The U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Technology funded this study of international policy and programmes supporting information and communications technologies (ICTs) in education across 21 countries at primary and secondary levels. The final report includes an overview of international programmes and priorities as well as individual reports for each of the 21 countries. Findings suggest focusing on data collections at international level in order to compare the type and impact of ICT policies and programmes in education as well as improving the understanding of ICT in education best practices.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology, International Experiences with Educational Technology: Final Report, Washington, D.C., 2011.
This paper is based on the simple idea that students’ educational achievement is affected by the effort put in by those participating in the education process: schools, parents, and, of course, the students themselves.
DeFraja, G., Oliveira, T., & Zanchi, L. (2010). Must try harder: Evaluating the role of effort in educational attainment. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 92(3), 577–597. Retrieved from https://art.torvergata.it/retrieve/handle/2108/55644/108602/De%20Fraja%20Zanch%20Oliveira%20REStats%202010.pdf
Schools in the United States now spend more than $2 billion each year on education technology. But what are schools getting in return for this significant investment in technology learning? Robert Slavin examines the results from five studies designed to answer this question.
Slavin, R. (2019). A Powerful Hunger for Evidence-Proven Technology. Baltimore, MD: Robert Slavin’s Blog. https://robertslavinsblog.wordpress.com/2019/11/14/a-powerful-hunger-for-evidence-proven-technology/.
This study explored student achievement in a K-12, full-time, online learning environment and the effect parents had on student success.
Curtis, H. & Werth, L. (2015). Fostering student success and engagement in a K–12 online school. Journal of Online Learning Research, 1(2), 163–190. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1148836.pdf
This paper examines the factors affecting the successful implementation of a laptop program, classroom uses of laptops and the support required for schools from current research almost exclusively from the United States.
State of NSW, Department of Education and Training, Curriculum K-12 Directorate. (2009, March). One-to-one computing: literature review. Retrieved from http://www.dec.nsw.gov.au/detresources/about-us/how-we-operate/national-partnerships/digital-education-revolution/rrql/support/lit_review.pdf
The U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Technology published this brief that summarizes research on the role of online communities of practice and social networks in supporting the professional performance of educators.
U.S. Department of Education. (2014, November). The Future Ready District: Professional Learning Through Online Communities of Practice and Social Networks to Drive Continuous Improvement. Retrieved from http://tech.ed.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Section7-FutureReadyDistrictBrief-Final.pdf.
The U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Educational Technology, in partnership with the American Institutes for Research (AIR), developed a research-based synthesis defining a set of policies and practices implemented by successful Future Ready district leaders. The resulting rubric provides a basis for personalized professional learning to expand the capacity of district superintendents to effectively transition to digital learning.
U.S. Department of Education. (2015, December). Characteristics of Future Ready Leadership A Research Synthesis. Retrieved from http://tech.ed.gov/files/2015/12/Characteristics-of-Future-Ready-Leadership.pdf.
This chapter reviews the state of the field as it pertains to the preparation of preservice teachers
for K-12 online and blended learning.
Archambault, L., & Kennedy, K. (2018). Teacher preparation for K–12 online and blended learning. In K. Kennedy & R. E. Ferdig (Eds.), Handbook of research on K–12 online and blended learning (2nd ed., pp. 221–245). Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mellon University, ETC Press. https://www.academia.edu/37013644/Handbook_of_Research_on_K-12_and_Blending_Learning_Second_Editio.pdf
This article explores the theoretical underpinnings surrounding quality teaching in online settings as well as practical considerations for what teachers should know and be able to do in online environments.
Archambault, L., DeBruler, K., & Freidhoff, J. (2014). K-12 online and blended teacher licensure: Striking a balance between policy and preparedness. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 22(1), 83-106. Retrieved from
https://www.academia.edu/6459023/K-12_Online_ and_blended _Teacher_licensure_Striking_a_balance_between_Policy_ and_Preparedness
A quantitative research synthesis (meta-analysis) was conducted on the literature concerning the effects of feedback on learning from computer-based instruction (CBI).
Azevedo, R., & Bernard, R. M. (1995). A meta-analysis of the effects of feedback in computer-based instruction. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 13(2), 111-127.
The report provides foundational knowledge needed to examine and understand the potential contributions of online learning to educational productivity, including a conceptual framework for understanding the necessary components of rigorous productivity analyses, drawing in particular on cost-effectiveness analysis as an accessible method in education.
Bakia, M., Shear, L., Toyama, Y., & Lasseter, A. (2012). Understanding the implications of online learning for educational productivity. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. https://tech.ed.gov/files/2013/10/implications-online-learning.pdf
In these pages, we estimate the costs of blendedlearning models and fulltime virtual schools as currently operated in the U.S.
Battaglino, T. B., Haldeman, M., & Laurans, E. (2012). Creating sound policy for digital learning: The costs of online learning. Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Institute. http://www.edexcellencemedia.net/publications/2012/20120110-the-costs-of-online-learning/20120110-the-costs-of-online-learning.pdf
This article examines issues relating to the use of websites popular with educators. This article offers guidelines for maximizing the usefulness of such sites and for avoiding many of the pitfall educators may face.
Beahm, L. A., Cook, B. G., & Cook, L. (2019). Proceed With Caution: Using Web-Based Resources for Instructing Students With and at Risk for EBD. Beyond Behavior, 28(1), 13-20.
A report about blended learning programs analyzes the instruction, operational, and financial models of Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) schools. KIPP focuses on blending technology with in-class education to provide small group instruction and to meet the needs of each individual student.
Bernatek, B., Cohen, J., Hanlon, J., & Wilka, M. (2012). Blended learning in practice: Case studies from leading schools, featuring KIPP Empower Academy. Austin, TX: Michael and Susan Dell Foundation. https://www.heartland.org/_template-assets/documents/publications/kipp.pdf
The purpose of this study is to investigate the role of familial participation in student's achievement in K-12 virtual schools.
Black, E. W. (2009). An evaluation of familial involvements’ influence on student achievement in K–12 virtual schooling [Doctoral dissertation, University of Florida, Gainesville]. University of Florida Digital Collections.https://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0024208/00001
Researchers have hypothesized that parental engagement is even more critical when online students learn from home, but few researchers have examined parents’ engagement behavior—especially parents of adolescent learners. In this case study, we addressed this gap using parent and student interviews at a full-time online charter school.
Borup, J., Stevens, M. A., & Hasler Waters, L. (2015). Parent and student perceptions of parent engagement at a cyber charter high school. Online Learning, 19(5), 69–91. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1085792.pdf
This report summarizes the methodology, measures, and findings of research on the influence on student achievement outcomes of K–12 online and blended face-to-face and online learning programs that offer differentiated learning options.
Brodersen, R. M., & Melluzzo, D. (2017). Summary of research on online and blended learning programs that offer differentiated learning options (REL 2017–228). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Central. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED572935.pdf
This thesis reviews past research and provides an analysis of relevant studies conducted within the last ten years. This meta-analysis provides a comprehensive overview of the effect of technology enhanced learning (TEL) programs on K-12 students‟ overall academic performance and factors that can increase the effectiveness of such programs.
Brown, J. (2011). Does the use of technology in the classroom increase students' overall academic performance? (pp. 1-45). Communication and Organizational Leadership Studies School of Professional Studies, Gonzaga University.
This paper explores the theoretical and empirical literature on the impacts of technology on educational outcomes. The literature focuses on two primary contexts in which technology may be used for educational purposes: i) classroom use in schools, and ii) home use by students.
Bulman, G., & Fairlie, R. W. (2015). Technology and education: Computers, software, and the internet. Working Paper 22237. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. https://www.nber.org/papers/w22237.pdf
While research has been conducted on parental involvement in K-12 online learning, none of this research relates specifically to the parents of students with disabilities. Thus, researchers developed a survey around the following constructs: parental roles, instruction and assessment, communication and support from the school, and parental challenges.
Burdette, P. J., & Greer, D. L. (2014). Online learning and students with disabilities: Parent perspectives. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 13(2), 67–88. https://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/pdf/13.2.4.pdf
Education Week is learning as it surveys educators across the country about the impact school closures have had on their morale, student engagement, technology skills, and many other factors.
Bushweller, K. (2020, June 2). How COVID-19 is shaping tech use. What that means when schools reopen. Education Week. https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2020/06/03/how-covid-19-is-shaping-tech-use-what.html
The author reviews the economics literature at the intersection between innovation and K-12 education from two different, but related perspectives.
Chatterji, A. (2018). Innovation and American K–12 education. Working Paper 23531. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. https://www.nber.org/papers/w23531.pdf
This article briefly describes blending learning definition and models.
Christensen Institute (2020). Blended learning definitions. http://www.christenseninstitute.org/blended-learning-definitions-and-models/
The Clayton Christensen Institute, formerly Innosight Institute, has published three papers describing the rise of K−12 blended learning. This fourth paper is the first to analyze blended learning through the lens of disruptive innovation theory to help people anticipate and plan for the likely effects of blended learning on the classrooms of today and schools of tomorrow.
Christensen, C. M., Horn, M. B., & Staker, H. (2013). Is K–12 blended learning disruptive? An introduction to the theory of hybrids. Christensen Institute. http://www.christenseninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Is-K-12-Blended-Learning-Disruptive.pdf
This study investigated inner-city middle school teachers' perceptions of the importance of time in learning and sharing information. The survey identified ways that teachers shared what they had learned and discussed factors that helped or hindered them in sharing. Teacher interviews examined: knowledge, skills, and insights gained by participating in the EELC.
Collinson, V., & Fedoruk Cook, T. (2001). “I don’t have enough time”—Teachers’ interpretations of time as a key to learning and school change. Journal of Educational Administration, 39(3), 266–281.
This paper discusses an adapted-Continuous Practice Improvement model, which qualitative findings indicate was effective in facilitating the transfer of creative and innovative teaching approaches from the expert or Resident Teacher’s school to the novice or Visiting Teachers’ classrooms over the duration of the project.
Cowan, P. (2013). The 4I Model for scaffolding the professional development of experienced teachers in the use of virtual learning environments for classroom teaching. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 13(1), 82–98. https://citejournal.org/volume-13/issue-1-13/current-practice/the-4i-model-for-scaffolding-the-professional-development-of-experienced-teachers-in-the-use-of-virtual-learning-environments-for-classroom-teaching/
This mixed-methods study investigates student achievement in the full-time, online learning environment and the effect parents have on student success.
Curtis, H. (2013). A mixed methods study investigating parental involvement and student success in high school online education [Doctoral dissertation, Northwest Nazarene University]. https://nnu.whdl.org/sites/default/files/Curtis%20Final%20Dissertation.pdf
Based on a review of more than seventy recent studies, this brief describes these approaches, particularly as they apply to high school students who have been at risk of failing courses and exit examinations or dropping out due to a range of personal factors and academic factors. The brief then outlines policy strategies that could expand the uses of technology for at-risk high school youth.
Darling-Hammond, L., Zielezinski, M. B., & Goldman, S. (2014). Using technology to support at-risk students’ learning. Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education; Alliance for Excellent Education. https://edpolicy.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/scope-pub-using-technology-report.pdf
Going Virtual! 2010 is a follow-up report to the Going Virtual! Research series started in 2007. The purpose of the series is to describe current trends on the status of professional development for K-12 online teachers, as well as identify the unique needs and challenges faced by these instructors.
Dawley, L., Rice, K., & Hinck, G. (2010). Going Virtual! 2010: The status of professional development and unique needs of K–12 online teachers. Boise, ID: Boise State University. https://aurora-institute.org/wp-content/uploads/goingvirtual3.pdf
The Handbook of Research on K-12 Online and Blended Learning is an edited collection of chapters that sets out to present the current state of research in K-12 online and blended learning.
Dawson, K., & Dana, N. F. (2018a). Mentoring for online teachers. In K. Kennedy & R. E. Ferdig (Eds.), Handbook of research on K–12 online and blended learning (2nd ed., pp. 261–272). Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mellon University, ETC Press. https://www.academia.edu/37013644/Handbook_of_Research_on_K-12_and_Blending_Learning_Second_Editio.pdf
This chapter provides a survey of what is known about professional development for both brick and mortar and online teachers and uses this knowledge as a springboard to suggest policy and research implication of professional development and K-12 online teacher.
Dawson, K., & Dana, N. F. (2018b). Professional development for K–12 online teachers. In K. Kennedy & R. E. Ferdig (Eds.), Handbook of research on K–12 online and blended learning (2nd ed., pp. 247–260). Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mellon University, ETC Press. https://www.academia.edu/37013644/Handbook_of_Research_on_K-12_and_Blending_Learning_Second_Editio.pdf
This article presents a critical review of the transitions that technology integration has made over the years; the amount of resources and funding that has been allocated to immerse school with technology; and the conflicting results presented on effectiveness of using is technology in education.
Delgado, A. J., Wardlow, L., McKnight, K., & O’Malley, K. (2015). Educational technology: A review of the integration, resources, and effectiveness of technology in K–12 classrooms. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 14, 397–416. http://www.jite.org/documents/Vol14/JITEv14ResearchP397-416Delgado1829.pdf
This article offers ideas to improve the quality of inquiry into teacher learning, one of the most critical targets of education reform.
Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualization and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181–199.
Online, blended, and digital learning in K–12 schools in the United States includes an assortment of schools, programs, tools, and resources. These range from the fully online schools in which students receive their entire education, to the digital platforms and content that mainstream teachers are using to bolster instruction in their physical classrooms.
Digital Learning Collaborative. (2019). Snapshot 2019: A review of K-12 online, blended, and digital learning. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/59381b9a17bffc68bf625df4/t/5df14d464ba53f72845791b2/1576095049441/DLC-KP-Snapshot2019.pdf
The authors examine whether social capital created at home and at school has differing effects on child academic achievement. They hypothesize that children derive social capital from both their families and their schools and that capital from each context promotes achievement.
Dufur, M. J., & Parcel, T. L., & Troutman, K. P. (2013). Does capital at home matter more than capital at school? Social capital effects on academic achievement. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 31, 1–21.
This study is the first internationally comparative data analysis of the impact of computer use of student performance, based on OECD’s PISA 2003 assessment of educational performance by 15-year olds. It backs up previous OECD analysis about the importance of computers in schools
E. C. D. (2006). Regular computer users perform better in key school subjects. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
This National Center for Education Statistics report provides national data on the availability and use of educational technology among teachers in public elementary and secondary schools during the winter and spring of 2009. The data are the results of a national teacher-level survey that is one of a set that includes district, school, and teacher surveys on educational technology.
Gray, L., Thomas, N., and Lewis, L. (2010). Teachers’ Use of Educational Technology in U.S. Public Schools: 2009 (NCES 2010-040). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC.
This article examines issues in the Ohio’s state funded online schools. In the fall of 2016 the Ohio education department completed attendance audits of 13 e-schools. Nine were found to have over reported their student enrollment. This issue takes on added significance with the selection of Betsy DeVos, U.S. education secretary, a prominent advocate of school choice who supports expanding online school options.
Harold, H. and Harwin, A. (2017). Student Login Records at Ohio E-Schools Spark $80 Million Dispute. Education Week. Retrieved March 16, 2017 from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2017/03/08/student-login-records-at-ohio-e-schools-spark.html?cmp=eml-enl-dd-news2.
This influential book is the result of 15 years research that includes over 800 meta-analyses on the influences on achievement in school-aged students. This is a great resource for any stakeholder interested in conducting a serious search of evidence behind common models and practices used in schools.
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning. A synthesis of over, 800.
This report analyzes computer usage in the classrooms of teachers who are at least moderately well-prepared in the use of computers for reading instruction. Data from the 1998 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) database were used to analyze the influence of computers on academic achievement.
Johnson, K. A. (2000). Do Computers in the Classroom Boost Academic Achievement? A Report of the Heritage Center for Data Analysis.
This correlational study is the first internationally comparative data analysis of the impact of computer use of student performance, based on OECD’s PISA 2003 assessment of educational performance by 15-year olds. It backs up previous OECD analysis about the importance of computers in schools.
O. E. C. D. (2006). Regular computer users perform better in key school subjects. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
Based on results from PISA 2012, this Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) report examines how students’ access to and use of information and communication technology (ICT) devices has evolved in recent years, and explores how education systems and schools are integrating ICT into students’ learning experiences.
OECD (2015), Students, Computers and Learning: Making the Connection, OECD Publishing, Paris.
This study assesses the learning effectiveness and motivational appeal of a computer game for learning computer memory concepts, which was designed according to the curricular objectives and the subject matter of the Greek high school Computer Science (CS) curriculum, as compared to a similar application, but lacking the gaming aspect.
Papastergiou, M. (2009). Digital game-based learning in high school computer science education: Impact on educational effectiveness and student motivation. Computers & Education, 52(1), 1-12.
Are there computers in the classroom? Does it matter? Students, Computers and Learning: Making the Connection examines how students’ access to and use of information and communication technology (ICT) devices has evolved in recent years.
Peña-López, I. (2015). Students, Computers and Learning. Making the Connection. OECD Publishing.
A survey of 2,462 Advanced Placement (AP) and National Writing Project (NWP) teachers finds that digital technologies have helped them in teaching their middle school and high school students in many ways. At the same time, the internet, mobile phones, and social media have brought new challenges to teachers.
Purcell, K., Heaps, A., Buchanan, J., & Friedrich, L. (2013). How teachers are using technology at home and in their classrooms. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/02/28/how-teachers-are-using-technology-at-home-and-in-their-classrooms/
This study analyzes five large-scale studies of education technology: (1) "Meta-Analytic Studies of Findings on Computer-Based Instruction" (J.A. Kulik); (2) "Report on the Effectiveness of Technology in Schools, 1990-1997" (J. Sivin-Kachala); (3) "Evaluating the Apple Classrooms of Tomorrow" (E.L. Baker, M. Gearhart, & J.L. Herman) ; (4) "West Virginia's Basic Skills/Computer Education Program: An Analysis of Student Achievement" (D. Mann, et al.); and (5) "Does It Compute? The Relationship between Educational Technology and Student Achievement in Mathematics.
Schacter, J. (1999). The impact of education technology on student achievement: What the most current research has to say. Milken Exchange on Education Technology.
Using the U.S. PISA results to investigate the relationship between school computer use and student academic performance
Sun, L., & Bradley, K. D. (2003). Using the US PISA results to investigate the relationship between school computer use and student academic performance.
The purpose of the study was to determine whether the use of the Internet integrated into an eight week social studies unit at the fourth grade level of elementary school would affect students' achievement in social studies or students' attitudes toward school, reading, writing, geography, history, maps, computers, and typing.
Toriskie, J. M. (1999). The effects of Internet usage on student achievement and student attitudes (pp. 1-248).
This experiment evaluated the effects of requiring overt answer construction in computer-based programmed instruction using an alternating treatments design.
Tudor, R. M. (1995). Isolating the effects of active responding in computer‐based instruction. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 28(3), 343-344.
A group experimental design compared passive reading, covert responding to frame blanks, and actively typing answers to blanks with and without immediate confirmation of correctness. Results strongly supported the effectiveness of requiring the student to supply fragments of a terminal repertoire while working through a program.
Tudor, R. M., & Bostow, D. E. (1991). Computer‐programmed instruction: The relation of required interaction to practical application. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24(2), 361-368.
The U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Technology created this guide to assist software developers, startups and entrepreneurs in gaining specialized knowledge and is designed to help apply technology in smart ways to solve persistent problems in education.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology, Ed Tech Developer’s Guide, Washington, D.C., 2015.
The U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Technology published this brief that is intended to help policymakers and administrators understand how analytics and data mining have been—and can be—applied for educational improvement while rigorously protecting student privacy.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology, Enhancing Teaching and Learning Through Educational Data Mining and Learning Analytics: An Issue Brief, Washington, D.C., 2012.
This report is the 2016 National Education Technology Plan. It is the latest policy document on educational technology from the U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Technology. It sets a national vision and plan for learning enabled by technology through building on the work of leading education researchers; district, school, and higher education leaders; classroom teachers; developers; entrepreneurs; and nonprofit organizations.
Category: 172, 173, 174, 175, 180, 189, 192, 194, 196
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology, Future Ready Learning: Reimagining the Role of Technology in Education, Washington, D.C., 2016.
The Future Ready Schools: Building Technology Infrastructure for Learning guide provides practical, actionable information intended to help district leaders (superintendents, principals, and teacher leaders) navigate the many decisions required to deliver cutting-edge connectivity to students. It presents a variety of options for district leaders to consider when making technology infrastructure decisions, recognizing that circumstances and context vary greatly from district to district.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology, Future Ready Schools: Building Technology Infrastructure for Learning, Washington, D.C., 2014.
The U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services collaborated in the development of the Early Learning and Educational Technology Policy Brief to promote developmentally appropriate use of technology in homes and early learning settings.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology, Policy Brief on Early Learning and Use of Technology, Washington, D.C., 2016.
The U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Technology published this report that details the results of exploratory research on how to design and manage online communities of practice for educators.
U.S. Department of Education. (2014, April). Designing Online Communities of Practice for Educators to Create Value. Retrieved from http://tech.ed.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Exploratory-Research-on-Designing-Online-Communities-FINAL.pdf.
This paper examines the impact of computers on student achievement has concluded that providing each student with a computer has a modest but positive effect on student achievement. This meta-analysis included 10 studies from more than 15 years of research on the topic.
Zheng, B., Warschauer, M., Lin, C. H., & Chang, C. (2016). Learning in one-to-one laptop environments: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 1052–1084.