Is it just me, or does the continued hyper-focus on technology in the classroom leave anyone else just a little bit cold? While it has long been said that academic institutions change more slowly than any others, and for good reason, this is perhaps no longer the case. When I was a school administrator, the joke was always that the kids could keep ahead of the technology, while the adults were forever chasing both.
I do believe that our children are growing up in an increasingly disconnected world -- socially, emotionally, and geographically. Educational technology offers the opportunity for kids to be "connected" in many different ways, even socially, even globally. Is this sort of virtual connection a viable substitute for real connections among students, and between students and adults in their schools? Or does it actually enhance those real-world connections? I think the question of the place of educational technology is one of emphasis, not of essential value.
Less than a year after release of the iPad2, here comes the iPad3. I'm no technology expert, so I do not presume to know how the 3 will surpass the 2, or whether the new iPad will make significant inroads into schools. It seems that everyone has something to say about educational technology these days, and that's not a bad thing. Technology and the Internet allow all of us to have something to say about education, which broadens the stage for this very important discussion.
Do I risk professional suicide -- or at the very least, comment thread suicide -- if I propose that there is a potential downside to the technology craze being embraced by schools? According to this recent NYT article, "the debate continues over whether schools invest wisely in technology -- and whether it measurably improves student achievement." While many comments on this article rave about the benefits of 1:1 technology access in classrooms, others feel differently, as expressed by this comment:
Education that heavily relies on technologies such as laptops is producing a generation of students incapable of prolonged, sustained intellectual thought. This is evident in my college students' performance as:
• The inability to write. Papers resemble texting and not the formal compositions traditionally taught. The writing I see is absolutely abysmal.• Poor behavior in the classroom. Unless professors continually stimulate or entertain students, their minds wander. They become impatient and begin to act out.
One thing is clear: teachers and students love technology and use it constantly in their lives. It is therefore not surprising that most of them feel technology makes school better and "less boring," as I have heard many kids (and teachers) say. Does "less boring" equal greater skill development? And where in the budget-setting process -- particularly during tough times -- do we place line items for computers vs. line items for teaching staff? What is the optimal recipe for the success of our students, within America and relative to other countries?
Technology and the 3 R's
Among the many enthusiastic articles, blogs, and discussion threads about our new educational technology revolution are a few rather tentative voices asking, "But what about deep reading skills? What about writing?" The iPad and similar devices save trees, and that's a good thing, but, assuming these mobile devices eventually get into the hands of every child in America, do we have anything to worry about as well as celebrate? I think we do. Reading on screens encourages skimming and undermines comprehension. Typing on touch pads is difficult. Math has become increasingly disconnected from computation by hand. Some educators feel the tail is wagging the dog, but opinions do vary, and I'm open to all of them. Of greatest interest are best practices in countries outside of our own, and the need to become less inwardly focused.
What About Equal Access?
When the iPad2 came out, much of my cynicism was directed at yet another expensive piece of hardware that would require infrastructural tech supports that school districts don't always have, especially the poorer ones. These tablets would be more intuitive to use and less cumbersome to maintain than traditional desktops and laptops, but here again was another shiny new toy that could potentially further widen the digital divide. And how long would it be before the introduction of a newer version of the iPad that everyone wanted?
Nine months ago a friend of mine who heads a charter school in a socioeconomically disadvantaged urban neighborhood of Providence, Rhode Island, quipped, "So if we somehow come up with the funds to get some iPad2's, what if only 15 months later, there is a newer, better version?" Well, that has happened in much less than 15 months. The arms race is well under way.
It is difficult to find articles that address the issue of equal technology access. It is as if the ubiquitous slogan that "education will be revolutionized" masks the very real problem of equal access across the socioeconomic spectrum. Theoretically all of this new technology can be deployed into schools throughout the country to enhance (even revolutionize) student learning, but can it really? Do Apple, the tech pundits, the academic intelligentsia, and all of the people in the educational trenches really care? It seems a lot more exciting to discuss the technology itself than who will and won't have it. And as is usually the case, technology evolves faster than our understanding of the complex cultural, psychological, and sociological impacts of using it.
Can We Have it All?
Technology isn't going away and it shouldn't. It is in the classroom, the workplace, the home, and many other environments -- to stay. Children must learn to use technology effectively to be successful in our world. No argument there. My concern involves what it may be replacing. Perhaps ever-improved technology will allow teachers to gain more free time that can then be spent nurturing and guiding students in other important ways. That would be a positive way of looking at it.
But what is the appropriate balance between the role of technology in children's education, and the role of human beings in their education? Putting aside questions about 1:1 technology widening versus narrowing the digital divide, what will be the effect of increasing the time kids spend with computers, other technology-assisted classroom learning, and even full-blown online learning, while decreasing the time students spend forming personal relationships with teachers, knowing them and being known, and being academically, socially, and emotionally mentored by caring flesh-and-blood adults? How will upping the incidence of multi-tasking (and the resulting divided attention), increasing the role of information processing in learning, and boosting screen time affect students' learning and developing brains?
This study by the Kaiser Foundation found that today's excessive media consumption via mobile technology among 8 - 18-year-olds is contributing to lower grades and decreased personal satisfaction. Can all of our new academic technology really fit seamlessly into the necessary human relationships, and harmlessly into child cognition and achievement? Is the trade-off in resources -- more technology, fewer teachers, bigger classrooms -- in our kids' best interests? Many people think so. I'm skeptical.
I advocate that educators step aside from the fast-paced excitement of new technology and the cascading waves of enthusiastic media coverage of each new device for long enough to think deeply about what might be gained versus what might be lost.
Used strategically, educational technology has the power to change lives for the better. Used indiscriminately for the sheer awe of it, not so much.
You can connect with Lori on Facebook, Twitter, or Google+.
Follow Lori Day on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Lori_Day
My daughter recently said she wants to buy an iPad for my two-year-old granddaughter. I begged her not to. This little one has a vivid imagination, an astounding vocabulary, a love for books, and a passion for the outdoors. Let's nurture this exuberance and allow her to experience life firsthand rather than vicariously through someone else's lens.
The integration started with just science and has slowly spread into other subjects. It goes without saying that a "best practices" integration/usage manual fitting of our school (parochial k-8 working/middle class) is being developed. In the end, it's all about balance and proper training/implementation that will give tablets the best possible positive impact on students.
In my experience limited attention spans are caused by incredible number of changing images on both computer and TV screens. As I previously stated the average 30 second television commercial flashes a new image every 2 seconds or so. Most TV shows changes camera shots almost as quickly. In several years of surveying students those who are limited in their TV viewing time and recreational computer time I have noticed a much longer attention span. That attention span increases even more if the student is a recreational reader. A full blown study in this area is desperately needed, especially after the recent released study from the AAP:
"A study from the American Academy of Pediatrics shows that watching videos as a toddler may lead to ADHD in later life. TV watching "rewires" an infant’s brain, says Dr. Dimitri A. Christakis lead researcher and director of the Child Health Institute at Children’s Hospital and Regional Medical Center, Seattle. The damage shows up at age 7 when children have difficulty paying attention in school.
"In contrast to the way real life unfolds and is experienced by young children, the pace of TV is greatly sped up." says Christakis. His research appears in the April 2004 issue of Pediatrics. Quick scene shifts of video images become "normal," to a baby "when in fact, it’s decidedly not normal or natural." Christakis says. Exposing a baby’s developing brain to videos may overstimulate it, causing permanent changes in developing neural pathways."
Four, the key for parents and educators is to find well balanced moderation in raising and educating in the digital age. In my social studies classroom technology is used about 10% of the time (for the 2013-14 school year I expect that to go up as we will be switching to tablet-based interactive texts). On my wall are three large posters with my education mantra: Slow Down, Mono-Task, and Think. On every report the students must have a physical book source for every Internet one. They hand write notes in cursive as well as rough drafts of essay assignments before being allowed to type the final draft.
Finally, I am under no illusion that chuckholes abound as tablets are integrated into classrooms. Wrong choices will be made along the way implementing, weak/ineffective apps will be purchased, and poor governance by staff of student usage to name a few. With this in mind, I am firmly convinced that finally critical mass has been reached in digital education. True 1-1 ratio in technology with the ability to access, collect, internalize, interpret, and demonstrate information. I have watched this happen via our fifth grade class this year via grant. The level of engagement continues to grow even as the newness has worn off. Part of this success is due to deliberate rather than all-at-once roll out.
First, the number of teachers who are comfortable using technology is in the majority now, thanks to requirements in college education programs and Intel's Teach to the Future training. Computer competency and usage is solid.
Second, training is now a key component in rolling out new technology. Unlike the late 1980's and 1990's when computers were dumped into classrooms without such training, administration is much wiser about the limited $$ spent and are demanding/negotiating worthwhile training programs.
Three, our children are growing up in a world that seems to us to be running at hyper speed. But this is always the case with each generation. Though we wish it wan't true children's brains are being wired naturally every day to expect quick impulses of new information. Just watch the amount of image changes in any 30 second commercial. It is easy for us adults to sympathize with Maggie Smith's character on an episode of "Downton Abby" when she laments at being unable to accept electricity and the telephone.
continued in next post
Schools have limited budgets, limited resources of every type so they should really be looking for the best bang for their buck and at $25-$35 the Pi certainly seems to fit the bill. No btw I don't work for them nor am I affiliated in any way I just find the entire project laudible and exciting. The cost btw does not include mouse, keyboard or monitor. Check out http://www.raspberrypi.org/ if you're interested.
But it must be remembered no matter the computers used in schools - these are not panacea for every ill there are limits to what computers and their use can accomplish. Educators (and more importantly admin) should keep in mind that you don't use a spanner when what you need is a soldering iron.
There is an Education revolution going on all over America right now. Yes it will take them a while to develop a curriculum that works. The best curriculum that will work is a program that has more than one learning curve. This way a student learns many different styles instead of just one.
This is what we lost in schools over the years. I went to school decades ago we had field trips, in class experiments, we learned how to balance a checkbook, how to cook, and we put on exhibits that we were graded on. Rockets were set off hopefully to go the highest of anyone else's and it was so cool because we had the lower grades as a audience cheering us on. Sadly by the time my third from youngest was out of school all of that was gone. MY youngest saw none of this. None of my grandchildren have either.
We need to bring it back. http://gygo.getyourgeekon.info/2012/02/what-teachers-need-to-do/