I have a lot of concerns about certain technology being a good
investment, especially trendy (read: pricey) devices like iPads. I get just as
excited as everyone else about having a fully equipped modern classroom with a SmartBoard
and enough computers, but I think this stems from the greedy nature that comes
along with growing up in an entitled consumerist society.
Most of us want to ensure that we have all the ‘tech necessities’
in our lives – a smartphone, high speed wireless internet at home, a big enough
hi-def enough tv, the devices that make our HDTV prove that it’s HD, etcetera,
etcetera. I think that we as teachers have that same mentality about our
classroom – that we, and of COURSE our students, need and deserve the very
best. Otherwise, how are we to educate in the very best manner? (Sarcasm intended)
When we put more thought into it, it becomes obvious that we
do not need to set our classrooms up with one top of the line fully loaded 17” MacBook
Pro and iPad 3 for each student. Nor can we really afford to go to the opposite extreme and have our
students trying to do 21st century work on computers running Windows
’95, or even worse, fail to have our students learn to be tech savvy in the
first place. So the real question is, “how do we find the best balance when it
comes to equipping our schools with modern enough technology on a sensible
budget?” To answer this, we’ll need to have proper research and evaluations
behind how well different technologies support learning.
As Larry Cuban points
out, the research approach needs a lot of improvement and schools have to be
willing to trust the data:
The article is a quick read, but be sure to hit both parts
of it. I’d love to hear your thoughts and reactions – if better research showed
that a lot of classroom technologies have little to no impact on learning, how
would that hit you?
This article was really interesting to read, especially since all the quotes from superintendents and administrators seem to be directly taken from our education courses. Technology is supposed to motivate the student, engage them and ultimately increase test scores. Right? Well, in fact, this article did get me thinking about the research or lack of. I wanted to know the answer, and based on a quick google- I think the answer is 'incomplete' for now. If I didn't read your post I think I would have been swept away into all this commotion and uproar of technology this, technology that. But I did find another site that helped answer my question a little bit:
ReplyDeletehttp://edupln.com/profiles/blogs/will-increased-technology-usage-improve-state-test-scores
Basically I think this first quote summarizes his others, although they all make strong points. "State tests are centered on a student’s mastery of state standards. Technology and software can be used appropriately to strengthen a student’s basic grasp of the standards, but technology is best used to increase a student’s ability to do research, to deepen learning, and to make the curriculum relevant. Those things might not be effectively measured by standardized tests."
His other points talk about how technology literacy doesn't necessarily mean students are more prepared to take a standardized test- which is sadly an important goal of most schools. In the end I still always come to the conclusion that education needs some sort of reform, whether is be backing of standardized tests, or looking at the systems other countries use- I cannot say what it will be but some change is needed. In the end I would not be surprised is currently technologies have little impact on learning according to standardized tests. I do believe having technology literate students will increase their success in later life, but the question is how do we make sure student learning is increased by technology to 'justify' their spending?
Maybe that isn't the question but in the end I think this post stimulated my thinking tremendously in a direction I haven't yet gone. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts.
Thanks for sharing this Liana, it's great! I hadn't thought about it from this perspective either, but the point he makes about the imbalances in what our students are being exposed to is powerful. It's obvious to many teachers that standardized testing is an ineffective and outdated way to legitimately collect information about what our students are capable of. Perhaps the problem isn't that technology is ineffective in improving high stakes testing scores, but rather that high stakes testing is such an outdated archaic practice that it no longer measures the intelligence of 21st century students?
ReplyDeleteThis was a good read, but I disagree with one thing. He says "These devices will motivate students to work harder, gain more knowledge and skills, and be engaged in schooling" I could not agree less with that statement. I see laptops and ipads used in class all the time. The vast majority of them are not being used for constructively in the classroom. I feel like it is demotivating them the try in school. Why try to learn something, when you can just google the answer?
ReplyDeleteThe data on the actual research on the effects of technology in the classroom would be skewed, because from what I see, it is not being used for entertainment rather than gaining knowledge. You would have to separate the two in order to do the research. The research would take years to accomplish too. No matter what the result is, it stems back to causation vs correlation. Just because students are using more technology, does that mean their grades are going up , or they become "smarter"? Finally, we cant come to a conclusion on whether the technology is worth the money, until this research is done correctly.