U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OFFICE OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH AND IMPROVEMENT EDUCATION POLICY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGIES JUNE 1991 EDITED BY: Arthur D. Sheekey July 24, 1990 INTRODUCTION This report consists of eight papers that were prepared for two conferences co-sponsored by the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI) in the Spring of 1990. The first five papers were commissioned for the "1990 State Technology Leadership Conference" conducted by the Council of Chief State School Officers in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Each provides an overview, an analysis of issues, and recommendations. The remaining three papers resulted from a workshop on "Education and Telecommunications Technologies" at the Annenberg School of Communications' Washington Program. All papers are directed at concerns of policy makers and focus on critical issues and problems associated with the application of new and advanced telecommunications technologies for improving elementary and secondary education. The authors are knowledgeable experts who draw upon recent research and policy studies, as well as their own personal experiences in adopting and adapting instructional technologies. Federal, state and local policy makers should find these papers especially useful in planning for the inevitable integration of schools and telecommunications networks, and in identifying critical issues associated with the application, management, financing and governance of these alternative educational delivery systems. (1) TECHNOLOGY AND STUDENTS AT RISK OF SCHOOL FAILURE David W. Hornbeck begins his paper with a description of the overall decline in the condition of poor children: economic, non-academic, demographic and academic performances. He then describes several practical ways of using technology, and claims: "we have the means and the know-how" to use computers to teach basic skills. Hornbeck observes that many "technologies are available and they work," and, "when no satisfactory alternative is available," they can do a satisfactory job. His five recommendations for making use of technology to help improve the performance and progress of at-risk youths are: monitoring student performance, providing tracking and records of students, identifying indicators of at-risk students, relieving teachers of administrative burdens, and tracking individualized student objectives. (2) ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY INNOVATIONS AND APPLICATIONS Suzanne G. Douglas and Louis Bransford provide an historical perspective as well as up-to-date description of the technologies which constitute the facilities necessary for offering "distance learning." Transmission technologies, including, satellites, fiber optics, and cables are now interdependent and readily connected to low-cost reception technologies, which most schools can afford. The authors provide descriptions of hardware systems, including interactive audio and video technologies, that lay persons should find understandable. Douglas and Bransford emphasize systematic planning, early involvement of teachers and the importance of a broad vision for applications of available telecommunications technologies for transforming the nation's educational system. (3) POLICIES FOR EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY: A NATIONAL, STATE, AND LOCAL AGENDA Based on research supported by the Annenberg/CPB projects, Richard T. Hezel urged states to develop policies to ensure the equitable distribution of education and public service programs offered by telecommunications. Hezel says planning at the state level should be centralized and that states now have a host of planning models from which to choose. Planning for a statewide or regional network should begin with a thorough needs assessment. States are urged to form new partnerships and consortia, but governors and legislatures should recognize the need for designating one agency with governance authority for educational telecommunications. Other issues addressed by Hezel include: management, program resources, staffing, and training and evaluation. (4) TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND RESTRUCTURING: SUPPORTING CHANGE OR CREATING IT Citing a quote from Bela Banathy, Saul Rockman reminds us that "the current crisis in education is not a crisis of performance, it is a crisis of vision." He provides an exceptionally good and brief historical perspective on educational technology, reminding readers that few if any of the technology demonstration projects of the 60's and 70's succeeded in changing the structure of schools or the delivery of instruction. Rockman cautions policy makers against "technohype," which he describes as the repeated efforts by advocates and commercial vendors to sell technology as "the solution" for all or most educational problems. Rockman suggests two options: to view educational technology as tools to augment the existing system, or to recognize the full capacity of telecommunications and interactive technologies "to create restructuring," and in the process, transform the entire system. Clearly, Rockman favors using technology to change the fundamental way in which teachers teach and students learn. (5) USING TECHNOLOGY TO SUPPORT PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FOR TEACHERS AND ADMINISTRATORS: IMPLICATIONS OR STATE-LEVEL POLICY AND PLANNING The authors, Judson Hixson and Beau Fly Jones draw upon their knowledge and experience in working with schools and systems throughout the mid-west region of the nation. Their framework for changing and improving school learning is based on five strategic issues: (1) a recognition that schools and teachers need to make use of a wide variety of instructional resources, including those available from technology-based programs; (2) a recognition that the design and delivery of instructional programs must reflect changing demographics and needs of individual students; (3) the need for a revised curricula and more realistic assessment mechanisms; (4) an alteration of the classroom environment to foster more personalized and collaborative learning; and (5) the need to ensure linkages among formal schools, work places, and the wider community. Technology, they claim, could empower the teachers to communicate with students in schools, and with other agencies, organizations and individuals beyond school settings. (6) THE MASS LEARNPIKE: EDUCATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMES TO THE COMMONWEALTH The "Mass Learnpike," a distance learning network involving the use of 50 downlinks and some 400 schools, was launched by the Massachusetts legislation in 1990 at a time when the state of Massachusetts was experiencing serious declines in revenues. Inabeth Miller, the new Executive Director of the Massachusetts Corporation for Educational Telecommunications (MCET), describes how a new statewide consortium got underway and how it quickly progressed. She explains "the value in developing a positive mythology in a organization" through the metaphor of the "Mass Turnpike." Miller agrees with Hezel's recommendation to initiate a statewide plan by identifying common needs and interests. And, the critical importance of building coalitions of prospective constituents--in this case local schools and teachers. Ms. Miller identifies the practical and political processes, the contacts necessary for building a new telecommunications infrastructure, and how it can be designed to complement both educational needs and political interests. (7) A DEPICTION OF DISTANCE EDUCATION This paper was prepared by Donald C. Holznagel for educators in the Northwest region of the nation who have begun assessing problems and issues associated with technology-delivered educational programs in and across state boundaries. Some of the distance education programs identified by Holznagel have been operating successfully for more than five years. He explains how the Northwest region is already using instructional programs originating in other parts of the nation. The author attributes much of the progress to rural interests and to the availability of low-cost transmission systems (i.e., satellite networks). To progress further, he suggests the establishment of a regional clearinghouse, a mechanism for regional coordination, technical assistance research and evaluation all of which could be assigned to Regional Education Laboratories. (8) TELECOMMUNICATIONS: THE CRITICAL RESOURCE FOR ACHIEVING NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL GOALS The final paper includes an overview summary of issues identified as part of a workshop conducted by the Office of Educational Research and Improvement in conjunction with the Annenberg School of Communications' Washington Program and the Public Service Satellite Consortium. More than twenty experts participated in the workshop in an effort to identify and discuss critical policy issues relating to the application of telecommunications technologies and education. Arthur Sheekey and Suzanne Douglas provide a context to understanding the need to change policies and institutional arrangements associated with formal education and the domestic telecommunications infrastructure. Both may be outmoded. The opportunity, according to the authors and expert consultants, is in matching the interests and resources of educators addressing national educational goals with those responsible for planning and developing public and private telecommunications networks. Telecommunications technologies, which combine fiber optics, microwave, cable television, satellite linkages and a host of newer and low-cost interactive and transmission devices, have already transformed other sectors and many institutions in this nation. We should expect technologies to have a similar effect on schools and the delivery of education-related services in the not-too-distant future. Educators need to participate in the planning and development of these communications resources, and to proposed strategies to ensure they complement, rather than hinder, the efforts of teachers and school administrators. To obtain a copy of this publication write to: U.S. Department of Education Education Information Branch 555 New Jersey Avenue N.W. Room 300 Mail Stop 5641 Washington, DC 20208 or call (202-424-1616) Copies are available on a FIRST COME FIRST SERVE BASIS. Please use reference number IS-91-989.