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.
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.
Hetrick, B., and Van Horn, C. E. (1988). Educational research information: Meeting the needs of state policy makers. Theory Into Practice 27: 106–100.
Hord, S. M., Rutherford, W. L., Huling-Austin, L., and Hall, G. E. (1998). Taking Charge of Change, Southwest Educational Development Laboratory, Austin, TX.
Leviton, L.C., and Hughes, E. F. (1981). Research on the utilization of evaluations: A review and synthesis. Evaluation Review 5: 525–548.
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.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights 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
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012251304066