First of all, technology does break. You're correct that this is because
som times we're too far on the leading curve, and in many ways I prefer a
"go slow to go fast" approach, where useful and reliable technology is full=
y
utilized before the next new thing is implemented. As hinted at in my post=
,
word processing is still probably the "killer app" in academics, although
one could argue that communication tools (the emails, the threaded
discussions, the collaborative Skypes and chats) are now beginning to give
word processing and online research a run for their money.
One other idea: the original premise of technology in schools wasn't
"paradigm change." I believe it was "more efficiency." I.e., this tech is
supposed to make my life easier-- but now I have have to post homework four
different places and on a calendar, etc. When I look at friends with
careers outside of education, their work is becoming more collaborative and
more involved because of technology as well-- not easier or more
simplistic. I don't think anyone has stopped with simple automation using
technology. We reach for more, and that hurts sometimes.
As for "taking the blame" for miscommunication, I guess I've always accepte=
d
that as a norm because the alternative is to blame others. "Kids nowadays
are so ...., it's their fault that I can't get my ideas across." In my
teaching experience, student engagement goes up when the assignments and
discussions are crafted as an unfolding story that they are participants
in. The tools used weren't as important as the crafting, but understanding
their role and increasing engagement is critical.
I wrote the post in part because I've been reviewing Ted Sizer's work, and =
I
like how his ten common principles of Essential Schools aren't far from my
experiences and goals-- more depth, using one's mind well, personalization,
student as worker, a tone of decency and trust, and other CES principals
point towards objectives that are more than just teaching skills. To
appreciate and engage each student individually, careful attention to
communication and emotional intelligence is needed. All of that was
important before personal computers, of course, but the engagement of
students with technology doesn't necessary work against these goals. The
open and flexible approaches to technology used by top teachers show a
desire to engage on many levels.
Ah, fun stuff, but it's time to get back to work. Again, thanks for your
response!
Jim Heynderickx
On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 12:32 PM, Norman Maynard <nlm1@verizon.net> wrote:
> Thanks for sharing this Jim.
> Two quick responses:
> First, technology does "break" a lot. Unfortunately, I'm not old enough t=
o
> compare it to say, the phone. How often did the phone break down when tha=
t
> technology was first introduced into society? And it occurs to me that th=
is
> may not even be a problem of design/ manufacture, but one of too early
> adoption: we adopt computing technology much, much faster than we adopted
> anything else, and it may be partly our fault for buying, or buying into,
> these technologies before they've had time to really mature. I know I am
> often guilty of this. (Though I've not yet bought a Droid, so I'm very
> proud
> of myself on that count - the wisdom of age I guess!)
>
> Second, I'm not entirely in agreement that "if the students were confused
> or
> lost doing an assignment or understanding my
>
> comments on their papers, it was my fault entirely."
>
> As a teacher, when covering a new topic or handing out assignments, it ca=
n
> seem that I am expected to
>
> - present it orally
> - write in on the board or otherwise present it graphically
> - provide examples for students to take home and work from (often so
> their tutors can understand the assignment)
> - post the assignment and examples on the web
> - post it to the school calendar
> - and finally, answer all the emails from parents asking when things ar=
e
> due or what exactly I am expecting
>
>
> Learning issues aside, we fail our students when we do not teach them goo=
d
> listening skills. Or how to focus when there is important information bei=
ng
> given.
>
> Your overall point though is well taken, and this kind of collaboration i=
s
> just in time to solve problems (global warming, etc.) that require it. It
> reminds me of the cathedral in Florence. At the time it was built, there
> was
> no technology for spanning the central crossing of the nave and transept.
> So
> the cathedral remained uncovered, open to the elements for two generation=
s
> before Brunelleschi came along and developed the technology to build the
> dome that is there today.
>
> Norman Maynard
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 3:56 AM, Jim Heynderickx <jheynder@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi, All
> >
> > The following is a quote from my blog of a larger article I'm working o=
n.
> > Drafts, drafts, drafts! Thanks!
> >
> > The Balance <http://www.k12converge.com/?p=3D469>
> >
> > Before doing this =93educational technology=94 thing, I made a small li=
ving
> as
> > a
> > writer. I wrote for ERiC, the Educational Research Information Clearing
> > House, way back in the 1980s. I wrote articles and research reports, at
> the
> > same time I wrote short stories and plays.
> >
> > [Original message snipped to comply with 200 line limit.]
>
> [ For info on ISED-L see http://www.gds.org/ISED-L ]
> Submissions to ISED-L are released under a creative commons, attribution,
> non-commercial, share-alike license.
> RSS Feed, http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?RSS&L=3DISED-L
>
[ For info on ISED-L see http://www.gds.org/ISED-L ]
Submissions to ISED-L are released under a creative commons, attribution, non-commercial, share-alike license.
RSS Feed, http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?RSS&L=3DISED-L
