Technology in Schools: What the Research Says by Cisco and Metiri Group

I just realized, looking again at this amazing resource, that the first grant I will apply for will be a summer professional development mini-grant from my school in order to organize and prepare to implement the huge amount of data, instructions, strategies, and research I've encountered over the summer at ALA and this semester.

To the report:

1.  In discussing IWBs, the authors write, "students will continue to play a passive role if teachers do not engage them in active higher order thinking processes through student-centered uses of these devices."  Surely, this is a summary of any kind of classroom technology use and at the same time a stunningly difficult teaching style to change.  We've got to keep working on this, assisting teachers with specific strategies for this higher order thinking through student-centered teaching.
2. Summaries of Research Studies regarding clickers and physics students is particularly inspiring.  Our kids are taking high school level physics in 8th grade.  I personally believe this is simply too soon for many of their developing brains.  However, it is happening, and I'm thrilled to see these results again to remind me to try a collaborative project with the physics teacher in particular, incorporating clickers.  Great to have this as a segue into working with students in a science setting!
3. The entire gaming conversation is interesting.  It would be a hard sell in some ways, but not so much in certain contexts at my school.  I think a way to introduce the possibility of gaming-as-learning is through the Global Village geography game, especially since the authors cite excellent learning improvement results with this game in particular.
4. Reminding me of the cereal box claiming that its contents are part of a balanced breakfast, I think the authors are so wise to caution us regarding a rigorous 1:1 laptop program, "successful laptop programs must be part of balanced, comprehensive initiatives that focus on
   education goals, curricula, teacher professional development, and student assessment practices."  A math teacher at my school is currently pursuing this goal, but I'm not convinced it will be the magic bullet he indicates.  First, coming primarily from middle to upper middle class families, 99% of our students have computer access at home, and all of them have access to laptops in carts throughout the school.  Second, I haven't seen any initiatives that will ensure faculty and students alike will learn more or learn more efficiently if 1:1 were implemented.
5. I've been looking into computer assisted instruction with one of our algebra teachers, primarily to find technology-based teaching aids that will help him mix it up a bit in his class of slow math learners.  And isn't evidence interesting?  Nothing like the scientific method, I say!  There's I CAN Learn Pre-Algebra and Algebra, a commercial product, with a "Positive Effects" evidence rating and at least a positive 5 improvement index. Down below is the University of Chicago's Math program showing "No discernable effects" and a negative 6 improvement index!  Not what the ivory tower would have us believe.  This whole picture reinforces my growing understanding of the necessity to prove that what we do works to the benefit of the learner.