Wednesday, September 16, 2015

OECD Report on Students, Computers and Learning

The OECD has released the report "Students, Computers and Learning: Making the Connection" (2.3 Mbytes, 204 pages, PISA, OECD, 15 September 2015). The research finds no clear evidence that computers in the classroom improve education. This is not a surprising for those familiar with computers and education: computers need to be part of a program of education.

The report makes the point that exposure to the Internet does not improve digital literacy and it is teaching which makes the difference. This is a reassuring finding for teachers: computers are not a substitute for an educational program.

The report suggests that providing subsidized computer access to ICT does not reduce inequity in education. The effective use of the technology requires improved education, otherwise the ICT investment is wasted.


It should be noted that the OECD report only considers ICT as a supplement to conventional classroom education. There is no mention of e-learning or of distance education. This is understandable as most investment by OECD countries, including Australia, have focused on providing computers in schools, or computers for students, not on using computers for education. The assumption has been that providing computer access will in, of itself, help students with their education. Some countries have supplementary programs for providing training of teachers and some course content development. This approach is clearly a waste of time and money, but understandable in terms of the politics of governments being seen providing tangible help for students. The obvious policy to peruse: to first provide training and equipment for teachers and ICT course materials would not be politically popular.

The Australian education ministers are expected to approve the "Foundation to Year 10 Australian Curriculum: Technologies" this week. This would be an obvious area in which to introduce effective use of ICT for education. Clearly what is needed is to train teachers the technology curriculum and provide on-line curriculum materials for it. It seems blindingly obvious that e-learning should be used for teacher training in the technology curriculum.  However, apart from the CSER Digital Technologies courses, nothing appears to have been done for teacher training. Apart from a few company sponsored materials, nothing has been done to provide course content. It will not be surprising if an OECD report finds in five years time that the introduction of the Australian Technologies Curriculum was a failure, because the needed investment in teacher training and course-ware had not been made.

Unfortunately, Australian governments are no making the needed investment for effective use of ICT in schools. As a result this investment will happen in an ad-hoc way, at higher cost and mostly using imported services and skills. Australian schools will become places where local teachers will be reduced to the role of child minders, while the students' education is carried out using on-line materials purchased from overseas, supervised by on-line teachers who are overseas.
"These findings, based on an analysis of PISA data, tell us that, despite the pervasiveness of information and communication technologies (ICT) in our daily lives, these technologies have not yet been as widely adopted in formal education. But where they are used in the classroom, their impact on student performance is mixed, at best. In fact, PISA results show no appreciable improvements in student achievement in reading, mathematics or science in the countries that had invested heavily in ICT for education."
From Executive Summary, Students, Computers and Learning: Making the Connection, PISA, OECD, p. 15, 15 September 2015).
"Korea and Singapore, the two highest-performing countries in digital reading, and among those countries whose students are the most proficient in navigating through the web, have excellent broadband infrastructure,  and their 15-year-old students use computers with ease in their daily lives. Yet students in these countries are not more exposed to the Internet at school than are students in other OECD countries. This suggests that many of the evaluation and task-management skills that are essential for online navigation may also be taught and learned with conventional, analogue pedagogies and tools."
From Executive Summary, Students, Computers and Learning: Making the Connection, PISA, OECD, p. 15, 15 September 2015).
"Ensuring that every child attains a baseline level of proficiency in reading and mathematics will do more to create equal opportunities in a digital world than can be achieved by expanding or subsidising access to high-tech devices and services." 
From Executive Summary, Students, Computers and Learning: Making the Connection, PISA, OECD, p. 16, 15 September 2015).

Table of Contents from the Report


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 15
READER’S GUIDE 27
CHAPTER 1  HOW STUDENTS’ USE OF COMPUTERS HAS EVOLVED IN RECENT YEARS 31
Students’ access to ICT at home 33
 • Access to a home computer 35
 • Home Internet access 35
 • Students’ experience using computers 37
Students’ use of computers and the Internet outside of school 39
 • How much time students spend on line 39
 • Students’ ICT-related activities outside of school 41
How students’ use of the Internet outside of school is related to their social well-being
and engagement with school 43

CHAPTER 2  INTEGRATING INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY
IN TEACHING AND LEARNING 49
Students’ use of computers at school 51
 • Internet use at school 55
 • Computer use during mathematics instruction 56
 • Use of home computers for schoolwork 58
Drivers and barriers to integrating ICT into teaching and learning 61
 • The school ICT infrastructure 62
 • How school infrastructure trends are related to the use of ICT 67
 • Curricula and the use of ICT at school for instruction 67
How ICT use is related to pedagogical practices in mathematics 73
CHAPTER 3  MAIN RESULTS FROM THE PISA 2012 COMPUTER-BASED ASSESSMENTS 81
Similarities and differences between paper-based and computer-based assessments 82
 • Differences between digital and print reading 83
 • Differences between computer-based and paper-based mathematics 84
 • Differences in test design and operational characteristics
of computer- and paper-based assessments 84
Student performance in digital reading 85 • Average performance in digital reading 85
 • Trends in average digital reading performance 87
 • Students at the different levels of proficiency in digital reading 89
 • Trends at the top and bottom of the performance distribution in digital reading 92
Differences in performance between print and digital reading 94
 • Top performers in digital and print reading 95
 • Low performers in digital and print reading 96
Student performance in the computer-based assessment of mathematics 97
 • Average performance in the computer-based assessment of mathematics 98
Differences in performance related to the use of ICT tools for solving mathematics problems 100
CHAPTER 4  THE IMPORTANCE OF NAVIGATION IN ONLINE READING: THINK, THEN CLICK 105
Successful and unsuccessful navigation 108
 • How navigation is related to success in digital reading tasks 109
The navigation behaviour of students in the PISA assessment of digital reading 112
 • Student-level indices used to describe navigation behaviour 112
 • The typical navigation behaviour of students across countries/economies 112
The relationship between performance in digital reading
and students’ navigation behaviour 119
CHAPTER 5  INEQUALITIES IN DIGITAL PROFICIENCY: BRIDGING THE DIVIDE 123
One divide or many divides? Digital access, digital use and digital production 124
Access and experience gaps related to socio-economic status 125
 • Socio-economic differences in access to computers and the Internet 125
 • Socio-economic and gender differences in early exposure to computers 129
 • Rural/urban gaps in Internet access 132
 • The role of schools as providers of access to computers and the Internet 132
Differences in computer use related to socio-economic status 135
 • Computer use at home 135
 • Computer use at school 137
How performance on computer-based tests is related to socio-economic status
and familiarity with computers 137
 • Disparities in performance related to socio-economic status 137
 • Trends in the relationship between digital reading performance
and socio-economic status 140
CHAPTER 6  HOW COMPUTERS ARE RELATED TO STUDENTS’ PERFORMANCE 145
Technology investments and trade-offs 146
How learning outcomes are related to countries’/economies’ investments
in school ICT resources 149
How performance is associated with students’ use of ICT for school 152 • Use of computers at school 153
 • Use of computers in mathematics lessons 154
 • Use of computers outside of school for schoolwork 156
Use of computers at home for leisure and digital reading performance 160
Research evidence on the impact of computer use on student performance 16
CHAPTER 7  USING LOG-FILE DATA TO UNDERSTAND WHAT DRIVES PERFORMANCE
IN PISA (CASE STUDY) 165
Description of the unit SERAING 167
How fluently can students read? 170
How do students allocate effort and time to tasks? 173
How do students navigate a simple website? 175
 • Successful and unsuccessful navigation in Task 2 in the unit SERAING 176
Implications of the case study for computer-based assessments 181
CHAPTER 8  IMPLICATIONS OF DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY FOR EDUCATION POLICY
AND PRACTICE 185
Digital tools are often complementary to skills, both basic and advanced 186
Teach the foundation skills that are needed in a digital environment 187
Invest in skills to promote equal opportunities in a digital world 188
Raise awareness of the possible harmful aspects of Internet use 189
Develop coherent plans, including teacher training, for using ICT in the classroom 189
Learn from past experience to improve the effectiveness of future investments
in technology 190
ANNEX A     TECHNICAL NOTES ON ANALYSES IN THIS VOLUME 195
ANNEX B   
LIST OF TABLES AVAILABLE ON LINE 197

Reference


OECD (2015), Students, Computers and Learning: Making the Connection, PISA, OECD Publishing.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264239555-en

No comments:

Post a Comment