Technology has become commonplace in K-12 classrooms with students actively using digital technology to support learning (Ross, 2020). Empirical evidence has shown that technology has been used in K-12 learning to increase higher-order thinking skills (Almerich et al., 2019; Koh et al., 2019; Önür & Kozikoğlu, 2020), foster critical thinking skills (Rubel et al., 2016), promote collaborative learning (Mathieu, 2021; Pietarinen et al., 2019), improve study skills (Donnelly-Hermostillo et al., 2020), and increase academic achievement (Cayvaz et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2020; Zakharov et al., 2020). Nonetheless, empirical findings also report that technology use has at times been detrimental to learning. For example, Ravizza et al., (2017) found that mobile technologies were negatively associated with self-regulatory issues in classrooms, and Mueller and Oppenheimer, (2014) reported in one study that students using technologies for notetaking had lower recall and performance than peers using traditional methods.
The incorporation of technology into learning does not necessarily mean that the technology will be used in a way to promote learning. To effectively incorporate technology into learning requires cogitation on the complex interplay of the various social and ecological factors of learning with technology in the K-12 milieu. The complexity of using technology for learning is highlighted in the many frameworks designed for educators to support them in technology integration, such as the technological pedagogical, content knowledge framework (Koehler, & Mishra, 2008), the substitution, augmentation, modification, and redefinition framework (Puentedura, 2009), and the social-ecological technology integration framework (Crompton et al., 2023).
Advertisement
Standards have also been developed to provide specifics on how to operationalize best-practices. Educational technology standards are a set of competencies for effectively integrating technology into an educational setting (Crompton et al., 2021; Simsek et al., 2016). Standards are typically focused on what educators should be doing to have the students using technology effectively (e.g., UNESCO, 2018; and ISTE, 2017). However, to pinpoint what students should be doing with technologies to promote learning, the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) developed a set of standards for students (ISTE, 2016) to consider a more student-centered process of technology integration. While the ISTE Standards for Students provide guidance on what students should be doing with technology, it is important to examine if those practices with technology lead to learning gains. Therefore, the aim of this study is to analyze empirical evidence identified in the research to establish whether there is a correspondence between the implementation of practices outlined in the ISTE Standards for students and corresponding learning gains.
Literature Review
Technology for Learning
Students are using an increasing number of technologies for learning. The term technology in this study refers to digital technologies which include electronic devices, systems, and resources (Crompton & Sykora, 2021). Scholars and practitioners from the 1990’s onward highlighted a major concern with digital equity/inequity (see., van Dijk, 2006). While there is still more work to be done to make sure all students have access to technologies, the divide between those students who have technology and those without has been greatly reduced (Resta, 2020). In recent years, the majority of students in school have internet connectivity and 75% of schools provide at least one device to each student (Education Super Highway, 2019). In addition, a study in 2020 revealed that 94% of students have access to personal/school-loaned computers and the internet at home (NCES, 2020). The important issue to address now is how are these technologies being used in the educational context. The most recent additions of artificial intelligence (AI) programs, such as ChatGPT have added to that collection of accessible technological resources with a variety of new challenges and affordances.
Access to technology is only one part of technology integration in schools. Early technocentric integration focused on technology and skills (Duran, 2022). The more recent SETI framework points out a variety of other social-ecological factors that need to be considered when integrating technology into the educational context, such as policies, technology support, online or online/face-to-face context (see., Crompton et al., (2023). Educational integration requires connecting to learning theories and practices (Bernacki et al., 2020). This understanding then allows the focus to be on emphasizing technological affordances and minimizing the challenges. To this end, technology integration frameworks and standards have been developed to guide the use of technology in education.
Frameworks and Standards
Scholars (e.g., Bernacki et al., 2020; Consoli et al., 2023; OECD, 2015) have emphasized the need for quality in operationalizing technology integration into education. Frameworks and standards highlight those quality approaches and provide protocols, guidelines, structure, and scaffolding to solve the complex challenge of technology integration in K-12. The literature shows that frameworks and standards target different roles and responsibilities, such as a systemwide focus for high-level educational leaders (e.g., district leaders, national/global leadership), in-school leadership, an educator focus, and a specific student focus.
Advertisement
At the systemwide level, the United Nations has Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with Goal-4 focused on education which includes a focus on the use of information communication technologies (United Nations, 2015). UNESCO has a variety of frameworks, such as the ICT in Education Policy Toolkit and the Effective Edtech Framework (UNESCO, 2015). These are very high-level technology frameworks. For educational leaders, the SETI (Crompton et al., 2023) explicates the variety of components to consider when integrating technology. For educators, who are more directly connected to implementing technology, TPACK (Koehler, & Mishra, 2008), and SAMR (Puentedura, 2009) provide a broad overview.
While these frameworks are helpful in offering a big picture view, nonetheless, more specificity is needed to determine the activities, practices, and educational strategies students should be involved with when using technologies. Scholars highlight a variety of practices. Hu et al., (2022) describes the benefits of collaborative learning with the use of Wikis. Georgiou and Ioannou, (2019) advocate for the use of embodied learning which emphasizes the use of the body in learning and connects to motion-based technologies and natural user interfaces. Tikva et al., (2021) discuss the affordances of computational thinking, and Hussein et al., (2021) highlights the use of digital game-based learning. The variety of educational strategies that can be combined with technology can be overwhelming. Scholars call for a clear set of standards to provide a framework to guide the combination of practices with technology for educational purposes (Skoretz et al., 2011). UNESCO has a set of standards with the UNESCO ICT Competency Framework for Teachers (2018), and ISTE has the ISTE Standards for Educators (2017). These standards inform educators of how to use technology with students. However, to provide a concentrated focus on students, it is pertinent to look at student standards for specific information of what they should be doing with technology.
Subject discipline organizations describe how students can use technology for learning in science with the Next Generation Science Standards (National Research Council, 2013), social studies (College, Career, and Civic Life: National Council for Social Studies, 2013), and language arts (The Next Generation World Language Standards: NGWLS, 2015). However, ISTE provides what appears to be the only set of standards for students (ISTE, 2016) that are inclusive of all subjects and K-12 grade levels. The ISTE Standards for students (2016) are comprised of seven sections (see Table 1). Each of these standards also has an additional corresponding set of indicators that list examples of what the standard looks like in practice.
Table 1
Student Section of the ISTE Standards
ISTE Student Standard Number | Standard Title | Standard |
|---|---|---|
1.1 | Empowered Learner | Students leverage technology to take an active role in choosing, achieving, and demonstrating competency in their learning goals, informed by the learning sciences |
1.2 | Digital Citizen | Students recognize the rights, responsibilities and opportunities of living, learning and working in an interconnected digital world, and they act and model in ways that are safe, legal and ethical |
1.3 | Knowledge Constructor | Students critically curate a variety of resources using digital tools to construct knowledge, produce creative artifacts and make meaningful learning experiences for themselves and others |
1.4 | Innovative Designer | Students use a variety of technologies within a design process to identify and solve problems by creating new, useful or imaginative solutions |
1.5 | Computational Thinker | Students develop and employ strategies for understanding and solving problems in ways that leverage the power of technological methods to develop and test solutions |
1.6 | Creative Communicator | Students communicate clearly and express themselves creatively for a variety of purposes using the platforms, tools, styles, formats, and digital media appropriate to their goals |
1.7 | Global Collaborator | Students use digital tools to broaden their perspectives and enrich their learning by collaborating with others and working effectively in teams locally and globally |
While the ISTE Standards for Students provide specifics on how students should be using technology for learning, further consideration is needed to understand if there is empirical evidence that those student practices lead to student learning.
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to investigate whether there is empirical support that implementing the ISTE Standards for Students can result in learning gains. The extant literature will not necessarily reference the ISTE Standards for Students. Therefore, to accomplish this, studies that described the use of instructional strategies and activities that have students acting as described in the ISTE Student standards were used. The specific question guiding this study is:
-
Do the practices in the student section of the ISTE Standards lead to learning gains?
Method
A scoping review methodology (Peters, et al., 2015) has been used to answer the research question guiding this study. Scoping reviews function to map the extant literature to determine evidence available on a topic (Peters, et al.). To ensure transparency in the selection of the articles and the evidence-gathering procedure (Moher et al., 2015), an a priori (Stemler, 2001) method was used. This a priori method of the scoping review describes what databases were searched, what years were included, and the article inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Search Strategy
An electronic search was conducted of databases specific to education, namely: Elsevier Direct, ERIC, Sage Journals Online, Wiley International, Science Direct, JSTOR, and LearnTechLib. Only peer-review journal articles were included in the search to provide a level of confidence in the quality of the articles (Gough et al., 2017). The years 2015 to 2023 were included in the search. This ensured that the research would be relatively recent to best match up-to-date teaching approaches to find the examples. Studies that described the use of instructional strategies and activities that have students acting as described in the ISTE Student standards were used. Therefore, for the keyword search, nomenclature aligned to the practices in the standard were included. The list of practice keywords is presented in Table 2.
Table 2
Keyword Search for Articles
ISTE Standard Number | Standard Title | Standard | Keywords |
|---|---|---|---|
1.1 | Empowered Learner | Students leverage technology to take an active role in choosing, achieving, and demonstrating competency in their learning goals, informed by the learning sciences | • Active learning • Personalized learning |
1.2 | Digital Citizen | Students recognize the rights, responsibilities and opportunities of living, learning and working in an interconnected digital world, and they act and model in ways that are safe, legal and ethical | • Digital Citizenship |
1.3 | Knowledge Constructor | Students critically curate a variety of resources using digital tools to construct knowledge, produce creative artifacts and make meaningful learning experiences for themselves and others | • Knowledge constructor • Students creating |
1.4 | Innovative Designer | Students use a variety of technologies within a design process to identify and solve problems by creating new, useful or imaginative solutions | • Design thinking • Design process |
1.5 | Computational Thinker | Students develop and employ strategies for understanding and solving problems in ways that leverage the power of technological methods to develop and test solutions | • Computational Thinking |
1.6 | Creative Communicator | Students communicate clearly and express themselves creatively for a variety of purposes using the platforms, tools, styles, formats, and digital media appropriate to their goals | • Students communicating |
1.7 | Global Collaborator | Students use digital tools to broaden their perspectives and enrich their learning by collaborating with others and working effectively in teams locally and globally | • Collaborative learning • Students collaborating |
In addition to the keywords, the term technology was added to the search to ensure those practices were tied to technology use. To further align with the research question, student learning was also included in the search. Therefore, the Boolean String used to search for relevant empirical work consisted of:
[keyword] AND K-12 OR K12 AND Technology AND “Student Learning”.
Multiple searches were conducted as the keyword changed to match the practices in the standards listed in Table 2. This resulted in identifying research articles for possible inclusion in this study. As the ISTE standards may involve different components within a standard, such as active learning and personalized learning, articles may be selected that have one of the search terms, but all search terms must be included in the final selection of articles.
Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
To ensure the identified articles matched the research question guiding this study, the articles then went through a further examination using a set of inclusion and exclusion criteria, see Table 3. The articles identified from the Boolean search were examined one by one in order to see if they met each of these criteria to be considered for inclusion.
Table 3
Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria
Inclusion | Exclusion |
|---|---|
• Peer-reviewed • Journal articles • K-12 context • Formal education • Use technology with the ISTE practice | Conference proceedings After-school clubs (evenings and summer clubs) Articles not published in English |
The articles matching the inclusion and exclusion criteria were then reviewed again. In a systematic review, numbers would be collected for all articles related to a search term. In larger studies, such as this where there are multiple Boolean searches simultaneously, generating an masses of hits, a scoping review process is conducted. This process involved a constant comparative method to Therefore in addition to the match to the ISTE standards practices, research was also selected from a variety of disciplines and learner ages in K-12. Once two examples were identified for a standard that met these criteria the search was deemed redundant, and no further articles were gathered. This final review of articles aligned with the scoping review methodology of ensuring a representative match (Peters, et al., 2015).
Findings and Discussion
The findings and discussion section were organized by the seven ISTE Student Standards. Each section begins with the standards and an explanation of the practices embedded in that standard supported by current research. Then, from the findings in the scoping review, two research studies are reported that embody the practices and provide evidence of student learning gains.
Empowered Learner: Students Leverage Technology to take an Active Role in Choosing, Achieving, and Demonstrating Competency in Their Learning Goals, Informed by the Learning Sciences
Technology supports learning and plays a crucial role in allowing students to be empowered and self-directed (Geng et al., 2019). The effective use of digital technologies can help students to make choices in achieving and demonstrating their learning goals. Two studies selected revealed learning gains by using the practices described in the ISTE Standard 1.1 in empowering learners. Mead et al., (2019) had high school biology students participate in immersive, interactive virtual field trips (iVFTs) which focused on life and environments during the Ediacaran Period, roughly 550 million years ago.
The lesson design empowered students to take an active role in managing and demonstrating their own learning progress and competencies. Each student experienced a series of interactive 360-degree spherical images supported by a short introductory text that asked the student to make an observation or navigate to a particular viewpoint. The complete lesson, including instructions, activities, and assessment was provided in a web environment, which allowed the iVFT to be completed by students independently which empowered them to take an active role in their learning. The learning objective had students describing the Ediacaran ecosystem. To assess this outcome, the researchers analyzed pre and post quiz results. Results showed a large and statistically significant improvement. Perfect post lesson scores were achieved by 88% of the students. In addition, over half of the students reported that they would enjoy engaging in another iVFT.
In a second study (Phan, 2020) middle school students were enrolled in a personalized learning program whose goal was to give students more choice and voice in their learning with technology. This program used various web-based technologies to provide students with twenty-first century learning competencies. Student focus groups were held to learn more of the actual use of technology in the classroom and to hear student feedback and perspectives. Also, semi-structured questionnaires focused on how technology also increased student engagement and motivation, how students used technology for voice, choice, and collaboration, and to what extent technology promoted or distracted their learning and helped them meet their learning goals. The results of the focus groups and interviews showed students had more ownership of their learning when allowed to use web-based technologies such as Google Slides and Google Docs. Students also revealed being more engaged and motivated to achieve learning gains when using technology to explore new ideas or solve a problem on their own.
Digital Citizen: Students Recognize the Rights, Responsibilities, and Opportunities of Living, Learning and Working in an Interconnected Digital World, and They Act and Model in Ways That are Safe, Legal and Ethical
As the use of digital technology has become more ubiquitous, it is crucial that students understand what it means to engage in safe, positive, legal and ethical ways when using digital technology (Statti et al., 2021). Students need to be able to demonstrate their understanding of their rights and responsibilities regarding the necessary skills and behaviors needed to successfully engage in multiple digital environments. This scoping review revealed that digital citizenship in ISTE Standard 1.2 can lead to learning gains.
Tapingkae et al., (2020) used digital game-based learning to teach digital citizenship. Digital game-based learning provides students with opportunities to experience various situations, and to learn coping strategies to navigate problems encountered in daily life (Komalawardhana et al., 2021). Tapingkae explored 7th and 8th grade students’ digital citizenship behaviors, learning motivations, and perceptions. Using a quasi-experimental design, the researchers compared the difference between and within two groups to determine their behaviors leading to learning gains. The digital citizenship behaviors examined included cyberbullying, digital drama, digital relationships, and online communication.
The experimental group received digital citizenship learning activities with a formative assessment-based contextual digital gaming approach, and the students in the control group completed the digital citizenship learning activities with the conventional learning approach. A pre- and a post-digital citizenship questionnaire of self-reported digital citizenship behaviors was used to measure gains in the students' digital citizenship behavior. The results revealed that the students in the experimental group showed greater learning gains as measured by more advanced digital citizenship behaviors than those in the control group. In addition, there was a significant difference in learning motivations between the two groups. The experimental group was significantly higher than the control group in terms of intrinsic motivation, goal orientation motivation, self-determination motivation, and self-efficacy motivation.
In the second study (Ali, et al., 2021) middle school students were introduced to generative AI techniques. Students studied how generative AI can be a tool for creation, and how to consider the ethical and societal implications. Students were encouraged to be pro-active in being responsible creators, consumers, and stakeholders of this technology. Learning activities were developed that introduced students to generative modeling, and how it is used to create Deepfakes, which are videos in which the face and/or voice of a person has been manipulated making the altered video look authentic (Almars, 2021). The results of this research show learning gains in understanding that generative media may be believable, but not necessarily true, and can contribute to the spread of misinformation. Students were also able to identify why misinformation may be harmful, drawing specific examples to social settings that indicate human-centered implications. All these skills are necessary for successful digital citizenship.
Knowledge Constructor: Students Critically Curate a Variety of Resources Using Digital Tools to Construct Knowledge, Produce Creative Artifacts and Make Meaningful Learning Experiences for Themselves and Others
The effective use of digital tools to create and represent knowledge is a critical skill for digital literacy (van Laar, et al., 2020). Students need to be able to locate, evaluate and create artifacts that demonstrate meaningful connections, conclusions or solutions for themselves or others. From the scoping review, the following two studies provide evidence of the efficacy of the practices of ISTE Standard 1.3 in helping students to construct knowledge and make meaningful learning experiences.
In the first study (Jiang et al., 2022), students constructed knowledge by using artificial intelligence and modeling real-world text data. The purpose of the study was for youth to gain a fundamental understanding of how intelligence is created, and applied, and its potential to perpetuate bias and unfairness. Students from an Advanced Placement computer science classroom at a public high school participated in this study.
To make machine learning concepts and practices engaging and accessible, the researchers used technology strategies including interactive visualizations and dynamically linked representations. StoryQ, a web-based text mining and narrative modelling platform was used to implement these strategies. This platform supported the process of the text mining practice in a visual, interactive fashion with dynamically linked representations. The study results revealed that the students showed learning gains of in-depth and nuanced understandings of how text classification models are trained. The researchers found that by constructing knowledge by creating text models, students: (1) engineered predictive features to address model errors, (2) drew on their cultural knowledge and social experiences to create predictive features, (3) reasoned about noisy features when comparing models, and (4) described model learning patterns from training data. Students demonstrated an understanding that modelers, the students themselves, played a critical role in helping machines learn and identify patterns in data.
In the second study (Lee, et al., 2015) fifth-grade students wore Fitbit Ultra activity trackers to record how active they had been during midday recess. Using wearable fitness devices allowed students to collect data while participating in familiar activities. Data was obtained through the three-axis accelerometer and altimeter in the Fitbit Ultra. This provided a minute-by-minute feedback on the activity. Throughout the week, the students would examine the data.
The students then created metrics to evaluate all their respective recess activity levels and then devised strategies to produce the greatest increase in physical activity by the end of the week. When analyzing the data, the students drew on explicit recall of the experiences that produced data and what they knew from participating in the activities. This allowed students to gain knowledge about how they could increase their own physical fitness using digital tools to determine the measure of activity, thus making the learning personal and meaningful.
Innovative Designer: Students Use a Variety of Technologies within a Design Process to Identify and Solve Problems by Creating New, Useful or Imaginative Solutions
The ability to identify and solve problems within a design process using digital technologies allows students to develop their skills of generating ideas, testing theories, creating a variety of artifacts, and solving real-world problems (Razzouk et al., 2012). From the scoping review, two studies were selected that revealed learning gains by having students become innovative designers while using technology.
In the first study (Liu, et al., 2017), scientific modelling was used to help students understand real world scientific phenomenon and solve problems as a type of design process. In the study, students experienced explicit model building in science laboratory work with the use of smart phones, digital video recorders and Lego Mindstorm NXT. This allowed students to collect and visualize data and generate mathematical models to fit the data, thus exercising their skills and use of technology to use a design process to solve problems. With immediate visual and fitness error feedback, students were able to see the corresponding graphs with the mathematical models they proposed. With these cues, students revised and improved their models by reducing the fitness error. All three technology tools were successful in helping students to achieve their learning goals.
In a second study, Rumahlatu et al., (2021) combined the Research Based Learning (RBL) model and the design thinking (DT) method to create the Resource-Based Learning Design Thinking (RBLDT) model to develop students’ creative thinking skills, concept gaining, and digital literacy. This new model required students to use a variety of digital resources to access information and communicate using technology while focusing on developing creative solutions to various topics/problems. The students in a high school biology class worked to provide creative ideas as well as solve problems related to the structure and function of animal tissues. In response to the research question: Is there an effect of the RBLDT learning model on students’ digital literacy, using pre and post test data, the authors found that RBLDT learning model had a statistically significant effect on the digital literacy of the students.
Computational Thinker: Students Develop and Employ Strategies for Understanding and Solving Problems in Ways that Leverage the Power of Technological Methods to Develop and Test Solutions
Computational thinking is an interrelated set of skills and practices for solving complex problems. It requires the cognitive processes necessary to engage with computational tools to solve problems (Charoula & Giannakos, 2020). These processes include abstraction, algorithmic thinking, debugging, decomposition, and pattern recognition. Computational thinking practices combine multiple computational skills to solve an applied problem. These processes and skills can be applied in multiple contexts, including core academic disciplines (Digital Promise). From the scoping review, research indicating that the student practice of computational thinking with technology led to learning gains is shown in the following two studies.
The first study (Aksit & Wiebe, 2019) introduced computational thinking in a middle school science class. Researchers examined how a unit introducing computational thinking and simulation-based model building through block-based programming promoted students’ learning of computational thinking and motion and force concepts. Scratch is an open-source software to teach computer programming through a visual, block-based environment and was selected for this study for students to use to promote computational thinking. The Computational Thinking Test (Román-González et al., 2018) was given to students as the pre-and post-test to assess students’ computational thinking abilities. A paired samples t test was conducted using students’ pre and post-test scores on the Rasch scale to determine if students’ computational thinking abilities significantly differed before and after the classroom instruction. The results of the paired samples test showed that participating in the instruction resulted in learning gains that indicated a statistically significant increase in students’ computational thinking abilities with a large effect size.
A second study (Wang et al., 2022) explored the design characteristics and principles of mathematics learning with a non-programming plugged domain to promote third and fourth grade students’ computational thinking. The Educreations app was the computational tool used by students to import multimedia materials, such as pictures using the “drag and drop” function enabling students to easily interact with them. The computational practice also had students use the Educreations app to collect and test data, model, and reapply the enumeration to verify the law. These computational tools provided opportunities to develop reasoning by visualizing geometric relationships. The computer-simulated micro-environment enabled participants to immerse themselves into mathematical relationships. Through each new situation, students learned to reuse reasoned thinking. They practiced the computational practices of “abstracting modularizing,” “testing and debugging,” “reusing and remixing,” and “being incremental and iterative.” The pre-and post-test results revealed that learning gains in students’ computational thinking perceptions and the sub-dimensions of decomposition, algorithmic thinking, and problem-solving significantly improved.
Creative Communicator: Students Communicate Clearly and Express Themselves Creatively for a Variety of Purposes Using the Platforms, Tools, Styles, Formats and Digital Media Appropriate to their Goals
The ability to communicate complex ideas clearly and effectively has traditionally been a significant learning outcome for students. With the pervasive existence of technology in students’ lives, the ability to communicate digitally has become even more critical (Bruno & Canina, 2019). The need to communicate in multiple modalities and to a variety of audiences has also significantly increased. The following two studies provide evidence that the practices described in ISTE Standard 1.6 are effective in helping students to become creative communicators.
In the first study (Ryoo, et al., 2018) students in an eighth-grade science class used interactive digital tools to create representations to communicate to others what happens to atoms and molecules during chemical reactions. In addition, students integrated key ideas they learned from visualizations into their written explanations. The lessons included interactive digital visualizations, such as modeling and simulations tools, with multiple representations, including molecular graphs, animations, symbols, and text to explicitly illustrate the molecular processes of chemical phenomena. Learning gains were measured by comparing pre and post-test scores. On the post-test, 79.5% of the students, compared to 17.7% on the pretest, were able to accurately construct and complete representations that visually depicted what happens to the reactants and how the number of atoms does not change during a chemical reaction.
In a second study (Yamaç et al., 2020) researchers explored the effects of digital writing instruction with tablets on fourth-grade school students’ writing performance and knowledge versus paper and pencil instruction. The participants in this study were divided into two groups. One group was appointed as the control group for traditional paper-and-pencil-based writing instruction, while other group was assigned as the experimental group for digital writing instruction with tablets. The students in the experimental group prepared narrative texts with tablet computers using educational software named Strategic Digital Writing Environment (SADIWE). The students using SADIWE had to carry out all the digital writing applications by means of tablet computers. SADIWE was used to have students become familiar with writing strategies like planning, idea generation, and organization of ideas, and enabled these strategies to be put into practice by providing learning support with videos, sound recordings and examples. Once the students had a written product, they added visuals to their text and published it on the class blog, providing the opportunity to share their learning on social media sites reaching a wider audience.
When the two stories written by students in both groups were compared in terms of number of words and writing quality, the stories of students who wrote on tablets were both longer and of better quality than those of students writing with paper and pencil. When the posttest writing scores were compared it was found that digital writing instruction with tablets was more effective in developing students’ writing knowledge, including production procedures, substantive processes, and story components. Another of the benefits of the digital writing platform was that it increased participants' motivation.
Global Collaborator: Students Use Digital Tools to Broaden their Perspectives and Enrich Their Learning by Collaborating with Others and Working Effectively in Teams Locally and Globally
In our diverse and connected global society, students need to be able to engage with a variety of audiences effectively and collaboratively in a variety of ways (Owens et al., 2022). The presence of multiple digital tools helps to make this possible. Knowing how to effectively use these tools is crucial for student success both in and out of school. Evidence that the practices described in ISTE Standard 1.7 empower students to be collaborators, both locally and globally, can be found in the following two studies.
The first study (Carvalho & Santos, 2022) investigated the impact of a technology-enhanced peer learning program on the collaborative and metacognitive skills of upper secondary English as a Foreign Language students. This study examined how collaborative online tools social media, and multimedia production contributed to student learning gains. A mixed methods approach from two self-report measurement tools and a survey was used. Data were analyzed by means of descriptive and inferential statistics and content analysis. The findings from this study revealed that participation in the technology-enhanced peer learning program had a positive impact on students’ metacognitive awareness and on the development of communication and collaboration skills-related competencies.
The second study (Healy & Walshe, 2020) investigated how the utilization of actual geography experts might support high school students' geographic knowledge. Students and professionals used a Geographical Information System (GIS) platform for this project. Students were taught how to use GIS over the course of a year utilizing a variety of strategies for collaborating with geographers in the field as real-world industry experts. These experts discussed their actual experiences using the tools and why they were crucial to their job. An analysis of questionnaire and interview data, as well as student work revealed that interaction with professionals from the field helped students let to learning gains in geographic information systems (GIS) comprehension and helped them gain a more nuanced grasp of the field. The combination of real-world experts and technology were important in the development of students’ geographical knowledge.
Limitations and Future Research
Only two studies were chosen as examples of evidence supporting the practices in the standards. This was an illustrative and not an exhaustive list and future researchers may explore how research supports the standards in different grade levels and curricular areas. For a more extensive examination of the ISTE Standards, it is recommended that each of the standards are examined individually as a systematic review across a limited number of years. For the scale of this work to be accomplished, would necessitate a separate study and publication for each standard.
It is important to note that this scoping review limited the research studies to only those studies that were peer-reviewed and published in an academic journal. While this served as a quality control, it also possibly eliminated research studies available in other formats that may provide evidence of the ISTE Student Standards. Future researchers may investigate studies available in other venues. This may also provide more of a representative sample of studies conducted in developing countries that may have less of a focus on publishing in academic journals. In addition, the review only analyzed studies that were written in English. Again, future research could investigate studies published in languages other than English.
Conclusions
The purpose of this study was to examine if the implementation of the practices within each of the ISTE student standards, coupled with the use of technology can lead to student learning gains. This study is unique in that it provides the first examination of a set of student standards for technology to determine if the practices with technology as described in the standards can lead to learning gains. Scholars lament (e.g., Daniela, 2019; Tanak, 2020) that the focus is often on the technological devices and not on those practices in how it is used. The findings of this study focus back onto practices in how technology is used and reveals that there is evidence that each of the standards can lead to learning gains.
The scoping protocol was followed, and empirical evidence was gathered for each selected topic (Peters et al., 2015), specifically each of the ISTE Student Standards 1.1–1.7. The search results allowed the mapping of all seven standards with specific research studies providing evidence of learning gains. The selected research studies can be found in Table 4.
Table 4
Empirical Studies Selected from the Scoping Review
ISTE Student Standards | Research studies |
|---|---|
Standard 1.1 Empowered Learner | Mead, et al., 2019 Phan, 2020 |
Standard 1.2 Digital Citizen | Ali, et al., 2021 Tapingkae et al., 2020 |
Standard 1.3 Knowledge Constructor | Jiang et al., 2022 Lee, et al., 2015 |
Standard 1.4 Innovative Designer | Liu, et al., 2017 Rumahlatu et al., 2021 |
Standard 1.5 Computational Thinker | Aksit & Wiebe, 2019 Wang et al., 2022 |
Standard 1.6 Creative Communicator | Ryoo, et al., 2018 Yamaç, et al., 2020 |
Standard 1.7 Global Collaborator | Carvalho & Santos, 2022 Healy & Walshe, 2020 |
The findings of this study provide an additional level of confidence of the efficacy of the ISTE standards for students. This can be helpful in providing direction and guidance for all, such as educational leaders, teachers, administrators, researchers, and policymakers who are looking for a roadmap for effective technology integration that leads to student success. The studies reported in this review provide evidence that the practices identified in the ISTE student standards are effective in helping students to use technology in a way that leads to an increase in their learning.
Declarations
Conflicts of interests
The author reports that there are no competing interests to declare. The authors have no relevant financial interests to disclose.
Informed Consent
This is a systematic review of literature. No ethical approval or informed consent is needed.
Ethics approval
N/A.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
