NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
ERIC Number: ED557110
Record Type: Non-Journal
Publication Date: 2012
Pages: 126
Abstractor: As Provided
Reference Count: N/A
ISBN: 978-1-3212-6848-5
ISSN: N/A
The Relationship of Technology Funding on Adequate Yearly Progress Objectives Met in South Carolina School Districts
Davis, Myron E.
ProQuest LLC, Ed.D. Dissertation, South Carolina State University
Technology has become more of a necessity for everyday use. It not only plays a crucial role in everyday use, it is also vital in the educational arena. Since the advent of the current technology age, technology has become an important educational tool in U.S. schools. Spending on technology. for K-12 education in the United States has jumped, and it is expected to exceed $56 billion by 2012 (Nagel, 2008). Access to computers, modems, video equipment, cable services, and other new educational technologies has risen dramatically. Former U. S. President William Clinton vowed to have all classrooms connected to the internet by the year 2000. As expenditures of technological equipment have increased, policy-makers are beginning to demand more accountability for massive expenditures to equip schools. Some argue that little substantive research establishes a clear link between technology and improved student achievement. They feel that huge technology expenditures are made at the expense of other programs. Some complain that the loudest calls for technology come not from classroom teachers but from public officials, corporate leaders, and other non-educators seeking to make schools mirror the high-tech workplace (Cuban, Kirkpatrick and Peck, 2001). Although debates about the benefits of educational technology in the classroom will continue, one thing is certain: technology in schools is to stay. After all, the call for new technologies has as much to do with preparing students for the emerging workforce and a rapidly changing world as it does with enhancing the learning process. The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between technology and software expenditures for school districts in South Carolina for academic year 2006-2007 and the number of objectives met with Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). This study examined the relationship between technology funding, specifically technology and software expenditures, and the number of AYP objectives met. The population consisted of 62 of 85 South Carolina school districts from the 2006-2007 school year. The study examined the relationship between those school districts' technology and software expenditures with the AYP success, The study initially sought the participation of all the school districts; 62 of them returned their total technology and software expenditure data. This study used a quantitative and non-experimental research method. A letter requesting the total software and technology expenditures was sent to each district's superintendent and finance director to obtain data to examine the relationship between technology funding and the school districts' AYP results for 2006-2007 to address the seven research questions. The researcher evaluated technology funding based on objective measures of student achievement recognized and understood by policy-makers who allocate educational funding to schools. The historic Coleman Report (1966), one of the largest documents that examined the disparities in funding to schools and achievement across different groups, showed initial concern about understanding these disparities and closing the gaps. An obvious source of the disparity in academic achievement has been the variation in educational opportunities arising from differences in educational spending. This study made no attempt to evaluate technology software types and their effectiveness. The strengths of the study included a large contingent of school districts across South Carolina, various size school districts, school district location, districts with diverse populations, and the use of control groups (race, gender, number of objectives attempted) to compare experimental results. The study found that there was not a significant difference in any of the variables tested involving the school district technology and software expenditures and the school districts' AYP status when controlled by race, gender, and number of objectives attempted or when disaggregated by district size, poverty index, and location. However, a limited relationship between students' demographic and socioeconomic status was discovered. It is reflected in the Achievement Gap research. There was no statistically significant relationship finding after the 2006-2007 school year as related to technology and software expenditures. The main conclusion of the study was that technology funding appeared to have no significant difference in South Carolina school districts' AYP statuses for the school year examined. This is contrary to what the noted forerunner in educational technology (Wenglinsky, 1998) became noted for in believing that the level of spending on technology can make a difference in student achievement. Throughout his contributions to the body of research involving educational technology, he is an advocate for educational funding and its benefits to student achievement (Wenglinsky, 1998). KEY WORDS: Adequate Yearly Progress Educational Resources Expenditures Improvement Rating Instructional Technology Integrated Learning Systems Local Revenue Location Met Target (Improvement) On Target Range Poverty Index School and District Size Socioeconomic Status Student Demographics. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]
ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway, P.O. Box 1346, Ann Arbor, MI 48106. Tel: 800-521-0600; Web site: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml
Publication Type: Dissertations/Theses - Doctoral Dissertations
Education Level: N/A
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Identifiers - Location: South Carolina