1.     Schools should not support a technology design that does not empower learning.

This does not mean that schools should abandon technologies that support low-level learning goals. These technologies still have value, especially if they deliver instruction to those who would otherwise not have access to it, or provide access to information that would otherwise be unavailable. What is important is adapting these technologies to support engaged learning.

2.     Schools should move toward distributed networks, as opposed to central source providers, in order to build communities of learners that include students and teachers as contributors.

 This does not mean that schools should abandon all projects or services involving central source providers or unnetworked software. There are some stellar projects that use central source providers as their base. These provide a high-quality product and service for schools that is motivating teachers and students and promoting engaged learning. The same is true for many tools that may - or may not - feature open architecture and high technology, but which provide powerful opportunities for teachers to solve problems, develop curricula, and so on. However, the key here is adapting the technology to be more interactive and focused on engaged learning using networking and the Internet.

 

 

 

3.     Schools must use technology - regardless of the specific one selected - to create powerful learning designs.

 Such designs allow students and teachers to: (1) work on authentic, meaningful, and challenging problems; (2) interact with the data in user-friendly ways that allow some student control of learning; (3) build knowledge together within a learning community that is broader than a few students or schools with similar characteristics and interests; and (4) interact with practicing professionals and community members.

 Schools need to become collaborators with research-based service providers. This would let teachers experience what it means to use technology effectively for communication and learning. Such projects should allow teachers to experiment with different models of instruction and different approaches to technology. During this experimentation phase, schools can evaluate cost effectiveness in terms of their learning goals.

5.     Schools must, from the outset, plan on connecting their technologies.

As a school grows in its experience and expertise, it can develop more powerful models of learning using more complex technologies - all the time moving toward high-technology, high-learning options. To move in this direction, schools must, from the outset, plan on connecting their technologies. Also, schools in the high-technology, low-learning quadrant

(see Table 3) should consider new options. They might move from closed-system ILSs and distance learning technologies that are providing direct instruction toward more interactive technologies, open architecture, connectivity to distributed resources, and more engaged learning experiences through their existing technologies.

6.     Schools cannot invest in technologies alone. They must also invest in ongoing professional development, training, and support services.

Research-based agencies that focus on learning and collaboration often support successful technology programs. As technology vendors seek long-term relationships with schools, they too will need to develop expertise in learning and will have to be able to provide professional development using their specific technologies and programs.