•  
  •  
 

Abstract

Most educators, parents, and students seem to agree that computers and information technology should play an increasingly important role in education. As schools continue to add hardware and software, there has been concern about equity. One fear has been that students in rural schools may be at a disadvantage compared to students in urban or suburban school districts. A major problem in interpreting the small, existing body of research comparing the use of information technology in urban and rural schools is the variety of ways that the term rural is defined by researchers. This study developed two matrices (Appendix A and B) and used them to categorize rural districts as either frontier (extremely isolated) or other rural and compared computing resources. The study determined that frontier schools have a higher quantity and quality of information technology resources per student and per classroom while rural schools tend to have faster and higher quality Internet connections.

Creative Commons License


This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

References

1. Smaldino, S. E., J.D. Russell, R. Heinich, and M. Molenda (2005), Instructional technology and media for learning (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.

2. Parsad, B. and J. Jones (2005), Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools and Classrooms: 1994-2003 (NCES 2005-015), U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

3. Cuban, L. (2001), Oversold and underused, Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.

4. Roblyer, M. D. (2004), Integrating educational technology into teaching (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.

5. Hawkes, M., Halverson, P., and B. Brockmueller (2002), "Technology facilitation in the rural school: An analysis of option," Journal of Research in Rural Education, 17(3): 162-170.

6. Ivers, K. (2002), Changing teachers' perceptions and use of technology in the classroom, Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (New Orleans, LA, April 1-5) (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED467095).

7. Norton, P., and D. Sprague (2001), Technology for teaching, Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

8. School Technology and Readiness Report. Professional Development: A Link to Better Learning. The CEO Forum on Education and Technology, Year Two (1999). Washington, DC: CEO Forum.

9. Fishman, B., S. Best, J. Foster, and R. Marx (2000), Fostering teacher learning in systemic reform: A design proposal for developing professional development, Michigan: National Association for Research in Science Teaching.

10. Yaghi, H. (1997), "The role of the computer in the school as perceived by computer using teachers and school administrators," Journal of Educational Computing Research 15(1): 137-155.

11. Yildirim, S. (2000, "Effects of an educational computing course on preservice and inservice teachers: A discussion and analysis of attitudes and use," Journal of Research on Computing in Education 32(4): 479-495.

12. Yildirim, S., and E. Kiraz (1999), "Obstacles to integrating online communication tools into preservice teacher education: A case study," Journal of Computing in Teacher Education 15(3): 23-28.

13. Parsad, B. and J. Jones (2005), Internet Access in U.S. Public Schools and Classrooms: 1994-2003 (NCES 2005-015), U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

14. Cattagni, A., and Farris E. Westat (2001), Internet access in U.S. public schools and classrooms, 1994-2000, Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

15. Cooper, M. (2002), Does the digital divide still exist? Washington DC: Consumer Federation of America.

16. Lauman, D. J. (2000), "Student home computer use: A review of the literature," Journal of Research on Computing in Education 33(2): 196-203.

17. Falling through the net: Toward digital inclusion (2000). Washington, DC: United States Department of Commerce, Economic and Statistics Administration, & National Telecommunications and Information Administration.

18. Katsinas, S. G., and P. Moeck (2002), "The digital divide and rural community colleges: Problems and prospects," Community College Journal of Research and Practice 26(3): 207-224.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/106689202317245419

19. Silvis, H. (2000), "Forget isolation, we're online now: Technology and good teaching practices combine to connect rural students with the wider world," Northwest Education 6(2): 43-44.

20. Staihr, B., and K. Sheaff (2001), The success of the "E-Rate" in rural America. The main street economist: Commentary on the rural economy, Kansas City, MO: Center for the Study of Rural America, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City.

21. Vidoni, K. (2002), Central Nevada Educational Technology Consortium needs assessment report. Reno, NV: Central Nevada Educational Technology Consortium.

22. Schwartzbeck, T. (2003), Declining Counties, Declining School Enrollments. Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators.

23. Bolinger, R. (1999), "Technology: Front and center in school reform," High School Magazine 7(3): 22-26.

24. Katsinas, S. G., and P. Moeck (2002), "The digital divide and rural community colleges: Problems and prospects," Community College Journal of Research and Practice 26(3): 207-224.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/106689202317245419

25. Schwartzbeck, T. (2003), Declining Counties, Declining School Enrollments. Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators.

26. Silvis, H. (2000), "Forget isolation, we're online now: Technology and good teaching practices combine to connect rural students with the wider world," Northwest Education 6(2): 43-44.

27. Staihr, B., and K. Sheaff (2001), The success of the "E-Rate" in rural America. The main street economist: Commentary on the rural economy, Kansas City, MO: Center for the Study of Rural America, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City.

28. VanSciver, J. H. (1994), "Using a strategic plan to promote technology in less wealthy rural school districts," T.H.E. Journal 22(2): 72-73.

29. Solomon, G., N.J. Allen, and P. Resta (2003), Toward digital equity: Bridging the divide in education. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

30. Hawkes, M., Halverson, P., and B. Brockmueller (2002), "Technology facilitation in the rural school: An analysis of option," Journal of Research in Rural Education, 17(3): 162-170.

31. Cattagni, A., and Farris E. Westat (2001), Internet access in U.S. public schools and classrooms, 1994-2000, Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

32. Smerdon, B., S. Cronen, L. Lanahan, J. Anderson, N. Iannotti, and J. Angeles (2000), Teachers' tools for the 21st century: A report on teachers' use of technology. statistical analysis report. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

33. Lauman, D. J. (2000), "Student home computer use: A review of the literature," Journal of Research on Computing in Education 33(2): 196-203.

34. Beale, C. (2002), "Measuring rurality: Rural-urban continuum codes," Retrieved April 15, 2003, from http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/rurality/RuralUrbCon/ (September 19).

35. Miller, A. (2003), What's rural? Retrieved April 15, 2003, from http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/ruraled/Definitions.asp [page no longer available].

36. Yax, L. (2002), About metropolitan areas. Washington, DC: United States Bureau of the Census. Retrieved April 15, 2003, from http://www.census.gov/population/www/estimates/aboutmetro.html, modified: About Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas, June 7, 2005.

37. Beale, C. (2002), "Measuring rurality: Rural-urban continuum codes," Retrieved April 15, 2003, from http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/rurality/RuralUrbCon/ (September 19).

38. Miller, A. (2003), What's rural? Retrieved April 15, 2003, from http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/ruraled/Definitions.asp [page no longer available].

39. Yax, L. (2002), About metropolitan areas. Washington, DC: United States Bureau of the Census. Retrieved April 15, 2003, from http://www.census.gov/population/www/estimates/aboutmetro.html, modified: About Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas, June 7, 2005.

40. Frontier Education Center (2002a), Frontier: A New Definition. The Final Report of the Consensus Development Project, "Consensus - an opinion held by all or most," Retrieved March 2, 2003, from http://www.frontierus.org/documents/consensus_paper.htm.

41. Sherwood, T. (2001), Where has all the "rural" gone? Rural education research and current federal reform. Washinton, DC: Rural School and Community Trust.

42. Frontier Education Center (2002b), Geography of frontier America: The view at the turn of the century, Retrieved November 8, 2002, from http://www.frontierus.org/geography.htm.

43. Frontier Education Center (2002c), List of counties, Retrieved April 12, 2003, from http://www.frontierus.org/2000census.htm.

44. Beale, C. (2002), "Measuring rurality: Rural-urban continuum codes," Retrieved April 15, 2003, from http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/rurality/RuralUrbCon/ (September 19).

45. Miller, A. (2003), What's rural? Retrieved April 15, 2003, from http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/ruraled/Definitions.asp [page no longer available].

46. Frontier Education Center (2002b), Geography of frontier America: The view at the turn of the century, Retrieved November 8, 2002, from http://www.frontierus.org/geography.htm.

47. Frontier Education Center (2002b), Geography of frontier America: The view at the turn of the century, Retrieved November 8, 2002, from http://www.frontierus.org/geography.htm.

48. Census of population and housing. Summary population and housing characteristics (2000). Washington, DC: United States Bureau of the Census.

49. Rand McNally and Company (2003), Rand McNally 2003 commercial atlas & marketing guide (134 ed.). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.

50. MapQuest (2003), MapQuest Web Site, Retrieved August 1, 2003, from http://www.mapquest.com/

51. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (2003), JCAHO Web Site, Retrieved August 1, 2003, from http://www.jcaho.org.

52. Smerdon, B., S. Cronen, L. Lanahan, J. Anderson, N. Iannotti, and J. Angeles (2000), Teachers' tools for the 21st century: A report on teachers' use of technology. statistical analysis report. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

53. Smerdon, B., S. Cronen, L. Lanahan, J. Anderson, N. Iannotti, and J. Angeles (2000), Teachers' tools for the 21st century: A report on teachers' use of technology. statistical analysis report. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

54. Cattagni, A., and Farris E. Westat (2001), Internet access in U.S. public schools and classrooms, 1994-2000, Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

55. A nation on-line: How Americans are expanding their use of the Internet (2002). Washington, DC: United States Department of Commerce.

56. Solomon, G., N.J. Allen, and P. Resta (2003), Toward digital equity: Bridging the divide in education. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

57. Solomon, G., N.J. Allen, and P. Resta (2003), Toward digital equity: Bridging the divide in education. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Additional Sources:

Dugdale, S., E. DeKoven and M. Ju (1998), "Computer course enrollment, home computer access, and gender: Relationships to high school students' success with computer spreadsheet use for problem solving in pre-algebra," Journal of Educational Computing Research 18(1): 49-62.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/6UAK-J8H1-5D49-JPAC

Nevada Department of Education (2003), Nevada Online Technology Information Survey. Retrieved January 5, 2003, from http://notis.nde.state.nv.us/main/default.asp [site and page no longer available].

Share

COinS