School reform symbolizes an opportunity for significantly improving public education. Reform movements occur every few years. A cry goes out for public support to implement another new improvement plan and to secure more money for the children. A review of the school reform movement finds very little change in the learning environment although technology has changed the world at large during the past century. This research suggests that reform movements and technology must work together to bring about major changes in the learning environment if public schools are to remain a viable institution in the twenty-first century. Creative teaching using technology must reach the learning and interest levels of all students. “Just-in-time” teaching techniques must be connected with the interest and ability of the student.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ClouseR. W., Entrepreneurship Education for a Global Economy in the 21st Century, Revista de Bibliotecología y Ciencias de la Informacíon, 9:1–3, pp. 16–18, 1994.
2.
ClouseR. W.MillerR., Entrepreneurship: Views from Educators and Business Executives, Psychology: A Journal of Human Behavior, 33:3, pp. 43–49, 1996.
3.
ClouseR. W., Entrepreneurship: A Changing Paradigm for the Next Millennium, Proceedings of the Academy of Entrepreneurship, Las Vegas, Nevada, 1997.
4.
ClouseR. W.AnielloJ.GoodinT., Navigating Uncertain Seas: How Entrepreneurship Education is Leading the Way into the Third Millennium, paper presented at the 53rd Annual Meeting of the National Council of Professors of Educational Administration, Jackson Hole, Wyoming, 1999.
5.
TyackD.CubanL., Tinkering toward Utopia: A Century of Public School Reform, Harvard University Press, Boston, 1995.
6.
TyackD., Restructuring in Historical Perspectives: Tinkering toward Utopia, Teachers College Record, 92:2, pp. 170–187, Winter 1990.
7.
GittellM., Participants and Participation: A Study of School Policy in New York City, Center for Urban Education, New York, 1967.
8.
LevinH., Community Control of Schools, Brookings Institute, Washington, D.C., 1970.
9.
National Commission on Excellence in Education, A Nation at Risk, The Commission, Washington, D.C., 1983.
National Center for Educational Statistics, Digest of Education Statistics, Table 67, Washington, D.C., 1988.
12.
MeyerJ.RowanB. (eds.), The Structure of Educational Organizations, Environment and Organizations, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp. 78–109, 1978.
13.
TyackD., The One Best: A History of American Urban Education, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1974.
14.
CallahanR., Education and Cult of Efficiency, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1962.
15.
KoernerJ. D., Who Controls American Education? A Guide for Laymen, Boston Press, Council for Basic Education, Boston, 1968.
16.
AppleM. W., Conservative Agendas and Progressive Possibilities: Understanding the Wider Politics of Curriculum and Teaching, Education and Urban Society, 23:3, pp. 279–291, May 1991.
17.
SchlesingerA. M., The Cycles of American History, Houghton Mifflin, Boston, 1986.
18.
AppleM. W., What Do Schools Teach?Curriculum Inquiry, 6:4, pp. 341–358, 1977.
19.
AppleM. W., Curricular Form and Logic of Technical Control, in Cultural and Economic Reproduction in Education, AppleM. (ed.), Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, pp. 247–274, 1982.
20.
BernsteinB., Class and Pedagogues: Visible and Invisible, in Power and Ideology in Education, KavabelJ.HulseyA. H. (eds.), Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 511–534, 1977.
21.
DenscombeM., The “Hidden Pedagogy” and Its Implication for Teaching Training, British Journal of Sociology of Education, 3, pp. 249–265, 1982.
22.
PokewitzT. S., Educational Reform: Rhetoric, Ritual, and Social Interest, Educational Theory, 38, pp. 77–93, 1988.
23.
WaddockS. A., Not By Schools Alone: Sharing Responsibility for America's Education Reform, Praeger, Westport, Connecticut, 1995.
24.
CampoyR., The Role of Technology in the School Reform Movement, Educational Technology, 32:8, pp. 17–22, 1992.
25.
BraceyG., Education Still Not Looking at the Big Picture, Electronic Learning, 9:8, pp. 20–21, 1990.
26.
MillerC. D.ClouseR. W., Technology Based Distance Learning: Present and Future Directions in Business and Education, Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 22:3, pp. 191–204, 1994.
27.
EverhartR. B., Institutional Parameters and the Purposes of Schooling, Public School Monopoly, Pacific Institute for Public Policy Research, 1982.
28.
ClouseR. W., Teaching and Learning with Computers: A Classroom Analysis, Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 20:4, 1992.
29.
ClouseR. W.MillerC. D., Entrepreneurship Education for a Global Economy in the 21st Century, Revista de Bibliotecología y Ciencias de la Informacíon, 9:1–3, 1994.
30.
StrommenE. E.LincolnB., Constructivism, Technology and the Future of Classroom Learning, Education and Urban Society, 24:4, pp. 466–476, August, 1992.
31.
HallinanM. T. (ed.), Restructuring Schools, Promising Practices and Policies, Plenum Press, New York, 1967.
32.
ElmoreR., School Decentralization: Who Gains? Who Loses? in Decentralization and School Improvement, HannawayJ.CarneyM. (eds.), Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1993.
33.
ElmoreR.PetersonP.McCartheyS., Restructuring in the Classroom: Teaching, Learning, and School Organization, Jossey Bass, San Francisco, 1996.
