In addition to the standards, NETS-T
resources available online include related performance indicators, profiles
addressing four benchmarks in preparation of new teachers, related assessment
resources, and model lessons that integrate both
subject area and technology standards (for more information, visit
www.iste.org and select
NETS). With these sets
of standards in hand and the research supporting the establishment of new
technology-rich learning environments, principals such as Mr. Banks will begin
to understand what should be expected of children in each grade range, to plan
for the types of technology-related curricular resources necessary for their
schools, and to acquire facilitative software for both the students and the
teachers. Principals will recognize effective uses of technology to support
learning and teaching in their schools, and gear the evaluation and assessment
practices around expectations gleaned from the
subject area and technology standards. Armed with this knowledge, school
leaders will begin to understand what other systems in their schools, such as
modern school libraries, can be in this new model of schooling.
>>ISTE National Educational
Technology
Standards for Administrators (NETS-A)
A third set of related standards, developed
by the Technology Standards for School Administrators (TSSA) Collaborative and adopted
as the ISTE National Educational Technology Standards for Administrators
(NETS-A), provides a core foundation of expectations for all administrators
with regards to effective integration of
technology in school settings. These standards
identify what every education administrator should know and be able to do with
technology.
Six standards are identified as the core
expectations for all administrators (see Figure 4 on page 19).
Additionally, there are specific profiles
that identify performances that are expected of administrators in each of the
following three job roles: (1) a superintendent or assistant superintendent,
(2) a district or central office program director, and (3) a principal or
assistant principal.
These standards would assist a building
administrator such as Principal Banks in understanding his role and how it is
affected by the infusion of technology in the school setting.
The State Education Standard
| Summer 2002
Essential Conditions Supporting
Standards Implementation
As an administrator considers all of these
sets of standards—for students, for teachers, for administrators—it is clear
that immediate and long-range planning must occur. There are several conditions
that must be considered when planning for implementation of these standards.
Realizing the expectations, ISTE provides additional
tools that will help administrators plan for the essential conditions necessary
to support these new learning environments. If the standards for teachers and for
students are to be met, certain essential conditions must be in place to
support the expected outcomes. These essential conditions identify
major considerations when planning for effective
integration of technology in schools and universities. When planning for
implementation of technology in schools and teacher education, the planning team
should consider each essential
condition and note whether, and to what extent, it
is present. The context, culture, and extent of collaboration among
stakeholders will affect how adequately the conditions are met. These will also
determine what types of strategies might be used to solicit support if the essential
conditions are not currently in place. Because of their importance
in the process of integrating technology,
each condition is examined separately in this section.
Shared Vision
Policymakers and administrators provide
proactive leadership in developing a shared vision for educational technology
among school personnel, parents, and the community—shared understandings and beliefs
surrounding what benefits technology will bring and how those benefits will be
realized. Defined as the presence of proactive leadership
and administrative support, shared vision
means that the commitment to technology is systemic. From the state education
department to school administrators to the school grounds personnel, there is
an understanding of, commitment to, and sense of advocacy for the
implementation of technology. When the implementation of a technology initiative
is problematic, often a major reason cited is a breakdown in the common
understanding of the institution’s goals among those who hold the
decision-making power. These situations can occur over something as simple as
unlocking the door to a lab, or as complex as modifying operational budgets to
provide allocations for technology funding. Facilitating the integration of
technology may require a change in policy or rules, and the decisionmakers
have to be willing to look at the situation, forge compromises when necessary,
and ensure communication among all parties. The collaborative environment
necessary for creating a shared vision is also necessary to sustain that
vision.
Equitable Access
The fact that educators need access to
current technologies, software, and telecommunications networks seems simple.
However, this access must be consistent across all the educational
environments—those supporting administrators, teachers, and students. Most
teacher education programs, for example, involve several entities, including at
least a college or university and one or more schools in the P-12 range.
Creative partnerships are often required to facilitate equitable access across
the spectrum of educational experiences.
When
the implementation of a technology initiative is problematic, often a major
reason cited is a breakdown in the common understanding of the institution’s
goals among those who hold the decision-making power.
I. TECHNOLOGY OPERATIONS
AND CONCEPTS
Teachers demonstrate a
sound understanding of technology
operations and concepts.
II. PLANNING AND
DESIGNING LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS AND EXPERIENCES
Teachers plan and design
effective learning environments and
experiences supported by technology.
III. TEACHING, LEARNING,
AND THE CURRICULUM
Teachers implement
curriculum plans that include methods and
strategies for applying technology
to maximize student learning.
IV. ASSESSMENT AND
EVALUATION
Teachers apply technology
to facilitate a variety of effective
assessment and evaluation
strategies.
V. PRODUCTIVITY AND
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
Teachers use technology
to enhance their productivity and
professional practice
VI. SOCIAL, ETHICAL,
LEGAL, AND HUMAN ISSUES
Teachers understand the
social, ethical, legal, and human
issues surrounding the use of
technology in PK–12 schools and
apply that understanding in
practice.
Source: International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE), National
Educational Technology Standards for Teachers (
2000). This chart
includes the standards, but not the performance indicators, that go with each
standard. For the complete document, go online to
cnets.iste.org/index3.html.
ALL CLASSROOM TEACHERS
SHOULD BE PREPARED TO MEET THE FOLLOWING STANDARDS:
ISTE National
Educational Technology Standards for Teachers (NETS-T)
Summer 2002 | National
Association of State Boards of Education 19
I. LEADERSHIP AND VISION
Educational leaders
inspire a shared vision for comprehensive
integration of technology and foster
an environment and culture
conducive to the realization of
that vision.
II. LEARNING AND TEACHING
Educational leaders
ensure that curricular design, instructional
strategies, and learning
environments integrate appropriate
technologies to maximize learning and
teaching.
III. PRODUCTIVITY AND
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
Educational leaders apply
technology to enhance their professional
practice and to increase their
own productivity and that of others.
IV. SUPPORT, MANAGEMENT,
AND OPERATIONS
Educational leaders
ensure the integration of technology to
support productive systems for
learning and administration.
V. ASSESSMENT AND
EVALUATION
Educational leaders use
technology to plan and implement comprehensive
systems of effective assessment
and evaluation.
VI. SOCIAL, LEGAL, AND
ETHICAL ISSUES
Educational leaders
understand the social, legal, and ethical
issues related to technology
and model responsible decisionmaking
related to these issues.
Source: International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE), National Educational Technology Standards
for Administrators (
This chart includes the standards, but not
the performance indicators, that go with each standard. For the complete
document, go online to cnets.iste.org/tssa. This
material was
originally produced as a project of the Technology
Standards for School Administrators Collaborative.
ISTE National
Educational Technology Standards for Administrators (NETS-A)
Developed by the TSSA
Collaborative and adopted by ISTE NETS
Additionally, there needs to be access to
technology resources appropriate to the subject areas being studied, such as
word processing programs and Internet access in language arts, or computer labs
and microscopes for science labs. Access must be in classrooms as well as lab
settings, and provisions must be made for special populations.
The technology should be accessible
immediately when it is the best route to the information or tools needed by
students, practicing and future teachers, and administrators. Furthermore,
model classrooms,
including at least a presentation system and four to
six stations, can facilitate effective use of technology to support student
learning. Access to technology for administrators and staff in a school
district is also an essential condition for implementing effective technology integration.
While a job role does determine the extent to which technology access is
needed, the district environment must provide appropriate opportunities for all
employees.
Skilled Personnel
The district leaders, support personnel,
practicing teachers, and teacher educators must be skilled in the use of
technology for learning. They must be able to apply technology in the
presentation and administration of their coursework and facilitate the
appropriate use of technology by their students or teacher candidates. Current
and future teachers must work with mentors as they model and teach techniques
for managing technology in the classroom and for communicating outside the classroom
through electronic means. Administrators and support personnel should use
technology as is appropriate for their job role. Technology standards should be
used as one criterion when reviewing applications for hiring new teachers,
administrators, and support personnel.
Professional Development
Even in contexts in which professional
preparation and competence is exceptional, it is important to provide
consistent access to professional development as the technology constantly
changes. Ongoing opportunities for professional development should be available
to faculty, administrators, and support personnel at all levels. Professional
development is not a one-time event—it should be focused
on the specific needs of individual staff and sustained through coaching and
periodic updates. The district plan should outline opportunities afforded within
the system to teachers, district leaders, and support personnel for learning job-specific technology skills.
Technical Assistance
Educators need technical assistance to use
and maintain technology. The focus of the education professional should be on
teaching and learning, not on maintaining and repairing the technology beyond basic
trouble-shooting procedures. When the technology does not function well, a
learning opportunity is lost and educator frustration
grows. It is critical that district (and
university) leaders understand the negative effects that an unanswered need for
technical assistance can have on the attitudes towards technology use. It is
also critical that they are aware of options for providing timely technical
assistance.
Content Standards and
Curriculum Resources
Educators must be knowledgeable in the
content, standards, and teaching methodologies for their disciplines.
Practicing and prospective teachers must learn to use technology in powerful,
meaningful ways in the context of teaching content. Technology brings relevant resources
from the real world, provides tools for analyzing and synthesizing data, and conveys
content through a variety of media and formats.
Teachers should learn to use technology in
ways that meet the content standards and the technology standards for students
and teachers. Administrators must be aware of the variety of applications of
technology for teaching, learning, and management, and must expect that technology
will be used to support learning in all curriculum areas. The
The State Education Standard
| Summer 2002
savvy school librarian or library media
specialist can be a strong ally to teachers and administrators in locating,
reviewing, and providing engaging, standards-based, and technology-rich content
resources.
Student-Centered
Teaching
Teaching in all settings should encompass
student-centered approaches to learning. Technology should not be used only for
demonstration as an electronic overhead projector or blackboard; rather, the
use of technology by students should be an integral part of instruction. In
student-centered approaches to learning, students become the source for
problems investigated as well as for resources brought to the solution.
Students and teacher candidates must have
opportunities to identify problems, collect and analyze
data, draw conclusions, and convey results using electronic tools to accomplish
these tasks. Staff development leaders and teacher educators should model the
use of technology to demonstrate its usefulness and appropriateness for
collaboration, acquisition of resources, analysis and synthesis,
presentation, and publication. Administrators should
recognize student-centered, collaborative work as research-proven strategies
for student learning. They must also recognize promising strategies for use of
technology to improve student learning and commend teachers who are
successfully applying technology to facilitate such strategies.
Assessment and
Accountability
In addition to assessing teaching and
student outcomes, institutions and professional development programs should
continuously assess the effectiveness of technology for learning throughout the
teaching and teacher development environment. The data obtained from this
continuous assessment will: (1) inform the learning strategies used; (2) ensure
that the vision for technology use maintains the appropriate direction; (3) pinpoint
potential problems; and (4) provide data for altering policies and instructional
strategies and for acquiring resources. Changes made over time due to
technology innovation should exemplify informed decisionmaking.
Administrators should recognize opportunities for collecting and analyzing data
for use in making informed decisions about improvement
of teaching and learning strategies.
Community Support
The visioning process includes the
community and school partners who provide expertise, support, and resources for
technology implementation. The community must see that technology is a valuable
tool for teachers and their students, and must be willing to support it in the
political process from the boardroom to the state house.
Support Policies
Policies can either support or hinder the
implementation of technology. As decisionmakers
develop new policies, they must consider how the policies affect acquisition
of, and access to, technology. Some major barriers to the use of technology
relate to teacher and faculty expectations about incentives and reward
structures. The expectation for the use of technology must cut across all
subject areas and all teaching-learning contexts so that educators and future
educators are assured that their work will be valued.
Policies related to technical assistance
should also support the use of technology rather than obstruct it. For example,
although firewalls are essential in the educational environment, there are ways
to provide dialup and remote access while maintaining the security of central
servers.
Likewise, at the school level, there are
ways to control students’ Internet access to unwanted images and information
while maintaining an environment of exploration, inquiry, and progressive
self-responsibility.
External Conditions
External conditions that affect a school
district include various strategies and programs initiated at all levels of the
educational and political system. Policies, statutes, requirements, and
initiatives at the national, regional, and state levels support the district in
the effective implementation of technology for achieving national, state, and
local curriculum and technology standards. Administrative leaders are
responsible for implementation of these strategies and programs in school
districts and in teacher education and professional development programs.
System conditions related to access and
connectivity, supportive policy, modern infrastructure and technical support,
expectations of continuous improvement, standards-based curriculum,
student-centered learning activities, and community support are priority
concerns of the administrator committed to providing necessary system support
to achievement of expectations with
technology.
Conclusion
Effective technology leaders understand the
roles technology plays in schools and in society. Through an emphasis on
standards and benchmarks, the administrator clearly and frequently reminds all
involved of the expectations related to technology.
With technology investments in education
running in the billions, with the continuing need for educated and
ever-learning workers, and with the enduring dream of universal preparation of
young learners for a contributing and satisfying role in their information and
technology-laden futures, we as educational leaders should feel both the
internal and external motivation to grow, to learn, and to lead.
Technology changes the equation of
effective and efficient schooling.
Used across a school system, technology
both enables and causes change in tools, in communications, in planning, in
operations, in management, in decision-making, in curriculum, in teaching, and
in learning. It also presents challenges in safety and security, and it
refocuses schooling on ethical and legal behaviors. Education administrators,
like Mr. Banks, must grasp the magnitude of this professional challenge in
leadership for schools. The effective leader must ensure a shared vision among
all stakeholders that succinctly captures the expectations of the school
community
to focus technology use in the enterprise of
schooling.
Lajeane G. Thomas directs the NETS project for the
International
Society for Technology
in Education (ISTE). Donald G. Knezek is CEO
of ISTE.
References cited:
• International Society for Technology in
Education (ISTE). National Educational
Technology Standards
for Administrators.
Project, 2002.
• International Society for Technology in
Education (ISTE). National Educational
Technology Standards
for Teachers.
• International Society for Technology in
Education (ISTE). National Educational
Technology Standards for Teachers:
Preparing Teachers to Use Technology.
• Sivin-Kachala, K. and E.R. Bialo.
2000 Research Report on the Effectiveness of
Technology in Schools.Washington,DC: Software and Information Industry
Association (SIIA), 2000.
• Software and Information Industry
Association (SIIA). SIIA Trends
Report 2001: Trends Shaping the Digital
Economy.
Software and Information
Industry Association, 2001.