Andrea Jackson

EDTC 6460

October 26, 2018

Student Academic Performance in a Technologically Deficient Educational Setting in Low-

Income Communities

Educators are charged with the task of ensuring student academic performance is stellar

at all times. It is the duty of the teacher to everything in his or her power to make sure that by the

time the student finishes school and continues into a postsecondary path, that those students are

equipped with the tools to be successful. But, what does one do when the schools lack the

resources and administration refuses to allow students to use the devices they do have (cell

phones and tablets) during the school day to make up for the deficiency? The unfortunate reality

remains that some students do not have the access to computers at home due to the digital divide,

and administration continues to pushback on the idea that in some cases, when used properly,

electronics during the school day can be helpful? It is at this point in which we must explore the

further ramifications this poses to the students and their success. Deming presents an idea of

transformative leadership in which organizations can improve over time by making a few minor

changes. Through the 14 points for management, student success has the potential to improve in

low-income, technologically deficient schools if a new philosophy were adopted.

Deming approaches adopting a new philosophy through the lens of tackling the challenge

or uncomfortable situation head-on (1982). In his view, management can only be effective if

there is recognition that things may not be the way they’d like for them to be and to shift their

mind frame instead so the organization as a whole does not suffer. In my previous learning

environment, the idea was one which approached technology as a bad thing. The school already
had a shared computer cart between the upper school (grades 7-12) and the lower school (VPK-

6) which were located on campuses across town. Of that shared computer cart, with the limited

internet connectivity, it was safe to say that maybe 10 computers worked at a time. The school

was apprehensive about providing the Wi-Fi passcode for the laptops to function, even in

Research courses where computers were essential. If administration walked in the room and saw

students doing school work on their phones, the phones were confiscated without regard to what

the teacher said. In this scenario, technology is viewed as bad. The fear from administration was

that students would be off-task and engage in bullying. The philosophy that needed to be put into

action was one that emphasized the positive effects of incorporating technology in the classroom

which promotes more focus on student success.

Under this administration, teachers were often plagued with finding enough hours in the

day to meet the demands of the job. The strain of arriving early at 6 am and every teacher being

required to stay after school to work the after-school program until 6 pm is also one that was

taxing. There was limited time to create quality lessons that did not need a technology piece,

even if it was something that was as simply as typing an essay. As the school did not provide

teachers with laptops to use for instruction, it became an out-of-pocket expense to either

purchase one, or run the risk of damage happening to the personal laptop brought from home.

The imbalance of monkeys even trickled into the after-hours with texts from administration

being sent as late as 11pm and over the weekend. As Blanchard explains, monkeys result in a

decline in morale and and output (1989). This is precisely what was seen in the school. During a

school year that began with such great amounts of positive outlook for the year, it quickly

changed with mismanagement.

 Unfortunately, another commonality in these households is more often than not in low-

income areas, many students do not have access to computers at home either, especially when

compared to their middle-class and upper-class counterparts. This is a double-strike when the

schools are already lacking resources to appropriately teach the content. According to Celano

and Neuman, “This unequal access has serious implications for the growing chasm between low-

and middle-income students” (2010). Not only are youth without access to technology at home,

depending on the school, there may still be limited access. This puts these children at a

disadvantage because their technological skills are lacking, and “…these challenges could affect

school readiness and achievement” (Celano & Neuman, 2010). If a student begins at a

disadvantage and remains there, he or she generally falls further and further behind.

Covey urges individuals to control the things they can control. By adopting a new

philosophy that Deming believes in a way to better leadership, we begin to lay the blueprint for

productivity that Covey speaks of (1990). When administrators are able to visualize the needs of

the school, the transformation and philosophy becomes more realistic. It also comes with a sense

of awareness regarding the way students’ learning is not able to flourish with such rigid

restrictions and lack of funding. One way that a school in Chicago circumvented the digital

divide was to bring the technology to the students. As education continues to strive toward a

blended-learning approach, the need for technology, and consistent access to it, is ever-

demanding. Educators recognize that learning must continue at home, but if there is no access to

the basic tools required to drive the learning once the student is at home, it is an injustice to the

student and the education system has failed. VOISE Academy distributed iPads to students to

continue their blended learning. While VOISE Academy’s principal had concerns regarding the
safety of the devices and the lack of internet access at home, it was concluded that the focus

needed to be on making sure blended learning could take place at all times (Fairbanks, 2014).

It should be noted that technological deficiency cannot only be limited to possession of

devices. If one is not competent with technology, whether it be a student or a teacher, there is no

room for growth on either end of the spectrum. The teacher will not feel confident in his or her

teaching abilities to incorporate a blended learning model. A student will struggle if they have

not quite grasped the skills required to use the technology. In poorer neighborhoods where

district funding may not be as evenly distributed as it would be in more well-to-do areas, the

disadvantages continue to pile on.

Even in schools where technology is abundant, as previously mentioned, it does not mean

that all teachers have the required skills to implement said technology efficiently, further

contributing to the lack of technology in classrooms. To combat teacher inefficiency in

technology, Chesterfield County School District instituted the Student Technology and

Education Proficiency Initiative (STEP). Under this initiative funded by No Child Left Behind

Act, classrooms not only use the technology to enhance learning, but also technology coaches

who train the teachers to become comfortable with new ideas (Fox, 2009). More schools can take

this approach, or one similar, across the board to provide high-quality education to students.

After all, it is not only up to the students to learn.

There is often a battle between teachers and administrators over the proper use of

technology and whether or not it should be allowed in schools throughout the day. Stuht and

Colcord note, “Many high schools ban cell phones and iPod use on campus and employ intricate

firewalls that block access to useful sites…Teachers and administrators are working at cross

purposes by developing rules and policies against technology use” (2011). The constant tug-o-
war drives a wedge between the passion for education and the ability to do so effectively. We

look to Blanchard for Rule 4 of monkey management, “the dialogue between boss and staff

member shall not end until the monkey has a checkup appointment” (1989). Check-ins allow the

boss, or in this case administration, to hear out the challenges that teachers may be facing. This is

also an opportunity to provide praise for hard work that is noticed. Leveraging the daunting tasks

with positive feedback and renewed philosophy lays the foundation for a school who may be

facing technology deficiency but wants their students to succeed. When teachers feel heard and

valued, the output is increased thus creating a win-win for all parties involved (Covey, 1990).

It is no secret that technology is expensive, as many schools do not have enough funding

to provide every single student with computer access, but an option has been presented to ensure

students’ learning and achievement continues to improve. It has been suggested that K-12

districts relocate older computers to lower grades who may not rely so heavily on high-powered

functions as students in higher grades (Stuht & Colcord). In the end, the value of student

achievement is worth the additional funding.

Further researching the impacts of technology deficiency in low-income schools and

neighborhoods will further perpetuate the need for a reform. This process may not be an

overnight one, and there certainly is no one exact answer for how to approach the issue that

plagues many of our school systems across America, it is worth exploring. It is only through

synergy, that is – approaching the challenge with two heads rather than one, that a positive

outcome can be achieved. Staff meetings should become collaborative. Covey reminds us that

synergy isn’t about a compromise, but instead discovering new approaches to new (or old)

problems. Adopting a new philosophy is part of that foundation for student success and teacher

morale. As one who takes pride in being able to make sure that all students are met and receive
what they need, this is a fundamental criterion. Teachers who may be uncomfortable with

learning a new skill should understand the further implications on student success.

Administrators who battle teachers on technology policies rather than allowing a sense of

autonomy will most likely witness a change in educator morale within their schools.

Evidence continues to point to the need for technology in classrooms, especially in low-

income neighborhoods. Not only does it level the playing field and provide those students with

equal access and opportunities to succeed, but it makes them contenders in society after

graduation. These students deserve the right to a fair education to go into becoming a skilled

employee. If the divide is not bridged, students will continue to struggle and fall behind. That is

not an outcome that any educator desires.

 References

Blanchard, K., Oncken, W., & Burrows, H. (1989). The one minute manager meets the monkey.
New York, NY: Quill/W. Morrow.

Celano, D., & Neuman, S. B. (2010, November). Roadblocks on the information

highway. Educational Leadership, 50-53. Retrieved from
https://content.ebscohost.com/ContentServer.asp?T=P&P=AN&K=55114510&S=R&D
a9h&EbscoContent=dGJyMNXb4kSeqLI4zdnyOLCmr1Cep7ZSsqy4SbeWxWXS&Co
entCustomer=dGJyMPGut1G1qLdKuePfgeyx44Dt6fIA

Covey, S. R. (1990). The 7 habits of highly effective people. Provo, UT: Franklin Covey.

Deming, W. E. (1982). Out of the crisis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Fairbanks, A. M. (2014, January 29). Inequities hurt blended models. Education Week, pp. S4
S10. Retrieved from https://content.ebscohost.com/ContentServer.asp?
T=P&P=AN&K=94189477&S=R&D
a9h&EbscoContent=dGJyMNXb4kSeqLI4zdnyOLCmr1Cep7ZSsq24TK
WxWXS&ContentCustomer=dGJyMPGut1G1qLdKuePfgeyx44Dt6fIA

Fox, C. (2009). More than machines. The Journal,36(6), 23-26. Retrieved October 24, 2018,
from https://library3.webster.edu/login?url=https://search- from htt
com.library3.webster.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=41994206&site=ehost
live.

Stuht, A. C., & Colcord, C. (2011). Tech, teachers, and teens: Bridging the
divide. Leadership,40(4), 26-30. Retrieved from
https://content.ebscohost.com/ContentServer.asp?T=P&P=AN&K=60167696&S=R&D\
a9h&EbscoContent=dGJyMNXb4kSeqLI4zdnyOLCmr1Cep7ZSs6a4SrGWxWXS&Co
entCustomer=dGJyMPGut1G1qLdKuePfgeyx44Dt6fIA