The Every Student Succeeds Act supports personalized learning (PL) to close achievement gaps of diverse K-12 learners in the United States. Implementing PL into a classroom entails a paradigm change of the educational system. However, it is demanding to transform traditional practice into a personalized one under the pressure of the annual standardized testing while it is unclear which PL approaches are more likely to result in better academic outcomes than others. Using national survey data of ELA teachers in identified learner-centered schools, this study compared high and low-performing learner-centered schools (determined by their standardized test results) in terms of their use of five PL features (personalized learning plan, competency-based student progress, criterion-referenced assessment, project- or problem-based learning, and multi-year mentoring) and their use of technology for the four functions of planning, learning, assessment, and recordkeeping. Generally, teachers in high-performing schools implemented PL more thoroughly and utilized technology for more functions than those in low-performing schools. Teachers in high-performing schools more frequently considered career goals when creating personal learning plans, shared the project outcomes with the community, and assessed non-academic outcomes. They stayed longer with the same students and developed close relationships with more students. Also, they more frequently used technology for sharing resources and reported having a more powerful technology system than those in low-performing schools. This study informs educators, administrators, and researchers of which PL approaches and technology uses are more likely to result in better academic outcomes measured by standardized assessments.
This study explored the use of several learning management systems (LMS), their benefits, and their limitations in relation to the desired characteristics of an ideal Personalized Integrated Educational System (PIES) for the information age. A qualitative research design was used. The participants of the study were teachers, administrators, and technology coordinators in a small suburban school district. The data were collected through interviews and were subjected to content analysis. The findings of the study indicated that each of the LMSs investigated in this study still has some significant limitations, for none of them provides all the information-age functions of PIES, and what an ideal PIES should possess as information-age functions can be categorized under students’ learning, assessment and system-related preferences. 相似文献
Educational technology seems to be suffering from an identity crisis. Many exciting things are happening in the field, but increasingly we educational technologists find ourselves on the sidelines in our own ballgame. People from other disciplines are taking an interest in educational technology, but they show little interest in our knowledge base (often even little awareness that it exists!) and little interest in our professional organizations and publications. Why is this happening? What can we do about it? To what extent might our mindset be the problem? What new directions do we need to pursue to improve the health and value of our field? These are the central issues which this article discusses. 相似文献
This study utilised a qualitative research methodology known as formative research to improve the process guidelines that are described in the Guidance System for Transforming Education (GSTE). This study took place in a small (5447 students), partly urban and partly rural school district in Indiana. The researchers, also serving as change facilitators, investigated an early stage of the systemic change process as outlined in the GSTE. Specifically, the research focused on field‐testing and improving the process for assessing the district's readiness for change. It was found that this process could have been improved if the facilitators had had more guidance to help them develop the interview protocols. 相似文献
The transition from the industrial age to the information age has happened and is still happening in our society (Duffy, 2009). However, our current educational systems still operate based on the needs of the industrial-age society (Watson, Watson, & Reigeluth, n.d), making them among the least impacted organizations (Reigeluth & Joseph, 2002). This misalignment between schools and society takes the form of a discrepancy between what and how we teach students in schools and how schools are organized and operated (Banathy, 1991; Hargreaves, 1999; Wagner et al., 2006). Educational systems should address current students’ needs to facilitate their learning process and better preparethem for their future lives in society (Collins & Halverson, 2009). In this article, we explain how we envision the new paradigm of education and what roles educational technologists should play to help transform educational systems to this new paradigm. 相似文献