Introduction

With the passing of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, a greater emphasis has been placed on the public school system’s effectiveness at educating all children, despite race, socioeconomic status, and various other differences. The U.S Department of Education claims, “No Child Left Behind is designed to change the culture of America’s schools by closing the achievement gap, offering more flexibility, giving parents more options, and teaching students based on what works.” Many argue that a primary contributor to the achievement gap is the presence of the Digital Divide in schools, meaning that unequal access to technology in schools creates unequal levels of education.

This website provides insight into how a difference in access to technology affects education, specifically how funding, technological programs, and student achievement are all interrelated. The data and articles on past research provided will allow you to see that funding affects access to technology in schools, which then in turn affects the academic performance of students. This website will explore how schools in affluent areas are able to provide better technology, and thus a better education, while schools that struggle to afford adequate technological resources are not able to provide their students with the same education.

I selected this topic because as a Political Science major with an emphasis in Public Sectors, I have taken an interest in how policies aid or hinder the education of certain groups, specifically groups within different socioeconomic classes. The general question posed in this research is whether or not schools with more technology programs have better test scores and graduation rates, which would suggest that schools who can afford these technology programs are better equipped to set their students up for success; this question was explored through examination of 9 different public high schools throughout the bay area. My data was collected from school-profiling websites, such as greatschools.org and schoolmatters.com, which provided me access to information regarding dropout rates, test scores, financial information, and demographics. If we wish to uphold the promises made in the No Child Left Behind Act, we must recognize the inequalities that exist in education and understand their causes.

Annotated Bibliography

1. Digital Inequality: Difference in Young Adults’ Use of the Internet by Eszter Hargittai

This article looks past users/non-users and examines people’s web use: what they use the internet for and their ability to use the internet. It briefly discusses the fact that young adults use the internet, but not all young adults use the internet for the same activities. After looking at data regarding internet use of young adults throughout the United States, the article looks at social differences that may explain differences in activity. Eszter concludes that people with higher levels of education and more privileged background use the internet for “capital enhancing” activities, while people with less education who are from less privileged backgrounds use the internet for more recreational activities. Data also suggests that one’s online skills also influence types of online activity. Eszter and her colleagues examine a “second-level digital divide” which reveals the difference in internet use among young adults.
http://www.eszter.com/research/pubs/A25.Hargittai.Hinnant-DigitalInequality.pdf

2. Digital Inequality: From Unequal Access to Differentiated Use by Eszter Hargittai

This essay looks at both inequalities due to unequal access to technology, as well as inequality due to different groups of people using the internet for different reasons and activities. This paper focuses on 5 main elements of the analysis of the digital divide:

• The “haves” and “have not’s” of internet access, and how these groups have changed
• Is access to the internet the same as access to other forms of technology that provide users with information
• Inequalities that exist among the “haves”: how different uses can benefit users more than other ones
• Does access to the internet allow influence one’s ability to create a better life for themselves
• With technology changing, the implementation of more regulations, and further industrialization, is the 
• concept of the Digital Divide actually something we need to worry about

http://www.webuse.org/pdf/DiMaggioEtAl-DigitalInequality2004.pdf

3. The Digital Divide and What to Do About It by Eszter Hargittai

In present day society, the quote “knowledge is power” is very much true, which is seen through the link between the distribution of knowledge and stratification. Both academic researchers and professionals that deal with policies have shifted their focus to the benefits received by populations that have access to and use the internet. Although the diffusion of the internet has increased, it’s spread among different groups has been unequal both within the United States and in other countries. This essay focuses on

• Inequalities in internet access among individuals in the United States
• Patterns of connectedness across the United States
• Inequalities among producers in the internet community looking to expand their audience

http://www.webuse.org/pdf/Hargittai-DigitalDivideWhatToDo2007.pdf

4. The Impact of Media and Technology in Schools by Thomas C. Reeves

This research report, which was prepared for the Bertelsmann Foundation, summarizes evidence that media and technology have positive effects on teaching and learning in four sections. The first section is an introduction to important issues involved in the growing interest in media and technology in schools; it differentiates between using media and technology as a “tutor” and using media and technology as a tool to enable and enhance critical thinking and higher learning. The second section features an in-depth analysis of using technology for tutorials, and the third section features an in-depth analysis of using technology as a tool to facilitate necessary skills. The last section focuses on knowledge regarding the impact media and technology has in schools and offers solutions on how to improve further research on this topic.

http://www.sinc.sunysb.edu/Stu/ashidele/The_Impact_of_Media_by_Bertelsmann_Fdtn.pdf

5. Insisting on Digital Equality: Refraining the Dominant Discourse on Multicultural Education and Technology by Paul C. Gorski

The author of this article talks about how conversations regarding technology in education only focus on the great websites and software that should be used, but the main focus should be availability. The author challenges those who work with multicultural learning and technology to focus on eliminating digital inequalities because closing the digital divide is the only way to produce education that can benefit people from all of the different cultural backgrounds, which is essential considering the United States’ diverse population.
http://www.edchange.org/publications/digital-equity.pdf

6. Drake, Jr., Ph.D., Johnnie E. The Washington, DC Digital Divides: A State of Digital Disparity. Capella University, 2008. Print.Computer usage has become essential to Americans, specifically internet access and adequate skills with software. Computers are now being used in employment settings and school, so a citizen who wishes to be successful must possess the necessary skills and have access to the internet. However, computers and internet are not as readily available for certain populations. The term “Digital Divide” conveys the idea that there is a rift between the “information rich” and the “information poor.” There is not merely a gap between the two that can be ignored; the differences are much more complex and important.

7. Zhao, Ling, Yaobin Lu, Wayne Huang, and Qiuhong Wang. "Internet Inequality: The Relationship between High School Students’ Internet Use in Different Locations and Their Internet Self-efficacy". Computers & Education 55.4 (2010): 1405-423. Print.

Using the DiMaggio and Hargittai's framework for examining digital inequality, the authors looked at many types of relationships between internet inequality and their effects on high school students.  In this study, they looked at the many different uses of internet among students, as well as influences from non-technological factors, like authority and parent influence.  Their findings claim that internet access, whether it be at home, school, or in a cafe, was linked to higher levels of ISE(internet self efficacy).  They also found that students with higher levels of ISE demonstrated better academic performance.  This article details their research process and findings.

8. Morse, Timothy E. Ensuring Equality of Educational Opportunity in the Digital Age. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, 2004. Print.This article discusses the different meanings of the term digital divide, which is used to describe the inequities between social groups in regards to acquiring computer and internet access. Also discusses ways of addressing these inequalities. This argument is based off of the Brown v. Board of Education case, which stated that educational opportunities should be equal for all students, regardless of their race.

9. Song, Felicia W. "Being Left Behind: the Discourse of Fear in Technological Change." Hedgehog Review (2003). Print.

Argues that American society has become obsessed with the “no child left behind” concept and is blaming technological process as an exclusive part of society. Technology is being used more in society, and with the introduction to the term the “Digital Divide”, society is starting to fear that certain students are not receiving enough training in technology to prepare them for a secondary education or the workforce.

10. Using Technology to Support Education Reform by Means, B., Blando, J., Olson, K., Middleton, T., Morocco, C. C., Remz, A. R., & Zorfass, J.
This research report, which was sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education, looks at the American Education System and its need for reform.  Many research support the idea of implementing technology into education because they believe it will promote "superior forms of learning."  This research paper focuses on how technology can be used in the classroom, how teachers as well as students can use technology as support, how technology will affect student achievement, and methods that can be used to implement technology into our classrooms.

http://www2.ed.gov/pubs/EdReformStudies/TechReforms/index.html

Data, Methods, & Ethics

I gathered quantitative, archival data from greatschools.org and schoolmatters.com, both websites that profile schools throughout the country. I felt this type of data was most appropriate because I wanted to demonstrate correlation between various variables. My main focus was to see how our education system is affected by policy, so I thought public high schools would be the best sample. However, my sample is still a non-representative sample because it only consists of public high schools, rather than grade schools, middle schools and universities; it is also a non-representative sample because it only consists of public high schools in the bay area, rather than schools throughout the nation.

I initially decided on possible candidates based on the reputations of high schools throughout the Bay Area. I wanted 3 exceptional schools that demonstrate very high student achievement, 3 average schools that demonstrated pretty good student achievement, and 3 "bad" schools that represented less than desirable student achievement. The “bad” schools are, in actuality, schools with average test scores and dropout rates that are much lower than the national average, therefore I would not consider them schools that are actually failing.  Due to the fact that I don't see them as actually bad schools, and to use mroe neutral terms, these schools will be ranked as "less than desirable" schools.  The schools’ statuses were initially determined by the schools reputations, since I am from the Bay Area and have heard of all of these high schools. I then went on schoolmatters.org and compared their dropout rates and test scores to confirm that the schools had been placed in the appropriate categories.  After choosing the 9 schools I would be studying, I collected the following information on them:

• Percentage of Standardized Test Scores that received a proficient or higher in both math and reading
• District Capital Expenditures: the amount of money spent on instructional materials and maintentance, per student, by district

I also went on schoolmatters.com and looked at what technological programs were offered. The Art programs offered included Computer Arts, Video/Film Production, and Photography. I considered Photography a technological program because of the use of a camera. “Other Special Programs” offered included Radio/video/multimedia, Science and Technology, and Yearbook. I considered Yearbook a technological program because of the use of the camera, as well as the computer skills that are involved in editing yearbook pages and creating the layout. Lastly, the only technological Vocational program was Technology.   When organizing the data collected, this is the table I came up with.

School	Ranking	Dropout Rates	Reading Scores	Math  Scores	Capital Expenditures	Programs Offered
Miramonte	exceptional	0.30%	98.00%	99.00%	$2,316	7
Mission San Jose	exceptional	0.20%	98.00%	99.00%	$1,554	6
Monte Vista	exceptional	0.10%	99.00%	99.00%	$3,896	6
Mountain View	pretty good	0.60%	90.20%	91.40%	$775	7
Dublin	pretty good	0.80%	91.00%	91.00%	$3,522	6
Castro Valley	pretty good	0.90%	95.00%	93.00%	$2,481	6
Hayward	less than desirable	2.70%	75.00%	73.00%	$262	5
San Lorenzo	less than desirable	1.90%	69.00%	68.00%	$318	5
Mount Eden	less than desirable	4.40%	77.00%	76.00%	$262	3

I chose each of these factors because the goal is to see how funding, student achievement, and access to technology are all interrelated. The capital expenditures is used as the funding component; the standardized test scores and dropout rates are both used as the student achievement components, and the programs offered are used as the access to technology component. While there are certainly many other details that could be considered to assess the same thing, there are the ones that were more readily available to me.  I did not need to interview anybody or conduct a survey to receive this information; it is open to the public via various websites.  Therefore, confidentiality and ethics were not an issue in this data collection process.

Analysis

When looking at test scores and funding, the graphs show that there is a positive correlation between the two variables.  As capital expenditures increased, both math and reading test scores increased.  The exceptional schools, which were Miramonte, Mission San Jose, and Monte Vista, had capital expenditures in the $1,500 to $4,000 range and test scores in the 98.00% to 99.00% range.  The pretty good schools, which were Mountain View, Dublin, and Castro Valley, had capital expenditures in the $750 to $3, 600 range and test scores in the 90.00% to 95.00% range.  The less than desirable schools, which were Hayward, San Lorenzo, and Mount Eden, had capital expenditures in the $250 to $350 range and test scores in the 68.00% to 77.00% range.  Overall, schools with capital expenditures in the higher ranges had higher test scores.

When looking at dropout rates and capital expenditures, there seemed to be a negative correlation, with dropout rates decreasing as funding increased.  The exceptional schools, which were Miramonte, Mission San Jose, and Monte Vista, had capital expenditures in the $1,500 to $4,000 range and dropout rates that were less than 0.03%.  The pretty good schools, which were Mountain View, Dublin, and Castro Valley, had capital expenditures in the $750 to $3, 600 range and dropout rates that ranged from 0.60% to 0.90%.  The less than desirable schools, which were Hayward, San Lorenzo, and Mount Eden, had capital expenditures in the $250 to $350 range and dropout rates that ranged from 1.90% to 4.40%.  Overall, schools with capital expenditures in the higher ranges had lower dropout rates.

When looking at funding and technological programs offered, there is a positive correlation between the two, meaning that as capital expenditures increased, the amount of technological programs increased.   In other words, schools with more money were, for the most part, able to offer more technological programs to their students.  The exceptional schools, which were Miramonte, Mission San Jose, and Monte Vista, had capital expenditures in the $1,500 to $4,000 range and offered 6 to 7 technological programs.  The pretty good schools, which were Mountain View, Dublin, and Castro Valley, had capital expenditures in the $750 to $3, 600 range also offered 6 to 7 technological programs.  The less than desirable schools, which were Hayward, San Lorenzo, and Mount Eden, had capital expenditures in the $250 to $350 range offered 3 to 5 technological programs.  Although the exceptional and pretty good schools offered the same amounts of programs, the schools that lacked funding were not able to offer the same amount, showing that those with more than enough and just enough funding are able to offer more resources than schools that do not have enough funding.  Overall, schools with capital expenditures in the higher ranges offered more technological programs.

When looking at dropout rates and programs offered, there is a negative correlation, meaning that lower dropout rates are correlated with a larger amount of technological programs that are offered.  The exceptional schools, which were Miramonte, Mission San Jose, and Monte Vista, offered 6 to 7 technological programs and had dropout rates that were less than 0.03% .  The pretty good schools, which were Mountain View, Dublin, and Castro Valley, also offered 6 to 7 technological programs and had dropout rates that ranged from 0.60% to 0.90%.  The less than desirable schools, which were Hayward, San Lorenzo, and Mount Eden, offered 3 to 5 technological programs and had droupout rates that ranged from 1.90% to 4.40%.  Overall, the schools that offered more technological programs had lower dropout rates.

The graphs that depict test scores and programs offered do not demonstrate as strong of a correlation between the two variables as the other graphs, as seen with the larger amount of outliers. 

However, if we look at the following ideas presented, we can infer that there is a link between student achievement and the amount of technological programs that are offered.  More money is positively correlated with higher student achievement, which is seen through the fact that schools with more money have higher test scores and lower dropout rates.  More money is also positively correlated with more technological programs.  Using the if A:C and B:C then A:B associative method of reasoning, with A being more technological programs, B being higher levels of student achievement, and C being more money or funding, we can conclude that (A) technological programs are indirectly, but positively correlated with (B) higher levels of student achievement.  The data also establishes that there is link between more technological programs and lower dropout rates, and dropout rates are one of the elements used to gage student achievement

When looking at the data using this framework, we can conclude that more technological programs are linked to higher levels of student achievement.  Although the graphs do not directly state that more technological programs are linked with higher test scores, more technological programs are linked with lower dropout rates.  It is also important to remember that correlation does not equal causation; for example, we may be able to say that more technological programs are linked to lower dropout rates, however, we cannot say that more technological programs cause lower dropout rates.

Conclusions & Reflections

The data provided allows us to conclude that there is a link between funding and the availability of technological programs, as well as a link between funding and levels of student achievement.  Although we did not see a strong correlation between the availability of technological programs and test scores through the graphs, if we look at the following ideas presented, we can infer that there is a link between student achievement and the amount of technological programs that are offered.  More money is positively correlated with higher student achievement, which is seen through the fact that schools with more money have higher test scores and lower dropout rates.  More money is also positively correlated with more technological programs.  Using the if A:C and B:C then A:B associative method of reasoning, with A being more technological programs, B being higher levels of student achievement, and C being more money or funding, we can conclude that (A) technological programs are indirectly, but positively correlated with (B) higher levels of student achievement.  The data also establishes that there is link between more technological programs and lower dropout rates, and dropout rates are one of the elements used to gage student achievement

From this we can conclude that the availability of technology is at least somewhat connected to student achievement.  This claim is also supported in past research reports, one of which states, “The primary motivation for using technologies in education is the belief that they will support superior forms of learning” (Using Technology to Support Education Reform).  With this being said, school funds do impact the quality of education that schools are able to offer, and the variation in funds received by public high schools in the bay area is related to the unequal levels of education that are offered by these schools.

This research is important because the Brown v. Board of Education verdict states that we must offer equal education to all children in our public schools.  If schools are not given enough funding to be able to provide equal amounts of technology, then schools cannot offer the same levels of education.  Why does it matter if some students receive a better education than others, you may ask.  Eszter Hargittai’s extensive research on the Digital Divide has led her to claim that there is a link between the distribution of knowledge and stratification (The Digital Divide and What to Do About It).  Many sociologists believe that education is a good avenue for increasing one’s social capital, and thus increasing one’s life chances.  If we wish to diminish these inequalities within the public education system, we must first provide all students with the same opportunity.  Past research and critics of American schools also claim that technology has the potential to play a large role in this reformation of our education system (Using Technology to Support Education Reform).  If we want to not only reform our schools to offer equal education, but also reform them to offer an overall better level of education, we must turn to the use of technology.

Multi-media Links

Further information on the No Child Left Behind Act

• PBS-Frontline: summary and views
  http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/schools/nochild/
• Documentary on it’s effect on schools across the nation
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiGN7kVyeaM
• Pros, Cons, and Perceptions
  http://people-press.org/http://people-press.org/files/legacy-pdf/337.pdf

What exactly is the Digital Divide?

• General Information
  http://www.techknowlogia.org/TKL_Articles/PDF/410.pdf
• Video: What is the Digital Divide?
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCIB_vXUptY
• “What Digital Divide”: Is America over-reacting?
  http://news.cnet.com/2010-1071-858537.html

Websites used in gathering data

• http://www.greatschools.org/
• http://www.schoolmatters.com/