"Access to technologies has not led to shifts in teaching practices or increases in students' academic achievement"

In the US, these investments have been made for various reasons: to change teaching practices, to improve student achievement, or to prepare them for the labour market in a society that is increasingly based on knowledge and technology. With regard to this, according to the data that I have studied, the first two have failed to materialise and in terms of the whether these investments have helped students, or not, in finding work more easily once graduating... remains to be seen. I have not seen conclusive proof to justify this level of investment. They are the gatekeepers. They are the ones who decide to what degree students use these computers, even if each student has a laptop in class. Thus, what I try to determine is why teachers do not use computers more in the lessons, why their teaching practices have not changed. Studies have shown that, in the US, teachers use computers at home much more than they do in the classroom. They don't resist using them. The question is why they don't use them more in their lessons. And my explanation, which is merely my personal opinion, is that one of the reasons is because many of the things that teachers have to do can't be taught or done using software. If you are teaching small children to wait in line and not push in, there is no software that can teach that. But a teacher can teach this. If you are teaching students about a legal concept, there is no software that can do this. They know the possibilities offered by the classroom. I calculate that around 40% of US teachers use computers in their classes each day. But 60% don't. The 40% that do, do so principally by applying the usual, conventional or traditional teaching methods. I am not criticising. I am just stating that this is what they do. There are other teachers who use them to teach in a non-traditional, and highly imaginative and creative way. And why would we want to? In the past, 20% used them, then 30% and now 40%, and this percentage will continue to grow. Why should the government change this? Do you want 100% of teachers to being using computers every day? Why? Will students get better results? Will more of them get jobs? If that were the case, we would already have seen the results. The perennial problem: how to handle a class when students use computers. It may have something to do with the way schools are organised. Teachers have two roles: one academic and one emotional. The arrival of technology brings with it a change in authority ? and they are concerned about this, although that doesn't mean that they resist it. I think that a percentage of teachers are concerned by the idea that students have access to information that they cannot control. But I don't think that this is the whole explanation. This information is not knowledge. Teachers can help process it and give it meaning. Teachers make selections because they are experts in the subject and the skills associated with this subject, and because they have knowledge about children ? psychology, pedagogy, etc. Nevertheless, there are teachers who are not up-to-date and who are afraid of admitting that they are not knowledgeable about something... And, some students challenge their authority. A teacher's authority comes from their being chosen and hired to teach. This is an important task, but we must remember that teachers are expected to do much more. In the US, they have to prepare students for very strict examinations, ensure that they acquire the knowledge set out for each subject, etc. This is not easy because we're talking about social beliefs as to what students should know and be able to do, about what teachers should know and be able to do. These beliefs have developed over a number of decades, and to change them, you would have to make universities, the media and government employees want to change them. And to what? If you say that this is no longer relevant or modern... then, what is? Policymakers think they know what makes a good citizen. In the US, they would say that it is someone who plays a part in the community, who is concerned about it, someone who votes... and schools are supposed to prepare children and the young for this. The definition of a good citizen changes with time. In the past, it was someone who could read and write. Now more is expected of them. Though in my country nowadays, we don't talk about that so much, instead we talk more about becoming a good worker. We talk about the labour market, about how to get a good job and what skills are needed, instead of having a civic conscience or commitment...