1. CET 692 Leadership for 1 to 1 Computing January 17, 2007 Class Session 1 Tom Farrell Mark Hawkes

2. Tonight's Agenda Welcome to CET 692 Class Website and Syllabus “Creating the Case for 1 to 1 Computing” Classroom Connections: Year 2 Programmed Professional Development After 3 years... Results at DSU

3. Our Newest Motto “If we teach today’s students as we taught yesterday’s, we rob them of the future.” John Dewey

4. John Dewey: A Who2 Profile http://who2.com/jeeves/johndewey.html

5. Traditional New Learning Environments Teacher-centered Instruction Student-Centered Learning Single-sense StimulationMulti-sensory Stimulation Single-path ProgressionMulti-path Progression Single mediaMultimedia Isolated workCollaborative work Information deliveryInformation exchange

6. Traditional New Learning Environments Passive learningActive / exploratory / inquiry-based learning Factual, knowledge- based Critical thinking, informed decision making Reactive responseProactive / planned action Isolated, artificial contextAuthenticate, real world content Source: International Society for Technology Education (ISTE) Nets Project National Educational Technology Standards for Students, June 1998 p. 2

7. What is 1 to 1 Computing? “Anytime, anywhere technology for every student and teacher” Concept once never thought possible, but now becoming a reality.

8. Some Thoughts It is not a matter of if we have 1 to 1 but rather a question of when we will all have 1 to 1 We were a very vocal opponent of 1 to 1 computing at DSU Now it is “Give me 1 to 1 or give me retirement”

9. A Short Evolution of Classroom Computing Started with 1 or 2 computers per school Introduced labs and students came to the lab Room-based video Introduced laptop carts and computers came to students

10. From this... Computer Lab

11. To this... DDN Room—Lemmon H.S.

12. DDN Room—Redfield H.S.

13. DDN Room—Pollock H.S.

14. DDN Room—Watertown H.S.

15. DDN Room—Watertown M.S.

16. DDN Room—Canton H.S.

17. DDN Room—Shannon Co. H.S.

18. DDN Room—DeSmet H.S.

19. DDN Room—Faith H.S.

20. State Delivery Model

21. Regional Delivery Model

22. To this... Wireless, DSU

23. The Early Research on Mobile Computing Students have improved inquiry skills. Evidence points to improved student achievement in certain areas. Students report that laptops make their school work easier and help improve the quality of their work. Students are more motivated to learn. Technology allows teachers to more easily differentiate instruction. Teachers find laptops useful in developing integrated lessons. Teachers report improved communication with their students. Closes the gaps between the have’s/have not’s.

24. 1 to 1 Based Each teacher with their own wireless mobile device Each student with their own wireless mobile device Both have access to their device 24/7 Changes greatly how we teach and students learn

25. The Planets Are Aligning Wireless is coming of age with security as well as prices continue to decline steadily Size, weight, and price of mobile devices have continued to decrease while the power continues to increase The functionality of today’s laptops continue to increase with built in wireless, built in optical drives and even card readers

26. Guidelines for Successful Technology Initiatives in K -12 Schools Focus on learning WITH technology, not ABOUT technology Emphasize content and pedagogy and not just hardware Give special attention to professional development

27. Guidelines (cont’d) Engage in realistic budgeting Ensure equitable, universal access Institute a major program of experimental research

28. Other Thoughts of Laptops Children not only can work with, but also feel empowered with Can access many textbooks electronically Ease of collaboration Source: MIT Joseph Jacobson ($100 laptop concept) http://wired- vig.wired.com/wired/archive/13.04/view.html?pg=2

29. So Where is One to One being Implemented Many web based resources describing implementations Will attempt to share some here tonight and more from the WebCT class site Texas Technology Immersion Project http://www.tea.state.tx.us/press/techimmersion.htm lhttp://www.tea.state.tx.us/press/techimmersion.htm l Hopkins, Minnesota –http://weblogs.hopkins.k12.mn.us/onetoone/http://weblogs.hopkins.k12.mn.us/onetoone/

30. Additional 1 to 1 Implementations Fullerton, California –Middle School Implementation http://www.fsd.k12.ca.us/menus/1to1/index.ssi Vermont 1 to 1 –Not high school, but share experiences http://www.vermontinstitutes.org/tech/initiatives/12 1/121.htmhttp://www.vermontinstitutes.org/tech/initiatives/12 1/121.htm

31. More 1 to 1 Implementations Manatee Florida –Site forms and ideas http://www.manatee.k12.fl.us/sites/IT/summer03/in dex.htmlhttp://www.manatee.k12.fl.us/sites/IT/summer03/in dex.html Michigan and Indiana Plans –http://www.eschoolnews.com/news/showstory.cfm?ArticleID=5660http://www.eschoolnews.com/news/showstory.cfm?ArticleID=5660

32. More 1 to 1 Implementations Connecticut Plans for English Classrooms –http://www.eschoolnews.com/news/showStory ts.cfm?ArticleID=5524http://www.eschoolnews.com/news/showStory ts.cfm?ArticleID=5524 State of Maine –One of the most noted and most publicized –Seventh and eighth graders http://www.state.me.us/mlte/

33. Additional Resources K -12 One to One Computing Handbook published by the Center for Digital Education –Available hardcopy by contacting mark.hawkes@dsu.edu with U. S. postal mailing address and number of copies for your site. We have a limited supply. mark.hawkes@dsu.edu

34. Center for Digital Education Digital Editions http://www.centerdigitaled.com/reports.php

35. Classroom Connections: Year 2 Target: High Schools Funding: State one-third of the laptops/tablets which includes the basic software package; initial professional development for teachers, administrators and technical support people.

36. Classroom Connections: Costs to Schools Costs of setting up the wireless infrastructure Access points Electrical Outlets Ongoing tech support Some long-term professional development costs. Purchases of instructional software Screen management systems Projection systems

37. Classroom Connections: Device and Conditions Device: Gateway Tablet 285 (majority) Criteria for participation: Financial means to participate in the program Ability to implement training of staff and students Availability of a district technology plan Commitment from the school board and community Compliance with evaluation activities

38. Classroom Connections: Professional Development Advance Team Symposia May, 2007 Team: Building Principal, Technology Coordinator, Two Teachers Topics: Overview of the devices and support software, Demonstration of Applications, Laptop roll-out Delivery: Central location by vendors, experts, practitioners

39. Classroom Connections: Professional Development School-Based Assembly July 2007—3 Days Participants: High School Instructional Staff, 2-5 sophomore/junior students Topics: Content Development in Disciplinary Curriculum Teams, Classroom Management Delivery: At each pilot site location by facilitation team

40. Classroom Connections: Professional Development Content Symposia Early August, 2007—1-2 days Participants: High school staff within content areas Topics: Strategies for student engagement within content areas (math, science, languages, social studies, etc.). Content teams from each pilot site to share their curriculum development products/ideas. Delivery: Symposia at Dakota State University.

41. Classroom Connections Tentative Timeline –RFP process Publication of RFP January: 17, 2006 Answers to all Questions: Open Applications Submission Deadline: Feb. 21 Review & Evaluation of applications: March 9 Approximate Award Date: March 10-12

42. Faculty Level of WMCI Agreement

43. Faculty/Student Level of WMCI Agreement

44. Student Level of WMCI Agreement

45. Faculty Attitudes by College

46. Student Attitudes by College

47. Faculty WMCI Concerns

48. Student WMCI Concerns

49. Course: HIST-152 Spring 2004, without Tablet PCs Spring 2005, with Tablet PCs Number of observations (n)6384 Minimum48.33378.718 Maximum100.66752.333 Mean48.333101.333 Standard Deviation (SD)11.33012.001 Probability (p)0.807 Significance level = 0.050.05 Reject null hypothesisFail Course Comparison Data Comparison of learning outcomes between Fall-03 and Fall-04 classes, HIST-152

50. Course Comparison Data Comparison of learning outcomes between fall 2003 and fall 2004 classes, HIST-121 Course: HIST-121 Fall 2003, without Tablet PCs Fall 2004, with Tablet PCs Number of observations (n)1937 Minimum53.00044.000 Maximum98.50095.500 Mean77.76376.527 Standard Deviation (SD)13.43510.702 Probability (p)0.730 Significance level0.05 Reject null hypothesisFail

51. Course Comparison Data Comparison of learning outcomes between spring 2003 and spring 2004 classes, CIS-251 Course: CIS-251 Spring 2003, without Tablet PCs Spring 2004, with Tablet PCs Number of observations (n)5054 Minimum52.75056.750 Maximum93.50094.500 Mean77.32877.132 Standard Deviation (SD)9.9619.518 Probability (p)0.919 Significance level0.05 Reject null hypothesisFail

52. Course Comparison Data Within-treatment comparison of learning outcomes between 3 sections of the fall 2004 classes, ENG-101 Course: ENG-101, with Tablet PCs Fall 2004, Section A Fall 2004, Section B Fall 2004, Section C Number of observations (n)251822 Minimum60.13559.94060.948 Maximum98.58198.21299.603 Mean84.11380.03879.646 Standard Deviation (SD)9.25611.16610.481 Probability (p)0.280 Significance level0.05 Reject null hypothesisFail

53. Course Comparison Data Comparison of learning outcomes between fall 2003 and fall 2004 classes, ENG-101 Course: ENGL-101 Fall 2003, without Tablet PCs Fall 2004, with Tablet PCs Number of observations (n)7765 Minimum47.80059.940 Maximum98.80099.603 Mean83.64281.873 Standard Deviation (SD)11.47610.523 Probability (p)0.242 Significance level0.05 Reject null hypothesisFail

54. Course Comparison Data Within-treatment comparison of learning outcomes between 2 sections of fall 2003 class, Math-102 Course: Math-102, without Tablet PCs Fall 2003, Section A Fall 2003, Section B Number of observations (n)4228 Minimum21.33316.667 Maximum92.33383.000 Mean54.23849.655 Standard Deviation (SD)18.16020.316 Probability (p)0.339 Significance level0.05 Reject null hypothesisFail

55. Course Comparison Data Comparison of learning outcomes between fall 2003 and fall 2004 classes, Math-102 Course: Math-102 Fall 2003, without Tablet PCs Fall 2004, with Tablet PCs Number of observations (n)7036 Minimum16.66731.000 Maximum92.33384.750 Mean52.40561.792 Standard Deviation (SD)19.04114.365 Probability (p)0.006 Significance level0.05 Reject null hypothesisReject

56. Faculty Qualitative Data Comment Theme % of Total Comments (n) Generally positive reactions to WMCI23% (11) Concerns of Tablet misuse during classes21% (10) Desire to see M275’s for all faculty13% (6) Problematic integration with other campus technological components (WebCT, AirProjector) 9% (4) Inadequacy of Tablet RAM and processing speed6% (3) Generally negative reactions to WMCI6% (3) Concerns about Tablet repair and maintenance6% (3) Concerns about testing security6% (3) Course productivity challenges due to Tablet technical problems 4% (2) Other4% (2)

57. Student Qualitative Data Comment Theme% of Total Comments (n) Tablet device malfunctions, problems, and limitations24% (45) Concerns of Tablet misuse during classes14% (26) Problems in WMCI access, implementation and support 14% (25) Positive comments about WMCI of a general nature9% (17) Summer possession of Tablets8% (15) Tablets not used efficiently or to capacity in classes7% (12) Tablet costs not warranted6% (11) Students not trained well enough to use Tablets5% (10) WMCI is poorly conceived and confining5% (10) Tablets shouldn’t be mandatory for students3% (6) Problematic integration with other campus technological components (WebCT, AirProjector) 2% (4)

58. Like WMC... I'm a transfer student, and one of the main reasons I chose DSU over other schools was the Tablet PC program. I've thus far been very impressed with the program and sincerely hope DSU continues to promote and expand the program. These Tablet PCs are incredible devices and whenever I tell people about my change of school, I ALWAYS talk at great lengths about how great the support of cutting edge technology such as the Tablet PCs is here at DSU. I applaud DSU for taking the initiative to be leading the way in South Dakota though being committed to excellence in both education and technology.

59. Like WMC... I took a class that I did not need my computer in and I hated the class. Having the computer with me all the time is wonderful and my grades have improved so much. It is easier to get homework done and I am more organized with it. When I talk to people from other schools about the computers we have here.....they are so uneducated about them. Computers are the future and I am so glad to be able to experience them here!

60. Where to Do We Go From Here Next week (January 24, 2007) –How Dakota State has supported their one to one initiative Help desk functions Wade Pogany: Phase 2 status and information Faculty development Checking in from Chester Week after (January 31, 2007) Classroom Connections in South Dakota’s –Checking in from Mitchell