-DOCUMENT RESUME ED 235 IR 010 '858 AUTHOR Lesgold, Alan M., Ed.; Reif, Frederick,Ed. TITLE Computers in Education: Realizing the Potential. Report of a Research Conference, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, November 20-24, 1982. INSTITUTION Office of Educational Research andImprovement (ED), Washington, DC. PUB DATE, Aug 83 NOTE 265p.; For the conferencesummary and conclusions in Separate form, see IR 010 857. AVAILABLE FROMSuperintendent of Documents, U.S.Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402 (S/N-065-000.00188-8, $6.50 per copy). PUB TYPE Collected Works Conference Proceedings (021) Information Analyses 70) -- Viewpoints (120) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC11 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Computer Assisted Instruction; ComputerLiteracy; Computer Managed-Instruction; *EducationalResearch; Instructional Materials; *MathematicsEducation; Models; *Reading Instruction; ResearchNeeds; *Sciere Education; Teaching Methods;*Writing Instr ction IDENTIFIERS *Computer Uses in Education ABSTRACT The full proceedings are provided hereof a conference of 40 teachers, educationalresearchers, and scientists fram both the public and privatesectors that centered on the future of computers 'in education and the research requiredto realize the computer's educational potential. Asummary of the research issues considered and suggested means for stimulatingand supporting proposed basic and prototype research activities isfollowed by the Chairmen's Report. The invited;-papers are thenPresented: (1) "The Computer Age,* by Herbert Simon; (2) "Technologies for Learning," by Raj Reddy; (3) "Paradigms forComputer-Based Education," by Alan M. Lesgold) (4) "Research on Science' Education,"by Jill. H. Larkin; (5) "Research on Mathematics Education,"by Robert B. Davis; (6) "Teaching Mathematics," by Steve Davis, (7)"The 14athenlatic CurriCulum K-12," by Henry0; Pollack; (8) "Teaching Science," by Jim Minstrell; (9) "Research on ReadingEducation," by Richard C. Anderson; (10) "Research on Writing Education,"by Robert Gundlach; (11) "Teaching Reading," by CatherineCopeland; (12) "Teaching Writing," by Brooke Workman; and(18)'*Literacy," by E. D. Hirsch, Jr .Reports of the Conference Committeeson Mathematics and Science (Frederick Reif) and Read:ng and Writing (AlanM. "Lesgold) conclude the report. (LMM) **************************************************************4******** * ReOtoductions supplied by EDRSare the best that can be made * * from the original document. * *********************************************************************** ci -.4 ,*t74, f TZ,4'7117,1:, , OEPAIIIMEN1-0i1ONCAtION:trik NATIONAL INSTITUTE OFEDUCATION7ck EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION 4,4 ' CENTER (ERIC) his document has been ,refiroduced 'as received from the person or drganization originating it. , - c.) Minor changes have been made to improvbrr-:; reproduction quality. , Points of view or opinions stated i(this -docu-ment do not necessarily represent official NIE pqsition or policy. COMPUTERS IN EDUCATION REALIZING THE POTENTIAL Report of a Research Conference Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania November 20-24 1982 Alan M. Lesgold, and Frederick Reif Chairmen U.S. Department of Education Terrel H. Bell, Secretary Office of Educational Research and Improvement Donald J. Senese, Assistant Secretary CONFERENCE PARTICIPANTS RICHARD CANDERSON, Center for the Study oPReading, University of Illinois, Urbana JOHN SEELY BROWN, Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, California . RICHARD BURTON, Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, California WILLIAM J. CLANCEl', coLan uter_Scieriee;--St r LAN-M-reOL:LINS, Bolt Beranek and Newman, Cambridge, Massachusetts CATHERINE COPELAND, Southern Boone County School, Ashland, Missouri MARY KAY CORBIT.T, Mathematics & Curriculum, University. of Kansas, Lawrence ROBERT B. DAVIS,-Curriculum Laboratory, University of Illinois, Urbana STEVE DAVIS, Nortyl Carolina School of Science and Mathematics, Durham L. LINTON DECK, JR.-, Fairfax County PUblic Schools, Virginia ANDREA DiSESSA, Computer Science, M4sachusetti-Institute of: Technology, Cambridge RICHARD P. DURAN, EducatiOnal TestineService, Princeton, NeVt-tlersey PETER FAIRWEATHER, WICAT Systems, Orem, Utah LAWRENCE T. ERASE, Bell Laboratories, Piscataway, New Jersey FRANCIS D. FISHER, Professor of Ethics and the Professions, Haverford College, Pennsylvania ANDREW M. GLEASON, Mathemetics, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts ROBERT GUNDLACH, Director of Writing Programs, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois JOHN R. HAYES, Psychology, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania E.D. HIRSCH, JR., English, University of Virginia, Charlottesville BEAU' JONES, Curriculum, Chicago Board of. Education, Illinois GLADYS P. KNOTT, Educaiion, Kent State University, Kent, Ohio JILL H. LARKIN, Psychology, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania ALAN M. LESGOLD,-LearningR&D Center, University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania J.C.R..LICKLIDER, Computer Science, Massachusetts Institute of raii-Cology, Cambridge JOSEPH I. LIPSON, WICAT Systems, Orem, Utah VINCENT N. LUNETTA, Science Education Center, University of Iowa, Iowa City JIM MINSTRELL, Science and Mathematics, Mercer Island High School, Washington ANN. PIESTRUF', The Learning Company, Portola Valley, California HENRY O. POLLAK, Mathematici, Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, New Jersey RAJ REDDY, Computer Science; Carnegie - Mellon. University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania FREDERICK REIF, Physics, University of California, Berkeley HERBERT A. SIMON, Psychology, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania MARLENE SCARDAMALIA, Writing Research Group, Ontario Institutefor Research in Education, Toronto, Ontario JACOB T.SCHWARTZ, Courant Institute of Mathematical Scierices, New Yoilk University, New York MARSHALL S. SMITH, Education IdD-Center, University of Wisconsin, Madison BROOKE. WORKMAN, English, West High School, Iowa City, Iowa OBSERVERS YVES LE CORRE, Universite de ParisVII HENRY NI. HALFF, Office of Naval Research. JOSEPH F'SOTKA, U.S. Army Research Institute for Behavioral and Social Sciences DAVID Z. ROBINSON, Carnegie Corporation of New York FOREWORD Today we no longer ask, "Will computers be used in the schools?" We know that they are, and that they are being purchased by schools faster thaniwe can keep count. Indeed, surveys:of computers in schools'are outdated by the time they are published. The computer has excited-administrators, teachers, students, and parents in a way that no other educational tool, theory, or 'curriculum has before. With :this rapid adoption. of microcomputers, more questions have been raised than have answers,however. What are the optimum ischool usesto which microcomputers can and should be put? What doesresearch in learning theory,:_cognitiOn, motivation and artificial intelligence have to say about. how COiiiputers affect learning? What. approachescan betaken in various disciplinesto maximizethe_ computerfs effectiveness? HoW can schools most efficiently integrate.these ---fiiidings_rinto their instructional programs? /7-\ It was withthese.qu/ef2t1 ons in mind that the Department of EduCation invited a group of educational researchers and practitioners to theresearch con ference "Computers in EduCation: Realizing the Potential" at the UniVersity of Pittsburgh in late November 1982. The results of that conference are summarized in ,this Chairmen\s Report. \ We are pleased to- share'theresults of .thiS important research conference with the eduCational communitY4 On behalf of the Department.of Education, I' would like /to extend our sincere thanks to those participating scholars and educational practitioners who b "rought so much;w1sdom,.experience, and common sense to the conduct of thisconference. ponald J. Senese ssistant,Secretary for Educational Research and Improvement U.S.. Department of Education CHAIRMEN'S PREFACE In November, 1982, The Department of Education invited forty people to a special conference:on the future of computers in education and the research needed to realize:the compute,r's potential. There were computer scientists, psychologists, other educational researchers, teachers,'schOol administta7- tors and parent representatives. A se.t-ef invited papers {published in the proceedings of this conference) and an ex,zellent series of software. demOn- strations provided .a good foundation for our discussions. The participants discovered quickly that they agreed on a number of.issueS Theicomputer is perhaps the most exciting potential source of educational improvement in centuries. Although most currently available Applications for schools are mediocre,' the possibilities for significant uses are,imPres sive. The agenda for research, our primary charge, was easily agreed:upon, Many.Of us also stressed the need to develop teachers'. abilities to use com- puters. and theneed tomake richcomputerenvironments accessible to teachers,. parents andchildren of allsocioeconomic leVels. Many of the participants worked extremely hard to build a coherent set of recOmmenda tione;...some attended sessions all day and drafted recommendations a good 'part of the night. Without these effOrts,this report wouldihave been extremely difficult to write. This report benefited-from_the dedication of'many people. The Secretary of Education, Tetrel Bell, and A istant Secretary'Donald Senese shqwed great cOne-e-ift-for-issues of educational technologyand keptus motivated in our efforts. We, hOjoe that we and the other participants have produced recommen- dations,:they-'-canuse. Arthur Melmed, John Mays,Sus-*Chipman,,And Joeepho