Funding Technology for Middle and High School Classes

1. Funding Technology for Middle and High School Classes

2. Ignacio CruzPost University2016

3. AbstractWhere will the future of education end up without the technology needed today for tomorrows leaders? That is the question and problem this Capstone Project set out to answer, and solve. The lack of funding from all government sources is an issue that can be solved by a self-supported Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) initiative for middle, and high school students.

4. Abstract (Cont’d) The United States educational system is in dire need of a complete overhaul of the policies, and teaching pedagogies in order to prepare today’s students for tomorrow’s challenges. Instructing in the same manner that was done over a hundred years ago, is no longer feasible, or productive. All stakeholders from parents, educators, politicians, to students must come onboard and start learning using modern technology and technical gadgets that are currently being used in all facets of life today, and in the future. The students of this nation deserve and need the support of all stakeholders to provide the required technology tools, and teaching methodologies so that they can be prepared for a successful future in tomorrow’s global economy.

5. PROBLEM STATEMENT • The lack of devices in schools, specifically in middle schools, and high schools, where students need to strengthen and master digital technology skills, is hurting the quality of education for those students. Without these highly desirable skills which most employers require and demand, the future of American students looks bleak, and so does the economic status of the United States. Providing education technology to students can be very beneficial as long as it fulfills the learner’s requirements and improves the curriculum, as long as it does not eliminate educators, but on the contrary, assist them in teaching (Koba, 2015). So in order to support technology, budget increases in the forms of property taxes, bonds, and of course funding from the federal government must be stressed, and called for by educators (Noonoo, 2015).

6. RESEARCH QUESTIONS Capstone Project set out to answer the following questions pertaining to BYODs: • Will a community, given a set of tax incentives, willing to support a BYOD initiative to provide their students technological devices • Will parents from the community be willing and able to provide their own children, and perhaps even donate an additional device to a less-well to do student, given additional tax incentives for donating same • Provided the BYOD initiative is supported, will the school funds then be utilized to improve IT infrastructure and teacher training • Lastly, does the lack of devices in schools negatively impact learning, and does the fact that some students can easily afford them and others cannot create an additional learning hurdle in the classroom

7. LITERATURE REVIEW • The lack of devices in schools, specifically in middle schools, and high schools, where students need to strengthen and master digital technology skills, is hurting the quality of education for those students. • Providing education technology to students can be very beneficial as long as it fulfills the learner’s requirements and improves the curriculum, as long as it does not eliminate educators, but on the contrary, assist them in teaching (Koba, 2015). • So in order to support technology, budget increases in the forms of property taxes, bonds, and of course funding from the federal government must be stressed, and called for by educators (Noonoo, 2015).

8. LITERATURE REVIEW (CONT’D) There is a lack of training for educators on how to use technology. • Teachers must be adequately trained in advance of implementation. The articles below make a very convincing argument for such needed training: • Vojtek, R. O. (2015, January/February). The Case for BYOD and Tech-Smart Schools. Principal, 94(3), 36-37. Retrieved February 23, 2016, from Post University Library • Grant, M., Tamim, S., Brown, D., Sweeney, J., Ferguson, F., & Jones, L. (2015). Teaching and Learning with Mobile Computing Devices: Case Study in K-12 Classrooms. Techtrends: Linking Research & Pracice To Improve Learning, 59(4), 32-45. Retrieved February 28, 2016, from Post University Library • Thompson, G. (2014). 1-To_1 +BYOD+PD=Success. T H E Journal, 41(18), 13-19. Retrieved February 28, 2016, from Post University Library

9. LITERATURE REVIEW (CONT’D) • A BYOD initiative which contains tax rebates, tax reductions, will surely entice consumers to buy digital devices for students, and donate some to low-income students. • Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and others offer tax-free days for school supplies (Martin, 2015). BYOD initiatives have several benefits, and one is that digital device use and ownership has risen exponentially, and students are more comfortable using their own familiar gadgets. The articles below stress this very important issue along with other benefits of BYOD initiatives: • Bruder, P. (2014). Gadgets Go to School. Education Digest, 80(3), 15-18. Retrieved February 28, 2016, from Post University Library • Kiger, D., & Herro, D. (2015). Bring Your Own Device: Parental Guidance (PG) Suggested. Techtrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 59(5), 51-61. Retrieved February 28, 2016, from Post University Library • Soukup, P. (2015). Smartphones. Communication Research Trends, 34(4), 3-39. Retrieved March 1, 2016, from Post University Library • Shanedra, D. (2014). Using Disruptive Technologies to Make Digital Connections: Stories of Media Use and Digital Literacy in Secondary Classrooms. Educational Media International, 51(2), 109-123. Retrived March 2, 2016 from Post University Library

10. LITERATURE REVIEW (CONT’D) • There are numerous articles discussing the fact that schools across the United States do not have enough computers or digital devices to provide to all students. • this causes class interruptions and class delays. • BYOD is the way of the future, • When taxpayers realize the success of their students depend on BYOD, they will prove more supportive of providing BYOD technology (Vojtek, 2015). • Currently, there is an issue of inequality. The following articles clearly delineates this inequality and also provide the benefits of BYOD: • Barrett, J., Moore, G., & Slate, J. (2014). Elementary Students in Texas: Inequitable Access to Computers. Journal of Education Research, 8(3), 107-121. Retrieved March 5, 2016, from: Post University Library • Kiger, D., & Herro, D. (2015). Bring Your Own Device: Parental Guidance (PG) Suggested. Techtrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 59(5), 51-61. Retrieved February 28, 2016, from Post University Library

11. DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY • The Action Research type used in this Capstone Project was that of a qualitative type which was decided early on when formulating the problem statement. • The project looked at various aspects of the situation and gathered data from the stakeholders that were involved in, or at least interviewed, to discover their opinions, ideas, and points of view on the funding of technology for the children in their community. • As allured to in the previous sentences, the research design type consisted of surveys or interviews, or a combination of both to gather honest opinions from the community residents possible through anonymous surveys, and confidential interviews. • In these interviews the questions were posed to discover if the community parents were willing to fund and improve their student’s education by purchasing their own mobile devices at a discounted price.

12. DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY (Cont’d) • These type of interviews had several benefits in that questions could be better explained on the spot if the interviewee did not understand them • The interviewer had control of the sequence of the questions; and lastly; the responses to the personal interviews were more in depth due to the personal contact given (Ary, Jacobs, Sorensen, & Walker, 2015). • In addition to purchasing a BYOD, which the majority of students already owned, and continuously upgrade, if the parents were willing to purchase an additional gadget and donate it to a low-income student, the benefit of this action was three-fold: • first, they bought it at a discounted price, • second, they improved a student’s learning opportunities, and • third, a tax-deductible gift was credited to their personal income tax.

13. PROJECT DELIVERABLES

14. PROJECT DELIVERABLES (CONT’D)

15. EVALUATION AND ASSESSMENT • Evaluation and assessment of the Capstone Project; “Funding Technology for Middle, and High Schools” was accomplished using a rubric acquired from Rubistar, (http://rubistar4teachers.org) using several elements, each with its own grading criteria. • Since this Capstone Project was on the non-implementation track, the evaluation and assessment had to be self-conducted with some feedback from the panel of experts. • Initial feedback from some panel members were mixed with both positive and constructive feedback offered. While one panel member thought the project had merits, and was of the opinion that it was a worthy project to be pursued, another panel member was of the strong opinion that mobile devices in the classroom, especially in the High School campuses are a hindrance to learning since they are more of a distraction and a disruption in the classroom (Salazar & McFetridge, Personal communication, 2016).

16. RUBRIC SELF ASSESSEMENT • Rubric:

17. RUBRIC SELF ASSESSEMENT (CONT’D)

18. RUBRIC SELF ASSESSEMENT (CONT’D)

19. DISCUSSION AND REFLECTION • This Capstone Project was initiated to identify the lack of funding in education from both local, state, and federal government entities (Price, 2014) • The project served to point out the inequalities that exist between well-to-do school districts, and the poor urban, or rural schools • As a nation, schools are falling behind in the utilization of modern technology to teach students • The solution to this problem is to entice communities to self-fund a Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) initiative so that any other funds provided can be used for other requirements including technology infrastructure in schools

20. DISCUSSION AND REFLECTION(CONT’D) THINK ABOUT IT! • By taking ownership of the problem, community citizens, including parents with children in schools can benefit in many ways • Parents that can afford and willing to purchase portable devices suitable for school receive tax incentives and discounts • Parents and other citizens that donate an additional device to a student receive additional tax breaks • In addition to these incentives, States have tax-free days for school supplies, including technical devices • Local and national chain stores include additional discounts passed on by the manufacturers • It is a win-win situation • Schools, students, educators, parents, and the community benefit

21. DISCUSSION AND REFLECTION(CONT’D) • A BYOD initiative can work! Here is why: • First, the problem of lack of devices must be recognized-it is a fact! • Second, inequalities exists in all schools, even in the well-to do ones some students do not own a technical gadget. • Third, funds for education keeps spiraling down, the economy is in a slow recovery, thus reduced resources all across the board. • A majority of students already own compatible portable devices, so the additional devices will not be an exorbitant number (Estable, 2013). • Schools will have surplus money to strengthen Information Technology (IT) infrastructure, and provide IT training to educators. • The increase in IT purchases will create a domino effect in the economy which will grow the IT and related businesses. • As Stressed before, it is a win-win situation!

22. REFERENCES • Ary, Jacobs, Sorensen, Walker. (2015). ACP Introduction to Research in Education - EDU688, 9th Edition. [VitalSource Bookshelf Online]. Retrieved fromhttps://ambassadored.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781305708112/ • Barrett, J., Moore, G., & Slate, J. (2014). Elementary Students in Texas: Inequitable Access to Computers. Journal of Education Research, 8(3), 107-121. Retrieved March 5, 2016, from http://eds.a.ebscohost.com/abstract?site=eds&scope=site&jrnl=1935052X&AN=98721280&h=kE1XoVnOaJqnIixknqi3uYNVMlUkKmdXD%2fpWI1gmLF4AHkfGwSRkxXxyatzurlZMWDLQ6YejFfxbTBTaFVWGXw%3d%3d&crl=f&resultLocal=ErrCrlNoResults&resultNs=Ehost&crlhashurl=login.aspx%3fdir • Bruder, P. (2014). Gadgets Go to School. Education Digest, 80(3), 15-18. Retrieved February 28, 2016, from {targeturl}authtype=uid&user=ns017336&password=password&custid=ns017336 • Estable, M. (2013, September). A Review of Considerations for BYOD M-Learning Design. Distance Learning, 10(3), 21-26. Retrieved February 28, 2016, from {targeturl}authtype=uid&user=ns017336&password=password&custid=ns017336 • Kiger, D., & Herro, D. (2015). Bring Your Own Device: Parental Guidance (PG) Suggested. Techtrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 59(5), 51-61. Retrieved February 28, 2016, from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=mfi&AN=108841490&authtype=cookie,cpid&custid=ns017336&site=eds-live&scope=site • Koba, M. (2015, April 28). Education Tech Funding Soars--but is it Working in the Classroom? FORTUNE. Retrieved February 7, 2016, from http://fortune.com/2015/04/28/education-tech-funding-soars-but-is-it-working-in-the-classroom/ • Martin, J. (2015, July 31). Augusta Back-To-School Shoppers Out on Sales Tax Holiday. Augusta Chronicle, p. 1. Retrieved March 2, 2016, from http://eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=14&sid=5c2af123-46ea-49c1-bcee-56cf14dbd33f%40sessionmgr4005&hid=4111&bdata=JmF1dGh0eXBlPWNvb2tpZSxjcGlkJmN1c3RpZD1uczAxNzMzNiZzaXRlPWVkcy1saXZl#AN=2W62076398841&db=n5h

23. REFERENCES (CONT’D) • Noonoo, S. (2015, April 3). 6 Grants for Putting More Technology in Your Classroom. eSchool News. Retrieved February 7, 2016, from http://www.eschoolnews.com/2015/04/03/technology-grants-568/2/ • Price, S. (2014). BYOD? {Bring Your Own Device}. Teaching Tolerance, 48, 26-29. Retrieved February 28, 2016, from {targeturl}authtype=uid&user=ns017336&password=password&custid=ns017336 • Shanedra, D. (2014). Using Disruptive Technologies to Make Digital Connections: Stories of Media Use and Digital Literacy in Secondary Classrooms. Educational Media International, 51(2), 109-123. doi:10.1080/09523987.2014.924661 • Soukup, P. (2015). Smartphones. Communication Research Trends, 34(4), 3-39. Retrieved March 1, 2016, from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ufh&AN=111876520&authtype=cookie,cpid&custid=ns017336&site=eds-live&scope=site • Thompson, G. (2014). 1-To_1 +BYOD+PD=Success. T H E Journal, 41(18), 13-19. Retrieved February 28, 2016, from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=mfi&AN=97887836&site=eds-live • Vojtek, R. O. (2015, January/February). The Case for BYOD and Tech-Smart Schools. Principal, 94(3), 36-37. Retrieved February 23, 2016, from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eue&AN=100959888&authtype=cookie,cpid&custid=ns017336&site=eds-live&scope=site • Images retrieved from Google Images