Skip to main content
Log in

Technology Programs...for All or for Some?

  • Published:
Journal of Science Education and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The 1990s have been a decade of great spending and great introspection, particularly when it comes to educational allocations. Citizens, corporations, and public officials are becoming increasingly inquisitive about where their money is going and if the dollars spent are making a difference. For 5 years, the multimillion-dollar Delaware Technology Innovation Challenge project has implemented LightspanTM educational software in the classrooms and homes of elementary school students. Program goals are to increase parent involvement, generate more time for learning, and improve student achievement. On the surface, the program seems to have met its goals. Parents report being more involved in their child's education. Students and parents describe the time spent on the software at home as not replacing traditional homework, but rather television watching. And, student achievement in both reading and mathematics has increased at rates higher than would be expected. However, a closer examination of evaluation results reveals the program has worked best for lower achieving students; students who scored below the 50th percentile in fall testing had much greater achievement gains than their higher scoring peers. This paper investigates whether evaluation findings are reflective of the program's implementation or rather reveal a limitation of the technology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Aronson, S. R., Mutchler, S. E., and Pan, D. T. (1998). Theories of Change: Making Programs Accountable and Making Sense of Program accountability, Southwest Educational Development Laboratory, Austin, TX.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hetrick, B., and Van Horn, C. E. (1988). Educational research information: Meeting the needs of state policy makers. Theory Into Practice 27: 106–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hord, S. M., Rutherford, W. L., Huling-Austin, L., and Hall, G. E. (1998). Taking Charge of Change, Southwest Educational Development Laboratory, Austin, TX.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leviton, L.C., and Hughes, E. F. (1981). Research on the utilization of evaluations: A review and synthesis. Evaluation Review 5: 525–548.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, C. H. (1995). Nothing as practical as good theory: Exploring theory-based evaluation for comprehensive community initiatives for children and families. In Connell, J. P., Kubisch, A. C., Schorr, L. B., and Weiss, C. H. (Eds.), New Approaches to Evaluation Community Initiatives: Concepts, Methods, and Contexts, Report by the Roundtable of Comprehensive Community Initiatives for Children and Families, The Aspen Institute, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Giancola, S.P. Technology Programs...for All or for Some?. Journal of Science Education and Technology 10, 369–384 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012251304066

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012251304066

Navigation