Center for Applied Research in Educational Technology (CARET), managed by ISTE, is an excellent website to start looking for research about educational technology. A search for some useful questions about technology literacy yielded the following answers. Use the question links to view the research evidence used to answer each question:

Q: How can technology influence student academic performance? The CARET site answers "Technology improves performance when the application provides opportunities for students to design and implement projects that extend the curriculum content being assessed by a particular standardized test."

Q: How can technology develop higher order thinking and problem solving? CARET indicates " Technology can enable the development of critical thinking skills when students use technology presentation and communication tools to present, publish, and share results of projects."

American Association of School Administrators. (n.d.). Preparing Schools and School Systems for the 21st Century. Arlington, VA.

This study points out 16 major characteristics of schools and school systems capable of preparing students for a global knowledge/information age:

“In the 21st century, schools will become nerve centers, with walls that are porous and transparent connecting teachers, students and the community to the wealth of knowledge that exists in the world, Schools in the 21st century will not be confined by their walls but will be encompassing of the entire community and the world…. [They will become] digital hubs, which will be open electronically 24-hours-a-day, 7-days-a-week, 365-days-a-year…”

Colburn, L.K. (2002, February). Integrating laptops into multiple subject areas: Thoughts from teachers and students. Reading Online, 5(6).

This article presents some interesting ideas about how tech literacy should be part of a school literacy curriculum. The Reading Online journal contains several pertinent articles in the archives of past issues.

Hewett, S. (2004, September). Improving Instructional Practices. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 48(5), 26-30.

This article describes three basic types of portfolios and outlines implementation of digital portfolios within a teacher education program.

Higgins, C. (2007). Digital portfolios in middle school: A phenomenographic study of student engagement and achievement. Doctoral dissertation, Argosy University, Sarasota, 2007.

This study was conducted within New Hampshire middle schools during the 2006-07 academic year. Its purpose was to examine how the development of digital portfolios by middle school students impacts student engagement and student achievement. Data collection, using a mixed methods approach, included interviews of six eighth grade students, content analysis of eighteen student portfolios, and the use of secondary source data from state assessment reports and from the My Voice Student Aspirations Survey. T-tests were used to compare the assessment and survey data between twenty-three portfolio and non-portfolio schools. Content analysis was used to analyze portfolio data using a category-coding procedure. The absence of schools with robust portfolio processes in place at the time of the study made it necessary to adjust the definition of portfolio schools for purposes of the quantitative portion of the study. Results of the quantitative data analysis indicated no significant difference between portfolio and non-portfolio schools, while qualitative data revealed strong evidence that digital portfolios have a positive impact on student engagement.

Kelly, M.G., Haber, J. (2006). National educational technology standards for students: Resources for student assessment. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.

This is an excellent resource on the variety of resources on student assessment available, as well as the unique considerations that should be addressed when implementing different types of assessments.

McNabb, M., Cradler, J., Freeman, M., & Cradler, R. (2002, November). On the horizon: electronic student performance assessments for higher-order thinking. Learning and Leading with Technology, 30(3). p50(5).

The authors present many valuable ideas which deserve to be quoted:

“Assessment-centered lessons, units, or projects require teachers to identify learning outcomes and to explicitly link all lesson components, criteria, and rubrics for assessing what students are learning. Additionally, programs with embedded assessments can provide students and teachers with immediate feedback about what is being learned.... Methods for using technology to expand the domains of what can be measured, however, are emerging. For example, networked environments provide ways to measure individual and team performance strategies in problem-solving simulations. Students can use digital authoring tools as simple as Inspiration and HyperStudio to demonstrate their mental maps of relationships among facts, concepts, and processes."

Moersch, C. (2002). Beyond Hardware: Using Existing Technology to Promote Higher-Level Thinking. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education. -- Dr. Chris Moersch is the author of the LoTi assessment survey used across New Hampshire. His book provides a framework for using existing technology to develop and revise lesson plans that promote critical thinking skills.

Second Information Technology in Education Study: Module 2 (SITES: M2) is an international study of innovative pedagogical practices that use information and communication technology (ICT).