I am very pleased with the comments to the six questions posted from yesterday. I would say we are off to a great start with the blogs and new ideas. I want to give everyone a chance to discuss the video we saw yesterday in Disruptive Innovation. I found the video very informative and made me think about how things have changed. The part that struck home the most was the atlas to the GPS system which we have with all the traveling. I use to make sure and have an atlas before I left town, now I check to make sure I have the TomTom.
Chris
I think we need to be careful by only teaching (and, therefore, relying solely on) technology. First, in order to fully understand something, we need to understand the principles that underlie it. For example, we need to understand and be able to perform long division by hand before we can make the most effective use of a calculator. Further, without a thorough knowledge of the concept of multiplication, we are unlikely to multiply in the abstract (such as with variables). It also seems that a true appreciation of what a calculator does for us (saves time primarily) can only be reached by knowing how much time it takes without one.
ReplyDeleteSimilarly, one should learn to navigate without GPS before ever using one. What if my TomTom suddenly fails? Doesn't having a device tell me where to go, when to turn, etc. actually decrease the amount of critical thinking that I am required to do? I am NOT against GPS (or most technology), but think we certainly first need to understand the concepts upon which they work. When it comes to technology, it might be best to spend more time considering if the benefits truly outweigh all the costs (e.g. less self-reliance, less direct peronal interaction, decreased physical fitness, etc). To borrow a quote from the frist Jurassic Park movie: "The scientists were so busy trying to figure out if they could do it that they never stopped to think if they SHOULD do it." There is an increasing tendency by society to think that any and all new technology must be "good" (almost to the extent of diefication) with little or any thought to the present or future consequences. Walt Disney Studios recognized this danger...watch the movie "Wall*E".
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMr. B, I think you are making a very good point.
ReplyDeleteThe foundational concepts you mention are introduced early in education. And as curriculum directs, these skills are built upon block by block. Technology does not have to interfere with the acquisition of this knowledge but should supplement it, and later advance it if used resourcefully.
As students progress and become users of technology; however, it is the educator's job to recognize their abilities and intuitions and cater to their strengths, reduce their weaknesses etc., and furthermore use our strengths as teachers, or should I say facilitators to advance their knowledge and awareness.
Since we are living in a digital age and preparing students to become productive citizens economically/globally, someone-somewhere has to begin realizing that our children need practice with the tools they will be using to lead successful lives. To reiterate, the workplace, jobs and skill demands are changing. As a mother of two children, I want my kids learning to use the tools that are becoming a way of life, a way of business.
I don't believe it is about replacing classrooms with technology - the physical atmosphere, but integrating technology to heighten the learning experience, enhance digital literacy, and expand students' horizons... to allow them the chance to be competitive in a more and more virtual world.
----
You make another good point about society and its tendency to assume all technology good. There is a reason that many are wooed by any new gadget - and that is, in my opinion, due to a lack of education. Another part of our job is to teach students to be effective evaluators of information (literate) and this includes technology. This is where I believe problem solving and critical thinking begin to take place --when students and teachers are allowed to explore, discuss, evaluate, and practice using the very tools we're discussing now. By taking these things apart theoretically, students are analyzing the purpose and value behind their creation.
When I think of technology, I think about what it can bring to the table for education. If I was to do a project on building a house; I could draw the house, construct it out of materials, or design the house inside a computer. The realm is opened up to new possibilities with technology. The point I believe Scott was trying to make is look at what is happening the world around us. More and more jobs and University expect students to understand and use technology right out of the gate. When a student is assigned a research project the first place they go is not the library but to a computer to do the research. The internet has changed the way a student can find information. As a school we need to help our students become the best they can be and technology is not going to do that, but technology can help increase our ability to bring the ideas to them. We can also show how to be effective users of technology along the way.
ReplyDeleteThanks for clarifying some of my points. I also have a child who will be trying to compete in an ever-changing and increasingly technological world. He MUST learn to use many of the new tools that will be created in the future. Fortunately, because he is my son, I have the advantage of lots of time to discuss/debate the value of various forms of technology and I hope he has developed a good sense of when and where technology should be used.
ReplyDeleteI also agree that we should be modeling appropriate use of technology to our students...both the technical and ethical aspects. I think in our rush to try to stay on the "cutting edge", that we are forced to spend almost all of our time trying to learn and teach the technical aspects of numerous new technologies at the expense of becoming fully proficient and, more importantly, having significant time to teach my students the ethical implications. Case in point: I have a smartboard I got use of last year. I have learned to do quite a few things on it (and thoroughly believe it is a valuable piece of technology), but it still has many capabilities that I have not been able to explore on my own...let alone teach my students to use. This year, it was "strongly encouraged" to develop a web site (which I also see considerable usefullness to) and a blog. My concern is that I am, in fact, modeling that same "rabid" desire for new technology that we both agree is potentially dangerous.
What exactly have I gained professionally if I never become proficient with any of my technology skills? At best I become a "good" teacher making poor use of a potentially good educational tool. Further, a teacher who is not fundamentally sound in their basic pedagogy becomes a "poor" teacher making poor use of that potentially useful tool. Neither situation seems to benefit the students to the fullest extent possible.
I am NOT advocating suspending the addition of new technologies. I realize that new technologies MUST be explored and that human nature is such that some people will not even try new things unless "forced". I am simply saying that perhaps the best strategy might be to require exposure to a number of new technologies, but then simply insist that each teacher become proficient (within a reasonable timeline) with the piece of technology that they see the most benefit for their students in and that they feel the most comfortable using. This would seem to solve many issues. First, as is evidenced by our current use of technology, students will still be exposed to a variety of different technologies. For example, certain teachers have already made huge strides with developing web sites/virtual classrooms. Others have begun to make good use of the smartboards. Still others are using specialized computer software and probes to gather and analyze data. Some teachers are already doing all several of these things!Second, those teachers have done so up to this point primarily because they enjoyed/were comfortable with these technologies. Therefore, they are more likely to be making more effective use of the technology and are less stressed. This would definitely appear to benefit the students. Wouldn't such an apporach to technology integration be a good way to model the concepts of learning styles and differentiated instruction that we believe to be so important?
As an example of some technology ethics that I try to expose my students to, I have included a link to a video I use in environmental science. It focuses on cell phones, but the implications discussed can be applied to virtually all technology (even some relatively primitive ones). To be honest, unforunately I think much of it goes "in one ear and out the other" due to our society's infatuation with new things....especially things that make us have to do less work.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkbpiL9UsY8
Chris, I must whole-heartedly agree with your comments regarding most internet-based technology as mainly just different ways to give students greater access to information. In some cases, it even provides a way to do some basic processing of data that would be more time-consuming to do manually. I further agree that these technologies cannot teach my students how to apply advanced cognitive skills (such as analysis, syntheis, etc) to make use of this information. It cannot teach them the ethical implications of using that information.
ReplyDeleteI want to clarify that I am NOT anti-technology. If I were, I obviously wouldn't be using this venue to discuss this issue. I wouldn't use my smartboard religiously,nor would I use streaming video, have my students use the computer software and probes, be preparing to use live video link (Skype?) to connect my classroom with a professor in a high-tech X-ray refraction lab at UNI.
It appears that I am at least not "behind the times" then when it comes to technology integration. However, I have come to use those technologies either after substantial training/exploration time or because I genuinely felt the NEED to do so (e.g the live video). I have taken much time to thoroughly consider the impacts (both good and bad) on myself and, more importantly, my students. This includes not just the pedagological and ethical implications, but the personal/social and environmental ones as well. Only after this lenghty and arduous consideration have I adpoted and continue to use these technologies.
I am simply wondering if our (and by this I even include society as a whole) pacing in acquiring and using new technologies is allowing us sufficient time to develop the necessary proficiencies and to make the crucial analysis of their impacts.
I think we have different perceptions of the objective behind our technology PD time. My interpretation was that it was indeed meant to introduce teachers to some new tools so they could choose the medium most suited to their curriculum needs.
ReplyDeleteBack in October we explored Google Sites and SmartBoard & Responder tips & tools. At this last session, we had a few hours to work on the tool of our choice. I had not heard that creating a site was mandatory or even highly recommended; as the Google Site presenter, I discussed the advantages it had and ways to integrate (?) - and took teachers step by step through creating a site.
Some teachers have been working in Wikispaces on their own as well as exploring Google Docs on their own- so these handouts were emailed so that teachers could choose the technology platform they were most comfortable with to integrate into a lesson. I think so far the district has been allowing teachers to move at their own pace. The only piece of technology that has come with an explicit expectation, to my knowledge, is our blogs so that we can post responses as well as post lesson plans. In your case, I see how it could seem like more since you are planning to post your lesson plans within a website instead but still need to be prepared to post comments in the blog setting.
My opinion regarding the spectrum of technology is that a decent amount of exposure has more advantages than disadvantages. Some may choose to move at a slower pace, while others may be ready to pick and choose and integrate different mediums for different purposes. At the pace our students are exploring technology, I would prefer to make more tools available than restricting or hiding them (or sheltering staff from them)- when we have "some" on staff ready to run.
In terms of which tools and how many. I can assure you that the tools I present or promote - are tools that I have used in my classroom (online classroom Ning & Google Docs), college classes (Wikispaces, Google Sites, & Google Docs), or professionally (Google Sites & Docs), and these are all tools that I have researched as well as found success in using with my students (especially at a level of differentiation), in using myself, or having received high regard from respected peers.
I do appreciate your perspective and believe these discussions are necessary in order to fully understand our range of comfort. As well, I think we are clarifying misconceptions on both ends that we didn't even realize existed.
An additional clarifications are in order. First, it seems that my reservations about a broad, shallow exposure to technology is NOT a personal criticism. Nor did I intend to suggest that anyone was not being professional in their approach to technology. My comments about my choices of technology implementation were meant to point out that I, personally, require much training and time before I feel professionally able to effectively expose my students to it. I was NOT suggesting that anyone was presenting these technologies to me without similar consideration for their own use of it, but only that it will take me a similar amount of time to explore and evaluate these newer sites/capabilites in terms how they will work for me and my students. I most certainly do NOT advocate restricting or hiding technology from students or staff! Finally, it still feels as though if one is not 100% for the use as much technology as possible as often as possible, then they must somehow be uninformed, reactionary, and not have the best interests of their students in the forefront of their mind?!?
ReplyDeleteHmmmm, I'm sorry, I am not sure what you mean, and did not intend or take anything personally. I guess I was simply trying to break down the tools we've been exposed to and the rate at which we've been exploring and of course the rationale behind my supportive nature.
ReplyDeleteI think a happy medium is good and natural for all. We are a learning community all progressing with different goals and each his/her own pace whether 10, 50, or 90% in favor of one initiative or another - all of us focused on the #1, our students and their success... technology or not.
I apologize if I my previous response seemed more or less.
You are all making valid points here, BUT, I think there is a point that is missing here.
ReplyDeleteIn order for the teachers/students to learn and explore technology, they have to have it readily available.
I have 4 computers and my own personal laptop (which I prefer students don't use) that have the needed software for my classes in my classroom. That means when I have more than 4 students in the room we have to take turns using the computers. I have to then have a hands on lesson that keeps those who are not on the computer engaged and productive.
We can never become proficient if we all don't have the equal access.
There are still teachers without personal machines, who rely on whatever computer is around to access their email and do whatever needs done.
I believe that if everyone had access to their own machine and could become familiar with it, given time, they would be able to find and or develop the technology path they need to be on.
Perhaps those of us who are comfortable using technology in our classrooms could be paired with another instructor as a sort of mentor?
By the way...I may end up liking blogs. :)
You make a very good point about access. Both my students and I are much more likely to realize the motivational boost that technology apparently promises when we can actually use it regularly and reliably. I fully understand that this is being worked on diligently and I very much appreciate the efforts of those doing so! However,at this time, its hard to get really motivated to give up time to add digital copies of my worksheets to my class web page knowing that for the most part they will rarely be accessed from school (due to access to machines) and even more rarely from home. This is actually one of the places where I am excited about using technology and I would LOVE to go paperless!
ReplyDeleteAs a side note, I would like to offer the notion that people of all ages learn things best when they have a genuine need to. Someone else telling them they have to (no matter how compelling the reasons given may be) generally does not provide the stimulus needed to deeply motivate. The individual must come to a place where they realize that they truly want to do cannot be done without learning the new skil or concept. Case in point: I am old enough to remember life "B.C." (before computers). In those days, the only people who learned to type were going to be secretaries, writers, etc. Of course, we were all given lots of reasons why we should take it anyway (e.g. "thing of the future", "just good skill to learn", etc.)Needless to say, with my science ambitions, I chose not to.learn proper keyboarding. Obviously at some point later, computer keyboards became so ubiquitous that I was "forced" by my OWN desire to access the computers capabilities to use the keyboard. I still don't use proper technique, but I can type somewhere in the range of 40-50 wpm and my career/life sucess doesn't seem to have suffered noticeably. My point is that we need to try to find that way to spark that individual desire to learn technology (and accept that this may be a slow and cumbersome process) before we will truly see our students inspired. Since I'm a fan a quotes: "Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig." LOL
You have all made a lot of great comments and the line about learning to type is probably where schools are heading. More and more schools are going to be using Silo and PPEL money to purchase these types of programs. If you look at Maine alone the entire state is one to one and Nebraska from what I heard is also heading in that direction. Scott made the point that technology is disruptive and new technology is constantly around the corner and will not stop.
ReplyDelete