Larry Cuban on technology in the schools

Larry Cuban (author of Oversold and Underused: Computers in the Classroom): U.S. school reformers have a tradition of overselling and underusing technological innovations. Thus the chances of widespread adoption in schools of new classroom technologies in the next decade are in the 70 to 90 percent probability range, but the probability of routine use in most schools for instruction is much lower, in the 10 to 20 percent range.... Regardless of what technological enthusiasts predict, no “revolutions” in technology use have occurred in U.S. schools and classrooms....

[snip]

Slight increases in home schooling may occur—say from 1.1 million students in 2003 to 2 or 3 million by the end of the decade. The slight uptick would be due to both the availability of technology and a far broader menu of choices for parents. Online college curricula and offerings from for-profit entrepreneurs give home-schooling, anxious college-driven, and rural parents new options. [ed.: Anxious college-driven parents, you say. Well, maybe if someone listened to anxious college-driven parents once in a while, we'd have fewer SMARTBoards and more college preparation.]

[snip]

In tracking such technological innovations as film, radio, television, videocassettes, and desktop computers over the past half century, I found a common cycle. First, the promoters’ exhilaration splashes over decisionmakers as they purchase and deploy equipment in schools and classrooms. Then academics conduct studies to determine the effectiveness of the innovation as compared to standard practice; they survey teachers and occasionally visit classrooms to see student and teacher use of the innovation. Academics often find that the technological innovation is just as good as—seldom superior to—conventional instruction in conveying information and teaching skills. They also find that classroom use is less than expected. Formal adoption of high-tech innovations does not mean teachers have total access to devices or use them on a daily basis. Such studies often unleash stinging rebukes of administrators and teachers for spending scarce dollars on expensive machinery that fails to display superiority over existing techniques of instruction and, even worse, is only occasionally used.

Few earnest champions of classroom technology understand the multiple and complicated roles teachers perform, address the realities of classrooms within age-graded schools, respect teacher expertise, or consider the practical questions teachers ask about any technological innovation that a school board and superintendent decide to adopt, buy, and deploy. Is the new technology simple to use? Versatile? Reliable? Durable? How much energy and time will I as a teacher have to expend to use the new technology for what net return in enhanced student learning? Will the innovation help me solve problems that I face in the classroom? Providing teachers with economic or organizational incentives to use technology won’t answer these practical questions. Were policymakers, researchers, designers of the innovation, and business-inspired reformers to ask and then consider answers to these questions, perhaps the predictable cycle might be interrupted. [ed.: or -- and here's a thought -- policymakers, researchers, designers of the innovation, and business-inspired reformers could ask parents and taxpayers whether they feel like shelling out $4000 for SMARTBoards when a $400 data projector would serve]

[snip]

...tax-supported schools are expected to convert children into adults who are literate, law abiding, engaged in their communities, informed about issues, economically independent, and respectful of differences among Americans. [ed.: so....if a parent had written that list, would you expect to see the words "well-educated" on it? or "able to spell"? or, perhaps, "able to add, subtract, multiply, and divide without using a calculator"?] Schools are held publicly responsible for achieving those ends [ed: wrong again]

[snip]

It is a mistake to assume that if schools just adopt classroom technologies, academic achievement will improve, teaching will change dramatically, and students will be better prepared for the 21st-century workplace. Evidence for each reason to adopt technology is at best skimpy and at worst missing altogether.

Virtual Schools
by John Chubb, Terry Moe, and Larry Cuban
Education Next
Winter 2009
vol. 9, no. 1

When we toured private schools last spring, we found that the better the school, the less the reliance on technology, generally speaking. Dalton didn't have a single SMARTBoard. [see Anonymous, in Comments below]

The principal of Hogwarts told us that they've been considering investing in technology for the school, but so far they haven't seen anything to convince them that the benefits justify the costs.

Then he said a pencil is technology.