Skip to main content

Mobile Navigation

  • National
    • Policy
      • High Expectations
      • Quality Choices
      • Personalized Pathways
    • Research
    • Commentary
      • Gadfly Newsletter
      • Flypaper Blog
    • Events
    • Scholars Program
  • Ohio
    • Policy
      • Priorities
      • Media & Testimony
    • Research
    • Commentary
      • Ohio Education Gadfly Biweekly
      • Ohio Gadfly Daily
  • Charter Authorizing
    • Application
    • Sponsored Schools
    • Resources
  • About
    • Mission
    • Board
    • Staff
    • Career
Home
Home
Advancing Educational Excellence

Main Navigation

  • National
  • Ohio
  • Charter Authorizing
  • About

National Menu

  • Topics
    • Accountability & Testing
    • Advanced Education
    • Career & Technical Education
    • Charter Schools
    • Curriculum & Instruction
    • ESSA
    • Evidence-Based Learning
    • Facilities
    • Governance
    • Personalized Learning
    • Private School Choice
    • School Finance
    • Standards
    • Teachers & School Leaders
    • Think Again
  • Research
  • Commentary
    • Gadfly Newsletter
    • Flypaper Blog
    • Gadfly Podcast
  • Events
  • Scholars Program

What's In, What's Out - An Analysis of State Educational Technology Plans

Katherine Somerville
2.6.2002

Yong Zhao and Paul Conway, Teachers College Record
January 27, 2001

It's not news that inadequate teacher training and lack of access to adequate hardware and software have limited technology's impact on education, but many states are trying to do something about it. In this report, Yong Zhao of Michigan State University and Paul Conway of the National University of Ireland attempt to catalogue one aspect of the "multi-billion dollar frenzy" to train teachers and upgrade system capabilities that is underway in the 50 states by taking a close look at state technology plans: blueprints for implementing and securing funding for educational technology. In general, the authors find, state technology plans over promise and under deliver, taking the form of "idealistic vision statements" that skillfully sell technology by promising to meet lofty goals. This promotion of a "technological utopia" is problematic, they say, because it downplays serious educational inequities; underestimates the complexity of social change; amounts to "techno centrism," in which the limits and constraints of technology are rarely discussed; and simplifies the challenges students face in comprehending the complexities of their social and natural world. You must complete a simple (and free) registration process to view the report at http://www.tcrecord.org/PrintContent.asp?ContentID=10717.

Katherine Somerville
Fordham Logo

© 2026 The Thomas B. Fordham Institute
Privacy Policy
Usage Agreement

National

P.O. Box 110
Burke, VA 22009

202.223.5452

[email protected]

Ohio

P.O. Box 82291
Columbus, OH 43202

614.223.1580

[email protected]

Sponsorship

130 West Second Street, Suite 410
Dayton, Ohio 45402

937.227.3368

[email protected]