Educators and technology standards: Influencing the digital divide

Journal of Research on Technology in Education

Volumn 34, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 326-335

  Swain, Colleen ^a   Pearson, Tamara ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

^b NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

Digital Divide; Professional development; Technology experiences; Technology standards

Indexed keywords

EID: 85007826477     PISSN: 15391523     EISSN: 19450818     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15391523.2002.10782353     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Becker H. (1994). How exemplary computer-using teachers differ from other teachers: Implications for realizing the potential of computers in schools. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 26(3), 291-321.
2. Becker, H. J. (2000). Who's wired and who's not: Children's access to and use of computer technology. The Future of Children, 10(2), 44-75.
3. Berson, M. (1996). Effectiveness of computer technology in the social studies: A review of the literature. journal of Research on Computing in Education, 28(4), 486-499.
4. Chessler, M., Rockman, S., & Walker, L. (1998). Powerful tools for schooling: Second year study of the laptop program. San Francisco
5. Rockman et al. CEO Forum (1999). Professional development: A link to better learning. Washington, DC: Author. Available:www.ceoforum.org/downloads/99report. Pdf
6. CEO Forum (2000). School technology and readiness report. Washington, DC: Author. Available: www.ceoforum.org/downloads/report3. pdf.
7. Chessler, M., Rockman, S., & Walker, L. (1998). Powerful tools for schooling: Second year study of the laptop program. San Francisco: Rockman Et AI.
8. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt University. (1994). Multimedia environments for developing literacy in at-risk students. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
9. Coley, R., Cradler, J., & Engel, P. (1998). Computers and classrooms: The status of technology in US. schools. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
10. Education Week on the Web. (1999). Technology counts 99 [Online document]. Bethesda, MD: Education Week. Available: www.edweek.com/sreports/tc99.
11. Hill, C. (2001). Developing educational standards [Online document]. Available: http:/I edStandards.org/standards.html.
12. International Society for Technology in Education. (2000). National Educational Technology Standards for Students: Connecting curriculum and technology. Eugene, O R: Author.
13. International Society for Technology in Education. (2002a). National Educational Technology Standards for Teachers: Preparing teachers to use technology. Eugene, O R: Author.
14. International Society for Technology in Education. (2002b). National Educational Technology Standards for Administrators. Eugene, OR: Author.
15. Krueger, A. B (2000). The Digital Divide in educating African-American students and workers. In C. Conrad & M. Simms (Eds.), Education and training for the Black worker in the 21st century (pp. 12-16). Washington, DC: Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies.
16. Kulik, J. (1994). Meta-analytic studies on findings on computer-based instruction. In E. Baker & H. O'Neil (Eds.), Technology assessment in education and training (pp. 9-34).
17. Hilsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Mann, D., Shakeshafr:, C., Becker, J., & Kottkamp, R. (1999). West Virginia's basic skills/computer educatimz program: An ana£vsis ofstudent achievement. Santa Monica, CA: Milken Exchange on Education Technology. (ERIC No. ED 429 575)
18. National Education Goah Panel. (2002). National education goals panel [Online document]. Washington, DC: Author. Available: www.negp.gov/.
19. Niederhauser, D., & Stoddart, T. (1994, February). Teachers' perspectives on computer assisted instruction: Transmission versus construction of knowledge. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. (ERJC No. ED 374 116)
20. Pattison, C., & Berkas, N. (2000). Integrating standards into the curriculum [Online document]. Napen-ille, IL: North Central Regional Educational Laboratory. Available: www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/content/currclum/cu300.htm
21. President's Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology. (1997). Report to the President on the use of:echnology to strengthen K-12 education in the United States. [Online document] Washington, DC: U.S. Government, Office of Science and Technology Policy. Available: www.ostp.gov/PCAST/k-12ed.html.
22. Ronnkvist, A., Dexter, S., & Anderson, R. (1998). Technology support: Its depth, breath and impact in America's schools. Teaching learning, & computing. National survey report #5. Irvine, CA: Center for Research on Information Technology and Organization. (ERIC No. ED 445 658)
23. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1996). Computer support for knowledgebuilding communities. InT. Koschmann (Ed.), CSCL: Theory and practice of an emergingparadigm (pp. 249-268).
24. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Schacter, J. (1999). The impact of education technology on student achievement: What the most current research has to say. Santa Monica, CA: Milken Exchange on Education Technology. (ERIC No. ED 430 537)
25. Shields, M. K & Behrman, R. E. (2000). Children and computer technology: Analysis and recommendations. The Future of Children, 10 (2), 4-30.
26. Sivin-Kachala, J. (1998). Report on the effectiveness of technology in schools, 1990-1997.
27. Washington, DC: Software Publisher's Association
28. Stanley, R., Lindauer, P., & Petrie, G. (1998). Factors that increase teachers' use of computer technology. ERS Spectrum, 16(3), 42-46.
29. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (1999a). Student computer use. (NCES Publication 1999-011). Washington, DC: U.S. Governoent Printing Office
30. U.S. Department of Educaion, Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (1999b). Internet access in public and private schools. (NCES Publication 2000-002)
31. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office U.S. Department of Educaion, Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (1999c).
32. Teachers'fertilizg of preparedness. (NCES Publication 2000-003). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
33. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (2000a). Internet access in U S. public schools and classrooms: 1994-99. (NCES Publication 2000-086) Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
34. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educatioral Research and Improvement. (2000b). Teacher use of computers and the Internet in public schools (NCES Publication 2000-090). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
35. U.S. Department of Education, Office ofEducational Research and Improvement. (2001). Internet access in US. public schools and classrooms: 1994-2000. (NCES Publication 2001-071). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
36. U.S. Department of Labor. (1991). What work requires ofschools: A SCANS report for America 2000. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
37. Wenglinsky, H. (1998). Does it compute? The relationship between educational technology and student achievement in mathematics. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. (ERIC No. ED 425 191)