e

L

e

a r

n

i

n

g

THE NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY PLAN

U.S DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

e-Learning

PUTTING A WORLD-CLASS EDUCATION AT THE 

FINGERTIPS OF ALL CHILDREN 
CONTENTS

3 LETTER FROM THE SECRETARY

4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

9CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

13 CHAPTER 2: TEACHING AND LEARNING WITH TECHNOLOGY: 

PROGRESS AND PROSPECTS

13 Support for Teacher Use of Technology 

15 Teacher and Student Access to Technology

20 Use of Digital Content and Networked Applications for Teaching and Learning

21 Technology’s Impact on Teaching and Learning

25 CHAPTER 3: OPPORTUNITIES TO ENHANCE LEARNING WITH

TECHNOLOGY

27 Helping Students to Comprehend Difficult-to-Understand Concepts

28 Helping Students to Engage in Learning

29 Providing Students with Access to Information and Resources

30 Better Meeting Students’ Individual Needs

31 Looking Forward

33 CHAPTER 4: THE LEADERSHIP IMPERATIVE: A NATIONAL

STRATEGY FOR TECHNOLOGY IN EDUCATION

33 National Educational Technology Goals

34 Goal 1: All Students and Teachers Will Have Access to Information Technology in Their

Classrooms, Schools, Communities and Homes.

37 Goal 2: All Teachers Will Use Technology Effectively to Help Students Achieve High Academic

Standards.

39 Goal 3: All Students Will Have Technology and Information Literacy Skills.

44 Goal 4: Research and Evaluation Will Improve the Next Generation of Technology

Applications for Teaching and Learning.

48 Goal 5: Digital Content and Networked Applications Will Transform Teaching and Learning.

54 Conclusion

55 APPENDICES

56 A. The Process of Developing e-Learning

57 B. Contributors

61 C. Endnotes

CENTERFOLD

Educational Technology Timeline, Highlights During the Clinton Administration: 1993-2000 
Richard W. Riley

Secretary

Frank S. Holleman III

Deputy Secretary

Linda G. Roberts

Director, Office of Educational Technology

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 1

e-Learning

PUTTING A WORLD-CLASS EDUCATION AT THE 

FINGERTIPS OF ALL CHILDREN 

THE NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY PLAN

U.S DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
2 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children
December 2000

Dear Member of Congress:

In response to the tremendous potential for improving educational opportunities through the effective use of technology, I released the nation’s first educational technology plan in 1996. That plan

set forth a far-reaching vision for widespread improvements in teaching and learning guided by four

national educational technology goals. 

We have made remarkable progress toward achieving the 1996 educational technology goals. Due in

large part to federal programs such as the Technology Literacy Challenge Fund and the E-rate program, many of the nation’s teachers and students are beginning to reap the benefits of increased

access to computers and the Internet. That progress is a testament to the commitment of local communities, states, the private and non-profit sectors, educators, the federal government, and others to

integrate technology into America’s schools.

Building on what has been accomplished, I am pleased to share with you e-Learning: Putting a

World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children. This plan shows where progress has been

made since 1996, where new opportunities exist, and where challenges remain. e-Learning outlines

five new national educational technology goals. It proposes national, state, local, and private sector

actions to ensure that all of our nation’s teachers and students have the opportunity to take advantage of the power of new and emerging technologies for widespread improvements in teaching and

learning—today, tomorrow, and far into the future.

Leadership is required to sustain our commitment to the future. I hope that the Congress and the

new administration will continue to support state and local education leaders in using technology

to strengthen the academic achievement of all children. National progress on these five goals is an

opportunity that the country cannot afford to miss.

Yours sincerely,

Richard W. Riley

Secretary, U.S. Department of Education

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 3
In response to the educational opportunities made

available by dramatic technological innovations in the

early and mid-1990s, U.S. Secretary of Education

Richard Riley released the nation’s first educational

technology plan in 1996, Getting America’s Students

Ready for the 21st Century: Meeting the Technology

Literacy Challenge. This plan presented a far-reaching

vision for the effective use of technology in elementary

and secondary education to help the next generation 

of school children to be better educated and better 

prepared for the evolving demands of the new

American economy. 

Due in large part to markedly increased federal,

state, local and private investment in technology for

education, the nation has made tremendous progress

toward achieving the 1996 national educational technology goals. These investments in computers and Internet

access, professional development, technical support and

content have allowed many elementary and secondary

school teachers and students to reap the benefits of

powerful teaching and learning applications. 

The latest research and evaluation studies demonstrate that school improvement programs that employ

technology for teaching and learning yield positive

results for students and teachers. Given that many

schools and classrooms have only recently gained access

to technology for teaching and learning, the positive

outcomes of these studies suggest a future for education

that could be quite bright if the nation maintains its

commitment to harnessing technology for education. 

The adoption of new and emerging technologies by

schools and classrooms offers even more reason to be

hopeful. With sufficient access and support, teachers

will be better able to help their students comprehend

difficult-to-understand concepts and engage in learning,

provide their students with access to information and

resources, and better meet their students’ individual

needs. If we take advantage of the opportunities presented to us,technology will enhance learning and

improve student achievement for all students.

Given the tremendous progress made in integrating

technology into teaching and learning and the continued

advances in the affordability and capabilities of technology, the need to move beyond the 1996 goals became

evident. In the fall of 1999, the U.S. Department of

Education undertook a strategic review and revision of

the national educational technology plan, in consultation with the full range of stakeholders: educators,

researchers, policymakers, students, parents, and higher

education, industry and other leaders. The outcome of

this strategic review was five new national goals for

technology in education. 

Working together to achieve these goals constitutes a

major leadership imperative facing those seeking widespread improvements in teaching and learning. As a

nation, we should pledge to meet these new goals: 

NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY GOALS

Goal 1: All students and teachers will have

access to information technology in their

classrooms, schools, communities and

homes.

Goal 2: All teachers will use technology

effectively to help students achieve high

academic standards.

Goal 3: All students will have technology

and information literacy skills.

Goal 4: Research and evaluation will

improve the next generation of technology

applications for teaching and learning.

Goal 5: Digital content and networked

applications will transform teaching and

learning.

4 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In committing to achieve these goals, everyone has a

role to play: federal, state and local governments; education; nonprofit organizations and associations; the private sector; communities; and families. For each of these

goals, there are numerous strategies that can be undertaken to ensure continued progress in using technology

effectively for education. 

Goal 1: All students and teachers will have

access to information technology in their 

classrooms, schools, communities and homes.

An integral part of school improvement and reform

efforts in the 21st century, in the United States and

abroad, will be student and teacher access to educational technology, such as computers connected to the

Internet. Universal access to the Internet will help end

the isolation of teachers; exponentially expand the

resources for teaching and learning in schools and classrooms; provide more challenging, authentic and higherorder learning experiences for students; and make

schools and teachers more accountable to parents and

communities.

The quality of Internet access is critical. Broadband

access will be the new standard. Slow, unreliable connections that cannot support interactivity or rich multimedia content will no longer be sufficient. To take

advantage of access to technology for improved teaching

and learning, it will become increasingly important to

build and support network infrastructures—wired or

wireless, desktop or handheld—that allow multiple

devices to connect simultaneously to the Internet

throughout every school building and community in the

nation. 

To realize the goal of universal access to educational

technology for students and teachers, we should ensure

sustained and predictable funding for technology;

ensure that technology plans reflect the educational

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 5

A NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR TECHNOLOGY IN EDUCATION

“NEW TECHNOLOGIES CAN BE AN INCREDIBLE TOOL OF EMPOWERMENT IN

SCHOOLS, HOMES, BUSINESSES, COMMUNITY CENTERS AND EVERY OTHER PART

OF OUR CIVIC LIFE....IMAGINE IF COMPUTERS AND INTERNET CONNECTIONS

WERE AS COMMON IN EVERY COMMUNITY AS TELEPHONES ARE TODAY; IF ALL

TEACHERS HAD THE SKILLS TO OPEN STUDENTS’ EYES AND MINDS TO THE POSSIBILITIES OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES; IF EVERY SMALL BUSINESS IN EVERY

RURAL TOWN COULD JOIN WORLDWIDE MARKETS ONCE RESERVED FOR THE MOST

POWERFUL CORPORATIONS—JUST IMAGINE WHAT AMERICA COULD BE.” 

– PRESIDENT CLINTON 

1
needs of students and are regularly updated; improve

the affordability, reliability and ease of use of educational technology; ensure that school buildings and

facilities are modern; strengthen our commitment to

eliminating the digital divide; and ensure that all 

students have equal opportunities to access and use

technology.

Goal 2: All teachers will use technology effectively to help students achieve high academic

standards.

Most teachers have been prepared for a model of

teaching dramatically out of step with what is needed to

prepare the nation’s students for the challenges they will

face in the future. Recent reports by the American

Council on Education, the CEO Forum on Education

and Technology, the Milken Exchange on Education

Technology, the National Commission on Mathematics

and Science Teaching for the 21st Century, and the

National Council for Accreditation of Teacher

Education, among others, all identify opportunities to

enhance teacher quality and teacher preparation, particularly as they relate to the effective use of technology in

education. 

Ensuring that the nation has effective 21st-century

teachers requires more than just providing sufficient

access to technology for teaching and learning. We

should improve the preparation of new teachers, including their knowledge of how to use technology for effective teaching and learning; increase the quantity, quality

and coherence of technology-focused activities aimed at

the professional development of teachers; and, improve

the instructional support available to teachers who use

technology.

Goal 3: All students will have technology and

information literacy skills.

The need to prepare students with the skills they

need to participate fully in our increasingly technological society has become a major priority for the nation.

A meaningful, unified approach to providing students

with the skills they will need for their futures must be

more than a checklist of isolated technology skills;

rather, these skills are only a first step in assuring all

our children become proficient information and 

technology users. 

Also necessary are information problem-solving

skills, such as how to define tasks, identify information

seeking strategies, locate and access information, determine information’s relevance, organize and communicate the results of the information problem-solving

effort and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the

solution. The call for this new “21st-century literacy” in

no way supplants current efforts by states and districts

to set and even raise academic standards for students; it

simply reflects the fact that the bar for an educated citizenry and workforce continues to rise to reflect changes

in society.

In requiring these skills of students, we will ensure

that the opportunities made possible through the use 

of technology will be available to all students as they

progress through school, regardless of personal or

socioeconomic factors. Even for those students who 

do not pursue technology careers, ensuring technology

and information literacy skills will provide a number of

benefits. 

To ensure that students are prepared for their future

we should: include technology and information literacy

in state and local standards for what students should

know and be able to do; ensure students use technology

appropriately and responsibly; develop new student

assessment tools; and strengthen partnerships with

industry to help meet the workforce needs of the future. 

Goal 4: Research and evaluation will improve the

next generation of technology applications for

teaching and learning.

At the dawn of the 21st century, we are still at the

beginnings of a technological revolution that is bringing

dramatic changes to our society. This technological revolution will not automatically translate into a similar

revolution in teaching and learning. While we have

learned a tremendous amount about the implementation and use of technologies for teaching and learning in

the past few years, the need for an expanded, ongoing

national research and evaluation program to improve

the next generation of technology applications for

teaching and learning is profound. 

To implement such a program requires a sustained,

multi-disciplinary collaboration of learning scientists,

technologists, and subject-matter experts. Numerous

6 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children

3

2

4
organizations have pointed out the urgency of this

national need, including the President’s Committee of

Advisors on Science and Technology, the U.S.

Department of Education, the National Science

Foundation, the National Research Council, private

charitable foundations, independent research institutes

and representatives of academia.

To ensure that research and evaluation will improve

the next generation of technology applications for

teaching and learning, we should: initiate a systematic

agenda of research and evaluation on technology applications for teaching and learning; encourage state and

local evaluations of technology programs; and support

the dissemination and use of research-based information to improve teaching and learning.

Goal 5: Digital content and networked applications will transform teaching and learning.

Digital content and networked applications will support transformative changes in our approaches to teaching and learning. In order for these changes to lead to

increased educational opportunities for all students, digital content and networked applications must be independently judged to be of high quality (both in terms of

grounding in learning science and pedagogical effectiveness), well-documented, comprehensive and available for

all grades and subject areas, and have the power to

inspire or motivate students. In addition, they must be

easy to find and access, easy for students and teachers

to use, and accessible to people with disabilities.

Today, there exists tremendous opportunities for 

the creation of powerful digital content and networked

applications. For instance, digital content and networked applications offer direct opportunities to

enhance learning by helping students to comprehend

difficult-to-understand concepts; helping students to

engage in learning; providing students with access to

information and resources; and better meeting students’

individual needs. In addition, technology applications

can increase parental involvement and improve the

accountability and efficiency of school administration.

To ensure that digital content and networked applications will transform teaching and learning, we should:

ensure administrators and policymakers are technologically literate; support efforts to increase our understanding of how to improve teaching and learning

through partnerships within and across sectors; identify

leadership opportunities provided by technology to

offer better ways of accomplishing educational goals;

continue and expand efforts to digitize rich educational

materials consistent with copyright laws; encourage the

aggregation of demand for resources and services to

attract better and more effective technology-based services for teaching and learning; support educators and

technologists in defining what digital content and networked applications should be available to support

teaching and learning; remove barriers to purchasing

digital content and networked applications; recognize

developers of high-quality digital content and networked applications and exemplary adoption of educational technologies; and support the integration of digital content and networked applications into state and

local standards and curricular frameworks. 

The use of technology in education must remain a

national priority. It must be at the core of the educational experience, not at the periphery. Now is the time

to renew our commitment to the future by challenging

the nation to take bold action in hastening the coming

of the future of education. The leadership imperative is

clear. Collectively, these new goals for technology in

education represent an updated, high-level strategy for

ensuring that all students will benefit from enhanced

learning opportunities afforded by new and emerging

communications and information technologies.

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 7

5 THE LEADERSHIP IMPERATIVE
8 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children
In response to the educational opportunities made

available by dramatic technological innovations in the

early and mid-1990s, U.S. Secretary of Education

Richard Riley released the nation’s first educational

technology plan in 1996, Getting America’s Students

Ready for the 21st Century: Meeting the Technology

Literacy Challenge.1 To help the next generation of

school children to be better educated and better prepared for the evolving demands of the new American

economy, the 1996 plan presented a far-reaching vision

for the effective use of technology in elementary and

secondary education. The plan reflected four national

educational technology goals set forth by President

Clinton and Vice President Gore:

All teachers in the nation will have the training and

support they need to help students learn using computers and the information superhighway.

All teachers and students will have access to modern multimedia computers in their classrooms.

Every classroom will be connected to the information superhighway.

Effective software and online learning resources will

be an integral part of every school’s curriculum.

The 1996 national educational technology plan provided

the nation with a blueprint for the widespread, effective

use of technology in education. 

Due in large part to markedly increased federal,

state, local and private investment in technology for

education, the nation has made tremendous progress

toward achieving the national educational technology

goals first laid out in 1996. These investments in computers, Internet access, professional development, technical support and content have allowed many elementary and secondary school teachers and students to reap

the benefits of increased access to powerful teaching

and learning applications. With emerging evidence of

effective uses of technology in education,2 there is farreaching public support for the increased use of technology in elementary and secondary education:3

• 69 percent of Americans believe that the use of

computer technology has improved the quality of

instruction in their locals schools; and 

• 82 percent believe that schools should invest more

in computer technology for instructional purposes.

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 9

“EVERY CHILD IN AMERICA DESERVES A 21st CENTURY EDUCATION AND ACCESS TO 21st

CENTURY TECHNOLOGY.”

- VICE PRESIDENT AL GORE

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 1
10 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children

The Virtual High School (VHS)—supported by a 

federal Technology Innovation Challenge Grant—is 

a consortium of high schools that offers networkbased courses (NetCourses) taught by consortium

teachers for students in consortium schools. Teachers

in the VHS pool, with the help of experienced 

facilitators, design and offer NetCourses over the

Internet. Each VHS school also provides a part-time

coordinator who acts as liaison among students, the

VHS teachers, and the central VHS administrative

staff.

The growth of Virtual High School is impressive. In

September 1997, VHS offered Internet-based courses

for the first time to about 500 students in 27 schools

in ten states. By May 2000, after six semesters of

operation, VHS offered 87 different courses to about

1,700 students in 112 schools located in 29 states.

The number of students enrolled and the average

number of students per NetCourse have been steadily

increasing. The NetCourses, which are often quite

challenging, include topics like economics,

Shakespearean literature, nuclear physics, world 

conflict and peacemaking, and various languages 

of computer programming.

The Virtual High School often serves students who

would not have access to such a variety of courses.

Small school size and remote location often limit

access to adequately trained instructors to teach a

varied and sometimes specialized selection of courses. In fact, statistics show that over 80 percent of

the schools participating in VHS have enrollments of

fewer than 1,500 students. Half of these schools have

fewer than 800 students. As VHS has developed, some

of these small schools have come up with creative

ways to get involved in VHS, and VHS has supported

them in order to make their participation possible. In

some cases whole districts and geographic regions

have organized into “sub-cooperatives,” pooling their

local resources to take advantage of VHS courses. The

bottom line is that instead of schools finding an

expensive solution, or no solution at all, to the challenges that many schools face in meeting the

demands for course offerings, they are able to work

with VHS to develop creative solutions—all without

hiring new staff or adding a new building.

The principal of Monroe Senior High School, a very

small school (the smallest K-12 school in Alabama)

located in rural Southwest Alabama with a total

enrollment of 110 students—grades K-12—has high

praises for their participation in VHS. She feels that

had it not been for VHS, their school would not have

ranked in the 60th percentile on the Stanford-nine

Test, nor would it have had 99 percent of its Juniors

(Class of 2001) to pass all required parts of the new

state exit exam. Monroe hopes to be able to acquire

more computers in the near future so that they can

accommodate more students in the program. Right

now, because of the wide range of interest in VHS,

they have more students than space.

School principals and others at participating VHS

schools had reported that they believe the courses 

to be of high quality. A recent evaluation of VHS 

conducted by SRI International confirmed that VHS

courses provide students with high-quality 

curriculum content.

VIRTUAL HIGH SCHOOL PROJECT

Net Courses for High School
With increased access to technology in schools and

classrooms and with public support for its use, we can

now look to a future where the Internet and other

emerging information technologies have the potential to

foster even more dramatic improvements in education.

We have the potential to create an educational system

enhanced by technology that could be better suited to

the needs of educators, students and their families.

Indeed, visionary school leaders foresee advances in our

understanding of what learning really is, how diversified

it is, and which methods are flexible enough to meet the

learning needs of all students.4

For us to realize these visions, technology in education must remain a national priority. It must be at the

core of the educational experience, not at the periphery.

Indeed, emerging technologies will allow us to develop

new content to address evolving conceptions of the

skills and knowledge needed to succeed in today’s 

global society. Technology will enable new teaching

strategies and tools to increase student acquisition of

necessary skills and knowledge. It will also offer 

dramatic improvements in how we measure student

progress in attaining the necessary skills and knowledge.

If technology is to achieve genuinely transforming

improvements in schooling for all students, it must be at

the center of school reform and improvement efforts.

The leadership imperative is clear. Now is the time

for us to renew our commitment to the future of education. This report will show where progress has been

made, where new opportunities exist, and where challenges remain. Most important, it proposes national,

state and local actions that will ensure that all of our

nation’s teachers and students will have the opportunity

to take advantage of the power of new and emerging

technologies for widespread improvements in teaching

and learning today, tomorrow and far into the future.

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 11

“ONE OF THE MOST EXCITING THINGS I USE THE INTERNET FOR IS GETTING UPTO-DATE NEWS ACROSS THE WORLD. I DID A THESIS PAPER LAST YEAR ON CHINA 

AND I WAS ABLE TO USE NEWSPAPERS FROM HONG KONG AS RESEARCH. IT WOULD HAVE

BEEN IMPOSSIBLE TO GET SUCH NEW INFORMATION FROM THOSE SOURCES USING 

CONVENTIONAL METHODS.”

–STUDENT, INTERNET CHAT WITH U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 
12 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children
The 1996 national educational technology goals were

the four pillars of a comprehensive strategy for realizing

large-scale improvements in teaching and learning.

Addressing issues of support for teacher use of technology, teacher and student access to technology (computers and connectivity), and use of digital content and

resources, achieving the national educational technology

goals was intended to support widespread improvements in student achievement. This chapter reviews the

nation’s progress on each of these fronts, concluding

with a summary of the emerging positive impact of the

nation’s educational technology investments. 

SUPPORT FOR TEACHER 

USE OF TECHNOLOGY

Preparing the roughly three million teachers at work

in our public schools to use technology effectively first

became a priority in the early 1990s.5 In the 1993-94

school year, only 14 percent of public school teachers

had more than eight hours of training in the area of

educational technology, and as many as 50 percent of

teachers had little or no experience at all with technology in the classroom.6 In addition, most graduates from

teacher preparation institutions had only limited knowledge of the ways technology could be used in their professional practice.7

By 1999, one-third of public elementary and secondary school teachers reported feeling well or verywell prepared to use computers and the Internet for

classroom instruction.8 In addition, the vast majority of

teachers in 1999 reported that professional development

training in basic uses of technology for instruction were

now available to them, and nearly half of all teachers

had spent more than eight hours in educational technology-related professional development over the previous

three years.9 As a demonstration of the impact of technology-related professional development, teachers with

more professional development in the use of computers

or the Internet over the prior three years were more likely to assign students various types of work involving

technology.10

Even in schools with sufficient access to modern

computers, the Internet and digital content, teachers

still face challenges to using technology effectively.

Among the issues facing teachers’ effective use of computers and the Internet are a lack of the following:

release time to learn, practice and plan ways to use

computers or the Internet (cited by 83 percent of public

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 13

“TO IMPROVE THE RETURN ON AMERICA'S EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INVESTMENT, WE

MUST PROVIDE TEACHERS WITH THE SKILLS NECESSARY TO INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY

EFFECTIVELY INTO THE CURRICULUM. WE NEED TO USE TECHNOLOGY TO CONNECT

SCHOOLS, FAMILIES, AND THE COMMUNITY AND PROVIDE RESOURCES FOR SCHOOLS TO

USE TECHNOLOGY MORE EFFECTIVELY.”

–CRAIG BARRETT, PRESIDENT AND CEO, INTEL CORPORATION

TEACHING AND LEARNING

WITH T ECHNOLOGY: PROGRESS AND PROSPECTS

CHAPTER 2
elementary and secondary school teachers); support for

integrating telecommunications into the curriculum (68

percent of teachers); training opportunities (66 percent

of teachers); technical support or advice (64 percent of

teachers); and administrative support (43 percent of

teachers).11 Strikingly, one estimate of technical support

responsiveness by district technology coordinators in 27

states reveals that on average it takes between 14 hours

and more than seven days to fix a technology problem

that arises in a school or classroom (the average

response time across all 27 states was over two days).12

New teachers entering the profession are still not

being adequately prepared to teach with technology.

The CEO Forum on Education and Technology recently

found that fewer than half of the nation’s teacher preparation institutions require students to design and deliver

instruction using technology, and that even fewer require

technology use in the student teaching experience.13 In

response, the CEO Forum on Education and Technology

prepared the Teacher Preparation School Technology

and Readiness (StaR) chart, a self-assessment tool for

colleges of education. The STaR chart provides teacher

preparation programs with a set of benchmarks they

can use to measure their progress in integrating technology into their programs.14 As of November 2000, 243

teacher preparation institutions had committed to using

this self-assessment tool to help ensure that every new

teacher graduates from their institution prepared to use

and integrate technology effectively into teaching and

learning.15

A Model that Celebrates Good Teaching

As evidenced by their motto—“It’s not about technology.

It’s about LEARNING”—the Teacher Led Technology

Challenge (TLTC) strives to provide all regular pre-K

through eighth-grade classroom teachers in Berkeley with

the tools, support, and professional development they

need to make computers and other technologies tools for

teaching and learning in their classrooms. Berkeley teachers learn how to regularly integrate multimedia instructional materials in core subjects like reading, mathematics,

science and writing; address the neglected learning styles

and needs of students who learn differently; and harness

technology tools to reach instructional goals recommended

by national curriculum standards groups.

TLTC uses several innovative approaches to achieve these

measures. First, TLTC helps regular classroom teachers in

each school become leaders in integrating technology

within their own building in a peer-to-peer support mode.

Specifically, incremental, three-stage implementation 

allows teachers with various technology backgrounds to

join the project when it is most comfortable for them. By 

developing the skills of “lead teachers” in each school,

TLTC creates a corps of internal curriculum integration consultants and technical experts who can help teachers find

the right technologies to integrate into a specific unit or

topic and to troubleshoot any problems. Furthermore, a

roving substitute teacher covers each teacher’s classroom

for an hour during the school day while three to five

teachers are consecutively released from their class duties

to meet individually, at their school site, with a Classroom

Technology Integration Specialist in a program called “Prep

Shop.” The specialist and teacher discuss curriculum, outline instruction priorities, and together plan an activity to

integrate computer technology. The specialist returns on

subsequent days to each teacher’s class to co-lead the

planned activity with the teacher. These internal supports

will sustain technology integration beyond the life of the

Technology Innovation Challenge grant.

14 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children TEACHER LED TECHNOLOGY CHALLENGE BERKELEY UNITED SCHOOL DISTRICT, CALIFORNIA
To help future teachers become proficient in the use

of modern learning technologies, the U.S. Department 

of Education’s Preparing Tomorrow’s Teachers to Use

Technology (PT3) program was created. Implementation

and catalyst grants awarded under this initiative support

program innovations developed by consortia of higher

education institutions, state agencies, school districts,

non-profit organizations and others who are joining

forces to transform teacher preparation programs into

21st-century learning environments. To date, the PT3

program has committed to supporting 600,000 teachers

to become technology-proficient by 2003. In fiscal year

2001, the administration has requested $150 million for

this program to serve another 400,000 educators, bringing the total number reached by PT3 grants to one million by the year 2004. These grants will support teacher

preparation improvements in virtually every state and

region in the country, and a majority of the grants focus

on improving technology use in low-income communities and rural areas, and among minority groups and 

special populations. Importantly, consortia participating

in the program match federal dollars on at least an equal

basis with cash or in-kind, fairly valued, services, supplies or equipment.

Significant attention has been paid to making the

strategic investments necessary to build an education

technology infrastructure. Indeed, trends indicate that

access has dramatically improved since the early 1990s.

Due in large part to the successes of the Technology

Literacy Challenge Fund, which provides resources to

help states and districts develop and implement plans to

achieve the 1996 national technology goals, and the ERate program, which provides discounts on telecommunications services to schools and libraries, by 1999 nearly every school in the nation could boast of being able

to connect to the Internet and of being able to provide 

its teachers and students with access to computers and

the Internet somewhere in the school.16 

In 1994—the first year in which the National Center

for Education Statistics (NCES) began systematically 

collecting data on the availability of technology in elementary and secondary schools—only 35 percent of

public elementary and secondary schools and 3 percent

of public school classrooms had access to the Internet. 

By 1999, access had increased by 60 percent: 95 percent 

of schools and 63 percent of classrooms had access to

the Internet, providing on average one instructional

computer with an Internet connection for every nine

students. 17

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 15

TEACHER AND STUDENT ACCESS TO TECHNOLOGY
Over this time, the speed and capacity of connections to the Internet have also improved in most public

schools. In 1996, relatively slow dial-up network connections were used by almost three-quarters of public

schools with Internet access. By 1999, 86 percent of

public schools connected via higher-speed and highercapacity dedicated lines or through other types of highspeed connections (such as ISDN, cable modems and

wireless connections).18

The pace of these changes is a testament to the

commitment of local communities, states, the private

sector, educators, the federal government and others to

the integration of technology into America’s schools.

Both the Technology Literacy Challenge Fund and the

E-rate program have been instrumental in leveraging

other public and private resources to increase access to

technology for our nation’s students and teachers.

Access to computers and the Internet has also dramatically improved outside of school, in places such as

community centers, libraries and homes. Programs such

as the Community Technology Center Program have

increased the availability of technology learning centers

in public housing facilities, community centers, libraries

and other educational facilities in low-income communities. Students who visit these centers use computers 

to get information from the Internet, send and receive 

e-mail, set up Web pages, receive tutoring and homework help, and carry out their own self-directed projects.19 Similarly, the 21st Century Community Learning

Center Program, which enables school districts to fund

public schools as community education centers, provides opportunities for students to access technology

after school hours.

16 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (2000). Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools 

and Classrooms: 1994-1999, NCES 2000-086, by Catrina Williams. Washington, D.C.

http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2000086

0

20

40

60

80

100

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 

35

50

65

78

3

8

14

27

51

63

89

95

Instructional rooms with Internet access

Schools with Internet access

Percent

FIGURE 1. DRAMATIC INCREASES IN SCHOOL CONNECTIVITY SINCE 1994

Percent of Public Schools and Instructional Rooms with Internet Access:

1994 to 1999
Bridging the Digital Divide

The Education rate (E-rate) program, created

under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, is in

its fourth year of providing financial support to

schools and libraries for Internet access and

other telecommunications services. The recent

evaluation of the program, E-Rate and the Digital

Divide: A Preliminary Analysis from the

Integrated Studies of Educational Technology,*

confirms that the program is operating as intended, increasing the acquisition of equipment and

services for building connections, telecommunications services and Internet access. Thus far, more

than $5 billion has been committed to public

school districts, public and private schools, public

libraries, states and consortia since the first wave

of E-rate commitments in November 1998.

Over one million classrooms have been wired

through the E-rate program. Most of the funding

has gone to public schools, with the majority

going to high-poverty districts. Schools with more

than half of students eligible for free and

reduced-price lunch represent only 25 percent of

public school students; however, they have

received over 60 percent of E-rate funds awarded.

Because of the effort to serve the poorest students, those districts receive almost 10 times the

E-rate funding per student when compared to the

wealthiest districts. The targeting provisions of

the program to the neediest schools and rural

schools also are working. Three-quarters of all

rural districts and districts with 75 percent or

more students eligible for free and reduced-price

lunch applied for the program in its second

year—up for both groups from year one.

E-RATE FUNDING BY TYPE OF ENTITY

In addition to providing support to schools and

libraries, the E-rate program is on the cutting

edge of fast and efficient data collection. The

program encourages electronic application submission and conducts ongoing electronic program

monitoring and support by employing an electronic record system. The current data collection system, which contains approximately one million

records with data as current as January 2000, was

analyzed for the E-Rate and the Digital Divide

report. Such an evaluation of an ongoing policy

initiative is possible solely because of technology, and allows for the timely dissemination of

research on the impact of the program.

* U.S. Department of Education, Planning and Evaluation

Service and Office of Educational Technology, E-Rate and

the Digital Divide: A Preliminary Analysis from the

Integrated Studies of Educational Technology, 2000,

Doc. # 00-17, prepared by Michael J. Puma, Duncan D.

Chaplin, and Andreas D. Pape, The Urban Institute,

Washington, D.C., 2000.

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 17

“ THIS E-RATE IS ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL IN ORDER TO HELP COMMUNITIES AND

SCHOOLS ALL OVER THIS COUNTRY TO WIRE UP THEIR CLASSROOMS AND

SCHOOLS. IT IS FOR THE FUTURE OF THIS COUNTRY...[WITHOUT THE E-RATE,] WE

WILL END UP BEING A HAVE AND HAVE-NOT COUNTRY WHEN IT COMES TO 

E D U C AT I O N A L T E C H N O L O G Y. A N D W E C A N’ T HAVE THAT.”

- U.S. SENATOR OLYMPIA J. SNOWE

THE E-RATE PROGRAM

All Other 2.8%

Private Schools 3.0%

Libraries 3.9%

Public Schools 5.5%

State/Federal Schools 5.6%

Public School Districts 79.2%
Despite these great strides, there is more the nation

needs to do to improve access and connectivity. For

instance, teachers still cite access-related concerns

regarding the use of technology in instruction: more

than three-quarters of teachers cite a lack of computers

in schools as a concern; nearly two-thirds cite “outdated, incompatible or unreliable” computers; and nearly

six in ten cite the fact that “Internet access is not easily

accessible.”20

Only 10 percent of teachers have more than five computers in their classrooms21— the number of computers

that would allow for the student-to-computer ratio

advocated by the President’s Committee of Advisors on

Science and Technology.22 And of those teachers with a

computer in their classroom, one-third do not have a

connection to the Internet.23 While improvements have

been made in recent years, the bandwidth available in

most schools to connect to the Internet also remains

quite limited—allowing only about one in every four

computers in any given school to connect to the Internet

simultaneously with other computers in the school.24

While progress has been made in bridging the “digital divide”—that is, the socioeconomic and racial/ethnic

gap in access to computers and the Internet—challenges

remain. For example, data reveal that students in poorer

schools continue to have less access to computers and

the Internet. In 1999, the ratio of students per instructional computer was 16 to 1 for the poorest schools in

the United States, while our nation’s richest schools

averaged seven students per computer. In addition,

Internet access in classrooms was also less likely in the

poorest schools, with 39 percent connected. In contrast,

three-fourths of the classrooms in wealthier schools

were connected.25

18 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children

FIGURE 2. THE DIGITAL DIVIDE IN SCHOOL ACCESS TO TECHNOLOGY 

Students per Instructional Computer with Internet Access,

by School Poverty: 1998-1999

0

5

10

15

20

Less than 

11 percent

11 to30

 percent

31 to 49

 percent

50 to 70

 percent

71 percent 

or more

Percent of students in school eligible for 

free or reduced-price lunch

Students per instructional computer with Internet access

1999

1998

10

7

11

8

11

9

16

10

17

16

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (2000). Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools and

Classrooms: 1994-1999, NCES 2000-086, by Catrina Williams. Washington, D.C.

http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2000086 
The disadvantages of inequitable access to technology in schools and classrooms are compounded by the

fact that students with limited access to technology in

school are also less likely to have access to computers

and the Internet at home. Although the percentage of

homes with computers has increased in recent years,

household income clearly determines the likelihood of

student access at home. Ninety-four percent of schoolaged children in families with household incomes of

$75,000 or greater have computers in their homes this

year (2000), while only 31 percent of students in families

with household incomes less than $20,000 have them.

Household income factors into student use of the

Internet at home as well. Most households in the

wealthiest income bracket have a family member who

uses the Internet at home (85 percent), while only 18

percent of the poorest households with children use it 

at home.26 

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 19

“I THINK THAT SOMETIMES TEACHERS ASSUME THAT EVERYONE HAS COMPUTERS, AND

SOMETIMES THOSE KIDS ARE PUT AT A DISADVANTAGE. THEY HAVE TO COME IN AFTER

SCHOOL AND MISS OUT ON ACTIVITIES SOMETIMES, BECAUSE THEY CAN'T GET ON IT

ANY OTHER TIME.” 

–STUDENT, INTERNET CHAT WITH U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

0

20

40

60

80

100

Less than 

$20,000

$20,000 to

$34,999

$35,000 to

$49,999

$50,000 to

$74,999

$75,000 or

greater

Annual household income

Percent of children ages 5-17 in household with a computer

1997

1994

10

18

21

31

2000

1998

24

41 42

51

41

60

63

72

57

74 76

83

76

89 91 94

FIGURE 3. THE DIGITAL DIVIDE IN HOME ACCESS TO TECHNOLOGY

Percent of Children Living in a Household with a Computer,

by Household Income: Selected Years

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey: November 1994, October 1997, December 1998 and August 2000.
FIGURE 4. WELL-PREPARED TEACHERS INTEGRATE TECHNOLOGY INTO INSTRUCTION

Percent of Public School Teachers Making Various Assignments,

by Preparedness to Use Technology for Classroom Instruction: 1999

20 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children

USE OF DIGITAL CONTENT AND NETWORKED 

APPLICATIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Not at all prepared

Well/Very well prepared

Percent of Public School Teachers Making Various Assignments

Solve problems/analyze data

Word processing/spreadsheets

Graphical presentations

Demonstrations/simulations

Internet research

CD-ROM research

Multimedia projects

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (2000). Teachers’ Tools for the 21st Century: A

Report on Teachers’ Use of Technology, NCES 2000-102, by Becky Smerdon, Stephanie Cronen, Lawrence Lanahan, Jennifer

Anderson, Nicholas Iannotti, and January Angeles. Washington, D.C.

http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2000102

By the early 1990s, the market for digital content and

educational software, built on outmoded premises about

learning, was widely criticized for producing low-quality products or none at all for many content areas and

grade levels—especially for middle and secondary

school students.27 In fact, in 1996, many teachers did not

have ready access to computers and the Internet in their

schools, and those that did often used technology only

to provide supplemental drill and practice opportunities

to their students. 

Due to dramatic increases in the availability of computers and Internet access and to an increased emphasis

on professional development, a majority of the nation’s

public elementary and secondary school teachers (53

percent) were employing digital content and networked

applications in their classrooms at least to a small

extent by 1999. Many of these same teachers (48 percent) also reported making instructional assignments to

students outside the classroom.28 The most common

types of work assigned by teachers include: word processing/spreadsheets, Internet research, solving problems/analyzing data, and drills.29 In fact, teachers who

report feeling well prepared to use technology use it

more frequently, use it in a greater variety of ways individually and with their students—for instructional as

well as for preparatory and administrative purposes—

and are more likely to increase their use of technology

over time.30

Recent data suggest that digital content and networked applications are still supplementary to instruction for many teachers.31 For instance, fewer than two in

five public elementary and secondary school teachers

currently employ computers or the Internet for most

types of uses to a moderate or large extent, and only 20

percent of teachers with access to the Internet in their

classroom use it to any extent.32 In 1999, only ten percent of teachers reported feeling “very well prepared”

and 23 percent reported feeling “well-prepared” to use

computers and the Internet for classroom instruction.33

The CEO Forum on Education and Technology 

predicts exciting developments in the use of digital 

content and networked applications for instruction. 

In classrooms with ready access to these learning tools,

these developments will allow for greater levels of

collaboration, inquiry, analysis, creativity and content

production.34
e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 21

“STUDENTS RESPOND EXTREMELY WELL TO THE EASE AND SIMULATION PROVIDED BY THE

VARIOUS TECHNOLOGIES AVAILABLE IN THE CLASSROOM. I SAW STUDENTS THREE TO

FOUR GRADE LEVELS BEHIND THEIR AGE GROUP ABLE TO GAIN GROUND AND MOVE TO

[THE NEXT] GRADE LEVEL BECAUSE OF THE TECHNOLOGY. THESE STUDENTS ENJOYED

MAKING SOMETHING, SO THEY FOUND MOTIVATION TO IMPROVE THEIR READING SKILLS

SO THEY COULD IMPROVE THE PRODUCT THEY CREATED.”

–PARENT, ONLINE COMMENT TO U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

TECHNOLOGY’S IMPACT ON

TEACHING AND LEARNING

Building upon a knowledge base developed over the

past 40 years on the use of technology to improve teaching and learning,35 the 1996 national educational technology goals laid the foundation for widespread improvements in student achievement. Recent research and 

evaluation substantiates what anecdotal evidence has

suggested for quite some time about the effectiveness 

of computers and the Internet for education: It works. 

Programs such as the Technology Innovation

Challenge Grants have laid the foundation for advances

in our understanding of effective uses of technology for

teaching and learning. Challenge Grants—awarded to

school districts in partnership with higher education

institutions, museums, libraries, and private profit and

non-profit organizations—are five years in duration and

are intended to serve as educational technology testbeds. Recipients of these grants have developed and tested a wide variety of innovations, from virtual high

schools (in which over 150 schools and 3,000 students

participated in the 2000-2001 school year) to online

teaching resources for geography and history. In fact,

the U.S. Department of Education’s Expert Panel on

Educational Technology recently designated seven programs—several of which are Challenge Grants—as

exemplary or promising educational technology programs on the basis of the quality of their program, educational significance, evidence of effectiveness and usefulness to others. 

Studies have demonstrated that with technology student achievement increases, students can learn more in

less time and undertake more ambitious school projects,

and that students have more positive attitudes toward

classes that use technology.36 In fact, as briefly described

in the accompanying table, school improvement programs that employ technology for teaching and learning

yield a host of positive results for students and teachers. 

Given that many schools and classrooms have only

recently gained access to technology for teaching and

learning, the positive outcomes of these studies suggest

a future for education that could be quite bright if the

nation maintains its commitment to harnessing technology for education. The adoption of new and emerging

technologies by schools and classrooms offers even more

reason to be hopeful.

WHAT IS DIGITAL CONTENT?

Digital content is the multimedia material that calls upon

students to seek and manipulate information in the collaborative, creative, and engaging ways that make digital

learning possible. It includes video on demand, CD-ROMs,

Web sites, e-mail, on-line learning management systems,

computer simulations, streamed discussions, data files,

databases, and audio. Digital content is critical to digital

learning because it can be:

• Randomly accessed;

• Relevant, up to date, and authentic;

• Explored on many levels;

• Easily manipulated;

• Instantaneous; and

• Creative.

Source: The CEO Forum on Education and Technology (2000). The Power of Digital

Learning: Integrating Digital Content. School Technology and Readiness Report – Year 3.

Washington, D.C. http://www.ceoforum.org/downloads/report3.pdf 
YEAR 

2000

2000

1999

1999

1999

1998

STUDY

Evaluation of the Use of Technology in

Illinois Public Schools: Final Report by

Silverstein, Frechtling, and Miyaoka 37

Miami Dade County Public Schools

Assessment Study: 1999-2000 by the

Milken Family Foundation, Florida

Educational Technology Corporation

(FETC) and North Central Regional

Educational Laboratory (NCREL) 38

Computer-Assisted Cooperative Learning

in Integrated Classrooms for Students

With and Without Disabilities by Xin 39

The Idaho Technology Initiative: An

Accountability Report to the Idaho

Legislature on the Effects of Monies

Spent through the Idaho Council for

Technology in Learning by The State

Division of Vocational Education, The

State Department of Education, Bureau

of Technology Services 40

West Virginia Story: Achievement and

Gains from a Statewide Comprehensive

Instructional Technology Program by

Mann, Shakeshaft, Becker, and

Kottkamp41

Does it Compute? The Relationship

Between Educational Technology and

Student Achievement in Mathematics by

the Educational Testing Service 42 

PURPOSE

To determine the nature,

extent, and effectiveness of

the application of technology

for improving education in

Illinois.

To recognize and ensure that

the students of the MiamiDade County Public Schools

have the technology education

they need to succeed in the

digital age.

To determine the effects of

computer assisted cooperative

learning in classrooms for students with and without disabilities.

To evaluate the impact of

Idaho’s investment in technology for learning.

To investigate the effectiveness of the Basic Skills/

Computer Education (BS/CE)

program in West Virginia.

To examine if technology

increases achievement and if

the methods in which it is

used affects achievement.

FINDINGS

Controlling for a school’s poverty level, technology use has a small but significant impact

on student achievement as measured by the

Illinois testing program. The impact is 

generally strongest at higher grade levels.

Innovative programs are found to be enhancing student learning through technology.

Therefore, it is recommedended that the

school administration take actions necessary

to extend the benefits of technology use to

all students.

Students with and without disabilities

achieved significantly higher scores through

participation in computer assisted cooperative- learning groups than students who participated in whole-class learning.

The benefits of technology in teaching and

learning included: increased academic

achievement, improved technology literacy,

increased communication, innovative teaching, positive relationships with the community, more efficient operation of schools, and

technically qualified students ready to enter

the workforce.

Students participating in the BS/CE program

achieved significant gains in reading, writing

and math. Specifically, the program was

found to account for 11 percent of students’

improvements on the Stanford-9 from 1996-

98. BS/CE was also found to be more costeffective than other interventions and was

especially successful with low-income and

rural students as well as with girls.

Technology use by students was positively

related to academic achievement, especially

when used to teach higher-order thinking

skills. Among other findings: for eighthgraders, the use of technology to teach higher-order thinking skills was related to a .42

gain of a grade level in academic achievement in mathematics, while using computers

for learning games was related to a .15 gain

of a grade level for fourth-graders.

SELECTED EXAMPLES OF RESEARCH ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY

22 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children
e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 23

YEAR 

1998

1998

1998

1998

1998

1997

1996

STUDY

Project TELL Telecommunications for

Learning: Report of a Seven-Year Study

to Bell Atlantic by Birenbaum and

Kornblum43

Rhode Island Teachers and Technology

Initiative: Findings from the Pilot Year

by Henriquez and Riconscente 44

The Effect of Hypermedia Authoring on

Elementary School Students’ Creative

Thinking by Liu 45

The Union City Story: Education Reform

and Technology – Students’ Performance

on Standardized Tests by Chang,

Henriquez, Honey, Light, Moeller and

Ross 46

Using the Internet to Enhance Student

Understanding of Science: The

Knowledge Integration Environment by

Linn, Bell and Hsi 47

Word Processors and Children’s Writing

in a High-Computer-Access Setting by

Owston and Wideman 48

The Role of Online Communications in

Schools: A National Study by the Center

for Applied Special Technology 49 

PURPOSE

To determine if under-achievement could be reversed

through home access to computers and telecommunication

networks.

To determine if providing

training and laptop computers

for teachers will contribute to

school reform in the area of

technology use.

To investigate the impact of

hypermedia authoring on

scores of creativity.

To explore the difference in

performance between students

who have access to technology

at home versus students who

only have access to technology at school.

To determine whether

Knowledge Integration

Environment software programs helps increase students

understanding of science and

their ability to solve relevant

problems.

To determine if a highcomputer access environment

and regular, sustained use of

word processing software

improved writing quality.

To investigate the effects of

online communications on 

student achievement and 

attitudes.

FINDINGS

Gains in motivation and performance were

correlated to the time students spend on

computer-based telecommunications environments in reading and math.

Teachers who participated in the program

noted positive changes in student abilities

and work habits. Substantial changes to

teachers' professional practices due to the

program were also found, including teachers

becoming more reflective about their teaching practices, spending more time advising

their students, and spending more time working with other teachers on curricular and

instructional planning.

Engaging in hypermedia authoring resulted in

significant gains for students on examinations measuring creativity.

More access to technology does make a difference in student performance in writing,

however, performance in math could not be

contributed to greater access to technology.

The software allows students to interpret 

and apply significantly more complex pieces

of information and was found to be motivating and exciting to students. In short, it contributed to students’ understanding of science.

Students in high-computer-access schools

made greater improvements in writing quality

over the course of the study than did students who were in low-computer-access

schools.

Online access can help students become more

independent, critical thinkers, able to find

information, organize it and evaluate it, and

then effectively express their new knowledge

and ideas in compelling ways.
24 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children
Research has revealed that there are numerous opportunities to enhance learning through the use of technology. The National Academy of Science report on the

new science of learning, How People Learn: Brain,

Mind, Experience, and School, finds that new and

emerging technologies have the potential to enhance

learning and the development of new knowledge in

many exciting ways.50

For instance, technologies can help students visualize

difficult-to-understand concepts, such as differentiating

heat from temperature. Visualization and modeling software similar to the tools used in the workplace increase

students’ conceptual understanding. Since new technologies are interactive, it is now easier to create environments in which students can engage in learning,

receive feedback, and continually refine their understanding. In addition, new technologies provide access

to a vast array of information, including digital

libraries, real-world data for analysis, and connections

to other people who provide information, feedback and

inspiration—all of which can enhance the learning of

teachers and administrators as well as students. Finally,

new and emerging technologies also offer opportunities

to individualize instruction and assessment in promising

ways for all students, including especially those students

at the greatest risk for school failure. 51

This chapter highlights four of the most promising

opportunities to enhance learning through the use of

technology:

Helping students to comprehend difficult-to-understand concepts; 

Helping students to engage in learning; 

Providing students with access to information and

resources; and 

Better meeting students’ individual needs.

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 25

“LET’S USE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO FOCUS ON MORE THAN WIRES AND SCREENS. LET’S

SEND A MESSAGE TO THE COUNTRY THAT EDUCATORS ARE LOOKING AT THE DELIVERY OF

EDUCATION FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF HOW CONTENT WILL IMPACT STUDENTS. THE

INTERNET IS ONLY ONE TOOL FOR LEARNING. IT IS NOT A METHOD, IT IS SIMPLY A

MEANS.” 

–JOHN RICHARDS, TURNER LEARNING, INC.

TESTIMONY TO THE WEB-BASED EDUCATION COMMISSION

OPPORTUNITIES TO

ENHANCE L EARNING

WITH TECHNOLOGY

CHAPTER 3
HUNDRED HIGH SCHOOL

— HUNDRED, WEST VIRGINIA

Hundred High School is a Blue Ribbon School located

in a small rural community in West Virginia with an

enrollment of approximately 170 students in grades 9-

12. Since the school is in a remote area that did not

have an Internet Service Provider, Hundred High

School became the Internet Service Provider for its

community. Students and teachers were given dial-in

access and the community was transformed. After only

one semester, 80 percent of the students accessed the

Internet daily, compared to 26 percent before this

project.

During 1998-99, the Student Utilization of Computers

in Curriculum for the Enhancement of Scholastic Skills

(SUCCESS) program was launched. As a result, every

student in the school was provided a durable laptop,

which could be used both as a stand-alone computer

and as a wireless, networked computer. The laptops

were loaded with a number of applications including

word processing, spreadsheet and database software

as well as a popular browser, email, a presentation

creation package and a graphing program.

Not only does every student have a laptop, but every

teacher also was given a laptop for instructional and

classroom management tasks. In addition to the same

application packages available to students, teachers

were provided with an email package, an Internet

browser and special classroom management tools.

Hundred High School teachers have incorporated this

technology into daily classroom instruction in a number of ways. Through the use of several application

software packages students are able to complete

assignments using the application tools, using email

for receiving and submitting assignments or collaborating with other students on group tasks, accessing

information using the Internet browser, creating presentations to share with others and participating in

mentoring projects. A visit to Hundred High School

will find students in the school’s greenhouse gathering data and entering it into spreadsheets and clustered in groups after school using their laptops.

Students are able to access information anytime and

anywhere.

Through the Wetzel County Board of Education, an

important vehicle for enhancing school home communications has been added. Parents/guardians were

included in the initial training and dissemination of

the technology, and were encouraged to communicate

with teachers and students using the technology provided to their children. Parents also have the opportunity to observe what their children are doing in the

classroom by viewing assignments and files on the

laptops.

To increase the level of success for this program, onsite teacher and student instructional training, and

technical support was provided throughout the first

year of implementation. Evaluation data of the 

program is being collected on a continual basis to

establish the effectiveness of the program in terms 

of student learning as well as teacher progress in

delivering instruction through this new technology

model.

26 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children

Transforming a Community with Technology
For many students, the lack of visual representation

of many higher-order concepts makes learning them difficult. In this regard, teachers have been limited in what

they can teach by the tools to which they have access.

New technologies allow teachers to teach complex ideas

and address intellectual challenges more easily. 

In the near future, students who have difficulties

understanding text will be able to access multimedia

resources in real-time through the Internet or standalone software, allowing them to better understand the

relevant underlying principles. They will access video

clips of conceptual constructs (e.g., an orbiting planet);

definitions of specialized vocabulary (e.g., trajectory);

links to other textual references (e.g., an interactive

encyclopedia of the solar system); additional background knowledge (e.g., a narration about why it is

important to learn about planetary orbits); pronunciations of unknown words; or a mini-lesson that might be

tailored to help a child learn how to sound out an

unknown word (e.g., a voice prompt “If you know that

J-a-n-e-t is Janet, then pl-a-n-e-t would be ... planet.”).52

Many students find it difficult to make connections

between a mathematical expression and the situation to

which it refers. Computers—which can draw graphs and

other mathematical objects and allow students to “play”

with them—can help students relate mathematical

expressions to images in the “real” world. One way

these connections can be made is with digital cameras.

No longer are the pictures we take static objects; rather,

as digital objects the pictures take on a new life that

enables them to be closely linked with mathematical

representations. For instance, software applications can

provide tools to analyze motion as it is captured on a

video camera and to create the corresponding graphs of

changes in position or speed over time. Since the video

and the graphs are linked, when the student points with

the mouse to a point on the graph, the corresponding

frame of the video is displayed. 53

Exploratory data analysis software (and other visualization techniques) allows students to see patterns in

data they would never glimpse if they had to do the calculations or even draw the graphs themselves—emphasizing the meaning of mathematical objects and the

beauty of the patterns they exhibit. One such tool provides students with many ways to look at—and therefore understand—complex databases. 54

Technology can be used in dance to document and

analyze the dynamics of movement. For example, computer-aided choreography gives dance educators the

ability to work out ideas of space and movement on

screen without bringing the dancers together. Computer

software created for movement notation allows teachers

and students to create and edit dance notation scores

very quickly. 55 

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 27

HELPING STUDENTS TO COMPREHEND DIFFICULT-TOUNDERSTAND CONCEPTS
One of the most promising uses of technology in

education involves teachers helping students actively

engage in learning. In fact, the increasing power and

versatility of computers create teaching and learning

possibilities dramatically different from those that were

previously available, providing teachers with the opportunity to enrich their instruction and students with the

opportunity to contribute useful resources to others.

Technology resources and tools allow students to

explore their areas of interest and to investigate topics

that have been mere words in a textbook. For example,

a group of students that chose to focus their research on

ants created an animated simulation of the ant’s anatomy, digitally recorded aspects of the ant’s environment

(which they compared with data on ants from other

parts of the world), and followed ants with time-lapse

video that they broadcast on the Internet. Technology

was the tool that made possible this new approach to

learning. 56

Technologies such as CD-ROMs and robotics provide

incredible resources for teachers. Microcomputer-based

laboratories provide a wide range of probes—for pressure, temperature, alpha waves, heart monitoring, conductivity, sound, and motion—which along with the

supporting software enable students to collect, display

and analyze vast quantities of data over time periods

ranging from seconds to days. 57 With these tools and

access to the Internet, students can investigate weather

patterns and their impact on the environment in countries thousands of miles away. They can employ digital

geography and weather tools to examine the effects of a

drought on local crops; track patterns of rainfall; simulate the effects of erosion with a software-modeling

tool; chronicle population shifts; capture target information on random access video; formulate and support

hypotheses about weather effects on culture; document

their own conclusions about the event; and produce stories about the long-term ramifications of weather. 58

Electronic keyboards are being used as classroom

instruments, and computers are being used for creating

and composing music. Video technology can make it

possible for students to engage in all the aspects of theater just as professionals in the field work today. Set

design, costuming, lighting and sound-control boards

are all technology enhanced. 59 Through technology, students can participate in documentary TV productions,

gaining experience as writers, producers, editors, directors, and set and graphic designers, while also learning

about the topic on which they are reporting. Broadcasting segments to other students and teachers encourages feedback and helps students refine their ideas.60

Technology also allows students to learn about technology as they contribute useful resources to others. For

example, students in New York created a Web site to

inform and allay fears about orthodontic braces. On

their Web site, the students gathered and offered advice,

information and pictures from orthodontists; interviewed an oral surgeon; wrote a personal journal of one

of the group’s experiences with braces; designed an

original cartoon story; provided recommendations on

personal hygiene products, recipes and links to related

sites; translated material into Russian; and encouraged

other children to write about their own experiences with

braces.61 In these types of projects, it is the use of technology that actively engages students in the learning

process in ways that are simply not possible for classroom teachers to reproduce without technology.

28 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children

“I WAS FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO ATTEND EMERSON HIGH SCHOOL DURING THE UNION CITY

REFORM. THE NEW SYSTEM THAT THE BOARD OF EDUCATION DEVELOPED INCLUDED TECHNOLOGY AS A KEY COMPONENT. NOW, WITH THE EASE AND AVAILABILITY OF THE

INTERNET, STUDENTS ARE MORE ENGAGED IN THE LEARNING PROCESS....STUDENTTEACHER RELATIONSHIPS ARE STRONGER, AND STUDENTS EXHIBIT A CONFIDENCE THAT

WAS NEVER APPARENT BEFORE THE REFORM. INTER-DISCIPLINARY PROJECTS DEMONSTRATE CONNECTIONS BETWEEN CLASSES THAT STUDENTS MIGHT NOT HAVE NOTICED

OTHERWISE.” –MARIA JANELLI, STUDENT, ST. PETER’S COLLEGE, NEW JERSEY

TESTIMONY TO THE WEB-BASED EDUCATION COMMISSION

HELPING STUDENTS TO ENGAGE IN LEARNING
The Internet, more so than any technology that has

preceded it, provides students with access to a vast array

of information and resources far greater than could ever

be provided within the four walls of a classroom.

Creative uses of the Internet allow for the establishment

of “virtual” communities of learners, collectives of

teachers and students from literally around the world

assembling to learn from each other and to tackle realworld problems.

Digitized and multimedia primary sources on CDROMs and the Internet allow students to retrieve and

analyze primary documents. How teachers use these

resources ranges from simple Web exercises in which

students must find a photo that tells something about

work in the late 19th century to elaborate assignments

in which students carefully consider how different photographers, artists and writers historically have treated

the subject of poverty.62 

Rapid advances in science and technology—due, for

example, to recent advances in our understanding of

genetic engineering and gene mapping—cause science

textbooks to become out of date as soon as they leave

the presses. To address this problem, a project was

developed to provide up-to-date, age-appropriate

Internet resources linked to specific textbook passages.

Sites also provide teachers with access to information

and pictures from areas and events that they might not

be able to physically visit or see, such as deserts, hurricanes, oceans, salt marshes, tornadoes and volcanoes.

Reviewed by a panel of science educators, these

resources can be updated on a daily basis.63

Virtual communities of learners can take many

forms. One project, organized through the Internet,

allows hundreds of classes (particularly elementary

school classes) to learn geography by exchanging postcards (real and virtual, purchased and computer generated) with each other. At an elementary school in

Virginia, fifth-graders studying world cultures build a

different “wing” of a virtual museum each year,

researching and annotating cultural artifacts, and then

posting them online.64

Peer review and feedback on networked computers

allow students to share ideas and build on work collaboratively. For example, using one platform for these

activities, students create notes on topics that are then

shared with other students. The Internet is more recently being used for similar activities in which students

share and collaborate in projects from other parts of the

country or other parts of the world.65 

PROVIDING STUDENTS WITH ACCESS 

TO INFORMATION AND RESOURCES

Education for a Sustainable Future

The Education for a Sustainable Future (ESF) project, a Technology

Innovation Challenge Grant, helps teachers and students learn to see

technology in the context of a sustainable future. Sustainable development issues are urgently needed in the nation's schools and,

because they help students understand their futures, are inherently

very interesting and motivating. This project is a five-year effort to

develop, revise, and widely disseminate a collection of technologybased educational resources that fills this need.

It is having an extraordinary impact not only in Cobb and Fulton

Counties, Georgia, where it began, but has already attracted and

involved teachers from 35 additional states and three foreign 

countries in its first 3 years. One of numerous examples of positive

student outcomes is illustrated by attendance improvement when

ESF is the topic. One high school teacher designated every Friday

“EFS day,” and she documented 100 percent attendance every Friday

for two years with her at-risk classes.

Learning what it means to be a responsible citizen in a technological

society is at the core of the ESF project. Much of the technology rich

curriculum and the software created to support that curriculum,

address the issues of democracy through the lenses of the environment, the economy, society and technology.

For example, a third grade class studied land use changes in their

community using a variety of technology tools. Concerned about the

pattern of change and the poor quality of development they discovered, they invited the local mayor, a 19-year veteran of the zoning

board, to speak to them. They wanted to know about laws and plans

for clear-cutting, traffic control, and neighborhood park improvements. The Mayor was caught a bit off guard when asked what the

Internet has meant to zoning. “We've been working on our Web site

for about two years and we're almost ready to launch it,” he smiled.

Technology is something these students take for granted and depend

on. “What we are teaching is local and current,” teacher Eva Cronin

explains. “You can't find that information in a textbook, so the

Internet is an invaluable resource for us.”

COBB COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, MARIETTA, GEORGIA

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 29
While many of these online communities are interdisciplinary, they can also be subject specific. For example,

the best-known example of an online mathematics community is the Math Forum site, which includes a large

list of resources for kindergarten through college math

teaching. These resources include interactive activities;

recommendations of software; examples of classroom

activities and links to related discussion groups; a conversation space for teachers; an extensive math library;

an Ask Dr. Math feature, in which an expert answers

students’ questions; Problems of the Week at a variety

of levels of difficulty; discussion groups on topics such

as discrete math and a multilingual discussion on the

history of mathematics; and a showcase highlighting

recently added material. This site has served as an

important portal for mathematics educators and students and as a kind of social center for the mathematics

education community.66

Through the Internet, students also have a chance to

work interactively in the “real” world. Many links have

been established between practicing professionals and

schools where students actually assist in solving problems that professionals in the field are currently working

on. In such situations, students are able to work on and

develop problem-solving skills in realistic workplace situations. Some projects actually depend on students to

contribute information that professionals then use in

their work. In project GLOBE, students and teachers

from over 9,500 schools in more than 90 countries contribute data from their local environment. These data

are then used by both students and scientists for environmental analysis.67

One of the most powerful opportunities afforded

education by technology is the opportunity to better

meet students’ individual learning needs. In addition to

creating more engaging content, technology will allow

better and more accurate assessments of what students

know, where they are having difficulties, and how their

teachers could best convey the knowledge and skills students need. Access to real-time tutoring will also

increase, with opportunities being made available over

the Internet. Importantly, in creating technologies that

work better to meet students’ individual needs, all students will benefit, including students with disabilities

and students considered at-risk of school failure. As

Secretary Riley has said, “Assistive technologies help

children with special needs communicate via e-mail,

conduct research on the Internet, and become full participants in school activities. Technology has also made

a difference for gifted and talented children, allowing

them to learn at their own pace and explore subjects in

greater depth. As parents know, every child has special

needs and every child deserves individualized instruction. Effective education technology can help teachers

challenge all students to do their very best.”

With the evolution of the Internet, opportunities to

improve traditional assessments are created.68 Many

aspects of assessment—development, delivery, administration, scoring and distributing results—can be performed in a more cost-effective and efficient manner

using online technology. Along with these obvious benefits come more subtle benefits. Teachers could almost

instantly gain substantial insight into the problems that

their students face. Also, the ability to customize assessment will mean that teachers can identify the personal 

30 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children

“I GO ONLINE TO SEEK MATH HELP AT TIMES. AS FOR SCIENCE, A FEW BUDDIES AND I MADE A CHEMISTRY ONLINE WEB SITE SO STUDENTS WOULD CONTACT EACH OTHER AND TEACHERS TO GET HELP IN OFF-SCHOOL HOURS, AND

IT WOULD KEEP THEM UPDATED ON INCOMING ASSIGNMENTS AND TESTS.”

–STUDENT, INTERNET CHAT WITH U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

BETTER MEETING STUDENTS’

INDIVIDUAL NEEDS
PROJECT ESTRELLA

strengths and weaknesses of each student. As technology changes the way students learn, the need for assessment to reflect these changes is also important. Indeed,

recent research has suggested that in open-ended examinations, the performance of students who are accustomed to writing on computers is not accurately

assessed on traditional pencil-and-paper examinations.69 

The availability of real-time tutoring over the

Internet also provides opportunities for more individualized instruction to those students (elementary, secondary and postsecondary) who need it. Technology

allows tutors to work one on one with students online,

24 hours a day. Internet chat rooms and other virtual

workspaces allow students to work collaboratively with

each other, in study sessions with a tutor or in homework groups. Some sites also provide opportunities 

for students to post and view responses to homework

questions. 

LOOKING FORWARD

Since 1996, the nation has demonstrated an unprecedented commitment to employing technology for

improved teaching and learning. Looking forward, the

leadership imperative is to provide all teachers and students with the access and support they need to employ

new and emerging communications and information

technologies to facilitate learning in ways that were

never before possible.

With access and support, teachers will better be able

to help their students to comprehend difficult-to-understand concepts and engage in learning, provide their

students with access to information and resources, and

better meet their students’ individual needs. If we take

advantage of the opportunities presented to us, technology will enhance learning and improve student achievement for all students.

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 31

Encouraging Students through Technology to Reach High Expectations in Learning,

Lifeskills and Achievement

ESTRELLA, one of five technology programs funded by the U.S. Department of Education’s Migrant Education

Program, addresses the educational needs of migrant farmworker youth through technology. ESTRELLA serves

about 150 migrant students who migrate between Texas and Illinois, Montana and New York. These students

would otherwise not complete the coursework in a traditional school setting. While only 50 percent of migrant

students nationwide graduate from high school, all of the participating seniors in 1999 graduated, and 80 

percent enrolled in postsecondary education.

ESTRELLA provides laptop computers, training on computer use, a toll-free number dial-up number,

cybercounselors from the University of the Incarnate Word (UIW), and credit-awarding coursework via 

NovaNet to students. Students use these resources to complete the coursework required for graduation 

while living away from their home states during migration periods.

The program encourages active support and learning on the behalf of parents as well. Parents are required to

complete a training course and sign contracts to protect laptop and support the student in his/her use.

Parental involvement is a key criteria in the selection process.
32 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children
NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL

TECHNOLOGY GOALS

In 1996, four national educational technology goals

were developed. Together, they dealt with the critical

issues facing elementary and secondary schools seeking

to increase the effective use of technology in education

at that time: training and support, computer access,

Internet access and content. Given the tremendous

progress in achieving these goals and on the continued

changes in the capabilities and affordability of technology, it became evident that there was a need to move

beyond the 1996 goals. 

In the fall of 1999, the U.S. Department of Education

undertook a strategic review and revision of the national educational technology plan, in consultation with the

full range of stakeholders: educators, researchers, policymakers, students, parents, and leaders from higher

education, industry and other areas.70 The outcome of

this strategic review was the development of five new

national goals for technology in education. Working

together to achieve these goals constitutes a major

leadership imperative facing those seeking widespread

improvements in teaching and learning. Indeed, nothing

less than the future economic well-being of our nation

is at stake. As a nation, we should pledge to meet these

new goals: 

NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY GOALS

Goal 1: All students and teachers will have

access to information technology in their

classrooms, schools, communities and

homes.

Goal 2: All teachers will use technology

effectively to help students achieve high academic standards.

Goal 3: All students will have technology and

information literacy skills.

Goal 4: Research and evaluation will improve

the next generation of technology applications for teaching and learning.

Goal 5: Digital content and networked applications will transform teaching and learning.

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 33

“THIS DEBATE HAS NEVER BEEN ABOUT TECHNOLOGY. IT HAS BEEN ABOUT WHAT OUR

CHILDREN HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO. IT’S ABOUT MUCH MORE THAN JUST GIVING

A YOUNG PERSON A COMPUTER OR CONNECTING THAT PERSON TO THE INTERNET. IT'S

ABOUT CONNECTING STUDENTS TO A WHOLE NEW WORLD OF LEARNING RESOURCES AND

OFFERING THE MIND THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPAND AND TAKE ON A NEW AND CHALLENGING FUTURE.”

–SECRETARY RICHARD W. RILEY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

THE

LEADERSHIP I MPERATIVE:

A NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR TECHNOLOGY IN EDUCATION

CHAPTER 4
In committing to achieve these goals, everyone has a

role to play: federal, state and local governments; education; nonprofit organizations and associations; the private sector; communities; and families. This chapter

presents some of the key components of a national

strategy to ensure that the nation takes maximum

advantage of the opportunities afforded by technology

in education. 

Goal 1: All Students and Teachers Will Have

Access to Information Technology in Their

Classrooms, Schools, Communities and Homes.

An integral part of school improvement and reform

efforts in the 21st century, in the United States and

abroad, will be student and teacher access to educational technology, such as computers connected to the

Internet. Universal access to the Internet will help end

the isolation of teachers; exponentially expand the

resources for teaching and learning in schools and classrooms; provide more challenging, authentic and higherorder learning experiences for students; and make

schools and teachers more accountable to parents and

communities.

The quality of Internet access is critical. Broadband

access will be the new standard. Slow, unreliable connections that cannot support interactivity or rich multimedia content will no longer be sufficient. To take advantage of access to technology for improved teaching and

learning, it will become increasingly important to build

and support network infrastructures—wired or wireless,

desktop or handheld—that allow multiple devices to

connect simultaneously to the Internet throughout every

school building and community in the nation.

As the American education system is beginning to

realize the impact of technology on teaching and learning, other countries are making significant commitments to the use of technology for education. Political

recognition of its importance is reflected in high-profile

plans to make access to computers and to the Internet

universal in many Organization for Economic

Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries,

including the “The National Grid for Learning” in the

United Kingdom, and “Schulen and Netz” in Germany.71

Perhaps most significant, some people in Asia claim that

the region is home to the most distance learners in the

world, as evidenced by surging enrollments of distanceoriented universities with more than 100,000 students in

China, India, Indonesia, South Korea and Thailand,

among other Asian nations.72 Indeed, countries such as

China and India are making their own multi-million

dollar investments in technology for education.73

Nothing less than the ability of the American workforce

to remain competitive in the global economy is at stake.

34 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children

“EDUCATION AND TRAINING ARE CENTRAL TO HOW NATIONS WILL FARE IN THE

FUTURE. STRONG NATIONS AND STRONG COMMUNITIES WILL DISTINGUISH THEMSELVES FROM THE REST BY HOW WELL THEIR PEOPLE LEARN AND ADAPT TO

CHANGE. THE TASK OF EDUCATION MUST THEREFORE BE TO PROVIDE THE YOUNG

WITH THE CORE KNOWLEDGE AND CORE SKILLS, AND THE HABITS OF LEARNING, THAT ENABLE THEM TO LEARN CONTINUOUSLY THROUGHOUT THEIR LIVES.

WE HAVE TO EQUIP THEM FOR A FUTURE THAT WE CANNOT REALLY PREDICT.”

–PRIME MINISTER GOH CHOCK TONG, SINGAPORE

1
To realize the goal of universal access to educational

technology for students and teachers, we should:

Ensure sustained and predictable funding for technology to realize large-scale impact. For states, districts and schools to engage in effective planning

and realistic budgeting for the effective use of technology, sustained and predictable funding sources

are needed. Sustained and predictable funding

sources reinforce the long-term nature of the investments and allow states, districts and schools to plan

for the total cost of providing access to technology

(i.e., for instructional and technical support; for

software, digital content and online connection

charges; for maintenance, upgrades and repairs). 

Ensure that technology plans reflect the educational

needs of students and are regularly updated.

Planned investments for technology in education

will be most effective when they:

• Complement and support students in achieving

state and local standards for what they need to

know and be able to do; 

• Consider a full range of technologies, taking

into account the developmental and educational needs of students; 

• Consider the role of and need for parental and

community access to technology;

• Address the technical support, maintenance

and professional development needs of teachers and school staff; 

• Demonstrate leadership through targeting

resources to the areas of greatest need in

amounts sufficient to make a difference;

• Address issues of Internet safety, including

responsible and age-appropriate student technology use;

• Take into consideration access to and use of

technology both inside and outside of school

for teachers, students and their families; and

• Reflect lessons learned from previous technology investments, including assessments of the

strengths and weaknesses of partnerships with

other organizations and agencies.

Improve the affordability, reliability and ease of use

of educational technology. While desktop computers are powerful and flexible educational tools, they

can be complex to operate and expensive to maintain. New technologies, developed with the needs

and budgets of educators and students in mind,

offer opportunities to expand access to powerful

learning opportunities. These technologies include

handheld devices, such as personal digital assistants

(PDAs) and graphing calculators, as well as devices

that make it easier to connect to the Internet, such

as through TV sets or other Internet appliances.

Developers should work with researchers and 

educators to create new and affordable tools for

education. Other strategies to improve access to

technologies include developing cost-effective 

models of purchasing or leasing educational 

technology. 

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 35

“IF WE TRULY WANT TO CLOSE THE DIGITAL DIVIDE, THE TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY MUST FOCUS ON IMPROVING QUALITY AND LOWERING COST. BUT MORE

IMPORTANT, WE MUST MAKE IT RADICALLY SIMPLE FOR CONSUMERS TO USE

TECHNOLOGY AND CONNECT TO THE INTERNET.”

–ERIC BENHAMOU, CHAIRMAN, 3COM CORPORATION
Ensure that school buildings and facilities are 

modern. While there are several pre-conditions for

effective teaching and learning supported by technology, one of the greatest challenges relates to the

need for adequate school buildings and facilities.

For instance, at least one environmental factor—

such as lighting, heating, ventilation, indoor air

quality, acoustics or noise control, or the physical

security of buildings—is in unsatisfactory condition

in many school buildings.74 About a third of schools

are not satisfied with the energy efficiency of the

school, and nearly four in ten are unsatisfied with

the flexibility of instructional space.75 States should

consider requiring districts or schools to maintain a

written long-range educational facilities plan that

describes the impact of the increased use of technology on each school building and how any shortcomings could be addressed.

Strengthen our commitment to eliminating the 

digital divide. In the long run, our goals for access

are greater than ensuring that every school or classroom has a connection to the Internet. Our goals

should include ensuring universal access in communities and homes. In the future, universal access to

the Internet in communities and homes will allow

students of all means to complete school assignments at home, study with their peers, improve

parental involvement in education and foster lifelong learning for all family members. 

Today, the digital divide remains a real and persistent threat to the economic well-being of our

country. We must strengthen our commitment to

eliminating the digital divide through a variety of

governmental and private initiatives. Leadership

and creativity are required to target sufficient

resources to those schools serving children most in

need and to develop and implement classroom-,

community- and home-based programs to provide

technology resources, training and support to those

currently without access.

Ensure that all students have equal opportunities to

access and use technology. Access alone is insufficient if other barriers to the effective use of technology manifest themselves. We must be vigilant in

ensuring that teachers use technology to create

classroom environments that are inclusive and

engaging for students with varying backgrounds,

languages, cultures, abilities, disabilities, interests,

and motivation. Only in this way will the opportunities afforded by technology be used wisely and

creatively to support instruction and learning for

every student.

36 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children

“THEY’VE GOT TO HAVE ACCESS. THE INTERNET CAN EITHER BE THE GREAT EQUALIZER,

OR JUST ANOTHER MISSED OPPORTUNITY....ACCESS MAKES THE DIFFERENCE.”

–WILLIAM KENNARD, CHAIRMAN, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 37

Goal 2: All Teachers Will Use Technology

Effectively to Help Students Achieve High

Academic Standards.

Most teachers have been prepared for a model of

teaching dramatically out of step with what is needed to

prepare the nation’s students for the challenges they will

face in the future. To increase the frequency and variety

of effective technology use for teaching and learning, it

is vital that both new and existing teachers be well prepared. Recent reports by the American Council on

Education, the CEO Forum on Education and

Technology, the Milken Exchange on Education

Technology, the National Commission on Mathematics

and Science Teaching for the 21st Century, and the

National Council for Accreditation of Teacher

Education, among others, all identify opportunities to

enhance teacher quality and teacher preparation, particularly as it relates to the effective use of technology in

education.76

One comprehensive, promising initiative—the

International Society for Technology in Education’s

(ISTE) National Educational Technology Standards

(NETS) for Teachers Project—has provided a framework for employing technology in teaching and learning

to help students achieve high academic standards that

has been widely used in universities, state departments

of education and school districts across the nation.

Specifically, teachers should: 

• Demonstrate a sound understanding of technology operations and concepts;

• Plan and design effective learning environments

and experiences supported by technology;

• Implement curriculum plans that include methods and strategies for applying technology to

maximize student learning;

• Apply technology to facilitate a variety of

effective assessment and evaluation strategies;

• Use technology to enhance their productivity

and professional practice; and 

• Demonstrate an understanding of the social,

ethical, legal and human issues surrounding

the use of technology in education.77

Ensuring that the nation has effective 21st-century

teachers requires more than just providing sufficient

access to technology for teaching and learning.

Additionally, we should:

Improve the preparation of new teachers, including

their knowledge of how to use technology for effective teaching and learning. The demographics of

today’s teaching force are stunning: one-third of

today’s teachers have more than 20 years of experience, and two-thirds are at least at mid-career.78 At

the same time, K-12 enrollment is the highest it has

ever been in the United States, surpassing the explosive enrollment of the baby-boom years. The 53

million students expected by 2010 will stretch the

capacity of the nation’s schools for years to come.79

Consequently, over the next decade, more than two

million new teachers are expected to be employed

to replace retiring teachers, meet growing school

enrollments, lower class size, and replace teachers

who have left the profession.80 Preparing these new

teachers to effectively use technology in their

instruction and for their own professional and

administrative purposes represents an unprecedented opportunity to update the knowledge and skills

of the teaching force to better reflect changes in

society. Specific actions to ensure such preparation

could include:

• Providing faculty in schools of education with

the tools, incentives, and ongoing professional

development they need to integrate technology

into the teacher training curriculum; 

• Encouraging states to expand teacher licensure

and certification programs to include 

proficiency in integrating technology into 

the curriculum; 

• Establishing partnerships among schools of

education and exemplary technology-using elementary and secondary schools to improve the

student teaching experience of new teachers;

and, 

• Developing and disseminating more effective

models of teaching and learning.

2
Increase the quantity, quality and coherence of

technology-focused activities aimed at the professional development of teachers. Research has 

clearly demonstrated that the more professional

development teachers receive, the better prepared

they report feeling to use technology. Well-prepared

teachers use technology more frequently, use it in a

greater variety of ways individually and with their

students—for instructional as well as preparatory

and administrative purposes—and are more likely

to increase their use of technology over time.

Teachers who are most technically knowledgeable

about computers are more likely to have their 

students use computers as productivity tools in

complex projects that may involve higher-order

thinking, designing a product, and explaining their

ideas and constructions to an external audience. 

Specifically:

• States and districts should treat the provision

of professional development as a priority,

developing systematic plans and approaches to

providing their teachers with the skills and

knowledge they need to adapt to the changing

requirements of education; 

• Content associations and organizations, media

companies, and other private-sector organizations can also play a role in developing highquality professional development materials and

delivering training to assist teachers to effectively integrate technology into their teaching;

and 

• States and districts should explore opportunities to employ technology as a more effective

(and cost-effective) means of providing highquality professional development opportunities

to teachers. 

38 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children

“THE TECHNOLOGICAL TOOLS ARE AVAILABLE FOR CREATING COMPREHENSIVE PLATFORMS FOR TEACHER PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT THAT PUT THEIR LEARNING IN THE

CONTEXT OF WHAT THEY DO EVERY DAY IN INSTRUCTION.”

–ROY PEA, SRI INTERNATIONAL, INC. — TESTIMONY SUBMITTED TO NATIONAL COMMISSION ON

MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE TEACHING FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 39

Improve real-time instructional support available to

teachers who use technology. High-quality, comprehensive instructional support is critical in assisting

teachers to integrate technology into their instruction. Such support may include the availability of

just-in-time individualized training and professional

development activities, with content that focuses on

supporting teachers to integrate the technology

available to them into their instruction. Technology

coordinators also play a critical role in fostering the

effective use of technology in schools through their

knowledge of both technical and instructional

issues. Strategies include:

• States, districts, content associations and organizations, and private-sector organizations

should develop online resources to provide

just-in-time support to teachers. Specific examples include education-focused portal sites for

teachers, which offer online communities for

professional development or mentoring, tools

for classroom management and administrative

tasks, and tools to facilitate increased 

communication with parents and community

members.

• Educational technology organizations should

consider developing national standards and

certification programs for technology support

professionals and programs;

• Districts and schools should develop comprehensive technology support programs, directed

by qualified technology coordinators at each

school building; and

• States, districts, and schools should investigate

emerging approaches to providing technical

and instructional support over the Internet by

building, using, or purchasing teacher-specific

resources online. 

Goal 3: All Students Will Have Technology and

Information Literacy Skills.

Since nearly half of all U.S. workers will be employed

in industries that produce or intensively use information

technology products and services by 2006,81 it is hardly

surprising that there have been repeated calls for students to develop technology and information literacy

skills. In fact, the need to prepare students with the

skills they need to participate fully in our increasingly

technological society has been a longstanding priority

for the nation. 

A meaningful, unified approach to providing students with the skills they will need for their futures

must be more than a checklist of isolated technology

skills, such as knowing the parts of a computer, writing

drafts and final products with a word processor, or

searching for information using a CD-ROM database.82

Rather, technology skills are only a first step in assuring

all our children become proficient information and technology users. Also necessary are information literacy

skills such as:

• Task definition—The first step in the information

problem-solving process is to recognize that an

information need exists, to define the problem, and

to identify the types and information needed.

• Information seeking strategies—Once the information problem has been formulated, the student must

consider all possible information sources and develop a plan for searching.

• Location and access—After students determine

their priorities for information seeking, they must

locate information from a variety of resources and

access specific information found within individual

resources.

• Use of information—After finding potentially useful resources, students must engage (read, view, listen) the information to determine its relevance and

then extract the relevant information.

• Synthesis—Students must organize and communicate the results of the information problem-solving

effort.

• Evaluation—Evaluation focuses on how well the

product meets the original task (effectiveness) and

the process of how well students carried out the

problem-solving process (efficiency).83 

3
The 21st Century Workforce Commission concluded

that nothing less than the future health of America’s

21st-century economy depends directly on how broadly

and deeply Americans reach a new level of literacy that

includes not only strong basic academic skills, but also

thinking, reasoning and teamwork skills, as well as proficiency in using technology.84 The call for this new

“21st-century literacy” in no way supplants current

efforts by states and districts to set and even raise academic standards for students; it simply reflects the fact

that the bar for an educated citizenry and workforce

continues to rise to reflect changes in society.

In requiring these skills of students, we will ensure

that the opportunities made possible through the use of

technology will be available to all students as they

progress through school, regardless of personal or

socioeconomic factors. Even for those students who do

not pursue technology careers, ensuring technology and

information literacy skills will provide a number of benefits. In fact, everyone—from corporate executives and

others in the business world, brokers and investment

analysts, journalists, teachers, doctors, nurses, farmers,

and homemakers—all will be able to perform their jobs

better if they have technology and information literacy

skills. On the individual level, technology and information literacy skills will help consumers better assess

products and make more intelligent buying decisions.

And, on the societal level, technology and information

literacy skills should help citizens make better decisions

through heightened understanding of the scientific and

technological foundations of many public policy issues

facing the nation and the world (such as genetic engineering and global warming).85

In addition to providing sufficient access to technology for teaching and learning, to ensure that students are

prepared for their future we should:

Include technology and information literacy skills

in state and local standards for what students

should know and be able to do. We should ensure

that in addition to mastering fundamental literacy

and mathematics skills, students are able to demonstrate age-appropriate technology and information

literacy skills, such as how to define tasks, identify

information seeking strategies, locate and access

information, determine information’s relevance,

organize and communicate the results of the information problem-solving effort and evaluate the

effectiveness and efficiency of the solution.

Specifically:

• States and districts should look to national

organizations such as ISTE and the

International Technology Education

Association (ITEA) for guidance on the 

adoption or development of their own 

student technology and information literacy

skill standards.

• National organizations and the private sector

can create materials and tools to help teachers

prepare students to meet new technology and

information literacy skill standards.

• Employers should work with local districts

and schools to ensure that the specific technology and information literacy skills in demand

are being taught. 

40 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children
e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 41

FAIRFAX COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, VIRGINIA

Most students who go on-line have positive and

rewarding experiences, but educators cannot ignore

that there is inappropriate material on the Internet. In

the fall of 1997, the Fairfax County Public Schools

(FCPS) School Board addressed the challenge of

Internet safety by directing the school administration

to examine the technologies available to protect students from accessing inappropriate material on the

Internet. A working group that included over 500 parents and community members, teachers and students

was formed to study the issue and draft policy. The

Fairfax County Public Schools implemented an Internet

safety strategy based upon the findings of the working group. The three-part strategy consists of:

I. ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY: All parents and students

must sign the acceptable use policy which includes

three sections: (1) Respect for Others, (2) Ethical

Conduct for Users and (3) Respect for Property. The

Ethical Conduct section states that students should

“restrict the use of the FCPS network and

resources to the mission or function of the school

system.”

II. TEACHER EDUCATION: The teacher’s role is critical

to ensuring that students are using the Internet

appropriately as an effective educational tool.

As part of ongoing professional development,

teachers are provided classroom management techniques that promote Internet safety. Some 

strategies include:

• Educating teachers on Internet safety 

practices.

• Identifying effective techniques for identifying

and evaluating safe Web sites.

• Using child-safe search engines.

• Arranging computers to enable the teacher 

to easily see the monitors of all computer 

systems.

• Sharing best practices on the Internet.

• Developing a brochure and/or educational

video to assist teachers, students and parents.

III. TECHNOLOGICAL SOLUTIONS: In Fairfax County, the

School Board policy provides protection from inappropriate Internet material by preventing access to

“content known to be obscene, harmful to juveniles, or child pornography.” They employ a contractor to sort Internet sites by category (e.g. “sex

acts”). The district identifies the categories that

they want blocked and the server-based lists are

remotely updated every night by the contractor.

When someone tries to access a Web site that has

been put on the restricted list, it is blocked and

the user is sent a message.

Supporting Safe Student Searching on the Internet
42 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children

Ensure students use technology appropriately and

responsibly. Research suggests that students can

use technology most successfully when that use is

age-appropriate. However, some have pointed out

that inappropriate uses may lead to increased risks

of emotional and physical health hazards.86

Students also must understand that along with the

privileges associated with using technology comes

a great deal of responsibility, such as how to navigate the Internet while avoiding inappropriate

material and safeguarding personal information. 

In addition, students must safeguard technological

hardware and software by protecting it from damage or misuse. In their final report to the U.S.

Congress, the Commission on Online Child

Protection indicated that no single technology or

method can effectively protect children from harmful material online.87 Consequently state, district

and school technology plans need to consider a

range of approaches to ensuring students use technology appropriately and responsibly. Specifically:

• Students, teachers, and parents should be

required by their schools, districts or states to

agree to follow acceptable use policies dictating the appropriate standards of behavior

expected from the educational use of the

Internet and the consequences for violating

these standards.

• Schools and districts should develop Internet

safety plans.

• Schools and districts should employ technological and non-technological methods to protect children from inappropriate material.

• Internet sites maintained by states, districts

and schools should provide families and students with detailed information about the

technologies and methods available to protect

children online, instructions on how to report

trouble, and links to resources for more information (such as to law enforcement and child

advocacy organizations).

• States and districts should develop Internet

safety curricula and supporting materials for

all teachers to use with their students.

• States, districts, and schools should employ

protective technologies—such as filtering and

blocking technologies, monitoring technologies, and child-safe sites—as one component

of their Internet safety programs.

• Producers of online content should develop

next-generation systems for helping parents

and teachers prevent students from accessing

inappropriate content. 
Develop new student assessment tools. Emerging

research suggests that traditional paper-and-pencil

assessments may no longer accurately capture the

learning of 21st-century students. In addition,

through innovative private- and public-sector collaborations, technology itself will offer opportunities to improve the assessment of students. Other

opportunities to increase our understanding of student assessment include participating in international comparative work currently underway. These

cross-national studies, led by the International

Association for the Evaluation of Educational

Achievement (IEA) and the Organization for

Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD),

provide unprecedented opportunities to learn from

the experiences of other countries that are also

engaged in efforts to improve student assessment. 

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 43

State and national standards call for students to master not only challenging content knowledge but also

the inquiry and problem solving skills they will need

to be productive workers and citizens in the 21st century. Skills in planning how to address a problem,

working in collaborative teams, locating relevant,

accurate information, drawing conclusions based on

data, and communicating findings are critical aspects

of school, work and life in general. Yet conventional

assessments—multiple-choice or short-answer paperand-pencil tests—do not capture these essential

skills. Hands-on performance assessments, intended to

address these skills, are widely regarded as difficult

and expensive to construct and administer.

SRI International’s Center for Technology in Learning

(CTL) is exploring the potential for technology to support more effective assessments of 21st-century

skills. Several of CTL’s new assessments have been

developed under a grant from the U.S. Department of

Education’s Office of Educational Technology. One of

the prototype assessments has students search

through Web resources, identify relevant information,

make judgments about the credibility of Web site

information and claims, and then make and communicate a decision based upon the information they have

obtained through their Internet search. The entire

assessment is administered online, with students

using real Web resource materials.

A second prototype assessment developed under the

same grant makes use of palm-top computing devices

as an aide to the assessment of students’ collaboration skills. The teacher first uses a Web interface to

review the particular dimensions of collaboration—

distilled by SRI researchers from the research literature—he or she wishes to assess. For each dimension,

a three-category scoring rubric is provided. The

teacher downloads the selected assessment dimensions onto a palm-top computer, which the teacher

then uses as a prompt and an information storage

device while circulating from group to group observing student interactions. The student groups can also

use the palm-top assessment, with each group rating

its own performance on the dimensions selected by

the teacher. SRI expects to have refined versions of

these assessments available from the CTL Web site by

summer 2001 (www.sri.com/policy/ctl/).

Other CTL-developed Web-based assessments ask students to work with scientific data, identifying which

data are relevant to making a decision, analyzing that

data, and then preparing a presentation using data to

support their conclusion. By using technology, these

assessments can provide students with realistic, motivating problem contexts; information and data of the

kinds used in real-world decision tasks; and a rich,

high-fidelity mode of demonstrating what they understand and can do. Moreover, Web-accessible assessments can be used by students anywhere there is

Internet access, and provide test developers with efficiencies associated with automated scoring and with

re-using software components across assessments.

SRI INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR TECHNOLOGY IN LEARNING

Advances in Student Assessment
Strengthen partnerships with industry to help meet

the workforce needs of the future. One purpose of

elementary and secondary education is to provide

students with the skills they need to become productive members of the workforce. Recognizing

business interest in a highly qualified workforce,

organizations such as the Business Coalition for

Education Reform, the Business-Higher Education

Forum, the Business Roundtable, the Committee 

for Economic Development, the Council on

Competitiveness, the National Alliance of Business,

and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce coordinate private sector activities aimed at improving education.

To help meet the workforce needs of the future:

• Individual businesses and business organizations should create innovative technology training and apprenticeship programs for high

school students. 

• States, districts and schools should establish

partnerships with local businesses and national

and state business organizations to gain support for school improvement efforts.

• Given the need for higher quality mathematics

and science teaching—as found by the

National Commission on Mathematics and

Science Teaching for the 21st Century—businesses should “lend” qualified employees to act

as part- or full-time teachers in local schools,

without incurring loss of pay or benefits, as

well as make regular contributions of time,

materials and resources to enhance instruction

in mathematics and science instruction in local

schools.88

Goal 4: Research and Evaluation Will Improve the

Next Generation of Technology Applications for

Teaching and Learning.

At the dawn of the 21st century, we are still at the

beginnings of a technological revolution that is bringing

dramatic changes to our society. This technological revolution will not automatically translate into a similar

revolution in teaching and learning. While we have

learned a tremendous amount about the implementation and use of technologies for teaching and learning in

the past few years, the need for an expanded, ongoing

national research and evaluation program to improve

the next generation of technology applications for

teaching and learning is profound. 

To implement such a program requires a sustained,

multi-disciplinary collaboration of learning scientists,

technologists, and subject-matter experts. Numerous

organizations have pointed out the urgency of this

national need, including the President’s Committee of

Advisors on Science and Technology, the U.S.

Department of Education, the National Science

Foundation, the National Research Council, private

charitable foundations, independent research institutes

and representatives of academia.89

To ensure that research and evaluation will improve

the next generation of technology applications for

teaching and learning, we should:

Initiate a systematic agenda of research and evaluation on technology applications for teaching and

learning. There is a pressing need for a high-quality,

long-term national agenda for collecting, analyzing

and disseminating information on the use and effectiveness of technology in education. Such an organized agenda could consist of: 

• Basic research in various learning-related disciplines and fundamental work on various educationally relevant technologies.

• Early-stage research to improve the state-ofthe-art in educational hardware and software,

digital content, networked applications, and

other technology-enabled applications of pedagogy and assessment.

• Empirical studies—conducted in schools and

classrooms—designed to determine which

approaches to the use of technology are most

effective and under which conditions with

which students.

44 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children

4
• Evaluations of federal, state and local programs with a substantial technology component to gather the necessary information to

adjust their operation so that they better meet

intended purposes.

• Descriptive studies of the availability and use

of technology in classrooms, schools and communities to allow the nation to continue to

track progress in integrating technology into

education. 

• International comparative studies to benefit

from innovations in using technology in education occurring elsewhere in the world.

Any systematic approach to conducting research

should involve an upgrading of the capacity of the U.S.

Department of Education to manage the national

research agenda. In addition, the implementation of a

national research agenda will require a sustained, multidisciplinary collaboration with learning scientists, technologists, and subject-matter experts.

Encourage state and local evaluations of technology programs. There are many valuable reasons to

evaluate a program, including: (a) to provide information to program personnel and others on aspects

of the program that work well and potential problems; (b) to catch potential problems early in the

program so they can be corrected before more serious problems occur; (c) to guide further evaluation

efforts (e.g., an evaluation may bring to light issues

that need to be examined in greater detail or an initial evaluation of program implementation may be

used, in part, to guide a later evaluation of longterm impact); (d) to provide information on what

technical assistance may be needed; and (e) to

determine what impact the program is having on

participants.90 To assist states and localities in conducting evaluations of their education programs:

• The federal government, foundations and

states should support the development, 

dissemination and adoption of user-friendly

evaluation tools, including specifying the 

outcome measures they expect their grantees 

to measure (such as improvements in student

achievement).

• The federal government, foundations and

states should provide ongoing technical support to their grantees for conducting evaluations, setting high standards for the quality of

evaluation information and reports.

• The federal government, foundations and

states should make available on the Internet

evaluation reports and studies on the use of

technology in education so that researchers

and evaluators can benefit from lessons

learned.

Support the dissemination and use of researchbased information to improve teaching and learning. The effectiveness of technology in education is

dependent upon how individual teachers employ it

in their instruction. A national priority should be to

ensure that teachers have access to useful and timely research-based information that can help them

make appropriate decisions about how best to use

technology with their students. Of equal importance, administrators and policymakers need access

to rigorous research findings to make better decisions about how and where to make investments in

technology-related equipment, materials and services. There are a number of actions that could

help with the dissemination and use of research in

education. For instance: 

• The federal government, foundations, national

associations and the private sector should convene national and regional conferences to bring

researchers, educators, and policymakers

together to discuss the implications of emerging research on technology in education. 

• The results of research and evaluation should

be synthesized and disseminated directly to

states, districts and schools, or through national education associations.91 The products of

these research syntheses should be geared to

the information needs of policymakers and

practitioners.

• National, regional and state technical assistance centers should employ new online tools

to provide research-based information to educators and policymakers. The Internet offers

an unprecedented opportunity to dynamically

share research-based information.

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 45
In an effort to better understand emerging technologies, potential educational applications, challenges and success stories, The Grove Consultants

International in collaboration with the Institute for the Future are developing an ”Educational Technology Horizons Map” under a grant from the U.S.

Department of Education. The map (depicted below) is a work-in-progress and should not be construed to advocate a particular solution or approach to

using technology to improve teaching and learning; rather, it presents an array of possibilities.

MAPPING THE EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY HORIZON

46 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children
e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 47
Goal 5: Digital Content and Networked

Applications Will Transform Teaching and

Learning.

Digital content and networked applications will support transformative changes in our approaches to teaching and learning. In order for these changes to lead to

increased educational opportunities for all students, digital content and networked applications must be independently judged to be of high quality (both in terms of

grounding in learning science and pedagogical effectiveness), well-documented, comprehensive and available for

all grades and subject areas, and have the power to

inspire or motivate students. In addition, content and

applications must be easy to find and access, easy for

students and teachers to use, and accessible to people

with disabilities.

Today, there exists tremendous opportunities for the

creation of powerful digital content and networked

applications. For instance, digital content and networked applications offer direct opportunities to

enhance learning by helping students to comprehend

difficult-to-understand concepts; helping students to

engage in learning; providing students with access to

information and resources; and better meeting students’

individual needs. In addition, technology applications

can increase parental involvement and improve the

accountability and efficiency of school administration.

For many students, the lack of visual representation

of many higher-order concepts makes learning them difficult. In this regard, teachers have been limited in what

they can teach by the tools to which they have access.

New technologies allow teachers to teach complex ideas

and address intellectual challenges more easily. One

example of this type of application is the Pump Algebra

Tutor (PAT), which has been shown through studies to

yield dramatic student achievement gains relative to

control classes (15-25 percent better on standardized

tests of basic skills and 50-100 percent better on assessments of problem solving and representation use). PAT

is designed to help students to learn to model real-life

problem situations using algebraic representations

including tables, graphs, equations, and words. 

Another promising use of technology in education

involves teachers helping students to actively engage in

learning, in helping students to learn by doing. In fact,

the increasing power and versatility of computers create

teaching and learning possibilities dramatically different

from those that were previously available, providing

teachers with the opportunity to enrich their instruction

and students with the opportunity to contribute useful

resources to others. Project-based learning—which is a

model for classroom activity that shifts away from the

classroom practices of short, isolated, teacher-centered

lessons and instead emphasizes learning activities that

are long-term, interdisciplinary, student-centered, and

integrated with real world issues and practices—is one

way in which technology can support teachers in helping students to engage in learning. 

The GLOBE Program, for instance, brings together

K-12 students, teachers, and scientists from around the

world to help us learn more about the environment. By

participating in GLOBE, teachers guide their students

through daily, weekly, and seasonal environmental

observations, such as air temperature and precipitation.

Using the Internet, students send their data to the

GLOBE Student Data Archive. Scientists and other students use this data for their research. Participating in

48 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children

“SCHOOL LEADERS MUST WORK TO KEEP ABREAST OF ALL THE LATEST DEVELOPMENTS IN CURRICULUM AND DELIVERY OF THE NEW TECHNOLOGY TOOLS.” 

–CHERYL S. WILLIAMS, DIRECTOR, EDUCATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAMS

NATIONAL SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIATION

5
this program provides teachers an opportunity to integrate computers and the World Wide Web into classroom activities and to get students involved in hands-on

science. 

Another example is the ThinkQuest Internet

Challenge. It is an international program for students,

ages 12 through 19, that encourages them to use the

Internet to create information-rich Web-based educational tools and materials. Students form teams with

their colleagues from around the world and are mentored by teachers or other adult coaches. In the running

for scholarships and awards totaling more than $1 million, student participants learn collaboration, leadership

and critical thinking skills that help raise their level of

education and technological expertise. 

The Internet, more so than any technology that has

preceded it, provides students with access to a vast array

of information and resources far greater than could ever

be provided within the four walls of a classroom.

Creative uses of the Internet allow for the establishment

of “virtual” communities of learners, collectives of

teachers and students from literally around the world

assembling to learn from each other and to tackle 

real-world problems. Today, students can compare how

different U.S. and foreign newspapers cover the same

international event. They can use primary resources in

their research, such as the Harry S. Truman Library to

study the Marshall Plan for an American history class.

Students in astronomy courses can use images from 

professional telescopes along with image processing

software developed for use in the classroom to pursue

guided investigations of astronomical objects and 

phenomenon. Advanced placement (AP) and foreign

language courses can be accessed over the Internet for

students that do not have access to those classes in their

own schools and districts. 

One of the most powerful opportunities afforded

education by technology is the opportunity to better

meet students’ individual learning needs. In addition to

creating more engaging content, technology will allow

better and more accurate assessments of what students

know, where they are having difficulties, and how their

teachers could best convey the knowledge and skills students need. Access to real-time tutoring will also

increase, with opportunities being made available over

the Internet. Importantly, in creating technologies that

work better to meet students’ individual needs, all students will benefit, including students with disabilities

and students considered at-risk of school failure.

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 49

“THE NEXT BIG KILLER APPLICATION FOR THE INTERNET IS GOING TO BE EDUCATION. EDUCATION OVER THE INTERNET IS GOING TO BE SO BIG IT IS GOING TO

MAKE E-MAIL USAGE LOOK LIKE A ROUNDING ERROR.”

–JOHN T. CHAMBERS, CEO, CISCO SYSTEMS INC. 
PROJECT LEMONLINK 

— LEMON GROVE SCHOOL DISTRICT, CALIFORNIA

LemonLINK is the hub for a connected learning community. The school district provides networking services for 8 schools and 16 other local government

facilities including city hall, the fire department and

community centers. LemonLINK extends well beyond

the classrooms and community centers in to the

homes providing high-speed Internet access and a

wide variety of educational tools and learning

resources to students at home and at school. With a

federal Technology Innovation Challenge Grant, local

investment, and high technology industry partnerships, local educators have built one of the most

advanced district-wide networks in the nation.

A unique centralized network design allows the

Lemon Grove School District to function as the

applications service provider (ASP), offering 24 hour

a day Internet access and applications to parents

and students, community members, city government,

community facilities, the parochial school and the

local library. Working with business partners,

LemonLINK has developed a low-cost network appliance that is used to connect student homes to the

district Intranet via cable modem technology. The

device has also enables a 1 to 2 computer to student

ratio in every classroom and abundant access to a

rich variety of learning resources via the Internet

that vastly expands what is traditionally available in

their own classroom, school and local library.

The positive impact of this extended curriculum,

increased computer access and expanded time for

learning is documented in gains in achievement by

students in grades 3-8 who participated in the technology program. A recent two-year evaluation compared students who had access to technology and

those who did not (in a random assignment of students). Gains were seen in both reading and mathematics achievement for the LemonLink Project students. In all of the comparisons, the LemonLINK students consistently exceeded those noted for the

comparison students.

The long-term goals of the LemonLINK project are to

bridge the digital divide by connecting all of the

families in the district to the Internet and Intranet;

to create a community-wide technology-based education environment; and to provide a comprehensive

and continuing professional development program

for educators at all levels.

50 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children

An Innovative Approach to Bridging Home, School and Community.
Increasing parental involvement in their children’s

education through technology represents another

promising opportunity. In fact, existing technologies can

help address what is perhaps the largest barrier to family involvement in education: a lack of time. The

increase in the number of single-parent households,

those with dual income earners, and those with parents

working more than one job, has led to a sharp decline in

how much time is spent helping children with their education. Technologies such as voicemail and easy to use

Web sites offer parents new ways of communicating

with their children’s schools.92

By integrating disparate sources of information on

the performance and operation of schools, technology

also offers opportunities to improve the accountability

and efficiency of school administration. Networked

applications will allow appropriate individuals to access

up-to-date information, through the Web, on every

important aspect of schooling, from trends in attendance, test scores, finances and student demographics.

Through technology, parents—for the first time—will

be able to track the real-time progress and performance

of their children’s schools on a daily basis. In addition,

these applications will allow for reductions in administrative overhead and free-up resources and teacher time

to support student learning.

To ensure that digital content and networked applications will transform teaching and learning, we should:

Ensure administrators and policymakers are technologically literate. Technologically literate education leaders will be the agents of educational

reform and improvement in the 21st century. The

best of all leaders will possess instructional leadership and effective management and communication

skills, as well as a comfort with and knowledge of

technology. Demonstrated technological literacy

will ensure that administrators and policymakers

will be able to articulate and implement plans to

effectively harness the information age for education in their schools. To ensure administrators and

policymakers are technologically literate, states and

districts should provide professional development

opportunities for state and local administrators and

policymakers so that they are well-prepared to

make decisions about the use of technology for

improved teaching and learning, as well as provide

administrators and policymakers with sufficient

time to take advantage of professional development

opportunities. In addition, the private sector and

national education associations should develop

materials and tools to help administrators and policymakers to become technologically literate.

Technology Standards for Administrators

While national organizations, states and local entities have begun to establish technology standards

for teachers and students, few have yet addressed

technology standards for administrators and policymakers. Mississippi is one of the first states to

implement technology standards for education

administrators. These are:

Standard 1 – Vision: Communicates to all stakeholders a vision of the role of technology in teaching

and learning.

Standard 2 – Funding and Long-Range Planning:

Develops, implements, and monitors a long-range

technology plan.

Standard 3 – Professional Development: Initiates

and supports professional development processes

that produce effective uses of technology in teaching and learning.

Standard 4 – Model User: Models the effective use

of technology in support of teaching, learning, and

administrative functions.

Standard 5 – Learning Environment: Creates a learning environment that empowers staff to infuse technology into teaching and learning.

Standard 6 – Student Learning: Ensures the implementation of district, school, and classroom strategies that prepare students to be successful in a

technological world.

Standard 7 – Legal, Ethical, and Security Issues:

Communicates the legal, ethical, and security issues

related to technology.

Source: http://c2t.mde.k12.ms.us/tasl/adminstandards.html

MISSISSIPPI STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 51
Support efforts to increase our understanding of

how to improve teaching and learning through

partnerships within and across sectors. To realize

improvements in teaching and learning enabled by

technology requires increased collaboration within

education, as well as a need for policymakers,

administrators and teachers to seek expertise from

regional, state and local external partners. These

partners include businesses, postsecondary education institutions, libraries, museums and other community-based organizations and associations.

Specific strategies include:

• Hosting conferences and meetings that bring

together educators, researchers, private sector

experts and others to increase dialogue on how

to improve teaching and learning through 

technology. 

• Establishing partnerships among states, districts and schools and other organizations and

entities who have not traditionally been

involved in educational matters to help

increase our understanding of how to improve

teaching and learning.

• Forming independent organizations at the

national, regional, state and local levels to

solidify ongoing partner commitment and

build the likelihood of continued involvement. 

• Establish innovative partnerships to jointly

fund projects to develop new technology-based

products and services.

Identify leadership opportunities provided by technology to offer better ways of accomplishing educational goals. In creating more effective schools, we

have been constrained both by our imagination of

what is possible and by the power of our learning

tools. New technological tools—enabled by innovations in the learning environment—give us a chance

to create rich and diverse learning resources, such as

graphic and simulation tools, that are fully accessible to all. The delivery of education and related services over the Internet offers the possibility to

rethink teaching and learning, from educational

resource materials and content to assessment and

tutoring. Other areas ripe for innovation include

ways of establishing collaborations among schools,

libraries, museums, higher education and industry;

evaluating the quality of educational materials and

content; and archiving public-domain historical,

cultural and scientific resources. More specifically:

• States, districts and national education organizations and associations should partner or

enter licensing agreements with educational

content and related service providers;

• The federal government, states, districts and

national education organizations and associations should commit to creating and using

tools to digitize and share existing resources

(e.g., videos of effective teaching or teacher lesson plans aligned to existing standards); and

• The federal government, states, districts and

national education organizations and associations should form “incubators” to develop

promising new ideas and ventures for education and commit resources to help bring to

fruition the ideas with the greatest potential

for education.

Continue and expand efforts to digitize rich educational materials consistent with copyright laws. As

access to the Internet becomes universal, it becomes

increasingly important to ensure that information

heretofore only available in public libraries, museums and federal, state, and local government offices

also be available online and in digital formats. The

American Memory Project of the Library of

Congress is but one exemplary example, as is the

work of NASA and other governmental resources.

The continuation and expansion of projects like

Federal Resources for Educational Excellence

(FREE), which contains hundreds of federally supported education resources from over 30 federal

agencies, will contribute to this effort. In continuing

and expanding these efforts, it is essential to link

our efforts with those of other countries to help

build awareness and understanding of other cultures to all our learners.

Encourage the aggregation of demand for resources

and services to attract better and more effective

technology-based services for improved teaching

and learning. The economics of developing highquality interactive content require large up-front

investments of time and resources, while the costs

associated with distribution of such content once it

has been produced are trivial. To encourage the

development of high-quality digital content and

52 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children
networked applications, state and local agencies—

as well as national education associations and organizations—should experiment with ways of aggregating purchasing power (e.g., through statewide

licensing, multi-state RFPs, etc.). In so doing, content developers can be encouraged to make the

large up-front investments of time and resources

required to develop high-quality interactive content.

Support educators and technologists in defining

what digital content and networked applications

should be available to support teaching and learning. Many recent efforts to develop curriculum

materials by states, districts, content publishers,

and national education associations and organizations are disconnected with initiatives to develop

high-quality digital content and networked applications. As access to technology is reaching a critical

mass in schools, classrooms, homes and communities, the technical and practical reasons for this disconnect fall away. It is becoming increasingly

important to ensure that powerful curricular materials be migrated to technology-based platforms in

ways that take unique advantage of the more powerful medium. As a first step in this process, educators and technologists can define what digital content and networked applications should be available

to support teaching and learning. 

Remove barriers to purchasing digital content and

networked applications. To best take advantage of

the opportunities provided by high-quality digital

content and networked applications, states and districts should review their financial model for technology—including hardware, connectivity, professional development, and digital content—and identify opportunities to leverage existing resources and

target new ones. Among other actions, school systems should ensure that instructional materials

budgets are available to purchase the most appropriate content to meet educational objectives. This

becomes critically important as many Internet business models that provide educational content and

resources for free are not sustainable.

Recognize developers of high-quality digital content and networked applications and exemplary

adoption of educational technologies. It is important to create incentives to support the development

and innovative use of high-quality digital content

and networked applications. Universities should

provide academic/career recognition—recognition

that influences tenure decisions—to professors that

develop high-quality online learning resources. The

U.S. Department of Education should continue and

expand its expert panel program, recognizing exemplary and promising technology programs accorde-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 53

“THE ORGANIZATION OF SCHOOL WILL BE DIFFICULT TO CHANGE. ULTIMATELY,

WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT NEW WAYS OF ASSESSING AND DOCUMENTING COMPETENCE, MUCH OF WHICH MAY BE SUPPORTED BY TECHNOLOGY IN ORDER TO FREE

UP EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND STRUCTURES TO TRY NEW METHODS TO

MEET THE GOALS OF EDUCATION. THIS WILL BE A TECHNOLOGY-BASED, MORE

FAR-RANGING VERSION OF THE CURRENT EXCHANGE OF FLEXIBILITY FOR

ACCOUNTABILITY SEEN IN CHARTER SCHOOLS. 

–PARTICIPANT, FORUM ON TECHNOLOGY IN EDUCATION: ENVISIONING THE FUTURE
ing to rigorous criteria. Competitions, such as those

sponsored by ThinkQuest, encourage students to

take part in content development activities. Awards

by technology industry groups, such as the Software

& Information Industry Association and Nelson

Heller and Associates, encourage the development

of high-quality digital content and networked

applications for improved teaching and learning.

Support the integration of digital content and networked applications into state and local standards

and curricular frameworks. Student learning is

enhanced by digital content and networked applications when it is integrated into state and local standards and curricular frameworks for what students

should know and be able to do. States and districts

should support technology coordinators and teachers in identifying appropriate technology resources

for their students. The federal government should

allow the use of funds from programs such as the

Technology Literacy Challenge Fund for activities

to integrate digital content and resources into classroom instruction.

CONCLUSION

Today, it is evident that school improvement programs that employ technology for teaching and learning

yield positive results for students and teachers. In addition, the adoption of new and emerging technologies by

schools and classrooms offers even more reason to be

hopeful. With sufficient access and support, teachers

will be better able to: help their students to comprehend

difficult-to-understand concepts and engage in learning;

provide their students with access to information and

resources; and better meet their students’ individual

needs. In addition, technology applications can increase

parental involvement and improve the accountability

and efficiency of school administration. Indeed, if we

take advantage of the opportunities presented to us,

technology will enhance learning and improve student

achievement for all students.

The use of technology in education must remain a

national priority. It must be at the core of the educational experience, not at the periphery. Looking forward, we should ensure that:

• All students and teachers will have access to information technology in their classrooms, schools,

communities and homes.

• All teachers will use technology effectively to help

students achieve high academic standards. 

• All students will have technology and information

literacy skills.

• Research and evaluation will improve the next generation of technology applications for teaching and

learning.

• Digital content and networked applications will

transform teaching and learning.

The leadership imperative is clear. Collectively, 

these new goals for technology in education represent

an updated, high-level strategy for ensuring the future

of education in which all students will benefit from 

the enhanced learning opportunities afforded by new

and emerging communications and information 

technologies. 

54 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children
A. The Process of Developing e-Learning

B. Contributors

C. Endnotes

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 55

APPENDICES
56 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children

In the fall of 1999, the U.S. Department of

Education’s Office of Educational Technology (OET)

initiated the strategic process of revising the national

educational technology plan, Getting America’s

Students Ready for the 21st Century: Meeting the

Technology Literacy Challenge. This effort was necessary to address the tremendous progress that had

occurred toward achieving the initial four goals, as well

as the continuing advances in the capabilities of technology. In addition to reviewing current literature and

data, the Department solicited input from researchers,

policymakers, educators, practitioners, administrators,

parents and students interested in the future of

technology in education. 

OET commissioned four white papers to explore 

different perspectives on the future of technology in

education. In addition, five papers were commissioned

to examine the relationship between content and technology in the following areas—social studies, science,

mathematics, the arts, and reading and language arts.

Together, these white papers informed discussions at the

Forum on Technology in Education: Envisioning the

Future, which was held December 1-2, 1999 at

Georgetown University in Washington, D.C. 

The Forum on Technology in Education: Envisioning

the Future explored the need to revise the national educational technology plan, generate emerging priorities

for the future of technology in education, and identify

creative strategies to improve teaching and learning for

all students through the effective use of technology. The

participants included technology futurists, educators

and students, content experts, business and government

representatives. Grove Consultants International and

CoVision, Inc. assisted in the success of the Forum

through expert graphics facilitation and GroupWare

technology. 

Following the Forum, OET launched a web site,

Revising the 1996 National Educational Technology

Plan (http://ed.gov/Technology/). The site includes the

white papers, background information on the Forum

(including the agenda, participant biographies, graphic

notes, and the synthesis report of the Forum), summaries of online input, emerging priorities, and the

1996 National Educational Technology Plan. 

OET also hosted an online forum to solicit comments

on the emerging priorities. The public—including educators, students, administrators, policymakers, parents,

family members and other concerned citizens—was

encouraged to submit their opinions on access to technology; teachers and technology; students and technology; educational technology research and development;

and e-Learning and education. Online comment periods

began on April 17, 2000 and concluded May 19, 2000.

On June 13, 2000, the Office of Educational

Technology hosted an Internet-based “Kids Chat” to

discuss the issues important to students and the future

of technology in education. This interactive online discussion provided insight by children from around the

country. K12nation.net hosted the “Kids Chat” event.

The 21st annual National Educational Computing

Conference (NECC) served as an invaluable gathering of

people interested in the future of technology in education. OET sought input on strategies for addressing the

emerging priorities from a number of sessions held in

conjunction with NECC. The International Society for

Technology in Education (ISTE) hosted a Leadership

Forum during which participants shared input on the

goals and helped to identify innovative strategies for

achieving the goals. A Technology Innovation Challenge

Grantee, Education for a Sustainable Future (Cobb

County, GA), hosted a Teachers’ Forum to test the goals

and strategies before an audience of several hundred

educators. OET also had the opportunity to solicit feedback on the goals and strategies from more than twenty

state technology directors. 

OET participated in numerous conferences and

forums across the country to solicit input on the development of e-Learning. Given the complementary work

of the Web-based Education Commission, OET held

meetings with their staff, attended the Commission

hearings and reviewed testimony submitted to the

Commission. OET also presented the new goals to the

TechNet Board of Directors in California and numerous

national education and technology groups in

Washington, D.C. 

OET reviewed all of the invaluable input received

from across the country in developing e-Learning:

Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All

Children. It is our expectation that e-Learning will help

to guide all education stakeholders in increasing the

effective use of technology for teaching and learning.

APPENDIX A

The Process of Developing e-Learning
Carole Wacey, U.S. Department of Education, and Douglas Levin,

American Institutes for Research, directed the development of

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of

All Children. e-Learning is the culmination of input from countless 

numbers of people who contributed their time and ideas to its development. We have highlighted many of those people here:

Tom Abeles, On the Horizon

Kay Abernathy, Brazos-Sabine Connection 

Trudy Abramson, Nova Southeastern University 

Bernadette Adams Yates, U.S. Department of Education 

Casey Aden-Wansbury, Simon Strategies

Joan Almon, Alliance for Childhood

Colton Alton, The Center for Internet Technology in Education

Anthony Amato, Hartford Public Schools

Kari Arfstrom, American Association of School Administrators

Sara Armstrong, The George Lucas Educational Foundation

Joan Assey, Office of the Governor of South Carolina

Stacy Avery, Region XIII Education Service Center

Catriona Ayer, Schools and Libraries Division

Sally Bair, Northern Lebanon School District

Patricia Barbanell, NYS Council of Educational Associations

Randall Bass, Georgetown University

Donna Baumbach, University of Central Florida

David Bayne, Lee Jr. High School

Mary Dee Beall, Hewlett Packard 

Barbara Bennison, California State University

Angela Benson, University of Georgia

Germán Bermúdez, Connecticut Department of Education

David Bergman, American Institutes for Research 

Dean Bergman, Nebraska Department of Education

Jon Bernstein, Federal Communications Commission

Romana Bertolotti, Teaching Matters, Inc.

Linda Beyt, University of Louisiana at Lafayette

Margaret Bingham, SEIR*TEC

Robert Bird, Richfield High School

Gary Bitter, Arizona State University

Kathy Bjelland, Area IV Learning Technology Hub

Jim Blackaby, The Museum of America and the Sea

Helen Blanch, Miami Dade County Public Schools

Charles Blaschke, Education Turnkey Systems

Jennifer Bletz, The CEO Forum on Education and Technology

MaryAnn Blind, Stephen F. Austin State University

Kathy Boguszewski, Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction

Donelle Blubaugh, Cable in the Classroom

Janet Bolin, Fort Sam Houston ISD

Dorothy Booker, Teaching Matters, Inc. 

Tom Bookler, Addison District 4 and ICE

Daryl Ann Borel, Houston Independent School District

Frances Bradburn, North Carolina Department of Public Instruction 

Anna Bradfield, Stephen F. Austin State University

Candy Bradshaw, Imaginuity Interactive

Sally Brewer, Montana Council for Computers and Technology in

Education 

David Brittain, MGT of America 

Clint Brooks, NorthWest Arkansas Community College

Mary Bronnimann, Valverde Elementary

Sue Brown, Cobb County School District

Karen Bruett, Dell Computer

Elsie Brumback, North Carolina Department of Education

Melissa Burak, Lynbrook Public Schools

Ann Burcham, Will Rogers High School

Charline Burgess, Teaching Matters, Inc.

Jeff Burnett, National Association of Independent Schools

Sally Burnett, Central Missouri State University

Alix Burns, TechNet

Ellen Burns, Carter Cosgrove and Company

Bette Bush, Cobb County School District

David Byer, Web-based Education Commission

Al Byers, NASA/Virginia Tech

Jack Byrne, Center for a Sustainable Future

Michael Byrne, Long Island University 

Elizabeth Byrom, SEIR*TEC 

Jennifer Cannistra, Princeton University

Judy Cannings, CUE, Inc. 

Michael Cannon, Eastern Oregon Collaborative Colleges Center

Tom Carroll, U.S. Department of Education

Michelle Cavataio, America Online

Jacqui Celsi, Knowvation, Inc. 

Jennifer Charles, Teaching Matters, Inc.

Sylvia Charp, T.H.E. Journal 

Bonnie Chernikoff, National Cable Television Association

Charlotte Chowning, Kentucky Department of Education 

Douglas Clements, State University of New York at Buffalo

Karen Cohen, Karen Cohen Associates

Tiawanna Coles, U. S. Department of Education 

Debbie Collier, Candor Elementary School

Chris Collins, National Association of Independent Schools

Richard Collins, The Internet Foundation

Sue Collins, Bigchalk.com

Jeff Conor, Washington Middle School

Bill Conrad, Illinois State Board of Education

Peter Copen, Copen Family Fund 

Cherie Cornick, Alliance for Math and Science

Mary Costabile, American Library Association

Craig Costello, Washington Middle School 

Eileen Cotton, California State University at Chico

David Couch, Kentucky Department of Education 

John Cradler, Educational Support Systems 

Ruthmary Cradler, California Teachers Association 

William Craig, Pennsylvania Department of Education 

Eva Cronin, Cobb County School District

Naomi Cooperman, Teaching Matters, Inc.

Louis Crossley, Tulsa Public Schools

Jane Crozier, University of Georgia

Larry Cuban, Stanford University

Andrew Cullen, American Institutes for Research 

Abigail Cyntje, Eudora Kean High School 

Gordon Dahlby, West Des Moines Community School District 

Vicky Dahn, Utah State Office of Education 

Cecily Darden, American Institutes for Research

Beth Davis, Berne-Knox-Westerlo Jr./Sr. High School

Betsy Davis, Cameron ISD

Katie Dean, Wired News 

Clare Donahue, Washington Department of Education

Kim Donius, Alfred-Almond Central School

Mary O’Hara Devereaux, Institute for the Future

Deborah deVries, NetSchools Corporation 

Glenn deVoogd, California State University at Fresno

Norris Dickard, U.S. Department of Education

Frankie Dilling, Klein Oak High School

Bill Donaldson, Teaching Matters, Inc.

Heather Dorfman, TechNet

Mike Duckworth, Teaching Matters, Inc.

Julie Dunkell, Intel

Fritz Edelstein, U.S. Department of Education

Mark Egan, The Widmeyer-Baker Group

Donna Elmore, NetSchools Corporation

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 57

APPENDIX B

Contributors
Sandra Elwell, Westview Elementary 

Donald Ely, Syracuse University

Todd Erickson, CoVision, Inc.

Julie Evans, NetDay

Raymond Farley, Hunterdon Central Regional High School

Leslie Flanders, Scott County Schools 

Geoff Fletcher, T.H.E. Institute 

Ann Flynn, National School Boards Association 

Michele Ford, Salem-Keizer Public Schools

Lawrence Forman, San Diego City College

Rob Foshay, TRO Learning, Inc.

William Fowler, Cisco Systems 

Edison Freire, School District of Philadelphia 

Susan Frost, U.S. Department of Education

Kathleen Fulton, Web-based Education Commission

Rick Gaisford, Utah Coalition for Educational Technology 

James W. Gardner, Southern University 

Cheryl Garnette, U.S. Department of Education

Charles Garvin, Imagicast

Anita Givens, Texas Department of Education

Betsy Goeltz, Blackfoot School District 

Carmen Gonzales, New Mexico State University 

Pat Gore, U.S. Department of Education

Terrie Gray, Classroom Connect 

Jerilyn Green, Detroit Public Schools/MACUL 

Kelly Green, U.S. Department of Education

Karen Greenwood, National Semiconductor

Jeanette Griffin, East Orange High School 

Shawn Gross, Sun Microsystems

Peter Grunwald, Grunwald Associates 

Lynette Guastaferro, Teaching Matters, Inc.

Dorothy Hajdu, Pennsylvania Department of Education 

Judith Hamilton, Classroom Connect

Jackie Hamlett, The Reading Group

Pierce Hammond, U.S. Department of Education

Vicki Hancock, ASCD

Michael Handy, Community School District 17 

Seymour Hanfling, Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory 

Brian Hardwick, American Institutes for Research

Dennis Harper, Olympia School District 

Ginny Harrell, Clayton County GA Public Schools 

Leslie Harris, Leslie Harris and Associates

Jane Hauser, U.S. Department of Education

Eileen Heasley, Michigan Association for Computer-related

Technology Users 

William Heller, Teaching Matters, Inc.

Sissy Henry, South Carolina School Boards Association 

Rich Herschman, NEKIA

Elizabeth Hoffman, Nebraska Department of Education 

Megan Hookey, Cable in the Classroom

Scott Horan, Eastern High School

Chuck House, Intel Dialogic Division

Jenny House, Classroom Connect

Barbara Houston, Bishop High School

Terri Huckabee, P.S. 155, New York City BOE

Sheila Hunter, Oracle

Kathy Hurley, NetSchools Corporation 

Laura Johns, U.S. Department of Education

Kemi Jona, Northwestern University

Kim Joyce, Massachusetts State Department of Education

Carol Kadamus, Voorheesville Jr.-Sr. High School

Karen Kahan, Texas Education Agency 

Vicki Kajioka, Hawaii Department of Education

Tom Kalil, National Economic Council, The White House 

Julie Kaminkow, U.S. Department of Education

Roberta Kaplan, Hunterdon Central Regional High School

Roberta Katz, TechNet

Henry Kelly, Office of Science and Technology Policy

Patrick Kelly, Brainshark, Inc.

Peggy Kelly, California State University at San Marcos 

D.M. Kersting, Teaching Matters, Inc.

Chip Kimball, Lake Washington SD

Alison King, Teaching Matters, Inc. 

Melissa King, Join Hands Ed’al Foundation

Susan King, Michigan Department of Education

Kayla Kirsch, The Grove Consultants International

Rita Kirshstein, American Institutes for Research

Marilyn Klakovich, Azusa Pacific University

Rachel Kliewer, National School Boards Association 

Ed Klonoski, Connecticut Distance Learning Consortium

Molly Knott, TechNet

Jay Koepke, Northwest Council for Computer Education 

Jim Kohlenberger, Office of the Vice President, The White House

Steve Kohn, Verizon

Pam Korporaal, CUE, Inc. 

Ted Kraver, Arizona Learning Technology Partnership

Jennifer Kugelmann, Atlantic.Net

Marcia Kuszmaul, Microsoft 

Mark La Porte, Temescal Canyon High School

Linda D. Labbo, The University of Georgia

Dan Lake, OCM BOCES

Lorraine Lambert, Griffin-Spalding County Schools 

Susan Lancaster, Jefferson County Board of Eduction 

Mary Lankford, Texas Education Agency

The Honorable John B. Larson, Congressman (D-Connecticut)

Jee Lee, Leslie Harris and Associates

Cheryl Lemke, The Metiri Group 

Jenelle Leonard, U.S. Department of Education

Alan Lesgold, University of Pittsburgh

Lucy Levy, Turner Learning 

Michael Leyba, Midland ISD

Lynn Lieberman, Oakland Schools 

Cathy Lipe, Hewlett Packard

Joseph Loeb, Breakaway Technologies 

Neah Lohr, Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction 

Harvey Long, America Tomorrow

Connie Louie, Massachusetts State Department of Education 

Chuck Lovett, U.S. Department of Education

Nathan Lowell, University of North Colorado

Edward Lowry, Advanced Information Microstructures

Nina Lucchi, Miami Country Day School

Vicki Lundmark, American Institutes for Research 

Melinda Maddox, State Department of Education

Anita Major, Flint Community Schools 

Bonnie Marks, Alameda County Office of Education 

Lora Marschall, Tulsa Public Schools

Wendy Marshall, University of North Carolina at Wilmington

Suzanne Martin, Florida Department of Education 

Daniel Marvin, Mt. Pleasant Public Schools

Charles Mason, Mountain Brook City Schools 

Robert Matheson, K12Nation.net

Dorothy McAbee, Coppell Middle School East

Jo McAdoo, Cottage Grove School

Emily McCartan, Olympia High School 

Florence McGinn, Hunterdon Central Regional High School

Barbara Means, SRI International, Inc.

Don Means, US Triworks

Don Medley, ZapMe! Corporation

Marilyn Melstein, School District of Philadelphia

Edwin Merritt, Fletcher-Thompson Architects

Regina Merriwether, Druid Hills High School 

Dick Methia, NCTET

Anne Meyer, Center for Applied Special Technology

Peter Mickelson, TBM Associates

Alice Miller, Texas Computer Education Association 

Katrina Miller, Powell High School

Rich Mincer, Idaho State Department of Education 

Cheryl Morgavi Mire, Archbishop Rummel High School

Holger Mishal, Hewlett Packard

Chuck Mlynarczyk, SUNY at Potsdam

Rich Molettiere, Nebraska Education Technology Association 

Betsy Susan Morgan, Glen Oaks Community College

David Moursand, ISTE

Scott Morris, National League of Cities

John Mundt, Adlai E. Stevenson High School

Melinda Murphy, Cypress Fairbanks ISD

58 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children
John Murray, Aberdeen Arts, Inc.

Cynthia Myers, Scientific Learning

Ray Myers, U.S. Department of Education

Greg Nadeau, Massachusetts State Department of Education

Cam Nelson, Hewlett Packard

Ellen Nelson, Decision Development Corp

Glenn Niles, Alfred University 

Martha Nixon, Grundy County School District

Cathleen Norris, University of North Texas 

Jorge Ortega, Florida Association for Computers in Education 

Merry Ortega, Lawton Chiles High School 

Luis Osin, Israeli Association for Computers in Education 

Helen Padgett, TBL&R

Ron Paquette, Hampton School District 29 

Elizabeth Payer, U.S. Department of Education

David Payne, Teaching Matters, Inc.

Patricia Payne, Teaching Matters, Inc.

William Pearson, South Lyon Public Schools 

Gabrielle Pelicci, U.S. Department of Education

Amy Perry, New York State Association for Computers and

Technology in Education

Sandra G. Pessner, California State University at Chico

Terry Peterson, U.S. Department of Education

Joyce Pittman, University of Cincinnati 

Stacey Plotnick, National Science Teachers Association

Kathy Politis, Fulton County School District

Jodie Pozo-Olano, NetDay

Gail Pritchard, National Academy of Sciences

Barbara Pryor, Office of U.S. Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-West

Virginia)

Vicki Puckett, Crawford County Elementary School

Steven Rakow, University of Houston—Clear Lake

Jesse Ramirez, Johnson & Johnson

June Ramondetta, New Jersey Association of Educational Technology 

James Redmond, Oakland Schools 

Diane Reed, U.S. Department of Education

Barbara Reeves, Maryland Department of Education 

John Richards, Turner Learning Inc. 

Sylvester Robertson, California State University at San Bernardino 

Lisa Roby, Armstrong Atlantic State University

Jeff Rodamar, U.S. Department of Education

Kathy Rodi, The CEO Forum on Education and Technology

Al Rogers, The Lightspan Partnership Inc. 

Heidi Rogers, University of Idaho 

Marsha Rogers, CESA #3

Tom Rolfes, Nebraska Educational Technology Association 

Mark Root, The CEO Forum on Education and Technology

David Rose, Center for Applied Special Technology

Judy Rose, Leisure City K-8 Center

Roy Rosenzweig, George Mason University

Andee Rubin, TERC

Nora Sabelli, National Science Foundation

Gary Sather, Center for Applied Technology

Leslie Saul, 3Com

Roger Schank, Northwestern University

Lee Scharback, nschool.com 

Mark Schlager, SRI International, Inc.

Gabriela Schneider, Center for Media Education

Bette Schneiderman, Long Island University 

Kathleen Schrock, Dennis-Yarmouth Regional School District

Lynne Schrum, University of Georgia

Sally Shake, Education Legislative Services

Tom Sharples, Imagicast

Arthur Sheeky, Council of Chief State School Officers

Glenn Shephard, University of North Carolina at Asheville

Donna Shiroma, Hawaii Department of Education

Dan Shoemaker, Wartburg Central High School

Charlie Shub, University of Colorado-Colorado Springs 

David Sibbet, The Grove Consultants International

Carol Simpson, University of North Texas

Kim Smith, New Schools Venture Fund

Matt Smith, KidsNet

Marhsall Smith, U.S. Department of Education

Robin Smith, Hollidaysburg Area School District

William Smith, Oregon Health Sciences University

Gwen Solomon, TechLEARNING.com 

Elliot Soloway, University of Michigan

Helen Soule, Mississippi Department of Education

Irene Spero, Web-based Education Commission

Mary Staley, National School Boards Association 

Julia Stapleton, New Jersey Department of Education 

Barbara Stein, National Education Association 

Bess Stephens, Hewlett Packard

Peter Stokes, Eduventures.com, Inc.

Connie Stout, Educational Dimensions, Inc. 

Eileen Stovall, New Jersey Department of Education

Mary Ellen Stroud, South Hadley High School

Jennifer Summerville, Emporia State University

Deborah Sutton, Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary

Education

Theresa Swann, Adams County School District 14 

Belinda Taheri, ACCESS ERIC

Claudette Tennant, American Library Association

Donald Tetreault, University of South Carolina

Janice Thiel, Education Service Center, Region 2

Lajeane Thomas, Louisiana Tech University 

David Thornburg, The Thornburg Center

Bonnie Thurber, Northwestern University 

Keith Tidman, American Institutes for Research 

Rhonda Toon, Georgia Youth Science & Technology Centers 

Chris Trahan, American Association of Colleges for Teacher

Education

Therese Turman, Georgia Tech Research Institute 

Lorie Twist, American Institutes for Research

Joanne Urrutia, Miami-Dade County Public Schools 

John Vaille, ISTE 

Jan Van Dam, Oakland Schools 

Jenifer Van deusen, Maine Center for Educational Services

Doris Vander Wiele, nschool.com 

Tonya Vandergriff, Powell High School

Phyllis VanWinkle, Harford County Public Schools

Laurie Vasquez, Santa Barbara City College

Laura Veazey, University of Kansas

Asteria Villegas, Teaching Matters, Inc. 

Susan Waalkes, Upper Dublin SD 

Teh-yuan Wan, New York State Department of Education

Gail Weatherly, Stephen F. Austin State University

Keith Wheeler, Center for a Sustainable Future

Danielle Weidler, American Institutes for Research

Carol Whelan, Louisiana Department of Education

Carolyn White, Indiana State Department of Education 

Jordy Whitmer, Birmingham Covington School 

Alan Whitworth, Jefferson County Public Schools

Tony Wilhelm, Benton Foundation

Joe Wilkes, U.S. Department of Education

Eric Willard, Elert & Associates

Brenda Williams, West Virginia Department of Education 

Cheryl Williams, National School Boards Association 

Jay Williams, K12Nation.net

Michelle Williams, Australian Council for Computers in Education 

Donna Williamson, Mountain Brook City Schools 

Ken Winnie, Tulsa Public Schools

KJ Winne, KJ Winnie & Associates

Alexander Wohl, U.S. Department of Education

Lisa Woodard, Alabama State Department of Education 

Jessie Woolley, MyRoad.com

Carmen Zamora, Rio Bravo Middle School

Jacquelyn Zimmerman, U.S. Department of Education

Pam Ziolkowski, Richardson ISD

Marco Zumbolo, WSWHE BOCES

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 59
1 U.S. Department of Education (1996). Getting America’s

Students Ready for the 21st Century: Meeting the

Technology Literacy Challenge. Washington, D.C.

http://www.ed.gov/Technology/Plan/NatTechPlan 

2 Bransford, J., Brown, A., Cocking, R., and Bransford, J.

(Eds.) (1999). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience,

and School. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

3 Rose, L., and Gallup, A. (2000). “The 32nd Annual Phi

Delta Kappa/Gallup Poll of the Public’s Attitudes Toward

the Public Schools,” Phi Delta Kappan, September, pp. 41-

58.

4 Rose, D., and Meyer, A. (2000). The Future Is in the

Margins: The Role of Technology and Disability in

Educational Reform. White paper prepared for the U.S.

Department of Education, Office of Educational

Technology. Forum on Technology in Education:

Envisioning the Future. Washington, D.C.

http://www.air.org/forum/AbRose_Meyer.htm 

5 The CEO Forum on Education and Technology (1999).

Professional Development: A Link to Better Learning. The

CEO Forum School Technology and Readiness Report –

Year Two. Washington, D.C.

6 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics (1995). Schools and Staffing Survey,

1993-1994. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of

Education; McKinsey & Co. (1995). Connecting K-12

Schools to the Information Superhighway. Palo Alto, Calif:

McKinsey & Company.

7 Office of Technology Assessment (1995). Teachers and

Technology: Making the Connection. OTA-EHR-616.

Washington, D.C.

http://www.wws.princeton.edu/~ota/disk1/1995/9541.html

8 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics (2000a). Teachers’ Tools for the 21st

Century: A Report on Teachers’ Use of Technology, NCES

2000-102, by Becky Smerdon, Stephanie Cronen, Lawrence

Lanahan, Jennifer Anderson, Nicholas Iannotti, and

January Angeles. Washington, D.C. http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2000102

9 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics (2000a). Ibid.

10 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics (2000b), Teacher Use of Computers and

the Internet in Public Schools, NCES 2000-090, by

Cassandra Rowand. Washington, D.C.

http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2000090.

11 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics (2000a) Ibid.

12 Solomon, L. and Wiederhorn, J. (2000). Progress of

Technology in the Schools: 1999—Report on 27 States.

Milken Exchange on Education and Technology. Milken

Family Foundation. Santa Monica: Calif: Milken Family

Foundation.

13 The CEO Forum on Education and Technology (2000a).

Teacher Preparation StaR Chart: A Self-Assessment Tool for

Colleges of Education – Preparing a New Generation of

Teachers. Washington, D.C.

14 The CEO Forum on Education and Technology (2000a).

Ibid. 

15 See http://www.ceoforum.org/scde-commitments.cfm for an

up-to-date status report of the names and numbers of institutions that have committed to improving their teacher

preparation programs by employing the CEO Forum on

Education and Technology’s STaR chart.

16 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics (2000c). Internet Access in U.S. Public

Schools and Classrooms: 1994-1999, NCES 2000-086, by

Catrina Williams. Washington, D.C. http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2000086; U.S. Department of

Education, National Center for Education Statistics (2000b).

Ibid.

17 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics. (2000a). Ibid. 

18 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics (2000c). Ibid.

19 Chow, C., Ellis, J., Mark, J., and Wise, B. (1998). Impact of

CTCNet Affiliates: Findings from a National Survey of

Users of Community Technology Centers. Education

Development Center. Newton, Mass.

http://www.ctcnet.org/impact98.htm 

20 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics. (2000a). Ibid.

60 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children

APPENDIX C

Endnotes
21 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics. (2000a). Ibid.

22 President’s Committee of Advisors on Science and

Technology (PCAST), Panel on Educational Technology

(1997). Report to the President on the Use of Technology to

Strengthen K-12 Education in the United States.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/WH/EOP/OSTP/NSTC/PCAST/

k-12ed.html 

23 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics (2000a). Ibid.

24 Anderson, R. and Ronnkvist, A. (1999). The Presence of

Computers in American Schools. Teaching, Learning, and

Computing: 1998 National Survey Report #2. Center for

Research on Information Technology and Organizations.

The University of California, Irvine and The University of

Minnesota. http://www.crito.uci.edu/tlc/findings/computers_in_american_schools 

25 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics (2000a). Ibid.

26 Analyses of US Census Bureau data.

27 Harvey, J. (ed.) (1995). The Market for Educational

Software. Prepared for Office of Educational Technology,

U.S. Department of Education. Santa Monica, Calif:

Critical Technologies Institute, RAND.

28 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics (2000a). Ibid.

29 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics (2000a). Ibid.

30 Ronnkvist, A., Dexter, S., and Anderson, R. (2000).

Technology Support: Its Depth, Breadth and Impact in

America’s Schools. Teaching, Learning, and Computing:

1998 National Survey Report #5. Center for Research on

Information Technology and Organizations. The University

of California, Irvine and The University of Minnesota.

http://www.crito.uci.edu/tlc/findings/technology-support;

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics (2000a). Ibid.

31 Education Week and The Milken Exchange on Education

Technology (September 23, 1999). Technology Counts ’99:

Building the Digital Curriculum. Volume XIX (4). Editorial

Projects in Education. Bethesda, Md.

http://www.edweek.org/sreports/tc99 

32 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics (2000a). Ibid.

33 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics (2000a). Ibid.

34 The CEO Forum on Education and Technology (2000b).

The Power of Digital Learning: Integrating Digital Content.

School Technology and Readiness Report – Year 3.

Washington, D.C.

http://www.ceoforum.org/downloads/report3.pdf

35 Lesgold, A., and Reif, F. (1983). Computers in Education:

Realizing the Potential. Report of a Research Conference,

Pittsburgh, Pa., November 20-24, 1982. Prepared for the

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational

Research and Improvement.

36 For example: Kulik, J. (1994). “Meta-Analytic Studies of

Findings on Computer-Based Instruction.” In Baker, E., and

O’Neil, H. (Eds.) Technology Assessment in Education and

Training. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA Publishers; Follansbee, S.

(1996). The Role of Online Communications in Schools: A

National Study. Peabody, Mass.: Center for Applied Special

Technology; The Software and Information Industry

Association (SIIA) (2000). 2000 Report on the Effectiveness

of Technology in Schools. Washington, D.C.: SIIA.

37 Silverstein, G., Frechtling, J., and Miyaoka, A. (2000).

Evaluation of the Use of Technology in Illinois Public

Schools: Final Report. Prepared for Research Division,

Illinois State Board of Education. Rockville, Md.: Westat.

38 The Milken Exchange on Education and Technology (2000).

Miami Dade County Public Schools Assessment Study:

1999-2000. Santa Monica, Calif.: The Milken Family

Foundation.

39 Xin, J. (1999). “Computer-Assisted Cooperative Learning in

Integrated Classrooms for Students with and without

Disabilities.” Information Technology in Childhood

Education, 61-78.

40 Idaho Council for Technology in Learning (1999). The Idaho

Technology Initiative: An Accountability Report to the

Idaho Legislature on the Effects of Monies Spent through

the Idaho Council for Technology in Learning. Idaho: The

State Division of Vocational Education, The State

Department of Education, Bureau of Technology Services.

41 Mann, D., Shakeshaft, C., Becker, J., and Kottkamp, R.

(1999). West Virginia Story: Achievement and Gains from a

Statewide Comprehensive Instructional Technology

Program. Santa Monica, Calif.: The Milken Family

Foundation.

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 61
42 Wenglinsky, H. (1998). Does it Compute? The Relationship

Between Educational Technology and Student Achievement

in Mathematics. A Policy Information Report. Princeton,

N.J.: Educational Testing Service.

ftp://etsis1.ets.org/pub/res/technolog.pdf

43 Birenbaum, H., and Kornblum, W. (1998). Project TELL

Telecommunications for Learning : Report of a Seven-Year

Study to Bell Atlantic. New York: The Stanton/Heiskell

Center for Public Policy in Telecommunications and

Information Systems.

44 Henriquez, A., and Risconscente, M. (1998). Rhode Island

Teachers and Technology Initiative: Findings from the Pilot

Year. New York: EDC Center for Children and Technology.

45 Liu, M. (1998). “The effect of hypermedia authoring on

elementary school students’ creative thinking.” Journal of

Education Computing Research, 1(19), 27-51.

46 Chang, H., Henriquez, A., Honey, M., Light, D., Moeller,

B., and Ross N. (1998). The Union City Story: Education

Reform and Technology - Students’ Performance on

Standardized Tests. New York: EDC Center for Children

and Technology.

47 Linn, M., Bell, P., and His, S. (1998). “Using the Internet to

Enhance Student Understanding of Science: The Knowledge

Integration Environment.” Interactive Learning

Environments, 1(6), 4-38.

48 Owston, R. and Wideman, H. (1997). “Word processors and

children’s writing in a high-computer-access setting.” Journal

of Research on Computing in Education, 30(2), 202 – 220.

49 Follansbee, S. (1996). Ibid.

50 Bransford, J., Brown, A., Cocking, R., and Bransford, J.

(Eds.) (1999). Ibid.

51 Bransford, J., Brown, A., Cocking, R., and Bransford, J.

(Eds.) (1999). Ibid.

52 Labbo, L. (1999). Toward a Vision of the Future Role of

Technology in Literacy Education. White paper prepared for

the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational

Technology. Forum on Technology in Education:

Envisioning the Future. Washington, D.C.

http://www.air.org/forum/Labbo.pdf

53 Rubin, A. (1999). Technology Meets Math Education:

Envisioning A Practical Future. White paper prepared for

the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational

Technology. Forum on Technology in Education:

Envisioning the Future. Washington, D.C.

http://www.air.org/forum/Rubin.pdf

54 Rubin, A. (1999). Ibid.

55 Assey, J. (1999). The Future of Technology in K-12 Arts

Education. White paper prepared for the U.S. Department of

Education, Office of Educational Technology. Forum on

Technology in Education: Envisioning the Future.

Washington, D.C. http://www.air.org/forum/Assey.pdf

56 The CEO Forum of Education and Technology (2000b). Ibid.

57 Rakow, S. (1999). Forum on Technology in K-12 Education:

Envisioning a New Future—Science. White paper prepared

for the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational

Technology. Forum on Technology in Education:

Envisioning the Future. Washington, D.C.

http://www.air.org/forum/abRakow.htm 

58 The CEO Forum on Education and Technology (2000b).

Ibid. 

59 Assey, J. (1999). Ibid. 

60 The CEO Forum on Education and Technology (2000b).

Ibid.

61 The CEO Forum on Education and Technology (2000b).

Ibid.

62 Bass, R., and Rosenzweig, R. (1999). Rewiring The History

And Social Studies Classroom: Needs, Frameworks,

Dangers, And Proposals. White paper prepared for the U.S.

Department of Education, Office of Educational

Technology. Forum on Technology in Education:

Envisioning the Future. Washington, D.C.

http://www.air.org/forum/Bass.pdf

63 Rakow, S. (1999). Ibid.

64 Bass and Rosenzweig (1999). Ibid.

65 Bransford, J., Brown, A., Cocking, R., and Bransford, J.

(Eds.) (1999). Ibid.

66 Rubin, A. (1999). Ibid.

67 Bransford, J., Brown, A., Cocking, R., and Bransford, J.

(Eds.) (1999). Ibid.

68 Bennett, R. (forthcoming). “How the Internet Will Help

Large-Scale Assessment Reinvent Itself,” in M. Rabinowitz,

F.C. Blumberg, and H. Everson (Eds.), The Impact of Media

and Technology on Instruction. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

62 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children
69 Russell, M. (2000). It’s Time to Upgrade: Tests and

Administration Procedures for the New Millennium. White

paper prepared for the U.S. Department of Education, Office

of Educational Technology. The Secretary’s Conference on

Educational Technology 2000. Washington, D.C.

http://www.ed.gov/Technology/techconf/2000/russell_paper.html

70 See Appendix A for more information on how this plan was

developed.

71 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development

(OECD) (2000). Education Policy Analysis: 1999 Edition.

Paris, France: OECD. 

72 Cohen, D. (July 14, 2000). “Hong Kong’s Boom in Distance

Education May Be a Sign of What’s to Come in Asia.”

Chronicle of Higher Education.

73 For example, Mooney, P. (July 13, 2000). “China Plans to

Expand Distance Education in Western Regions.” Chronicle

of Higher Education; Overland, M. (July 14, 2000). “India

Uses Distance Education to Meet Huge Demand for

Degrees.” Chronicle of Higher Education. 

74 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics (2000d). Condition of America's Public

School Facilities: 1999, NCES 2000-032, by Laurie Lewis,

Kyle Snow, Elizabeth Farris, Becky Smerdon, Stephanie

Cronen, Jessica Kaplan, and Bernie Greene. Washington, D.C.

http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2000032 

75 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics (2000d). Ibid.

76 American Council on Education (1999). To Touch the

Future: Transforming the Way Teachers Are Taught: An

Action Agenda for College and University Presidents.

Washington, D.C.; The CEO Forum on Education and

Technology (2000a). Ibid; The CEO Forum on Education

and Technology (1999). Professional Development: A Link to

Better Learning. The CEO Forum School Technology and

Readiness Report. Year 2. Washington, D.C. http://www.ceoforum.org/downloads/99report.pdf; Moursand, D., and

Bielefeldt, T. (1999). Will New Teachers Be Prepared to Teach

in a Digital Age? A National Survey on Information

Technology in Teacher Education. Santa Monica, Calif.:

Milken Family Foundation, Milken Exchange on Education

Technology; The National Commission on Mathematics and

Science Teaching for the 21st Century (2000). Before It’s Too

Late. A Report to the Nation from the National Commission

on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century.

Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.

http://www.ed.gov/inits/Math/glenn; National Council for

Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) (1997).

Technology and the New Professional Teacher: Preparing for

the 21st Century Classroom. Task Force on Technology and

Teacher Education. Washington, D.C.: NCATE.

77 See the International Society for Technology in Education’s

National Educational Technology Standards (NETS) for

Teachers Project at: http://cnets.iste.org/index3.html 

78 U.S. Department of Education (1998). Promising Practices:

New Ways to Improve Teacher Quality. Washington, D.C.

http://www.ed.gov/pubs/PromPractice/index.html 

79 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics (2000e). Projections of Education

Statistics to 2010, NCES 2000-071, by Debra Gerald and

William Hussar. Washington, D.C.

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2000/2000071.pdf

80 U.S. Department of Education (1998). Ibid. 

81 U.S. Department of Commerce (1999). The Emerging Digital

Economy II. By David Henry, Patricia Buckley, Gurmukh

Gill, Sandra Cooke, Jess Dumagan, Dennis Pastore, and

Susan LaPorte. Washington, D.C.

http://www.ecommerce.gov/ede/ede2.pdf

82 Eisenberg, M., and Johnson, D. (1996). Computer Skills for

Information Problem-Solving: Learning and Teaching

Technology in Context, EDO-IR-96-04. Syracuse, NY:

ERIC Clearinghouse on Information & Technology.

http://ericir.syr.edu/ithome/digests/computerskills.html 

83 Eisenberg, M., and Johnson, D. (1996). Ibid.

84 21st Century Workforce Commission (2000). A Nation of

Opportunity: Building America’s 21st Century Workforce.

Washington, D.C.: 21st Century Workforce Commission.

85 International Technology in Education Association (ITEA)

(2000). Standards for Technological Literacy: Content for

the Study of Technology. Reston, Va.: ITEA.

86 Healy, J. (1998). Failure to Connect: How Computers

Affect Our Children’s Minds—for Better and Worse. New

York: Simon & Schuster; Cordes, C., and Miller, E. (eds.)

(2000). Fool’s Gold: A Critical Look at Computers in

Childhood. College Park, Md.: Alliance for Childhood.

http://www.allianceforchildhood.net/projects/computers/co

mputers_reports.htm

87 Commission on Child Online Protection (2000). Report to

Congress. Washington, D.C.

http://www.copacommission.org/report 

88 The National Commission on Mathematics and Science

Teaching for the 21st Century (2000). Ibid.

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children 63
89 For example: Fouts, J. (2000). Research on Computers and

Education: Past, Present and Future. Seattle, Wash.: Bill and

Melinda Gates Foundation.

http://www.gatesfoundation.org/learning/education/executivesummary.pdf; PCAST (1997). Ibid.; Bransford, J., Brown,

A., Cocking, R., and Bransford, J. (Eds.) (1999). Ibid.

90 Quinones, S. and Kirshstein, R. (1998). An Educator’s Guide

to Evaluating the Use of Technology in Schools and

Classrooms. Prepared for U.S. Department of Education,

Office of Educational Research and Improvement.

Washington, D.C. http://www.ed.gov/pubs/EdTechGuide/ 

91 One promising approach to synthesizing research-based

information for education policy and practice is the

Campbell Collaboration. The Campbell Collaboration is an

emerging international effort that aims to help people make

well-informed decisions by preparing, maintaining, and promoting access to systematic reviews of studies on the effects

of social and educational policies and practices. See

http://campbell.gse.upenn.edu/index.html for more information.

92 Otterbourg, S. (1998). Using Technology to Strengthen

Employee and Family Involvement in Education. Research

Report 1223-98-RR. New York: The Conference Board.

64 e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children
• Executive Order #12881: National Science and Technology

Council

• Executive Order #12882: President’s Committee 

of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST)

• Federal Information Infrastructure Task Force

• U.S. Advisory Council on the National Information

Infrastructure 

President Clinton convenes CEO Roundtable and challenges industry and educators to work together on

educational technology; he launches the Technology

Innovation Challenge Grants; and he announces the

American Technology Honor Society and TechCorps.

• Federal Networking Council is chartered by the

National Science and Technology Council

• Secretary Riley’s Second Conference on Educational

Technology: Making It Happen

• U.S. Department of Education’s Conferences on

Improving America’s Schools: Institute on Meeting the

Technology Literacy Challenge

• U.S. Department of Education/Rand Corporation

Workshops: Technology and Teacher Professional

Development; Planning and Financing Educational

Technology; The Market for Educational Software; The

Costs and Effectiveness of Educational Technology

• U.S. Department of Education Satellite Town Meeting:

Linking Schools to the Future

• The White House Education Technology Forum for

Education and Business Leaders

U.S. Department of Education, National Center 

for Education Statistics: Advanced

Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, K-12

• Congressional Office of Technology Assessment:

Teachers and Technology: Making the Connection

• National Academy of Science and the National

Academy of Engineering: Reinventing Schools: The

Technology Is Now!

• U.S. Department of Commerce: Falling Through the Net:

A Survey of the “Have Nots” in Rural and Urban

America

• U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational

Technology: The Future of Networking Technologies for

Learning

Goals 2000: Educate America Act: Creates the U.S.

Department of Education’s Office of Educational

Technology

Improving America’s Schools Act, Title III: Technology

for Education Act 

Vice President Gore proposes national telecommunications reform and connecting every classroom and

library to the Internet.

In State of the Union Address, President Clinton challenges the nation to connect every classroom to the

Internet.

• All states receive state technology planning grants

under Goals 2000.

• Regional Technology in Education Consortia (R*TEC)

• U.S. Department of Commerce, Telecommunications and

Information Infrastructure Assistance Program (TIIAP)

[later becomes Technology Opportunities Program (TOP)]

• Secretary Riley’s First Conference on Educational

Technology: Pathways to Learning Communities:

Connecting Education to the Information Superhighway

• U.S. Department of Education Satellite Town Meeting:

Learning On-Line

• U.S. Department of Commerce, National Institute of

Standards and Technology: Putting the Information

Infrastructure to Work: A Report of the Information

Infrastructure Task Force’s Committee on Applications

and Technology

1993

1994

EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY TIMELINE

HIGHLIGHTS DURING THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION

1993 - 2000

1995

MILESTONES ■ LEGISLATION ■ EXECUTIVE ORDERS ■ COMMISSIONS ■ NATIONAL INITIATIVES 
President Clinton signs the Telecommunications Act

of 1996 into law and the Federal Communications

Commission, Federal-State Joint Board on

Universal Service recommends K-12 school discounts on telecommunications services (E-rate).

• Executive Order #12999: Educational Technology:

Ensuring Opportunity For All Children in the Next

Century: Created Computers for Learning (federal computer donations) and encouraged federal employees to

volunteer in schools

President Clinton issues the Technology Literacy

Challenge to achieve the four national education

goals and creates the Technology Literacy

Challenge Fund—a five-year, $2 billion commitment

to build capacity in the states.

NetDay: President Clinton, Vice President Gore and

Cabinet officials wire schools in California. This is 

followed by Net Days across the nation.

• 21st Century Teachers Network

• CEO Forum on Education and Technology

• CyberEd Truck travels to Empowerment Zones

• Education and Library Networks Coalition (EdLiNC)

• G-7 Ministerial Conference on the Information Society

• U.S. Department of Education’s Conferences on

Improving America’s Schools: Institute on Connecting

Classrooms to the Information Superhighway

• U.S. Department of Education Satellite Town Meeting:

Technology and Teacher Leadership for 21st Century

Teachers

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational

Technology, National Educational Technology Plan:

Getting America's Students Ready for the 21st

Century: Meeting the Technology Literacy Challenge

• National Governors’ Association: Technology and

Education Standards

• U.S. Advisory Council on the National Information

Infrastructure: Final Report to the President

• U.S. Advisory Council on the National Information

Infrastructure: KickStart Initiative: Connecting

America’s Communities to the Information

Superhighway

• U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics: Advanced Telecommunications in

U.S. Public Elementary and Secondary Schools, 1995

• U.S. Department of Education/Rand Corporation:

Fostering the Use of Educational Technology: Elements 

of a National Strategy

Federal Communications Commission votes unanimously to provide all K-12 schools and libraries discounts on telecommunications services (E-rate).

• Executive Order #13035: Advisory Committee on High

Performance Computing and Communications,

Information Technology and the Next Generation

Internet

• Executive Order #13133: A Safe and Content Rich

Internet

• White House Memorandum: Federal Resources for

Educational Excellence (FREE) www.ed.gov/free, which

becomes the portal to on-line teaching resources across

the federal government.

• Migrant Education Technology Grants

• America Links Up, Internet Online Summit

• U.S. Department of Education’s Conferences on

Improving America’s Schools: Institute on Using

Technology as a Tool for Education Reform

• U.S. Department of Education Satellite Town Meeting:

Ensuring Access to the Internet

• American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education:

The Use of Technology by Schools, Colleges, and

Departments of Education

• The CEO Forum on Education and Technology: School

Technology and Readiness Report: From Pillars to

Progress

• Education Week: Technology Counts: Schools and Reform

in the Information Age

• President’s Committee of Advisors on Science and

Technology (PCAST), Panel on Educational Technology:

Report to the President on the Use of Technology to

Strengthen K-12 Education in the United States

• U.S. Department of Education: America's Technology

Literacy Challenge: Using Technology as a Tool for

Education Reform 

• U.S. Department of Education: Parents Guide to the

Internet

• U.S. Department of Education/American Institutes for

Research: Investing in School Technology: Strategies to

Meet the Funding Challenge

• U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics: Advanced Telecommunications in

U.S. Private Schools, K-12, Fall 1995

• U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics: Advanced Telecommunications in

U.S. Public Elementary and Secondary Schools, Fall 1996

• U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics: Distance Education in Higher

Education Institutions

• U.S. Department of Education/SRI International:

Technology and Education Reform: Studies of Education

Reform 

1997

1996

■ CONFERENCES ■ REPORTS
• 1998 Amendments to the Higher Education Act of 1965,

P.L. 105-244 (Sec. 410a. Learning Anytime Anywhere

Partnerships; Sec. 486. Distance Education Demonstration

Programs; Part J—Web-Based Education Commission) 

• The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) 

President Clinton’s Commencement Address at the

Massachusetts Institute of Technology: Calls for student technological literacy by the end of the 8th

grade and a strengthened commitment to professional development.

• Secretary Riley’s Technology Address at the National Press

Club: Called for a commitment to eliminating the digital

divide.

E-Rate discounts awarded to 25,000 applicants to

provide telecommunications services and help more

than 500,000 classrooms get wired for the Internet.

• Expert Panel on Educational Technology

• Commission on Online Child Protection (COPA)

• U.S. Working Group on Electronic Commerce

• U.S. Department of Education’s Conferences on Improving

America’s Schools: Institute on Technology Classroom

Simulations

• U.S. Department of Education Satellite Town Meeting:

Updating Technology, Buildings and Classrooms

• White House Conference on Technology Training for

Teachers

• American Library Association/U.S. Department of

Education: The 1998 National Survey of U.S. Public Library

Outlet Internet Connectivity 

• The CEO Forum on Education and Technology: A Tool for

Assessing School Technology and Readiness: Focus on

Professional Development

• Education Week: Technology Counts ’98: Putting School

Technology to the Test

• U.S. Department of Commerce: Falling Through the Net II:

New Data on the Digital Divide

• U.S. Department of Education/American Institutes for

Research: An Educator's Guide to Evaluating The Use of

Technology in Schools and Classrooms

• U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics: Distance Education in Higher

Education Institutions: Incidence, Audiences, and Plans to

Expand 

• U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics: Internet Access in Public Schools

• U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics: Technology @ Your Fingertips: A

Guide to Implementing Technology Solutions for

Education Agencies and Institutions

• United States General Accounting Office: School

Technology: Five School Districts' Experiences in Funding

Technology Programs

1998

• Executive Order #13133: Working Group on Unlawful

Conduct on the Internet

• White House Memorandum: Narrowing the Digital Divide:

Creating Opportunities for All Americans in the Digital Age

• Community Technology Centers

• Distance Education Demonstration Program

• Interagency Education Research Initiative 

• Learning Anytime Anywhere Partnerships

• Preparing Tomorrow's Teachers to Use Technology 

• National Commission on Mathematics and Science

Teaching for the 21st Century

• Web-based Education Commission

• Secretary Riley’s Third Conference on Educational

Technology: Evaluating the Effectiveness of Technology

• U.S. Department of Commerce: Digital Divide Summit

• U.S. Department of Education’s Conferences on Improving

America’s Schools: Institute on Evaluating the Use of

Technology to Improve Teaching and Learning

• U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational

Technology: Forum on Technology in Education: Envisioning

the Future

• U.S. Department of Education Satellite Town Meeting, The

Power of Technology

• The White House Conference on 21st-Century Skills for

21st-Century Jobs

• Education Week: Technology Counts ’99: Building the

Digital Curriculum

• President’s Information Technology Advisory Committee:

Informing Technology Research: Investing in Our Future

• U.S. Department of Commerce: The Digital Work Force:

Building Infotech Skills at the Speed of Innovation

• U. S. Department of Commerce: Falling Through the Net:

Defining the Digital Divide

• U.S. Department of Commerce/New Mexico State

University College of Engineering: Assessment of

Technology Infrastructure in Native American Communities

• U.S. Department of Education: Technology Literacy

Challenge Fund Report to Congress

• U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics: Distance Education at Postsecondary

Education Institutions: 1997-98

• U.S. Department of Education, National Center for

Education Statistics: Internet Access in Public Schools and

Classrooms: 1994-98

• U.S. General Accounting Office: Federal Funding for

Schools and Libraries

• U.S. Working Group on Electronic Commerce: Towards

Digital eQuality

1999
President Clinton’s New Markets Tour: From Digital Divide 

to Digital Opportunity. In addition to promoting digital

opportunities in new markets across the country, President

Clinton encourages digital opportunities for Americans

with disabilities.

• National Academy of Sciences and National Academy of

Engineering: Improving Learning with Technology

• National Academy of Sciences: Tools and Strategies for

Protecting Kids for Pornography and Their Applicability to Other

Inappropriate Internet Content

• Secretary Riley’s Fourth Conference on Educational Technology:

Measuring Impacts and Shaping the Future

• U.S. Department of Education’s Conferences on Improving

America’s Schools: Institute on Learning to Teach with

Technology

• U.S. Department of Education Regional Conferences 2000:

Guidelines for Evaluating Technology in Education 

• U.S. Department of Education Satellite Town Meeting:

Technology and Buildings for a New Century 

• U.S. Department of Education: The Bridge Builders

Conference...Over the Digital Divide 

• The CEO Forum on Education and Technology: The Power of

Learning: Integrating Digital Content – School Technology and

Readiness Report

• The CEO Forum on Education and Technology: Teacher

Preparation STaR Chart: A Self-Assessment Tool for Colleges of

Education

• Commission on Online Child Protection: Final Report of the

COPA Commission

• International Society for Technology in Education: National

Educational Technology Standards for Students: Connecting

Curriculum and Technology

• International Society for Technology in Education: National

Educational Technology Standards for Teachers

• The National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching

in the 21st Century: Before It’s Too Late

• President’s Working Group on Unlawful

Conduct on the Internet: The Electronic

Frontier: The Challenge of Unlawful Conduct

Involving the Use of the Internet

• U.S. Department of Commerce: Falling Through

the Net: Toward Digital Inclusion

• U.S. Department of Education/Grove

Consultants International/Institute for the

Future: Mapping the Educational Technology

Horizon

• U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education

Statistics: Computer and Internet Access in Private Schools and

Classrooms: 1995 and 1998

• U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education

Statistics: Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools and Classrooms:

1994-1999

• U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education

Statistics: Teachers’ Tools for the 21st Century: A Report on

Teachers’ Use of Technology

• U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education

Statistics: Teacher Use of Computers and the Internet in Public

Schools

• U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education

Statistics: What are the Barriers to the Use of Advanced

Telecommunications for Students with Disabilities in Public

Schools?

• U.S. Department of Education/Urban Institute: E-Rate and the

Digital Divide: A Preliminary Analysis from the Integrated

Studies of Educational Technology

• Web-based Education Commission: The Power of the Internet for

Learning: Moving from Promise to Practice

2000

e-Learning: Putting a World-Class Education at the Fingertips of All Children
December 2000

The text of this document is in the public domain. Feel free to

photocopy or reprint this document.

This report is available on the Office of Educational

Technology’s Web site at: www.ed.gov/technology

TO ORDER COPIES OF THIS REPORT, WRITE:

ED Pubs

Education Publications Center

U.S. Department of Education

P.O. Box 1398

Jessup, MD 20794-1398

Fax: 301-470-1244

E-mail: edpubs@inet.ed.gov

You may also order this publication toll-free: 1-877-433-7827

(1-877-4-ED-PUBS). If 877 service is not yet available in your

area, call 1-800-872-5327 (1-800-USA-LEARN). Those who use

a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a teletypewriter (TTY) should call 1-800-437-0833.

To order online, point your Internet browser to:

www.ed.gov/pubs/edpubs.html

On request, this publication is available in alternate formats,

such as Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette.

For more information, please contact the Department’s

Alternate Format Center at 202-205-8113.

FOR MORE INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT US AT:

U.S. Department of Education

Office of Educational Technology

400 Maryland Avenue, S.W.

Washington, DC 20202-8200

Telephone: 202-401-1444

NOTICE:

This document contains examples of programs created by 

public and private organizations. They are provided for the

reader’s information and their inclusion is not intended as 

an endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education.
U.S. Department of Education

Office of Educational Technology

Suite 6W301

400 Maryland Avenue, S.W.

Washington, DC 20202-8200