|
|
|
AEP Online |
"Technology Counts 2005" Reports on State Funding and Related Trends: Looking Behind the Numbers"Technology Counts 2005" published by Education Week/Editorial Projects in Education, reports that state technology and other funds are being re-directed away from purchasing instructional applications toward data collection and management systems, largely as a result of NCLB requirements. State education earmarks for technology continue to decline; in 32 of 41 responding states, technology funds were cut or level-funded over the last two years. As a recent SETDA report found, the only funds in 12 states specifically earmarked for education technology were Title II D EETT which the Administration has proposed to cut from almost $500 million to zero for FY 2006. The Technology Counts report was based upon a survey, within the last six months, of Education Week “state contacts” by project staff and a review of data collected between October 2003 and March 2004 by Market Data Retrieval, which surveyed 85,000 U. S. public schools. One of the key findings according to Technology Counts is, “States and school districts are spending millions of dollars to build online student data systems that will offer teachers what policymakers hope will be the information needed to craft clear-cut strategies for raising achievement. The biggest impetus for putting money into such data systems is arguably the expansive reporting requirements and ambitious student-achievement goals set forth in the federal No Child Left Behind Act.” State officials were asked to identify the top two priorities for education technology spending in 2004-05. “Professional development” was a top priority in 28 states followed by “data management” in 15 states. On the other hand, “hardware for student use” and “curriculum software” were one of the two highest priorities in only nine and four states, respectively. While one could infer that funds being earmarked for technology are being reallocated to these areas, discussions with members of the project research team confirmed that state contacts were asked to respond, taking into account funding from all sources being allocated to priorities, not just state or Federal Title II D technology earmarks. The report also found that, over the last year, the number of states offering computer-based assessments has increased from 13 states last year to 16 this year, with four additional states conducting pilot tests of online assessments. The researcher with whom we spoke also confirmed that “online assessments” were considered separately from “data management” and were to be classified in the “other” category; 18 states included “other” activities as being one of their two highest priorities. Our TURNKEY survey last Fall of state directors of assessment, accountability, and/or evaluation, found that more than 40 states were planning or actually implementing some form of computer-based assessments, many of which were online, especially in the areas of alternative assessments for special education students and “exit exam” re-taking. Without doubt, funding has increased from a variety of sources such as the $400+ million annual NCES allocation to states to meet NCLB assessment, reporting, and data management requirements, as well as to computer-based assessment. Some estimates put total spending on regular state assessments and ongoing assessments designed to inform instruction at over $1.5 billion annually and continuing to increase. When asked by the research team, “How has the Federal NCLB law influenced technology spending in your state?,” fifteen states reported that more funding is now being focused on data management/collection, while nine states reported more funds being allocated to professional development and integration of technology into instruction. A chapter entitled “Federal Roles Seen Shifting” addresses the proposed cut in Title II D funding from $498 million to zero in the proposed FY 2006 budget. The article quotes Todd Jones, Associate Deputy Secretary for Budget within USED as saying, “We believe the purpose of this federal program has reached its end….The world has changed in the past two years,” in reference to USED’s survey showing that 92 percent of schools have Internet access in instructional rooms. As the article notes, “An explanation on the Education Department’s Website of why the technology grants should be cut says that Title I grants, teacher-quality state grants, or other federal funds could help districts blend technology into teaching and learning.” In fact, the two largest Federal education programs, Title I and IDEA, which are each scheduled to receive approximately $500 million increases next year, have new “earmarks” larger than the increases to be used for purposes in which technology is not likely to be an allowable cost. Specifically, 20 percent of Title I funds will be earmarked, in an increasing number of districts and schools identified for improvement, for transportation and SES tutoring. Up to $1.5 billion of the total expenditures for IDEA could also be used for prereferral interventions. USED guidelines and Non-Regulatory Guidance are likely to require interventions that meet most of the requirements for Reading First programs, which traditionally have not included technology-based formats. Questions, ideas, or in need of more information? Please contact Dave Gladney at 856-241-7772 or dgladney@AEPweb.org.
|
|
©
2008 The Association of Educational
Publishers
|
|
