He blinked. "Kidspiration? What's that?"
"Well, it's basically what you just described -- it's a software program for visually organizing, sorting, and organizing informaion for writing assignments. It's based on a program called Inspiration, but this one is tailored to kids."
I loaded it up and showed him the basics, and he said "Wow. Wow, it's amazing what technology can do these days. I would have loved this if I had this available when I was a kid. Why isn't everybody using this? I should be bringing the kids in and having them use this."
To which I cautioned him: "Whoah, whoah, whoah. It's a great tool, but in essence it really isn't any different than using the graphic organizers which you can print on paper and give to kids. You have to do it in a guided, purposeful way... and you have to explicitly teach the kids how you want them to use it. There needs to be a clear end-goal, and you'll have to demonstrate with some direct instruction. It's just a tool... if you bring them in and plop them in front of it, they may find it neat or intriguing, but they're not going to learn or accomplish much."
Completely disregarding what I said, he brought his students in later that week, and I saw many of them using Kidspiration -- but not in any logical or purposeful way. They were merely clicking the buttons, adding pictures, and linking them. While proponents of constructivist learning might argue that this is learning, the fact is that such exploration was not going to result in any meaningful product or applied cognitive connections, at least not any time soon (ie. before they graduate from 6th grade.)
I relay this anecdote because it perfectly illustrates multiple hurdles of technology education:
1. Access to hardware, software, and other resources is essential
Part of the problem in the above scenario could be that the teacher did not have resources available to provide whole-class direct instruction in use of the computer tools. There are only 3 computers in his classroom of 24 students, and those students only get 30 minutes per week of whole-class computer access in the school computer lab.
It might seem obvious that, in order to learn with and about technology, technology must be present. Although access to computers in schools has grown significantly over the past few decades, many schools have only a few or even just a single computer in the classroom. The average computer-to-student ratio is currently around 4 or 5 students per computer. Yet studies are beginning to show that students provided computers in a 1-to-1 ratio outperform peers in traditional classrooms. For one thing, it should be intuitively obvious that more computers means more time on the computers for practice. But, perhaps more importantly, a one-to-one ratio means that whole-group instruction can be provided with explicit teacher guidance.
When students must share resources, it is possible that only some will monopolize the machines (in a group setting, this could result in off-task behavior as well as disenfranchised students.) Even more troubling, certain beneficial tasks such as direct instruction in use of the tools, collaborative communications, and direct-response quizzes and polls are rendered impossible.
2. Technology solutions must be well-planned and rationally selected
Clearly, there is a need to acquire more technology... but it isn't as simple as that. Technology changes rapidly and schools never have ideal funding for the technologies they may want, so it is important to prioritize based on needs rather than on buying whatever cutting-edge gadgets may be available (Roblyer, 2006, pp. 64-65). Instead of thinking "This shiny new gadget seems pretty cool! How can we use it?" schools should be asking "What needs do we have and could they be met by technology? Which technology would best fill that role?" Just because something is newer or more expensive does not mean it is the right tool for the job.
Consider these examples:
- Students need to learn how to locate and evaluate online information for research and synthesis. The teacher may like using his or her Mac at home so the firt thought might be "Let's get a Mac lab." Yet purchasing a full class set of iMacs is going to run $1000 per computer... and that doesn't include the problem of finding space and electrical wiring for the workstations. A little diligent research would reveal that the exact same online research activities could be done with $250 netbook computers, which are small enough to be easily stored and portable enough to be shared between classrooms.
- Students are required to learn how to create spreadsheets for a math or science activity. The first thought may be to teach students Microsoft Excel, since that has long been a "real world" standard. Yet a cash-strapped school could save a lot of money by using either Google Apps (free, but requires internet connectivity/bandwidth) or OpenOffice (free, Microsoft-compatible, and runs on local computers)
3. It's not the medium, but instructional methods that cause learning
Even when technology is acquired and becomes available, teachers must be proficient in using that technology effectively. It was absurd in the example above for the teacher to assume that placing students in front of the software would automatically lead to successful creation of a product or knowledge because technology is, essentially, a "tool." Merriam-Webster defines technology as: "a manner of accomplishing a task especially using technical processes, methods, or knowledge." Thus technology can be mental tools or physical tools. If you hand someone a hammer, wood, and nails (the tools for building a house) does a house automatically construct itself? No. Tools must be used or applied. The same goes for technology; you cannot simply sit someone in front of a given software or hardware device -- especially ones designed for synthesis, creation, or other higher-order tasks -- and expect them to automatically create something. Patricia Deubel writes in The Great Debate: Effectiveness of Technology in Education:
... Robert Kozma, emeritus director and principal scientist at SRI International, who stated in a recent debate (The Economist, 2007) that "technology can make a particularly significant contribution when coordinated with the training of teachers to integrate technology into their teaching, with applications that draw on the unique capabilities of technology, and with supportive curricular, assessment, and school contexts that advance complex problem solving, creative thinking, and life-long learning--skills that are needed to support an information society and knowledge economy" (sec: Con Opening Statement). However, it's not the medium, but instructional methods that cause learning. Educators need to think in a systematic way about how and when to incorporate any new pedagogical strategy, including media, into instruction.
But the question remains: how does such knowledge come about? Studies summarized by Roblyer (2006, p.65) make a few points about teacher training clear:
- "One-shot" inservice training is ineffective; training must be ongoing and incremental.
- Most teachers learn technology through effect modelers, mentors, and colleague interaction.
- Teachers need support and guidance even after training.
References
Deubel, P. (2007). The Great Debate: Effectiveness of Technology in Education. Retrieved February 8, 2010 from Eduscapes website: http://thejournal.com/articles/2007/11/08/the-great-debate-effectiveness-of-technology-in-education.aspx
Johnson, L. and Lamb, A. (2007). The One Computer Classroom. Retrieved February 8, 2010 from Eduscapes website: http://eduscapes.com/tap/topic84.htm
Roblyer, M. D. (2006). Integrating Educational Technology Into Teaching (4th Ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Suhr, K. A., Hernandez, D. A., Grimes, D., Warschauer, M. (2010, January). Laptops and Fourth Grade Literacy: Assisting the Jump over the Fourth-Grade Slump. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 9(5). Retrieved February 6, 2010 from http://escholarship.bc.edu/jtla/vol9/5/
No comments:
Post a Comment