1. Maine Learning Technology Initiative: Impacts, Benefits and Costs of the School Laptop Program Dr. David L. Silvernail, Director Maine Education Policy Research Institute Caroline Pinkham, Research Associate Center for Education Policy, Applied Research and Evaluation University of Southern Maine Gorham, Maine, United States March 2013

2. Maine Legislative Mandate: How are the laptops being used by teachers and students? What are the benefits and impacts of the laptops on instruction and learning? What are the costs of the middle school laptop program? What are the relationships between teacher and school characteristics and laptop use? 2

3. Multi-Year Research and Evaluation Strategies: A Mixed Methods Approach 1. Longitudinal survey studies with teachers, students, principals, and others. 2. Selected site visits and observations. 3. Interviews with stratified samples of school personnel. 4. Analysis of documents. 5. Controlled experimental and quasi-experimental studies. 3

4. How Are the Laptops Being Used by Teachers and Students? www.usm.maine.edu/cepare/recent-cepare-publications A Middle School One-to-One Laptop Program: The Maine Experience 4

5. Table 1 5 Key: A few times a week or more

6. Table 2 6

7. 7 Table 3

8. Table 4 Use Levels: High School 1-to-1 Laptops and iPads 8

9. What are the Benefits and Impacts of the Laptops on Instruction and Learning 9

10. Table 5 * Percent Strongly Agree /Somewhat Agree 10

11. Table 6 11 * Percent Strongly Agree /Somewhat Agree Teacher Perceived Benefits of Laptops for Their Students*

12. Evidence Based Impacts 12

13. Impact Study 1: Improving Mathematics Performance: The Importance of Professional Development Study Design: Random control trial (RCT) study on mathematics 2-year professional development program Results: Teacher knowledge significantly improved. Teaching practices and uses of technology changed. Students in experimental group classrooms scored significantly higher on: 1. Tests specifically designed for the study 2. Statewide mathematics test 13

14. Impact Study 2: Improving Writing Performance: The Importance of Matching the Technology with the Learning Process Study Design: Causal-comparative study Compared writing performance on statewide Achievement test before and after introduction of laptops. Results: Writing scores improved approximately 1/3 of a standard deviation. Twice as many students who used the laptops in the writing program met state proficiency standards as those who used laptops only as a finishing tool. Economically disadvantaged students outperformed economically advantaged students in some situations. Overall writing performances significantly improved- both using laptop and paper/pencil. 14

15. Impact Study 3: Improving Science Learning: The Importance of Matching the Technology with the Learning Content Study Design: Field-based quasi-experimental study Using animation to learn earth science Results: Students using animation scored significantly higher on comprehension tests. Students who used animation had significantly higher retention scores. Students who used animation reported experiencing hard fun. 15

16. What are the Costs of the Middle School Laptop Program? 16

17. 2009-10 State MLTI Costs ItemUnitsYearly Cost 1.Middle School Student29,570 @ $242 per unit$7,155,940 2.Middle School Staff4,468 @ $242 per unit$1,081,256 3.Network Fee per School225 @ $7,817 per unit$1,758,825 4.MLTI StaffTen full and part-time staff$471,905 Total Costs$10,467,926 Cost per Unit per Year$308 per Unit per Year 17 Table 7

18. 2009-10 Local School District MLTI Cost Local District No of Laptops Ave Cost Per Laptop Range in Yearly Cost Per Laptop LowHigh Small SAUs (0-149 pupils) 1247$215$24$333 Medium SAUs (150-399 pupils) 3062$342$39$976 Large SAUs (400-2000 pupils) 5113$288$146$412 All Districts (n=28)9422$283$24$976 18 Table 8

19. 19 Average Cost per Laptop Unit per Year District\State No. of Units Yearly Cost per Unit Pre 1-to-1 Yearly Cost per Unit Post 1-to-1 District 14401$262$780 District 2850$577$541 District 31079$603$516 District 4540N/A$748 Non-Maine 1-to-1 Program Cost Average N/A$481$646 State of Maine34,038N/A$591 Table 9

20. Research in Progress Discrete mathematics Comparing achievement across states Characteristics of different adopters 20

21. Research in Progress: Success has led to a new challenge Benefit of MLTI program=created equity of access to technology for all students. Challenge of MLTI program=created inequities in opportunities to learn well using technology. 21

22. Research Question: How do we cross the chasm Analysis using two paradigms for examining technology use: Rogers (1962) theory of the diffusion of innovations. Moores (1991) theory of disconnect between adopter groups. 22

23. Rogers Categories of Innovation Adopters Innovators: The groundbreaking teachers who place a high value on trying new technologies like laptops, and are eager to use these new technologies even if they are not sure how to use them. Early adopters: These are teachers who believe strongly in the value of innovative technologies such as laptops and are willing to try those new strategies that innovator teachers have used with success. Early majority: These are teachers who can be convinced to implement new technologies like laptops once they have seen others teachers they respect use new these new technologies successfully, and have been given professional development. Late majority: These are skeptical teachers who need to be encouraged to use new technologies like laptops even when they have received professional development. These teachers have various reasons for their reluctance, but will conform to the cultural norms of the school. Laggards: These are the teachers who resist implementing new technologies such as laptops, and will use these new technologies only when they are mandated.

24. Rogers Innovations Adoption Curve 24

25. Comparison of Rogers and Maine Teacher Innovation Adoption Curves 25

26. Moores Revised Innovation Adoption Curve 26

27. Comparison of Rogers and Maine Teacher Innovation Adoption Curves 27

28. Perceptions of High and Low Users Scale: Higher scores for Categories A, B, D=more positive perceptions; Higher scores for Categories C and E=greater barriers. 28 Perception Categories High Users Low Users A. Administrative Support 3.70* 3.50 B. Professional Development 2.31 2.11 C. Use Infrastructure 1.94 2.02 D. Perceived Benefits 3.84 3.19 E. Innovation Characteristics 1.79 2.43

29. Differences in Perceptions Administrative support is important, particularly to low users. Administrative expectations and modeling behavior are important. Low users less likely to take the initiative in acquiring training, and turning to colleagues for help. More low users believe using technology will require too much work to change their established curriculum. More low users do not believe that using technology is compatible with the way they like to teach. More low users do not believe using technology will improve their students learning. 29

30. Observations on the Maine MLTI School Laptop Program 1.A clear strategic vision and plan is important. 2.Articulation and management of expectations is important. 3.Technology use should be appropriate to the task. 4.Administrator support, expectations, and modeling are important. 5.Strong, meaningful and sustained professional development are crucial. 6.Professional development may need to be customized for different categories of adopters. 7.Costs will vary depending upon program design. 8.Ongoing formative evaluation is very important. 28

31. http://www.usm.maine.edu/cepare Inquiries may be directed to: http://www.usm.maine.edu/cepare 31 Copies of MLTI research and evaluation reports available on the following website: Dr. David L. Silvernail: Telephone: 207.780.5044 E-mail: davids@usm.maine.edudavids@usm.maine.edu Caroline Pinkham: Telephone: 207.228.8072 E-mail: cpinkham@usm.maine.educpinkham@usm.maine.edu Amy Johnson: Telephone: 207.228.8221 E-mail: amyj@usm.maine.eduamyj@usm.maine.edu