Ruth Cey
Graduate Student
Educational Communications and Technology
University of Saskatchewan
April, 2001
Select
a different paper
Download a copy of the entire paper
Abstract:
Rural communities are faced with challenges resulting from depopulation, globalization and changing government priorities. In such a volatile setting, rural education must adapt to these challenges or face extinction. This paper explores the role of educational technology in addressing the needs of rural communities now and in the future. Specifically, it examines the integration of technology in two school Divisions in Rural Saskatchewan and discusses implications of technology plans in the present and for the future.
Introduction:
“Today, after more than a century of electric technology, we have extended our nervous systems in a global embrace, abolishing both space and time, as far as our planet is concerned” (McLuhan, 1964, as cited in Symes, 1995, p. 1).
Marshall McLuhan’s description of the “global village,” where we are no longer bound by physical presence seems to be the ultimate deliverance for rural people: It promises access to centres of information and power; connection and contact where social interaction may be limited; and release from the very “earth-bound” nature of agrarian life. With the click of a mouse, rural people can leave their narrow lives behind and connect with other like-minded global citizens.
How could rural residents resist the desire to invest their energy and financial resources in acquiring the technology for liberation? In an age of rapidly increasing communication options, could rural education be fueled by anything but the desire to connect students with with the wider world, freeing them from limitations of rural life?
The answers to such questions are not as obvious as they would seem. While McLuhan’s statement would appear to hold promise for rural individuals, its value is qualified with regard to rural communities. By their very nature, rural communities are rooted in an embodied wisdom that has arisen from the very circumstances that appear to limit them - - a wisdom distilled through vulnerability to the forces of nature; through “remaining together despite differences (Howley & Howley, 1995, p. 6); and through the lived contention that values such as responsibility and stewardship are learned in very concrete ways - - in relationships that involve our five senses. If “teaching and learning are social acts driven by human needs for connection, communication, and interaction (Cooley and Johnston, 2000, p.3), then the primary site of education would still be the terrestrial community, where such activities are most authentic.
Therefore, while technology holds promise for rural communities and for rural education, the challenge will be to maintain “learning communities that have deep local roots in the community as well as an extensive global reach” (Sayers, 1995, p. 773). To meet this challenge, rural communities need to reflect on the nature of rural life, the potential of technological interventions and the ways in which they can best marry the two in order to achieve goals that are consistent with humanity, community and ecological responsibility.
Thus, this paper will begin with a brief examination of rural communities, followed by an assessment of the current role of technology in rural schools and finally, a look at the ways in which technology use might address current and future issues for rural education.
Rural Communities: Background Information
In today’s information society, life in agriculturally-based rural communities seems anachronistic: The very nature of food production - - locally based, slow-paced and linear - - appears to be inconsistent with a wider society moving at hyper-speed in a global environment.
Should the lifestyle in rural Saskatchewan be seen simply as snapshot of a vanishing way of life, irrelevant in a time when agriculture could be carried out on a large scale basis by corporate interests? Or, conversely, in a time of great concern and mistrust over issues of food safety or water quality, should society seek to maintain a vibrant, educated rural populace, rooted in local values?
Rural Values
In part, rural communities can be distinguished from their urban counterparts by their distinctive values - - the “circumstances and commitments associated with particular places” (Howley & Howley,1995, p. 5). While not superior to “urban values,” the priorities of rural agriculturally-based communities should be seen as interrelated and complementary to those of urban communities: The shared goal of ensuring a safe food supply and a healthy ecology links us all.
Unfortunately, if recent public policy decisions are clear evidence, society’s priorities, reflect a concern for “the new economy” - - high tech and focused on information (McMurdy, 2001) - - to the exclusion of more basic concerns. However:
. . . before we fret any further about the companies that focus on finding newer, faster, high-tech ways to get bread and other basics to our table, it’s worth remembering that someone has to [grow it and] make and bake it in the first place. However unfashionable that may be (McMurdy, 2001).
We all benefit when that “someone” growing our food is educated for a rural way of life: aware of the issues, values and priorities for safe and ethical food production.
Stewardship of the land is a key value associated with agricultural communities - - a value that “persists as rural people struggle against the odds to care for the places dear to them” (Howley & Howley, 1995, p. 5). If society fosters and maintains such stewardship in rural communities, our entire country will benefit by deterring he development of a food production system based on narrow, profit driven motives.
Another value tied to the circumstances of rural life is the regard for manual labour, which, despite increasing mechanization, is still a component of food production. Unfortunately, “in our disregard for manual labor . .. we have as a people forgotten how much reflection and cleverness good handiwork requires” (Howley,1997, p. 3). Rural communities are still built on the collective wisdom of their pioneers and senior citizens - - drawn from years of manual labour and reflection. Such wisdom provides perspective and caution to counterbalance uncritical adoption of new practices.
Two other values that characterize rural residents are their unique combination of entrepreneurial spirit and cooperative strength: The same pioneer spirit has spawned a fiercely, independent business sense alongside a recognition of the need to cooperate for the benefit of all. Prairie cooperatives, both traditional and those of the “new generation” are evidence of this striking phenomena - - foregoing competition for the common good of all. “In a community, people remain together despite their differences, whereas in society, people remain separate despite their common interests” (Howley & Howley, 1995, p.6) and there is wisdom to be found in rising to the challenge of overcoming differences.
Finally, rural people value community involvement: Limited population and resources challenge many rural residents to take on a wide variety of community activities, in order to sustain a quality of life that ensures social, cultural, spiritual and economic well-being for all residents.
Ensuring a vigorous community life in rural areas, therefore, will protect the the values and commitments most strongly associated with them. Rural people who are steeped in these values will benefit society as a whole by contributing to the democratic process which will determine policies in such vital areas as food safety and environmental protection.
Pressures on Rural Life
Loss and Decline
Especially over the past twenty years, decline has been a defining feature of rural life. Rural people have watched their hospitals, churches, schools and grain elevators close and disappear - - altering the physical shape of the communities as well as the confidence and pride of their members.
With the advent of more efficient transportation systems, it has become more difficult for rural businesses to compete with their urban counterparts. The loss of rural infrastructure has caused out migration to cities - - leaving those remaining behind with a sense of powerlessness; a sense of mourning for a time when main street was booming, when a doctor was within a safe distance in case of an emergency; when the predominant mood was of optimism, growth and opportunity.
Globalization
Globalization of trade and communication has also been a palpable force in rural communities. Farmers are acutely aware of how the benefits - - diversified markets for diversified production - -have been tempered by loss of local power and autonomy. A system of trade and commerce based on remote ownership undermines the very commitments, traditions, and cooperative spirit that have been strengths of rural communities (Howley & Howley, 1995): For example, many employees of “agribusiness” are now employed by huge transnational corporations and do not have the same long-term commitments to their present locations as self-employed business people or those working for regionally based cooperatives. As a consequence, “fewer rural people - - and rural people less and less frequently - - are responsible for rural land. They are now as “free” as the rest of the nation to wander wherever big capital requires them to go” (Howley, 1997, p. 2).
Thus, rural residents are caught in a conflict between the need to survive in a highly competitive global economy and the desire to maintain local commitments. Since “the idea of place itself is antithetical - - and therefore essential - - to the idea of globalization (McMichael as cited in Howley, 1997 p. 4), it is not surprising that agriculturally-base communities, so necessarily rooted in their locations, are hesitant to succumb to a way of thinking that would eliminate the importance of the local.
Technology: Achieving Balance for Rural Communities
So, caught in a struggle to balance local aspirations with global possibilities, rural communities are struggling to devise a vision of the future. Part of this struggle is to determine ways to employ technology to best meet the aspirations of the community. As Gurstein warns, “Technology can be both a cause of local decline and a possible solution. (Gurstein, 1998, p.2) Therefore, rural communities must avoid seeking simplistic answers or technological “quick fixes” in their struggle to preserve a rural way of life in the face of increasing decline and globalization. Gurstein proposes an approach that esteems the role of the local in choices regarding technology use:
“Technology is not a release from the burden of place, but rather a tool to respond to the challenge and opportunities of the “local.” In this context there is an opportunity to be productive and economically vital, not by being “anywhere”, but precisely by being “somewhere” and particularly by being part of larger distributed networks where “place” is a “resource” not a burden. (Gurstein, 1998, p. 2)
The choice and application of technology, including educational technology, will both shape and be shaped by our vision for the future of rural communities. The challenge will be to consciously use technology to serve human purposes - - human communities - - rather than employing it as an engine of decline, fueled by false inevitability. After all, “Thoughtful decisions about uses of technology will be required to develop both rural sorts of schooling and sustainable rural communities.” (Howley & Barker 1997, p. 2) If rural communities are to remain vital, they must employ appropriate technology that serves the way of life rooted in them, while allowing the voices of their members to be heard, both on a small, local scale and in the greater “global village.”
Technology and Rural Schools: Background
Nature of Rural Schools:
Often, a school is a centre of community life and a source of pride (Rincones, 1988) for a small rural community. With low pupil-teacher ratios, rural schools often resemble “families” more than institutions. (J. 2000). Furthermore, since rural schools are often major employers in small communities, there is strong public will to ensure their viability (Rincones, 1988, p. 1).
Mr. J, the director of a rural school division interviewed for this paper, commented on the strengths of the schools that he oversees as being a history, culture and tradition of strong parent and community support for public education that he believes will help ensure “that people want to make the investment - - if it’s in technology or if it’s in personnel or whatever it has to be in order to keep moving ahead: (J., 2000, Dewees, 1999, p.1). Certainly, rural communities will have to draw upon these commitments as they determine the nature and direction of rural education, in the face of considerable challenges.
Toward a Broader View of Technology Integration in Rural Schools
If rural schools are to serve the communities that they represent, they must face the challenge to view their locations as “resources,” rather than “burdens. Part of this challenge in our information society will be to implement technology in a way that will respect rural realities, while maintaining a educational program that is equitable to those offered in urban settings. Such a delicate balance should be a goal of those making decisions regarding educational technology.
In an article dealing with introducing technology to the classroom, Catherine Barrette proposes two “levels of training” for educational technology. She describes the first as “technical,” consisting of “the hands-on introduction to the functions and technical skills necessary to use a given application” (Barrette, 2000, p. 2). Contrasted with the technical level, is the pedagogical level, which “demands a broader view.” In the pedagogical level, Barrette proposes that “faculty must become familiar with a technology, see it implemented by an “expert” user in order to learn the pedagogical aspects needed to employ it effectively, and then implement the technology for themselves and evaluate its success” (Barrette, 2000, p. 2).
While Barrette’s analysis is apt for staff training considerations, it fails to encompass the broader issues and address the values inherent in technology introduction. Therefore, a third level- -the critical/philosophical level - - is even more compelling in regard to the challenges faced by rural communities. Zuga’s discussion of the feminist approach to educational technology in the classroom employs this level of analysis:
...the critical discussion of technology and the way in which we, as a society, choose to implement technology, especially as a society in which gender, race, and class structures create inequities in power, would give students insight into how to subvert prescriptive technologies in favour of developing redemptive technologies. Addressing the critiques of technology would benefit all students by helping them to understand that technology is a debatable practice with both positive and negative consequences for the environment and different groups of people. (Zuga, 1999, p. 65.)
Zuga’s contentions about the discussion of technology to the classroom should be extended to a community level. Therefore administrators, teachers, community members and students must all be challenged to look deeper than the mere technical possibilities available to them - - the “bells and whistles” aspect of technology. They must also appreciate the ramifications that the implementation of various technologies will have on the communities in which they are used: “appropriate educational technologies in rural areas would have to nurture virtues locally; that is, they would have to present “the good” as something accessible locally - - and worth struggling for - - (Howley & Howley, 1995, p. 9).
“Each new medium changes the pattern of our lives, taking the content of the previous medium and reprocessing it, producing ‘psychic and social consequences . . . as they amplify or accelerate existing processes” (McLuhan, 1964, as cited in Canadian Teachers Federation, p. 1) McLuhan's words serve as a warning: without careful reflection about the values underlying new educational technologies, rural communities run the risk of accelerating the very processes that are destroying them.
Current Status of Two School Divisions in Rural Saskatchewan:
Nature of Analysis
For this paper, two school divisions comprising schools in rural Saskatchewan were studied. In School Division one, Mr. J., the director of education, Ms. R., an elementary school teacher-librarian and Ms. G, a high school classroom teacher were interviewed; In School Division two Mr. H., a full-time educational technologist, Mr. W, a technologist/classroom teacher, and Mr. S.,an elementary school principal were interviewed.
The interviews focused on access to technology, corporate sponsorship, professional development, teacher uses of technology, student uses of technology and future challenges facing rural schools. In each case, the analysis of the data will focus on both technical/pedagogical and philosophical/critical considerations. This reflects the contention that it is not sufficient to look simply at the practices common in schools - - it is necessary to look at the underlying values reflected and their implications for rural life.
Access to Technology:
Current Status:
The Director of School Division I describes the situation in his division as “mixed bag in terms of the actual hardware, software and knowledge of the personnel that we have.” (J., 2000). He credits this inconsistency to decentralized budgeting which “tends to have people heading in their own direction, depending on the size of the school and the key people who are in the building.” He also cites the fact that the division was formed in 1998 through the amalgamation of two smaller divisions as a reason for disparity among schools in the various communities.
A teacher from this division, Ms. R., affirms these differences, noting that “None of the computer equipment in a given school, or in the division in general, ever seems to be all functioning at the same time. Example: the Internet is down, the network is down, a machine is down.” However, she does note that the high schools in the division have well-equipped computer labs, while her own elementary school is in the process of “networking 24 computers in a new lab.” She adds that only one computer in the school is connected to the internet, although all 24 others are Internet compatible and loaded with Windows 95, with the goal to have all of them on-line in the near future.
She suggests that “if all schools in the division were supplied with the same machines, maintenance and upgrading would be easier to accomplish, and money should be saved overall.”
In contrast, in School Division II, “every school has a computer lab and, generally, you’re looking at about 20-25 terminals in each one of those. According to Mr. S., principal of an elementary school, “every classroom has four terminals and that’s consistent from the elementary schools right through into the high schools” (S., 2000). He explains that the entire school division is on a pilot project through a computer/software manufacturing company and that the technology is “based on terminal and server computing, as opposed to PC’s. It’s very very current - - almost “cutting edge” in some respects.” (S., 2000). Another notable aspect is the equity between schools resulting from this agreement, which actually works to the benefit of a smaller schools: “The way it works out we actually have the highest pupil per terminal ratio in the school division and we’re the smallest school, which is kind of neat and it’s just the coincidence of having small classes and the standard of having four terminals per classroom” (S., 2000).
Philosophical/Critical Issues:
Equity is a key value in any discussion of access to technology for rural schools: this includes equity of educational opportunity, as compared to urban schools, as well as equity between schools in a particular division and between elementary and secondary schools within a division.
Already, rural schools that have consistent - - particularly high speed - - internet access
are able to obtain information that previously would not have been available in their limited libraries. However, schools cannot merely provide information access to their students without teaching the media literacy skills necessary for them to evaluate the credibility of the various sources now competing for their attention. As Mr. S., explained, mere access to information will not raise the intellect of our children:
It’s compelling and interesting which is good for kids because if you’re using technology, it often brings them into things that they might not have been brought into otherwise. I don’t think technology’s going to make smarter kids. I think some people out there do, though. It makes them more sophisticated, but . . . it’s not going to effect intellect - - a pencil’s as good as a mouse (S., 2000).
Similarly, Mr. J. asserted:
There’s a mad rush to have it all one way, but there’s always been lots of roads to knowledge - - all kinds of ways in which we get to knowledge and now with the internet, there’s somehow a mad rush that all of your knowledge has to come off of there and really there’s almost no knowledge comes off the internet. I mean it’s really in the way that you process [it] (J. ,2000).
Therefore, access to communications technology is only a beginning: intelligent and critical use of such hardware is where the potential for real education begins.
Corporate Sponsorship
Current Status:
According to the an interim report compiled by a task force on the role of the school in Saskatchewan, the costs of implementing technology into the province’s schools are not sufficiently accounted for in provincial education budgets. The authors blame the tight provincial economy in the 1990’s, stating that “ . . . a technology fund has been created (as a line item) in the grant formula, but at $2M for the entire province it is well below the actual costs being borne by school divisions” (Tymchak et. al, 2000).
Furthermore, the public, may be increasingly less willing to cover the high technology costs for schools (Brandt, 1997 p. 2). Mr. J. expressed a concern that other priorities, such as road repair may be more important to tax payers, who, as a group have fewer children attending the province’s K to 12 school system. As he explained it, “the access to the tax base - - all the things that we’ve sort of held as truisms of Saskatchewan and what makes us different - - sort of the collaboration of the major stake holders - - like that’s all going to be challenged, I think, pretty quickly” (J., 2000).
Thus, in a climate of high technology costs and uncertain public funding for education, schools feel the pressure to find alternate means of financing their technology programs. Some educational technologists content that “funding for a quality school technology program must come from multiple sources and be aggressively sought on a regular basis (Bolinger,1999, p.2).
Both school divisions studied have sought sponsorship outside traditional sources of funding: School Division I entered a partnership with the Youth News Network. Three schools out of the nine in the division opted for this partnership, in which YNN supplied hardware - - televisions, satellite dishes and computers - - and the schools agreed to view a 12.5 minute newscast, including commercials, on a daily basis. The other six schools, wary of the compulsion to show the newscasts to students, chose not to enter the agreement which, in Mr. J.’s words “scraped the nerves of the community and the country” (J., 2000).
However, since the original deal, only one of the three schools has received the equipment: a lab of fifteen computers along with twenty-two television sets which are connected to the library through Star Choice.“ (J., 2000) The other two schools have not received any equipment to date, although the Youth News Network has since revoked the compulsion for schools to show the newscasts outlined in the original agreement.
Another notable partnership was formed between the School Division II and a computer/software manufacturing company. The company has supplied the division with “technical support and reduced hardware costs (H., 2000). In return, the division has agreed to participate in an independent study of the pilot project, with the results to be communicated to potential clients in the future. They will also allow prospective clients to visit their schools to view their installations and ask questions about them (S.,2000). In the fall of 2000, all schools in the division began a pilot project using the “soft client” system where hardware - - terminals and servers - - was installed in every school in the division, creating the consistent platform referred to earlier in this paper. All software used in the schools is then accessible over the internet.
Philosophical/Critical Issues:
“Competition among groups and individuals to influence the kinds of information being disseminated to students causes conflict” (Nellen, 1999, p. 3). Essentially, corporate sponsorship raises concerns over autonomy and objectivity. Often corporate funding is tied to some kind of commitment or compulsion on the part of the school division benefited.
In the case of School Division II, Mr. S. asserts the the partnering computer/software company “hasn’t been given an influence in terms of curriculum or how we use the equipment. They were involved in helping us access this equipment, helping us set it up and helping us maintain it from a technical point of view but the rest is up to us and so I’m quite satisfied with that.” (S. 2000). Mr. S. went on to express his concern that he would not be comfortable if the partnership involved any compulsion for students to view commercial material.
A similar concern was raised by Mr. W., a teacher and part time technology consultant in School Division II, with regard to other alternate sources of technology funding. He suggested that thus far, in his school division, teacher involvement in programs like Grassroots ( for more information, see http://www.schoolnet.ca/grassroots/) have been voluntary and have benefited schools by allowing them to purchase equipment (e.g. digital cameras) that they would not otherwise be able to afford. However, he said that he would be wary if in the future, teachers would be mandated to participate in such projects in order to make up for budgeting shortfalls.
The concerns raised by both Mr. S. and Mr. W. reflect a concern that local values and autonomy - - key values for rural communities who are already struggling to maintain their identity in the face of overwhelming external influences- - may be at stake when a corporate sponsorship deal is initiated. Certainly, school divisions, especially rural divisions with limited funding, are vulnerable when entering into agreements with corporations, who may view sponsorships as opportunities to push their own corporate agendas, without regard for the students and their communities. “Educators have to define for stake holders what constitutes an educational partnership and what is a business deal” (Gladstone & Jacobsen, 1999, p. 8). MacKinnon poses key considerations for sponsorship situations:
Are the stake holders focused on the educational outcomes of their programs? Building a community of shared resources should serve to provide better education for all students. The best partnerships require good will, flexibility, and a spirit of compromise which will, most importantly, ensure the continuation of visionary programs” (MacKinnon, 1998, p. 10).
Therefore, when it comes to seeking alternatives to public funding, “the trick is the balance all of the diverse interests and the economics of education” (Nellen, 1999 p. 3). Otherwise, public education runs the risk of selling out to corporate interests and, as a result, “egalitarian motives and grassroots systems will lose power and appeal” (Howley and Barker, 1997).
Professional Development for Technology Integration:
Current Status:
Professional development for technology integration should move beyond mere training and address technical, pedagogical and philosophical/critical aspects. Unfortunately, in many cases, the technical and pedagogical aspects alone can be overwhelming for teachers, who still lack sufficient training to feel competent in using the computer (Love and McVey, 2000). Mr. W. of School Division II (who is employed on a part time basis to provide mentorship for both teachers and students in his division) describes the obstacles that he faces in encouraging teachers to explore ways to use computers in their teaching:
Really, when you look at teachers who are scrambling with overstuffed classrooms and new curricula it’s pretty hard to approach people and say ‘Listen, we’re going to reverse your productivity for awhile and spend more time doing a lot less, but in the end it’s going to pay off’ (Jaber, 1999, p. 9). But that’s the biggest challenge because you have to get over that initial hump. Once people make that investment, then they can truly begin to understand the commonalities between different forms of software and the connections between telecommunications and computers and you start to make sense of this big wall of stuff that’s coming at you. But there’s no way to just jump in and be a generalist and know a little bit of everything and survive. I don’t believe in that. I think you won’t know anything. Get one core competency and build from there. So that’s our big challenge. It’s a tough thing to ask of people. (W. 2000)
In order to tackle the problem of technology integration most effectively, the authors of an Alberta document suggest that workshops and individual tutoring are best for entry-level teachers. Then “as they begin to use technology in teaching and learning, professional development may take the form of inservice sessions, peer coaching, visiting other classrooms, conducting classroom action research, and networking with other teachers” (Professional Development for Alberta Teachers, 1998, p. 5). Furthermore, continuous computer training - - especially in a context where teachers are allowed to “collaboratively investigate ways to integrate technology into their instruction to support learning outcomes, reflect on their teaching and assess student learning” (Cooley and Johnston, 2000, p. 2) - - rather than intermittent, concentrated training sessions seem to be most effective (Jaber,1999, p. 9).
The two divisions studied use a variety of the approaches suggested in the Alberta document. However, technology training for all teachers is not necessarily consistent, nor is it mandatory in all cases. In School Division I, all professional development, including that for technology use and introduction, falls under the broader scope of the division wide Professional Development Committee, composed of employee groups who make decisions regarding inservice programming. In past years they have configured their inservices in two or three day modules. This time allotment allows for more in-depth experiences in a for a variety of topics including those relevant to educational technology. For example, two years ago, about twenty employees were completed a 40 hour course through Prairie West Community College, gaining skills in troubleshooting computer networks and stripping down computers (J., 2000). However, not all teachers in the school division would necessarily be required to attend a module relevant to educational technology in the course of a school year.
Recently, this division also obtained a grant from Industry Canada to hire a technologist for one hundred hours. This technologist traveled throughout the division, working with secretaries, librarians and Special Education teachers, as well as with small groups of teachers (at staff meetings and after school), where she helped them to use such software as Office 97 and Plato.
Ms. S., a teacher in this division, mentions that teachers from her school have attended professional development sessions and summer short courses in educational technology, according to their personal interests. Also, where applicable, teacher assistants from the school have received training in technology used to benefit special needs students. The staff at her school hope to have a chance for all staff members to learn how to use the internet to locate teaching materials” when their computers are all on-line. She adds “We have also talked about developing some WebQuests where the teacher and the teacher/librarian would collaborate on a unit of study” (R., 2001).
School Division II has a technology committee comprised of teachers who plan inservices on a division-wide basis. Also, in as part of an ongoing pilot project (which is a joint venture between the division and a computer/software manufacturing company), the division has allotted 1.5 positions for technology consultants. Specifically, the two teachers who fill these positions “support teachers in the implementation of technology.” (H., 2000) This year, every teacher in the division will have at least 2.5 days of inservice time in the area of technology and some teachers will have five days or more. Mr. H., who holds the full time position, explains that teachers are “encouraged to attend technology workshops and conferences.” (H., 2000) and that “optional after-school workshops are held throughout the year on an as-needed basis.” (H.,2000).
Thus, mentorship, which entails support that is “primarily pedagogical in nature, focusing on helping teachers to use telecomputing activities within the curriculum, as opposed to helping them to develop personal technical skills” (Nellen,1999, p. 12) seems to be at an early stage in School Division II. Mr. W, the other technologist in School Division II, elaborates some of his activities in the schools:
I will either take their students in and show them how to use various pieces of software, show them how to use various skills, etc. I may meet with teachers one-on-one and do consultations with them -- - just coaching them or helping them to plan computer instruction. Oftentimes, I just troubleshoot their problems - - things that they’ve come across in their own explorations (W., 2000)
Thus, it is evident that a wide variety of approaches to technology integration have been tried in both of these school divisions. Research findings suggest that “teachers who use technology in their classrooms are more effective if they have received training, if they have district-level support and if they have a network of other computer-using teachers to share experiences with” (Wellburn, 1996, p. 4). Therefore personalized approaches to technology training - - such as teacher mentoring - - would most benefit teachers in both divisions whose needs for both technical and pedagogical technology training are widely varied. Furthermore, if technology use is to permeate all classrooms, all teachers should receive inservice in this area on a regular basis.
Philosophical/Critical Aspects
The more the new technology transforms the classroom into its own image, the more a technical logic will replace critical political and ethical understanding. The discourse of the classroom will center on technique, and less on substance. Once again, the ‘how to’ will replace ‘why’ (Apple, M.W., 1991, as cited in Canadian Teachers Federation, p. 1).
In the area of professional development, the “why” of technology - -a discussion of the underlying values to be reinforced by the use of technology in the classroom is critical. Unfortunately, there was little evidence gathered from interviews which suggests that this type of reflection or education is being done in a formal manner in the two divisions studied.
Ideally, critical reflection about the use of technology in schools should not be confined to those in the formal education system. In order to be relevant to rural community life, such reflection would have to invite others - - parents, community groups, business people, and seniors, for example - - to dialogue about their visions for the future of their communities, the role of the school in determining such a future and the ways in which technology could be used to advance these visions (Nellen, 1999, Howley & Howley, 1995). After all, “the qualities of education that we are most about are not technological; they are matters of educational philosophy and practice and in turn depend on broader moral and political judgments” (Nellen, 1999, p. 10). Rural communities, with their “closer community relationships along with a less complicated bureaucracy” (Dewees, 1999, p. 1) should be the ideal locations for such reflection to occur.
Appropriate technologies would accomplish local purposes in ways that are responsive to local commitments and circumstances” (Howley & Howley, 1995, p. 9). Unfortunately, approaching technology use in the schools as a “values free,” use of various gadgets, oversimplifies the issues and overlooks the potential for community involvement. After all, “tools are not mere instruments. They are born from , developed for, and applied on behalf of the interests of power” (Howley & Howley, 1995, p. 4). Ideally, in rural areas, the vast communication potential of educational technology could empower communities to maintain their local commitments and values yet enable them to participate in a global dialogue.
Patterns of Teacher Technology Use:
Current Status:
A teacher will incorporate technology into his/her classroom in a way that reflects both his/her level of technical competence and his/her awareness of pedagogical possibilities of the technology. For example, two possible ways that a teacher may use a computer are: as “an interactive textbook in control of the user” or as “an expressive medium under the control of the user” (Solomon, 1986, as cited in McConnell Falk, 1988, p. 441).
Both of these trends were evident in classrooms of the two school divisions surveyed: Throughout School Division I, Mr. J. asserts that teacher’s use of technology varies from “nothing to a significant amount.” In addition to word processing and internet research, J. adds that some teachers are teaching their students to use presentation technology such as Power Point for their assignments. He also specifies two schools within the division that are using Computer Assisted Instruction programs: Success Maker (Grades 3-8) and Plato (Grade 6 - University Level) are used for behavioral as well as content-related objectives. Mr. J. explains:
And with things like the C.A.I. around Plato and Success Maker, it’s used as much as anything to be a bit of a calming effect - - I hate to use it that way - - particularly around students who can’t focus and lack attention and get into behavioral issues . . . it seems to be a way of sort of getting the day to flow better for them and then they can work with others, teachers and so on. So some are using it that way and those are small numbers (J., 2000).
Mr. J. also mentions that students in the School Division I regularly use calculators. He foresees that with the (future) purchase of hand-held probes, students will soon be able to extend the use of calculators in subjects such as chemistry and physics (J., 2000). He also points out that both the Home Economics and Industrial Arts classes employ technology, but, at this point the division does not use advanced technology such as robotics, even though some schools in the division offer some of the P.A.A. courses and have done some writing and piloting in this area.
Ms. R., a teacher in School Division one, suggested that once schools in School Division I purchase new computer equipment, “existing labs could be used for keyboarding, etc. and the new labs could be more subject-friendly, ex. Social Studies, etc. This would help with time-tabling issues” (R., 2001).
Thus, both Ms. R. and Mr. J. are interested in adapting technology use to the demands of particular disciplines “rather than placing roughly equal resources in each classroom” (Bartles, 2000 p. 3).
Finally, Ms. R. also asserted that the staff at her school are excellent educators who are “willing to take risks and try new things.” They regularly use computers to “word process, create teaching materials, find teaching materials (Internet), teach keyboarding, word processing, etc.” She has also used WebQuests in her teaching. However she suggests that teachers in her school are limited by the technology available to them. She gives the example of a grade four teacher who wanted to take her students on a virtual tour of the Tyrell Museum in Drumheller, Alberta as a culminating activity for a fossil unit. However, without either a “a projector for the computer room” or “access to the internet on all computers”, this was not feasible. Ms. G., a high school teacher in the same division, concurs with this limitation, stating, “teachers are often wanting to have kids do research, but this is extremely limited due to poor connectivity and conflicts in the class schedule” (G., 2001).
As for School Division II, “Some schools have definitely embraced technology more than others. It comes down to a human issue. Schools that have teachers and administrators that support and are interested in using technology definitely use it more than others. “ (H., 2000). Mr. H., elaborates some of the ways in which teachers use technology on a daily basis:
All teachers have an email account and many administrators send daily staff announcements through email. Teachers use technology as a resource, Evergreen Curriculum, lesson plans and ideas, listening to web-based radio stations, up-to-date news, online banking, and investing (H., 2000).
Mr. W. adds that he predominantly sees teachers using the computer for word-processing, for “drill and kill” methods (such as typing programs) and for basic web design. He also observes teachers using the internet for resource based learning. This is a particular boon for small schools, which generally have limited libraries (S., 2000, R., 2001, Tymchak et. al, 2000).
Mr. W. cites Saskatchewan Education’s Grassroots program as the impetus for web design projects throughout School Division II in various levels, right down to grade two, which is possible, with careful planning and instruction (Love and McVey, 2000, p. 2)
At the time of the interview, the rural communities in School Division II did not have a high speed internet connection. As a result, according to Mr. S., access to programs had been limited mainly to word-processing and graphics applications. However, he stated that once the high-speed connection became available (Projections were that it would be installed only weeks after the interview), he would be able to use programs such as Hyperstudio, which he had used in the past, (when he taught in School Division I). Using Hyperstudio, he had taught scripting and programming skills for students from grades seven to twelve. He expressed his satisfaction with this program:
So it’s so flexible and allows kids to go beyond what maybe the rest of the group is doing. If they have the motivation and the interest. And it’s compelling . . . I’ve done animations using hyperstudio and I haven’t got anything right now that I could use to replace that. And there are kids that took it to a pretty sophisticated level - - I’m very impressed with them (S., 2000).
Likewise, Mr. W. is looking forward to a time when he can see teachers in the division taking full advantage of opportunities afforded by computers:
. . . the prospects for publishing are just mind-boggling. I can’t wait to do this stuff. Everybody’s competency level has to come up quite a bit before you can look at what you could make with this technology . . . so the sky’s the limit and I think it’s just going to be a tremendous tool once we get it unwrapped (W., 2000).
Thus, overall, leading teachers in both divisions show the desire to move towards more student-centered, expressive uses of educational technology, which could hold great promise in future years:
Perhaps the real benefit of educational technology will be an institutional transformation to a more student-centered and learning-focused educational process, where the tools for inquiry-based teaching and learning are more practically available. At least the potential is there, and the pattern that we have observed is that most of those who wade eventually start to swim (Johnson, Schwab and Foa, 1999, p. 46).
However, currently, in both of these school divisions, as in many jurisdictions, the limiting factors still include teacher skill levels, scheduling problems and access to hardware/software (Howley, 1997).
Philosophical/critical Implications of Technology Use by Teachers
On a broader level, the ways in which teachers aspire to use educational technology can, consciously or otherwise, reflect their basic beliefs about the nature and future of rural communities. Student-centered, constructivist means of using the technology tend to reinforce the importance of the local, while still tapping into global resources and communication networks. Such approaches teach the students that their realities, their local situations, and their creativity are valid and worthy of expression - - that they have the capabilities to draw information from diverse global sources and then analyze and synthesize it in a way that makes sense in their own, local realities.
On the other hand, heavy use of computers as “interactive textbooks in control of the user,” (Solomon, 1986 as cited in McConnell Falk, 1988, p. 441) tends to reinforce the idea that the source of important knowledge is outside the community. (Howley & Howley, 1995). This not only runs counter to the principles of local empowerment, but since “many teachers and teacher educators rejected a vision of education that appeared to reduce teaching and learning to the transmission of content from the electronic repository to the minds of students,” it is out of step with current directions in educational thought (Cooley and Johnston, 2000, p. 2).
Technology Use by Students:
Current Status:
In part, student use of technology can be an indication of the emphasis and approach of their teachers to technology use:
. . . when teachers emphasize communication and information-oriented objectives for their students’ software use (i.e. publishing for an audience, communicating electronically, writing and finding information) they expand students’ academic effort from class time to free time, suggesting that a non-skill, non-tool application focus to using computers in class results in greater student engagement in their academic assignments. (Becker, 2000 p. 15)
Aside from the technology use required by their course work, students in both school divisions studied are using the internet as a communication tool through email (H.,S.,J., 2000). Students also have supervised access to the computers in free time, when they may be allowed to use the computers to play games (from bonus.com, for example) or they work on projects assigned in other subject areas (W.,S., 2000). In School Division I, Ms. G., a high school teacher, the describes access rights of students in her school:
Those involved in more technology based classes (like C.P.T.) are using technology to work with video (non-linear video editing), audio, and visual media. Their projects demonstrate creativity and their ability to research. Web pages are developed, multi-media projects are burned on CD, etc. The school attempts to have the lab accessible to students throughout the day and after school. (G., 2001)
She also mentions that students in clubs such as the Student Representative Council and the Yearbook Club are using a digital camera and applications such as Adobe Photoshop for newsletters and other student publishing. Students in one of the high schools in School Division I, also may work for the local cable television station, which is housed in the school building. However, Mr. J. believes that the predominance of satellite television has already undermined the viability of this local station. (J., 2000)
In School Division II, Mr. S. also mentioned that in his school, for about 20 minutes prior to school in the mornings, students use the computers to “surf” the internet, play games or to work on personal web page design. (S., 2000)
Mr. S. gave the example of a student who is in regular contact with friends from Calgary with whom contact by telephone would be too expensive. He also explained that through sharing of email addresses, this contact tended to be fairly far-reaching - - to encompass “friends of friends.” Evidently, the rural student is no longer bound by locality, but can, virtually, interact with others in networks of wider communities. The pervasive use of communication technology by students, both at home and at school is a defining feature of the lives of today’s students.
Philosophical/Critical Issues
Certainly, the very world views of young people who are exposed to the internet and the potential for rapid, easy global communication from such a young age will be greatly influenced by technology. They will probably take for granted capabilities that still amaze many adults.
However, the area of communication and expression is certainly value-laden. Teachers must do more than ensure that students merely have ability to use communication technology: The need to teach responsibility in communication as well as media awareness is paramount.
The very nature of online communication - - especially its potential for anonymity - - raises an interesting implication for the preservation of local commitments and values. As expressed previously, rural, agriculturally-based communities are rooted in the significance of the local - - in the embodied quality of cooperation and communication between those who have a stake in each others’ lives by their proximity and common concern for the land that supplies their livelihoods.
It will be interesting to see how on-line communication, disembodied in nature, will affect the perceptions of our youth in rural communities. Will they prefer virtual communication, with like-minded individuals to the grind of compromise so vital to life in a small rural community? How can rural communities challenge their youth to persist in the process of community building which has been a source of wisdom for their elders?
Summary: Current Status of Technology
Thus, the two school divisions profiled in this paper are currently struggling with issues - - both practical and theoretical - - regarding technology access, corporate sponsorship, professional development and the use of technology by students and teachers. In order to meet current and future challenges in ways that will preserve rural values, decision-makers in both of these divisions would be wise to consult their wider communities. Ideally, “rural sorts of schooling would summon the personal commitments that animate intellect, cultivating more, thoughtful dispositions among members of the community” (Howley & Howley, 1995, p. 6), and hence, would build a base of support that may help these communities face future challenges that could threaten their very survival.
Future Challenges: for Two Rural School Divisions in Saskatchewan
Diversity of Student Populations
In the future, rural school divisions will need to cope with an ever increasing diversity of their student populations.
“One such trend, for example, is diversity, which for me raises questions about diversification of schooling and what that means for our historic commitment to publicly supported common schools for all people. I do not have to be a soothsayer to predict even more diversity of all sorts. Certainly the racial and cultural mix is changing in both the United States and Canada. (Brandt, 1997, p. 3)
In addition to the racial and cultural diversity outlined by Brandt, there will continue to be a diversity of educational needs in the classroom, in part, due to “a policy of inclusion spearheaded by Saskatchewan Education, through both the curriculum and the pedagogy” (J., 2000). According to Mr. J., Director of Education for School Division I, accommodating a diversity of needs requires “a public that not is just tolerating in word but accepting of the fact that each classroom could have unbelievable range of children - - and all successful.” He goes on to state that such a policy also requires deep expenditures for professional development, as teachers constantly need to be trained to meet the needs, both on the classroom and the student levels (J., 2000). School divisions that fail to meet the diversity of needs risk losing their students as well as the confidence of their stake holders (J., 2000).
This is one area where technology, specifically Web-based instruction - - including telementoring opportunities - - which accommodate “multiple intelligences” through the provision of visual and content as well as text-based information (Nellen, Mathew & Doherty-Poirier, 2000 ), may be of benefit to small rural schools. As Mathew and Doherty-Poirier elaborate:
Typical classes consist of students with varying abilities and previous knowledge and WBI can help a teacher address these differences. WBI also allows students to work at at pace that is more comfortable - - some students work faster than their peers while others may wish to take longer. In addition, the use of WBI provides the opportunity for multiple grade levels to be accommodated in the same classroom at the same time. (Mathew & Doherty-Poirier, 2000, p. 1)
Furthermore, advancements in educational technology which are beneficial to special needs students (including students who require enrichment, as well as those with learning disabilities) could help to improve access for students - - “not just physical access, but communication access, and cognitive access” (J., 2000, G., 2001).
Thus, technology could be an instrument of support for rural teachers faced with wide-ranging needs (Peck and Dorricott, 1994 as cited in Wellburn, 1996, p. 5). This would enhance the survival of small schools and maintain the spirit of rural communities, where people “remain together despite their differences” (Howley & Howley, 1995, p. 6).
Declining Enrollments and Staff Recruitment Concerns:
Rural school divisions will continue to face the challenges posed by decreasing enrollments, which include funding reductions and staffing dilemmas (R., Johnson). For example, School Division I has lost close to 350 students over the last three years and that they expect to lose the same amount again over the next five years. This presents a huge challenge, and causes conflict within the division, as Mr. J. explains:
. . . of course every community wants to maintain both the number of schools they have, the configuration of schools and yet they don’t have the bodies to justify it. So what we’ve got is infrastructure for 3500 students and we’ll have 2000. Now if you don’t adjust for that, then you simply don’t have the money to be a full-service division. And part of being full service right now is the wide range of technology investment that you need - - a wide range - - not just computer labs; not just computers in classrooms.
With the shortage of students, comes a staff recruitment problem. Not only are teacher numbers dropping in rural schools, but “the range of experience, the quality of training and . . . the quality of delivery” of teachers willing to teach in rural areas have all diminished (J., 2000). This concern was echoed by a principal in School Division II, who saw staff recruitment primarily as a problem in the high schools. He maintained that the elementary schools be less affected, as the teachers tended to be trained as generalists. (S, 2000).
Amalgamation as a Possible Solution
One possible solution to the depopulation and recruitment problems would be amalgamation of small rural schools. However, for various reasons, amalgamation is not as attractive as it may appear. As a participant in the recent Saskatchewan Task force on the role of the school commented: “Education keeps rural communities together. It keeps them sustainable. If we lose this, what’s left?” (Tymchak et. al, 2000). Furthermore, in rural areas, school closure and amalgamation can result in increased travel time, which is of particular concern for younger students. The Saskatchewan Task Force deemed that “Student travel . . . has already reached upper limits in many rural areas.” (O’Brodovich, 1997, p. 9).
Another important argument against school amalgamation is the conviction that “smaller, more humanly scaled institutions may be the essential ingredient for living a decent life - - no matter what the setting” (Howley & Barker, 1997, p.2). Rural residents, alienated by rationalization in other areas such as health care are skeptical of the rhetoric about increased benefits of amalgamation. As Mr. J. summed it up, “They’re tired of losing and yet they’ve already lost and so they’re not going to give for the community of communities.”
Furthermore, since “there is no comprehensive information to prove that consolidation has met the problems for which it has been advocated - - those of finances, staff, facilities and curriculum” (Rincones, 1988 p. 1), school divisions are now looking to other means to address these issues. The Saskatchewan Task force asserted that “provincial education policies could be revised to allow greater structural flexibility at the local level to help schools respond to the specific needs of the community” (Tymchak, M., et. al, 2000, p. 47).
Distance Education Technologies
inter-school delivery.
Distance education technologies, when applied appropriately, may help to address both the issue of declining enrollments and that of recruitment (Rincones, 1988). With upcoming implementation of the “Connecting Canadians” initiative (for more information, see: http://connect.ic.gc.ca/en/ne/1530-e.htm) and the accompanying high speed connection needed to facilitate this program, the potential to harness the new communication technologies could lead to more movement of data between the schools, in the near future (J., 2000, R., 2001). Thus, students could efficiently access course materials electronically from other locations.
Already some school divisions in Saskatchewan have experimented with sharing teachers between schools by offering courses via satellite:
Several Saskatchewan school divisions are currently experimenting with inter-school distance delivery. A full-service high school might transmit courses to outlying schools or schools could exchange distance delivery to share the subject expertise of their respective teachers. Local distance delivery preserves a sense of community, retains the personal flavour of interactions and relationships, and enables timely and flexible responsiveness to local needs and initiatives. (O’Brodovich, 1997, p. 10)
One advantage of inter-school distance delivery is that it is sensitive to the contentions expressed by rural students in Saskatchewan: they preferred electronic delivery of distance education to print-based formats (Tymchak, et. al, 2000, p. 78); they valued either “interactive models and one-way distance models supported by on-site tutors (Tymchak, et. al 2000, p. 78); they appreciated contact with other learners to being isolated learners (Tymchak, et. al 2000, p. 78); and, finally, they believed that education is best mediated by teachers, rather than computers (Tymchak, et. al 2000, p. 40).
However, arrangements for interschool distance education have their drawbacks: Problems include scheduling conflicts and power balances between participating schools as well as appropriate teacher training (Batey and Cowell, 1986, as cited in Monk, 1989): Teachers trained as academic generalists, rather than subject specialists may be more valuable to rural high schools that rely heavily on distance delivery of courses. This arrangement would require a shift in current teacher training practice, as academic generalists would need to be trained “to understand how learning takes place in a variety of fields, to stay informed about the resource base, and to become an effective manager[s] of instruction . . .” (Monk, 1989, p.2).
flexible scheduling.
Funding cuts in other areas may be necessary to offset technology costs for distance delivery. Mr. J. proposed that students might be in school only half-time, where they would focus mainly on the practical and applied arts, which he contends would be better taught in congregated settings (J.,2000). On the other days, the students would remain in their homes, where they could access their school assignments and content on-line. Of course, this arrangement would depend on the computer capabilities of individual families, which would raise serious equity issues.
Virtual Schools
Other possible options for addressing the issue of school depopulation and recruitment might be sought outside the conventional school system. There is a contention that the quality of student-teacher interaction is actually optimized by when instruction is totally web-based. Some experts contend that teachers have more personal contact with on-line students than they do with those in conventional classrooms (Ekhaml, 1999 p. 1) or that web-based instruction, with it’s flexible access, actually accounts for a bonus “virtual teacher,” receptive to student demands and needs (Mathew & Doherty-Poirier, 2000 p. 1). Therefore, another option is for rural schools to become access centres for students who wish to enroll individually in courses offered over the internet. Certainly, this arrangement would allow students to access a wide range of courses and materials, while remaining in their own communities.
Such a model, which could offer courses to students in various settings - - at home, in learning centres or in small schools - - is currently functioning in British Columbia’s Open Learning Agency. A pilot project called “New Directions in Distance Learning” provides a high school graduation program that is mediated through “audio conferencing, video block feeds and television broadcasts, audiographic tutorial seminars, electronic mail, and computer conferencing” (Standing Committee on Educational Technology, 1995, as cited 1995 in Wellburn, p. 5). Students enrolled in these courses are able to interact with mentors and peers both synchronously and asynchronously (Wellburn,1996).
freedom from location?
While virtual schools could help to maintain education in rural areas, they may not be supportive of “rural education:”
Conventional schools are prisoners of their locality. In contrast, virtual schools have a global reach and are globally accountable. The students and teachers in virtual schools can live anywhere as long as they have access to a computer that is connected to the Internet and equipped with Web technologies. (Rutkowski, 1999, p. 1)
Thus, opting for virtual schooling, in its purest form, sacrifices embodied interpersonal contact for access. While this may benefit rural individuals, it certainly works against the values and commitments of rural communities described earlier.
a question of balance?
Community stakeholders must weigh access against other considerations and values:
. . . formal sorts of education entail another virtue - -stewardship for a community of learning. Such a community is rooted locally and only then extends outward; every child and every adult belongs to that community. A community of learning is central to all culture, for the good upbringing of children is a community endeavor. (Howley and Howley, 1995, p. 6)
Thus, to best ensure viability, communities will have to determine where they are willing to trade embodied education for its virtual counterpart. For example, in their book In Search of the Virtual Class: Education in an Information Society, John Tiffin and Lalita Rajasingham contend that, despite future possibilities for virtual education, there will continue to be a role for the conventional classroom, which remains “a broadband, multisensory, multimedia communication system,” (Tiffin & Rajasingham, 1995, p. 70) which would be difficult to replace:
The education that takes place in them will be more a manifestation of community needs than national needs. It will be a place where people learn social and interpersonal communication skills, to express themselves in song and dance, to take part in sports and team activities, to learn arts and crafts, cooking and woodwork, gardening and pottery and skills of doing that involve touch and taste and smell. The custodial function of the conventional classroom will still be there. Someone will have to look after the community’s children. It may be that the conventional classroom becomes a community classroom centre where young and old gather for learning in a more informal group-centered nurturing environment than in today’s school-based classrooms (Tiffin & Rajasingham, 1995, 177-178).
Ultimately, with virtual schools in an early stage of development, it is difficult to know how - - or whether - - rural communities will resolve this balance.
concerns over course development.
Merely connecting students to courses from various locations would not necessarily ensure that learning and course work offered is meets recognized educational standards. The Director of Education for School Division I expressed a concern about academic rigour in the development of virtual course offerings. He contended that provincial curricula are developed after extensive consultation, in order to reflect values determined on a provincial level:
Out-of-province sources offer ready-made courses that not necessarily congruent with the Saskatchewan emphasis on the quality o the learning experience. Core Curriculum promotes constructive interaction among learners and teachers in the context of warm, caring environments . . . Information and communication technologies should be used to facilitate collaborative relationships, not learner isolation. (O’Brodovich, 1997 p. 24.).
Therefore, a decentralized approach, using any combination of local, provincial, and remote courses would need “extensive coordination and monitoring at the provincial level to ensure that the provincial curriculum is fully covered, that there is sufficient capacity to meet demand, and that all options can be easily identified” (Tymchak et. al, 2000, p. 32).
Conversely, one might argue that virtual schools and global access make provincial or local standards obsolete. However, this still raises the question of accountability and rigour on some level, whether it be local, provincial, national or international.
equity and corporate influences.
A final concern with virtual schooling, centres around educational equity and corporate influences. An Electronic Education report explains that there at least eight American states that have developed virtual high schools and that “businesses have sprouted up to meet the needs of individuals and schools in states without a virtual learning environment” (SIMBA, 2000, p. 1). One such business is Class.com, which “generates its revenues primarily from student enrollment charges and fees collected for helping establish state-wide virtual high schools” (SIMBA, 2000, p. 2). Whenever there is corporate involvement in education, there is a possibility of conflict between “education as a branch of economic policy, driven by the profit motive, subject to open market competition” with “education as a mix of social and cultural policy, concerned with equal opportunity and the preservation of national cultural and local ways of life” (Tiffin & Rajasingham, 1995, p. 165).
The potential for great differentials between the “have’s” and “have-nots” separated by ability to access funds and equipment to plug into such a highly competitive educational environment is of concern (Sayers, 1995). As a teacher from School Division II illustrated, in terms of software purchasing:
If a big company . . . can come out and sell you their math program, and their science program and their reading program - - they’re going to be able to beat the price of any smaller company and this is the big lie that they tell you. They’ll say “You have the choice. You can buy our ‘drill and kill’ math program or you can buy one from that small company that’s got more Canadian content (That’s the one that you want.) But it’s a lie because that one is going to be so much more expensive to buy when you compare it to the one from the corporate mega-giant because they’ll bundle it with seven other things that you want and in the end, it won’t be any kind of a feasible choice. That’s the one fear. Are we going to get so homogenized (and really, as Canadians, you gotta go “There are no Canadians”)? So who are these programs going to be invented for? (W.,2000).
Rural schools must be on their guard, therefore, before they so readily embrace such a competitive system as an answer to their needs.
Summary: Future Challenges
The development of communications and distance education technologies and processes will certainly present a wide variety of options for rural people. The challenge for rural communities will be to preserve a sense of what is best about the local, while facilitating access to ever-expanding learning opportunities.
Conclusion
In the face of change and upheaval - - of depopulation and globalization - - rural communities will undoubtedly turn to technology, to help them to stay viable in the global environment. However, since “it is the framework itself that changes with technology and not just the picture within the frame” (McLuhan, 1964, as cited in Canadian Teachers Federation, p. 1), the process of technology implementation should be approached with careful reflection and deliberation on the part of all stakeholders. Ultimately, this is the only hope for:
“creating, nourishing, and sustaining the genuine leading communities so desperately needed if we are to confront the social, cultural, economic, and ecological challenges of the coming years - - that is, the sort of learning communities that have deep local roots in the community as well as an extensive global reach” (Sayers, 1995, p. 773).
Communication of information is instant and convenient; transferring knowledge requires time and patience; but the pursuit of wisdom demands nothing less than commitment, the sharing of lives and paths, embodied in community life.
References
Barrette, Catherine M (2000). Preparing teachers for IT: Process, timeline, and outcomes. Compute-Ed. Available WWW: http://computed.coe.wayne.edu/Vol5 /Barrette.html. Retrieved 06 December, 2000.
Bartles, Lisa (2000). Gathering statistics: Is technology doing what you want it to? How do you know? www.electronic school.com. Available WWW: http://www. electronic-school.com/2000/09/0900f5.html. Retrieved 06 December, 2000.
Becker, Henry Jay (2000) Findings from the teaching, learning and computing survey: Is Larry Cuban right?. Education Policy Analysis Archives. Available WWW: http://olam.ed.asau.edu/epaa/v8n51/. Retrieved 14 November, 2000.
Bolinger, Rex W (1999). Technology: Front and centre in school reform. High School Magazine, 7(3), 22-26.
Brandt, Ron (1997). Public education in the 21st century. International Electronic Journal for Leadership in Learning, 1(1). Available WWW: http://ucalgary.ca/~iejll. Retrieved 06 December, 2000.
Calgary Regional Consortium, Central Alberta Regional PD Consortium, East Central Regional Consortium, Edmonton Regional Consortium, Northwest Regional Learning Consortium, South Alberta PD Consortium (1998).Teaching and learning with technology: Professional development for Alberta teachers.
Canadian Teachers Federation. The impact of technology on teaching and learning: Social, cultural and political perspectives. Available WWW: http://www.ctf-fce.ca/e/what/restech/introc.html. Retrieved 28 December 2000.
Cooley, Nancy & Johnston, Michelle (2000). Beyond teacher bashing: Practical, philosophical, and pedagogical influences on educator’s use of educational technologies. Commentary. Available WWW http://horizon.unc.edu/TS/commentary/ 2000-07.asp]. Retrieved 14 November 2000.
Cooley, Nancy & Johnston, Michelle (2000). Why can’t we just get on with it? forces that complicate the integration of technology into teaching and learning. Commentary. Available WWW: http://horizon.unc.edu/TS/commentary/2000-09b.asp. Retrieved 14 November 2000.
Dewees, Sarah (1999). Improving rural school facilities for teaching and learning. Eric Digest (ERIC Document Reproduction service No. ED 438 153). Available WWW: http://www.ed.gov/data bases/ERIC_Digests/ed438153.html. Retrieved 06 December, 2000.
Ekhaml, Leticia (1999). Tips for promoting collaboration and interactivity in online distance learning. Compute-Ed. Available WWW: http://computed.coe.wayne.edu /Vol5/Ekhaml.html. Retrieved 06 December, 2000.
Gladstone, Brenda & Jacobsen, D. Michele (1999). Educational partnerships i rocky view school division, part 1. International Electronic Journal for Leadership in Learning, 3(1). Available WWW: http://www.ucalgary.ca/~iejll. Retrieved 06 December 2000.
Gurstein, Michael (1998). Flexible networking, information and communications technology and local economic development. First Monday. Available WWW: http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue4_2/gurstein/index.html. Retrieved 26 November, 2000.
Howley, Craig B. & Howley, Aimee (1995). The power of babble: Technology and rural education. Phi Delta Kappan, 77(2), 126-132.
Howley, Craig B (1997). Studying the rural in education: Nation-building, “globalization,’ and school improvement. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 5(12). Available WWW:http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v5n12.html. Retrieved 06 December, 2000.
Howley, Craig & Barker, Bruce (1997). The national information Infrastructure: Keeping rural values and purposes in mind. Eric Digest. (ERIC Document Reproduction service No. ED 416 042). Available WWW: http://www.ed.gov/data bases/ERIC_Digests/ed416042.html. Retrieved 06 December, 2000.
Jaber, William E & Moore, David M (1999). A survey of factors which influence teacher’s use of computer-based technology. International Journal of Instructional Media , 26(3), 253-266.
Johnson, Michael J., Schwab, Richard L. & Foa, Lin. (1999). Technology as a change agent for the teaching process. Journal of Theory into Practice. Available WWW: http: Retrieved 26 November, 2000.
Love, Robin & McVey, Mary (2000). Teacher’s use of the internet. Teachers College Record. Available WWW: http://www.tcrecord.org/PrintContent.asp?Content ID=10538. Retrieved 06 December, 2000.
MacKinnon, Gregg (1998). Program survival can depend on partnerships: Technology education in Nova Scotia. International electronic journal for leadership in education, 2(14). Available WWW: http://www.ucalgary.ca/~iejll. Retrieved 06 December, 2000.
McConnell Falk, Judith (1988). [Review of book Computer environments for children: A reflection on theories of learning and education]. Teachers College Record, 89 (3), 441-443.
Mathew, Norman & Doherty-Poirier, Maryanne (2000). Using the world wide web to enhance classroom instruction. First Monday, 5(3). Available WWW: http://firstmonday .dk/issues/issue5_3/mathew/index.html. Retrieved 06 December, 2000.
Monk, David H. (1989). Using technology to improve the curriculum of small rural schools. Eric Digest (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 308 056). Available WWW: http://www.ed.gov/data bases/ERIC_Digests/ed308056.html. Retrieved 06 December, 2000.
McMurdy, Deirdre (2001). The unfashionable folks. Maclean’s, 114(8), 42.
Nellen, Ted (1999). Education and community: The collective wisdom of teachers, parents and community members. First Monday, 4(2). Available WWW: http://www. firstmonday.dk/issues/issue4_2/nellen/index.html. Retrieved 06 December, 2000.
O’Brodovich, Kate (1997). Diversifying opportunities for learning program delivery in Saskatchewan. Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada: Saskatchewan School Trustees Association.
O’Brodovich, Kate (1997). Strengthening strategies for small schools. Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada: Saskatchewan School Trustees Association.
Rincones, Rodolfo (1988). Exploring alternatives to consolidation. Eric Digest (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 296 817). Available WWW: http://www. ed.gov/data bases/ERIC_Digests/ed296817html. Retrieved 06 December, 2000.
Rutkowski, Kathleen M (1999). Virtual schools: charting new frontiers. Multimedia Schools, 6(1), 74-79.
Sayers, Dennis (1995). Educational equity issue in an information age. Teachers College Record, 96(4), 767-774/
SIMBA Information Incorporated (2000). Virtual schools provide supplementary courses and full scale diplomas to states, individual students. Electronic Education Report, 7 (8).
Symes, Benjamin (1995). Marshall McLuhan’s ‘global village.” Available WWW: http://www.aber.ac.uk/education/Undgrad/ED10510/benmcl.html. Retrieved 03 January, 2001.
Tiffin, John and Rajasingham, Lalita. (1995). In search of the virtual class: Education in a virtual society. New York, New York: Routledge.
Wellburn, Elizabeth (1996). The status of technology in the education system: A literature review. Community Learning Network. Available WWW: http://www.cln.org/ lists/nuggets/EdTech_report.html. Retrieved 14 November, 2000.
Tymchak, M., et. al (2000). Task force and public dialogue on the role of the school: Interim report to the minister of education, government of Saskatchewan. Zuga, Karen F. (1999). Addressing women’s ways of knowing to improve the technology education environment for all students. Journal of Technology Education, 10(2), 57-71.