EDUCATION

Technology in K-12 Education

NATIONAL
CONFERENCE
of
1

ISSUES STATE
LEGISLATURES

A Primer for Policymakers

January 2006

Technology in K-12 Education

By Heather Grinager, Policy Associate

Introduction
In the last few decades, the world has been saturated with changing and complex technology, leading to a 21st
century marked by its interconnectedness and an increasingly globalized society. This presents a challenge for
policymakers, because America’s children must be prepared to thrive in this new world and the United States
educational system must adapt to meet the needs of 21st century learners and workers.

Technology has the potential to transform learning environments in ways that will benefit the 21st century
student. As with many emerging societal trends, younger generations are the first to incorporate technical
change into their everyday lives. Increasingly, however, our nation’s schools also are becoming adopters,
dramatically changing the way students and teachers use technology in the classroom.

Effectively integrating technology in education settings, understanding technology’s effect on student learn-
ing, and articulating the role state policymakers have in that effort is far from complete. The unique nature
of technology investments makes them a difficult fit with traditional district and state budgeting processes.
Although several states have made great strides in using technology to improve education, others are lagging
behind. This brief presents goals for 21st century education technology, discusses the challenges of access and
funding, describes how technology is successfully being used in schools around the country, and highlights
state leaders and state-led initiatives in the innovative use of technology in education.

Why Is Technology Important in Meeting the Goals of 21st Century Education?

For students to compete in a global economy, experts agree that students must be equipped with certain skills
that will prepare them to succeed in the work force and in college. Complex thinking, sophisticated informa-
tion technology literacy skills, and highly developed, life-long learning skills are essential for all students.

According to The Partnership for 21st Century Skills (an organization that brings together the business com-
munity, education leaders, and policymakers to define a vision for 21st century education in order to ensure
every child’s success as citizens and workers), it is increasingly important that today’s education system bridges
the gap between how students live and how they learn. Students will spend their adult lives in a multitasking,
multifaceted, technology-driven world, and they must be prepared for such an environment. The Partnership,
therefore, proposes six key elements of 21st century learning.

1. Emphasize Core Subjects. As defined by the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, this includes
English, reading or language arts, math, science, foreign languages, civics, government, economics,
arts, history and geography.

National Conference of State Legislatures

2 Technology in K-12 Education

2. Emphasize Learning Skills. This includes information and communication skills,

thinking and problem-solving skills, and interpersonal and self-directional skills.
3. Use 21st Century Tools to Develop Learning Skills. Technology plays an important
role in engaging students in the learning process.
4. Teach and Learn in a 21st Century Context. Students understand and retain more
when their learning is relevant, engaging and meaningful to their lives.
5. Teach and Learn 21st Century Content. This includes global awareness; financial,
economic and business literacy; and civic literacy.
6. Use 21st Century Assessments that Measure 21st Century Skills. Sustainable and
affordable assessment at all levels must use new information technologies to increase
efficiency and timeliness.1

Does Technology Improve

Why is technology important in education? According to the Partner-
Student Achievement? ship’s report, Learning for the 21st Century,” technology will continue to
A Missouri program has demonstrated that the be a driving force in workplaces, communities and personal lives in the
thoughtful implementation of technology in a 21st century. Technology helps prepare students for the workforce when
classroom is correlated with higher standardized they learn to use and apply applications used in the work place. When
test scores. The Enhancing Missouri’s Instruc- content and strategies meet accepted education standards, research shows
tional Networked Teaching Strategies (eMINTS) that technology increases mastery of vocational and work-force skills and
program provides each participating teacher helps prepare students for work when emphasized as a problem-solving
with technology for the classroom, extensive tool. In this environment, the need for technologically literate citizens
professional development and ongoing support.
and workers increases every year, and skilled people in the 21st century
Specifically, each classroom receives the follow-
ing equipment:
need to understand how to use technology tools.
• One computer for every two students, with
a high-speed Internet connection, Technology also is important in engaging students in the learning process.
• Teacher workstation computer, Most young people have never lived in a world without computers, the
• Teacher laptop, Internet, cell phones, multi-media, and software applications. Their
• Interactive whiteboard and projector, personal lives are filled with “gadgets” that allow them to easily connect
• Digital camera and scanner, with people and direct their own discovery. Most education settings,
• Printers, and however, have been slow to incorporate these options, creating a “reverse
• Microsoft Office and Inspiration software. digital divide,” where students experience technology saturation out of
school but have lesser access during school.
Research conducted by Missouri’s Office of
Social and Economic Data Analysis concludes,
“…students of teachers who consistently apply The Partnership defines technology tools as information and communi-
the inquiry-based instructional practices em- cation tools (ICT). Current ICTs include computers; networking and
phasized by the eMINTS professional develop- other technologies; plus audio, video, and other media and multimedia
ment program scored higher on the Missouri tools. These tools enable people to perform effectively at work and in
Assessment Program (MAP) tests than did the their daily lives. However, today’s technology may be obsolete tomorrow.
students whose teachers used other instructional That’s why it is important for students to acquire higher-order thinking
practices.”2 skills so they can quickly adapt to changes.
The program has expanded beyond Missouri to
Utah, Maine, Nevada and Illinois. Test results
continue to show that, on most state tests,
students enrolled in eMINTS classrooms scored
higher than students enrolled in non-eMINTS
classrooms and that low-income and special
education students in eMINTS classes generally
score higher than their non-eMINTS peers.3

National Conference of State Legislatures

Technology in K-12 Education 3
Access to Technology: Results Are Mixed
The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) conducted its first survey on information
technology in schools and classrooms in 1994. Although the results of this report indicate access
to technology has increased dramatically in the decade since, significant room for improvement
still exists as schools have slowly struggled to provide all the essential elements—beyond the
hardware and connectivity—of a highly functioning, transformed learning environment.

According to the February 2005 NCES report, Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools and Class-
rooms: 1994-2003, in the fall of 2003, nearly 100 percent of public schools in the United States
had access to the Internet. Even more encouraging, however, is that 93 percent of public school
instructional rooms had Internet access, compared with 3 percent in 1994. The ratio of students
to instructional computers with Internet access in public schools was 4.4 to 1 in 2003, a decrease
from the 12.1 to 1 ratio first measured in 1998. This indicates dramatic improvement in the
opportunity for student access to technology in recent years. Schools also have begun offering
access to technology in their buildings during non-school hours as a way to address the digital
divide. In 2003, 48 percent of public schools with Internet access reported making computers
available to students outside regular school hours. Nearly all public schools (97 percent) used
some method to control student access to inappropriate material on the Web.

Many types of technology are used by schools. Among the more popular are laptops; hand-held
computers that are smaller, lighter, and more easily transportable; and Web sites. In 2003, 8
percent of public schools lent laptop computers to students. However, the median number of
laptop computers available for loan was five, making access to mobile units limited. Only 10
percent of public schools provided hand-held computers to students or teachers for instructional
purposes. Nearly 88 percent of public schools connected to the Internet in 2003 used a Web
site or Email to make information available to parents and students. (Later sections of this
report will focus on specific examples of the technologies being used as a result of statewide
policy setting.)

In 2003, 95 percent of public schools with Internet access used broadband connections to access
the Internet. Broadband, as opposed to dial-up connections, allows larger amounts of informa-
tion to travel faster, decreasing the amount of time spent waiting for information to arrive to the
end user. Broadband is loosely defined, however, and many schools still suffer from inadequate
bandwidth to accommodate increasingly complex information. Thirty-two percent of public
schools with Internet access used wireless connections. This permits a computer to be free of
cables plugged into a wall, allowing it to move freely throughout a building and still access the
Internet. However, only 11 percent of public school instructional rooms had wireless Internet
connections, a decrease from 15 percent the previous year.

In 2003, 82 percent of public schools with Internet access indicated that their school or district
offered professional development to teachers on how to integrate the use of the Internet into
the curriculum in the 12 months prior to the fall survey. However, only 37 percent of schools
have a full-time school technology coordinator and only 62 percent of teachers felt that their
pre-service education on technology prepared them.4

Although connectivity has largely been addressed in school buildings, access to technology
remains limited. Computer labs require a teacher to take students to a new room outside the
typical instructional setting to integrate computer-based lessons into instruction. Although

National Conference of State Legislatures

4 Technology in K-12 Education

Technology Statistics in Schools Nationwide, making a few computers available in a classroom adds value, it can
2003 be insufficient to truly transform teaching and learning. In addition,
if teachers are uncomfortable or have little or no training in how to
Student to computer ratio 4:1
use the technology that is available in their school, the effectiveness
Public schools with Internet access 100% of the technology is severely diminished. In fact, teachers report that
Instructional rooms with Internet access 93% the greatest barriers to their use of technology had to do with time:
Public schools with wireless Internet con- 32% limited time to develop new activities that incorporate technology,
nections limited time in the school schedule to conduct activities, and limited
Instructional rooms with wireless Internet 11% time to practice technology skills.5
connection
Teacher surveys reveal a slightly different story than do hard statistics.
Public schools with a full-time, paid tech- 37%
nology director
Although more than 70 percent of teachers said they use the Internet
“frequently or always” to prepare for class and 58 percent said they
Public schools that offered professional 82% use the Internet in class with similar frequency, most complained of
development for technology to teachers
inadequate availability of hardware. Just over 47 percent said they
Teachers who report feeling prepared after 62% have only a single computer with Internet access in their classrooms,
initial technology training and 41 percent said they have access to a computer lab. A quarter of
Source: Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools and Classrooms: teachers do not have such access, however, and others who do say it
1994-2003, National Center for Education Statistics, February
2005. is difficult to get into the labs.6 This presents a challenge for schools
and policymakers. An essential link in using technology to improve
student learning is teacher training. A computer or software application does little good if
teachers are not given sufficient time and professional development opportunities to learn to
effectively incorporate technology into classroom instruction. The progress of the past decade
will be fully appreciated only when teachers are prepared to use technology.

Funding Technology: Challenges and Opportunities

Understanding the role of the federal, state, and local governments in funding technology is
not easy. Districts bear most of the cost of technology used in schools, although the federal
government has taken the lead in providing schools with connection to the Internet and states
also are beginning to take a more active role.

The E-Rate (Education Rate) program was established in 1996 with Congress’s reauthoriza-
tion of the Telecommunications Act. As one of the initiatives of the longstanding Universal
Service program, which collects fees from and through telecommunications providers to ex-
tend telecommunications services to Americans who would not otherwise have access to such
services, E-Rate is subject to an annual spending cap of $2.25 billion. The E-Rate program,
administered by the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) at the direction of the
Federal Communications Commission, seeks to improve access to digital technology by provid-
ing approved schools and libraries with discounts ranging from 20 percent to 90 percent on
qualifying telecommunications services. Discount rates are based on the percentage of students
eligible for participation in the National School Lunch Program and on whether the school or
library is located in a rural area. The E-Rate program supports the acquisition of digital tech-
nology infrastructure, including telephone services (basic, long-distance and wireless), Internet
and Web site services, and the purchase and installation of network equipment and services.
Other components of educational technology—such as computer hardware and software, staff
training, and electrical upgrades—are not covered under E-Rate. E-Rate has been given much
of the credit for narrowing the digital divide by allowing networking capability for low-income
and rural schools.7

National Conference of State Legislatures

Technology in K-12 Education 5
Enhancing Education Through Technology, also known as E2T2, is Federal Funding for Enhancing
Title II Part D of the No Child Left Behind Act that provides grants Education Through Technology
to states for technology to improve student academic achievement. 2005 $496 million
Under E2T2, the U.S. Department of Education provides grants to
state educational agencies on the basis of their proportionate share of 2004 $691.8 million
funding under Part A of Title I. States may retain up to 5 percent of
their allocations for state-level activities and must distribute one-half 2003 $695.95 million
of the remainder by formula to eligible local educational agencies and
the other one-half competitively to eligible local entities, defined as
2002 $700.5 million
high-need schools or a partnership of a high-need school and another
qualifying institution. Between 2002 and 2005 more than $2 billion
dollars was awarded to states, although funding for E2T2 has decreased every year, down from
an initial amount of $700.5 million in 2002 to $496 million in 2005.8

State initiatives to fund technology are diverse in their purpose and funding amounts. Accord-
ing to a survey of state technology directors, Education Week reports that eight states, Alaska,
Colorado, Maryland, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Oregon and Utah, do not al-
locate state funds specifically for educational technology as of 2005. Of the 42 states that do
allocate money specifically for education technology, amounts range from a low of $318,000
in Mississippi to a high of $196.3 million in New York.9

Sampling of No Child Left Behind Texas, for example, allots $30 per
Education Technology Requirements student to provide for the purchase by
• By eighth grade, each student must be technologically school districts of electronic textbooks
literate. or technological equipment that
• The state educational and local education agencies contributes to student learning. It
should provide professional development so that all also may pay for training educational
educational staff may integrate technology effectively personnel who are directly involved
into their jobs.
in student learning in the appropriate
• The integration of technology into all teaching con-
tent areas must have a foundation in scientifically use of electronic materials, and for
based research on best practices. providing access to technological
equipment for instructional use.10
Source: North Central Regional Education Laboratory, Understand-
ing the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001: Technology Integration, http:
//www.ncrel.org/policy/curve/resource.htm.
Other states, instead of allotting a
per pupil funding amount, designate
funding for specific projects. Utah, for example, reported to Education Week the allocation of
$5 million (one-time appropriation) in 2005 to be used to build capacity and infrastructure
to deliver online, state-mandated, end-of-level tests in reading/language arts, math and
science.11

One difficulty in understanding technology funding is that many funding sources exist from
all levels of government. Titles I, II and V of NCLB each allow federal funds to be used for
technology purchases. When answering surveys of technology provisions, states may or may
not include funding for virtual schools or pass-through funds from the federal government.
Thousands of local education agencies also make funding decisions independently of the
federal or state governments.

National Conference of State Legislatures

6 Technology in K-12 Education

There are many challenges to funding technology. Given the combination of major equipment
purchases, the hiring of specialized staff, and the ongoing training of existing staff, technology
funding holds a unique distinction. “It is neither a labor expense nor a capital expense nor a
recurring material expense, but rather a hybrid,” according to Larry Picus, an expert on school
finance. Two funding philosophies currently are at work: Local governments will either choose
to continue to raise funds as needed, tacking technology onto existing line items in the budget,
or they will attempt to incorporate and design flexible budgets that allow for a wider array of
funding options.12

As states consider investing in technology initiatives, they may wish to consider identifying
those elements that are essential to ensuring that technology has a real and lasting effect on
student achievement.

Essential Elements to Ensure Technologies Are Used

to Support Real Gains in Educational Outcomes
1. There must be leadership around technology use that is anchored in solid
educational objectives. Simply placing technologies in schools does little good.
Effective technology use is always targeted at specific educational objectives.
2. There must be sustained and intensive professional development that takes
place in the service of the core vision, not simply around technology for its own
sake.
3. There must be adequate technology resources in the school including hardware
and technical support to keep things running smoothly.
4. There must be recognition that real change and lasting results take time.
5. Evaluations must be conducted that enable school leaders and teachers to deter-
mine whether they are realizing their goals, and how to adjust if necessary.

Source: Margaret Honey, Vice President and Director, Center for Children and Technology, testimony and
statement before the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Appropriations Subcommittee,
U.S. Senate, July 25, 2001.

States Lead the Way

Just as schools and districts are in various phases of adopting technology, so are states. Some,
however, are leading the nation. In 2005, Education Week named technology leaders based on
recently collected statistics. South Dakota is the leader in providing access to technology. At
the school level, there are 1.7 students per instructional computer and 1.9 students for every
Internet-connected computer. At the classroom level, there are 3.5 students per instructional
computer and 4 students per Internet-connected computer located in classrooms.

Utah leads the nation in the use of education technology. It is the only state that has state stan-
dards for students in technology, tests students on technology, has established a virtual school,
and offers computer-based assessments.

Virginia is the national leader in the capacity to use technology. Its state standards include
technology for both teachers and administrators; an initial license for both teachers and ad-
ministrators that requires technology training, coursework, or a test; and a requirement for
technology training, a technology test for recertification, or participation in technology-related
professional development.

National Conference of State Legislatures

Technology in K-12 Education 7
Schools and districts have long experimented independently of their state with education
technology initiatives. However, states have recognized the potential of technology to enhance
and improve learning and have taken an increasingly proactive role in developing technology
initiatives. Some examples of these state initiatives follow.

Laptops
Taking advantage of the mobility of laptops is one way schools are bridging the digital divide
and transforming teaching and learning. Research shows laptops can have a positive influence
on student and teacher outcomes.
• Laptop students spend more time engaging in collaborative work than do non-laptop
students.
• Laptop students participate in more project-based instruction.
• Laptops lead to more students writing and to writing of higher quality.
• Teachers who use laptops use a more constructivist approach to teaching.
• Teachers who use laptops feel more empowered in their classrooms.13

Although many districts and individual schools have laptop programs, three states—Maine,
Michigan, and New Mexico—have funded laptop initiatives in some form.

The Maine Learning Technology Initiative (MLTI), a “state learning technology plan to prepare
students for a future economy that will rely heavily on technology and innovation,” is the largest
educational technology project in the state’s history. Maine is the first state to embark upon
a plan to eliminate the digital divide by providing a laptop to every seventh and eighth grade
student and teacher. The initiative, begun in 2003, cost $37.2 million over a four-year period
and equipped more than 30,000 teachers and students. Wireless access to the Internet has al-
lowed students and teachers to acquire information that is not available through conventional
methods. Curriculum is being developed that will leverage this technology so that both teachers
and students will excel in a world that is driven by information.

Maine focused not only on providing the technology, but also on providing the professional
development necessary so teachers could integrate the technology into their instruction. A
program of professional development that introduced teachers to the laptop and basic computer
skills was developed early in the program and is continuing, with increasingly sophisticated
training focused more specifically on teachers’ academic content areas.14

Online/Distance Learning
Online education has the potential to enhance communication between teachers and students
and the ability to accommodate different learning styles. Students may be enrolled full-time
in an online program and forego attending a regular school or might be involved in only one
or two online courses as a supplement to traditional education environments.

During the 2002–2003 school year, students in about one-third of public school districts (36
percent) were enrolled in distance education courses.15 Many schools are taking advantage of
the Internet to offer classes to their students that the school cannot offer. Small schools with
few students and teachers are able to offer Advanced Placement classes online, allowing their
students to meet the same high academic achievement standards of large schools. Parents who
choose to school their children at home or whose children need a more flexible schedule can
take advantage of online courses, creating a virtual community of online learners. When it
is not economically viable to offer courses for a few students who are interested in a subject,

National Conference of State Legislatures

8 Technology in K-12 Education

students can instead choose to take the course online with students from around the country.
In fact, 80 percent of public school districts said that offering courses that are not available at
their schools is one of the most important reasons for having distance education.16 Some states
even have full-time virtual schools in which a student’s entire public education is provided via
online technologies, including supervision by a certified teacher and provision of standards-
aligned curriculum.

As of the 2004-2005 school year, at least 22 states had established a virtual school.17 Sixteen
states have cyber charter schools and/or district programs.18 Florida Virtual School (FLVS) has
become a leader in developing and providing virtual education solutions to students throughout
the country. The Florida Legislature initially funded the FLVS as a pilot project in 1997, at
$1.3 million to begin course development with limited student enrollment. The 2000 Florida
Legislature enacted Statute 228.082, establishing FLVS as an independent education entity with
a separate governing board appointed by the governor.

Today, FLVS serves schools across the nation, offering virtual education solutions for grades six
to twelve, as well as for adults who are seeking GED alternatives. Courses are free to Florida
residents and are available to public, private and home school students. National and international
students may enroll in FLVS on a tuition basis. FLVS offers more than 80 courses—everything
from GED to honors to 11 Advanced Placement courses.19

Beginning in 2003-2004, FLVS is funded through the Florida Education Finance Program,
according to how many students pass the school’s online courses. Traditional public schools are
funded according to the number of students enrolled. The virtual school’s 2004-2005 budget
was approximately $16.2 million, based on 3,171 full time equivalent students. Prior to 2003-
2004, the FLVS was funded through a line item in the General Appropriations Act.20 In 2003,
the Florida Legislature also created a separate, full-time virtual K-8 pilot program that now
serves 1,000 students across the state.

States with Virtual and/or Cyber Charter Schools, 2004-2005 School Year

Virtual Schools

Cyber Charter Schools and/or District Programs

Both Options Available

No Options Available

Sources: “Technology Counts, Electronic Transfer: Moving Technology Dollars in New Directions," Education
Week, 24, no. 35, (May 5, 2005); and John Watson, “Keeping Pace with K-12 Online Learning” (Naperville,
Ill.: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory, October 2005).

National Conference of State Legislatures

Technology in K-12 Education 9
Online Tutoring for Students
Few things are more valuable to a student’s learning than one-on-one time with a knowledge-
able instructor. Limited time and teachers can make it difficult for a student to receive the
amount of individual attention he or she needs during the school day; tutoring programs also
are limited by the knowledge of the tutor and the time allotted. Online tutoring can be one
solution to these problems.

Beginning August 1, 2005, all Alabama students in fourth through twelfth grades are able to
take advantage of free online tutoring between the hours of 3:00 p.m. to midnight in the sub-
jects of math, science, social studies and English. Students can connect to a tutor through any
computer with Internet access. The tutors help students with homework through the use of
instant messaging, an interactive virtual “chalkboard” and shared Web browsing. Drawing and
diagramming features allow tutors to demonstrate math and science concepts. When the ses-
sion is completed, students can print their session for future reference or share it with a parent
or teacher. Both students and tutors complete surveys, which are shared each month with the
Alabama Public Library Service and the individual public libraries. Although its primary intent
is to assist school children, any Alabama citizen can take advantage of the service.

According to Rebecca Mitchell, Alabama’s state librarian, the program was started with federal
funds from the Institute of Museum and Library Services in the form of a Library Services
and Technology Act grant. The state partnered with tutor.com, which provides issue experts
who are current or retired teachers, college professors or graduate students and who undergo
an extensive background check and training. In the first three months of the program, there
were 19,000 tutoring sessions, the most popular of which were middle school math and science
assistance. The $300,000 federal grant lasts 12 months, and the funding for future years has
yet to be determined.21

Online Professional Development Opportunities for Teachers

Research has found that quality, ongoing professional development for teachers is essential to
ensure high-quality teaching and learning. As discussed earlier, teachers most often feel that
lack of time is a barrier to learning how to integrate technology into the classroom. By offering
online professional development, teachers have more freedom to schedule their own learning.
The Louisiana Department of Education provides professional development projects through
the Louisiana Center for Educational Technology (LCET), which was established to provide
professional development for teachers, administrators and school personnel in K-12 school
districts. The impetus for the program was the need to provide professional development for
educators that better suited their learning styles and their schedules.

The program includes graduate-level online courses, community of learner networks, and work-
shops for specific educational needs. Through a variety of experiences, it provides learning
opportunities and resources to support all teachers in their efforts to improve student learning
and achievement.22

Data Systems and Online Assessments

Data-driven decision making is becoming popular in educational settings, partly due to the No
Child Left Behind requirements and the capacity of information technology to allow decision
makers access to data.

National Conference of State Legislatures

10 Technology in K-12 Education

NCLB stipulates that all public school students must meet or exceed the state’s proficient level
of academic achievement by the end of the 2014 school year. It also requires that each state
develop a monitoring and accountability system to measure that targets are being reached. In
light of this, states and districts are beginning to use technology to create systems that allow
them to answer important questions, such as:
• Given where we are now, are we improving at a rate that will keep us on track to reach
the target in the time remaining?
• If we are improving too slowly, what must we do differently?23

In 2003, the Idaho Legislature passed HB 367, authorizing the State Board of Education to
provide for and implement the Idaho Student Information Management System (ISIMS) and
requiring all school districts in Idaho to use it to the full extent of its availability. ISIMS creates
a statewide, student information management system designed to provide new resources for
parents, teachers, students and all stakeholders of education in the state. The J.A. and Kathryn
Albertson Foundation dedicated $35 million to the development and implementation of the
ISIMS system. The plan expands a $3.5 million pilot program in 13 districts that allows the
districts to collect, maintain and share student information among their schools. The project
will build a centralized, uniform system that includes a host of web-based resources and tools
for education stakeholders.24

Virginia has developed a model and implemented a statewide initiative for integrating data
systems and statewide online assessments. The goal of this initiative is to have Virginia schools
use Internet-based systems to administer assessments to improve student achievement with
use of data by stakeholders. Online testing became a major component of the initiative due
to a need to speed up return of preliminary test results for educational decision making. Four
objectives of the initiative are to:
• Provide student access to computers at a ratio of one computer for every five stu-
dents;
• Create Internet-ready local area network capability in every school;
• Ensure adequate high-speed, high-bandwidth capability for instructional, remedial and
testing needs; and
• Establish a statewide Internet-based standards of learning test delivery system.

An executive order from the Virginia governor that required the entire state to move toward
“electronic government” was the first step in establishing this program. Developed through a
partnership between the Virginia legislature, the Virginia Department of Education and the
Governor’s Office, the legislature included Item 143 C. 11. of the 2000 Appropriation Act,
which by May 2004 received $232 million in support.25

E-Textbooks and Digital Instructional Materials

Accurate and current textbooks are crucial to quality education because teachers rely on them
to aid in the instructional practice. Textbooks represent a significant expenditure, however, and
updating them regularly can be a challenge for school districts.

Texas, one of few textbook-adoption states in the country, began early to incorporate digital
materials. In 1989, Texas amended the definition of a textbook to include “computer software”
and, in 2004, the State Board of Education adopted instructional materials for technology
applications that included many online and computer-based products. These materials are
available to schools for the 2005-2006 school year.

National Conference of State Legislatures

Technology in K-12 Education 11
During the 2005 legislative session, several proposals were considered that would keep Texas
moving in the digital direction. Although none were passed by the Legislature, they continue
to be considered and debated. Several proposals would add flexibility to the process of textbook
adoption, changing the review and adoption cycle and the funding and purchasing process.
Another proposal provides for an instructional materials and technology allotment and allows
for purchase of traditional print materials, digital materials, technology, professional develop-
ment and network infrastructure.26

Emerging Technologies
If you were to walk into any school in America, you would likely see a wide variety of technolo-
gies in use by students, teachers and administrators beyond those discussed above. Unique
use of technology tends to occur first in schools and districts. The following excerpt from Hot
Technologies for K-12 Schools, a report from the Consortium for School Networking (CoSN),
highlights emerging technologies in schools.

Addressing diverse learning styles

One emerging technology is classroom audio enhancement, which evenly
distributes the teacher’s voice above background noise in the classroom, mak-
ing the sound more intelligible to students. According to CoSN, research
shows that all students, and especially those with attention deficit problems
and those for whom listening is an effective learning style, benefit from this
technology. In Anaheim Public Schools in California, a study of third and
fourth graders showed gains in reading, math, language and spelling scores in
sound-field enhanced classrooms, compared to the previous year’s test scores
without audio enhancement implementation.

Galvanizing the instructional process

Datacasting allows teachers to go online to find a rich collection of high quality
media content packaged with software, interactive time-lines and activities,
and games, to stream into classroom computers or TVs. Teachers can access
and navigate large data files easily using the Internet, select what they need,
and have it delivered to their desktop computers immediately or overnight.
In North Texas, the public television datacasting service provides more than
75,000 K-12 students and teachers with more than 8,000 learning objects.

Improving assessment and evaluation

Digital assessments come in all shapes and sizes and have the power to deliver
immediate results using a wireless or online tool. Students answer questions
in a classroom setting electronically using a remote control-like device, PDA,
or graphing calculator. Teachers see the results immediately on a computer,
gaining immediate insight into “knowing what the students know,” allowing
them to adjust classroom time to meet the needs of the students. In Cleveland,
Ohio, math and language arts teachers have built diagnostic assessments, called
“testlets” for each of the indicators in Ohio state standards.

National Conference of State Legislatures

12 Technology in K-12 Education

Conclusion
Understanding why and how technology is being used in schools is an important first step for
state legislators. Education is lagging behind all other industries in adopting technology as a
tool to increase efficiency and improve performance, and the pace of change will not slow as
we progress through the 21st century. Effective implementation of technology in education will
require thoughtful and diligent leadership at all levels.

The National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), through the Education

Technology Partnership and as part of a project with the NCSL Foundation, will
continue over the course of a year to produce materials that assist state legislatures as
they consider their role in education technology. Thanks to the legislators, legislative
staff and private partners who are participating.

Co-Chairs
Representative Dave Hogue, Utah
Delegate Nancy King, Maryland
Julie Pelegrin, Colorado

American Federation of Teachers

Apple Computers
Audio Enhancement
Connections Academy
Dell Computers
National Education Association
Microsoft
Software Information Industry Association

National Conference of State Legislatures

Technology in K-12 Education 13
Notes
1. Partnership of 21st Century Skills, “Learning for the 21st Century: A Report and Mile Guide
for 21st Century Skills” (Washington, D.C.: Partnership for 21st Century Skills, n.d.).

2. Glenn M. Kleiman, “Does Technology Combined with Inquiry-Based Lessons Increase Stu-
dents’ Learning?” (Newton, Massachusetts: Education Development Center, 2004).

3. North Central Regional Educational Laboratory, “Critical Issue: Using Technology to Improve
Student Achievement” (Naperville, Ill.: NCREL, 2005).

4. “Insights and Ideas of Teachers on Technology,” Highlights from the National Report on Net-
Day Speak Up Day for Teachers, 2004; http://www.netday.org/sud4teachers_2004_report.htm.

5. U.S. Department of Education, “Federal Funding for Educational Technology and How It Is
Used in the Classroom: A Summary of Findings from the Integrated Studies of Educational Technol-
ogy” (Washington, D.C.: U.S. DoE, 2003).

6. Education Development Center, “Effective Access: Teachers’ Use of Digital Resources in

STEM Teaching” (Newton, Mass.: EDC, 2005).

7. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Innovation and Improvement, Office of Non-Public

Education, http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oii/nonpublic/erate.html.

8. U.S. Department of Education, “Guidance on the Enhancing Education Through Technology

Program” (Washington D.C.: U.S. DoE, March 11, 2002).

9, “Technology Counts, Electronic Transfer: Moving Technology Dollars in New Directions,”

Education Week 24, no. 35 (May 5, 2005).

10. Texas Education Agency, http://www.tea.state.tx.us/technology/allot/index.html.

11. “Technology Counts.”

12. North Central Regional Education Laboratory, “Sustaining Educational Technology: Fund-
ing Challenges and Opportunities for Policymakers,” Policy Issues 4 (Naperville, Ill.: NCREL, Febru-
ary 2000).

13. James Cengiz Gulek and Hakan Demirtas, “Learning with Technology: The Impact of
Laptop Use on Student Achievement,” The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment 3, no. 2
(January 2005).

14. Paula B. Gravelle, “Early Evidence From The Field: The Maine Learning Technology Initia-
tive: Impact on the Digital Divide” (Occasional Paper #2) (Portland, Maine: University of Southern
Maine, Center for Education Policy, Applied Research, and Evaluation, April 2003).

15. National Center for Education Statistics, “Distance Education Courses for Public Elementary
and Secondary School Students, 2002-2003” (Washington D.C.: NCES, March 2005).

16. Ibid.

17. “Technology Counts.”

National Conference of State Legislatures

14 Technology in K-12 Education

18. John Watson, “Keeping Pace with K-12 Online Learning” (Naperville, Ill.: North Central
Regional Educational Laboratory, October 2005).

19. Florida Virtual School Web site, http://www.flvs.net/educators/fact_sheet.php.

20. Florida Department of Education, “2004-2005 Funding for Florida School Districts,” http:
//www.firn.edu/doe/fefp/pdf/fefpdist.pdf.

21. Rebecca Mitchell, interview with author, October 25, 2005.

22. U.S. Department of Education, “Toward a New Golden Age in American Education–How
the Internet, the Law and Today’s Students Are Revolutionizing Expectations,” National Education
Technology Plan 2004 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. DoE, 2004).

23. Arie van der Ploeg and Yeow Meng Thum, “Finding Additional Value in New Account-
ability Systems” (Naperville, Ill.: Center for Educational Decisions Support Systems, North Central
Regional Education Laboratory, December 2004).

24. “Toward a New Golden Age in American Education–How the Internet, the Law and Today’s
Students Are Revolutionizing Expectations.”

25. State Education Technology Directors’ Association, National Leadership Institute Toolkit
2003, http://www.setda.org/Toolkit2003/.

26. Anita Givens, Revamping the Textbook Adoption Cycle, Texas Style, Upgrade (Washington,
D.C.: Software and Information Industry Association, August/September 2005).

National Conference of State Legislatures

Technology in K-12 Education 15

National Conference of State Legislatures

16 Technology in K-12 Education

National Conference of State Legislatures

William T. Pound, Executive Director

Denver Office Washington, D.C. Office

7700 East First Place 444 North Capitol Street, N.W., Suite 515
Denver, Colorado 80230 Washington, D.C. 20001
(303) 364-7700 (202) 624-5400

www.ncsl.org

© 2006 by the National Conference of State Legislatures. All rights reserved.

Item #013156 ISBN 1-58024-436-X

Price: $10

National Conference of State Legislatures