In the beginning of the article, the dad talks about being a paper guy. I would have to agree with him. I do love technology and use it daily, but there is still something about having a hard copy of something in front of me. Many people have Nooks or Kindles, and I just could not use one of those devices; I enjoy holding a book. Plus, I already have bad eyes and stare at a screen for enough hours a day, that I do not need to add another screen into the mix. Going back to the article, though. I don't know if I would have looked on the Internet as a parent for ways to improve the race car. I would have followed the instructions and then try to come up with my own ways with my child on how to improve it. It would be more beneficial for my kid that way, then jumping onto Google and doing a quick search.
I do think it is very important that students have technology and know how to use it correctly. The example of the boy not believing in the Holocaust shocks me. How could you not believe it?! Just because the Internet says it does not exist, does not mean that it doesn't. The boy should have heard about the Holocaust at some point in his life. The fact that he didn't know how to tell if the site was credible or not is besides the point; he should have known that it did exist from a history class. With that said though, I think that a technology class should be required of all students. They should have one in elementary school, middle school and at least one or more classes in high school. For high school, it should be a graduation requirement. For the students who go onto college, they cannot make a mistake like that boy did in the example. Students do need to know about the dangers of the Internet, from blasphemous websites to protecting their privacy. In this digital age, simple skills like this are needed just to survive.
I do not know how I feel about live video cameras in the classroom. As a plus, it does force teachers to constantly reevaluate themselves. I think though that this technology could get out of control with parents. I feel that if parents could watch the class, they will complain too much about the teacher. Ms. Johnson doesn't pick my son enough. Ms. Johnson was mean to Stacy. Ms. Johnson doesn't know what she is doing. These are just some things that parents could say about the teacher. Parents want to believe that their child is the best and brightest, so they could take these biases out on the teacher. I see more problems right now then benefits. I think that what Iowa is doing is weird as well. These technology either needs to go or it needs to be improved first.
The fifth section has a lot of interesting points, but one of the most interesting ones was that if we gave technology to all students, then we are increasing the achievement gap between the rich and the poor. This may sound harsh, but the poor do not have the resources to take care of the technology like the rich do. If they were given a laptop, would they even have Internet access at home? Most likely, the rich are involved with their child's schoolwork. If a rich student doesn't know how to do something, a parent would be able to help them. I doubt that the same could be said for the poor. Poor parents might not have had enough schooling to help their child out. These are just generalizations though. Who knows, maybe the opposite could be true. Maybe technology could actually close this achievement gap.
In the end, I think that collegiality is extremely important. Teachers should work with each other to help improve each other and how to help their students. These teacher-teacher relationships should not just be within their own department; teachers should work with teachers in other disciplines to see if there could be any crossover in order to reinforce material for the students. I also think that idea that students should go to teachers to technology seminars is important. I think a lot of teachers, especially older ones are stuck in their ways. They may go to the seminar, but not add in the technology they learned about. If students are there, they can give their feedback to the teacher. They can help them decide if what they were taught would be worthwhile to introduce into the classroom. If the teacher didn't like the technology, but the students did, it would put pressure onto the teacher to use the technology. Overall, I think that technology should be used in the classroom, but there should be some caution with it. It should not cause more harm than good.
Kalyn, I agree with your talk about needing a hard copy! Even this article that we had to read I printed out and read it; I know in college professors posted articles and text and I had to read them but I would be the one to always have to print them out to read them. I have poor eyesight too but it seems impossible to escape "screens" in this day and age! And I like reading an actual book too because I like visually seeing how far or how much I read of a book rather than hitting the arrow for "next page".
ReplyDeleteWith your reference to the Holocaust, I agree. He should have known from a history perspective, but I feel (based on my tutoring sessions at a high school this past year) that students do not really use their textbooks for information, they rely on lecture and internet to find answers to their homework in the quickest way rather than trying to take initiative and look in the textbook where the facts are!
And with the video footage in the classroom, it is completely true. Parents today tend to be a little more...vocal and overprotective...than they have in the past. Some parents do not even let their children go on a bus because of safety concerns. Parents are quick to raise concerns over bullying and other issues and if there was video footage the negative would be emphasized than the positive from the parent's perspective and can turn into more of a headache than a benefit.
And technology can be useful, but if the rich have all these laptops, iPads, etc. they can do well and the students can use the resources, whereas the poorer students would have to obtain that technology (and where would the money for it come from? taxes? government? the poor receiving a "handout" for technologies that other people may have to work for? and what if that property is not respected and becomes damaged?). I do not mean to offend anyone by that statement, but those are just some thoughts that cross my mind.
And your last point is probably the most important point. Our generation, at least in my opinion, is used to collaboration and teamwork through our courses and learning. However, I know exactly what you mean about the teachers who are "set in their ways". I have encountered several who think their way is the best way and they use the same material every year and do not want to change anything for the benefit of the students, but for themselves to have an "easier job". I think the focus is finally being shifted and the tenured teachers are the ones who need to become open to change because one way or another, it is occurring.
My dad bought my mom a Kindle for Xmas this year, and she promptly returned it. She likes having a hard copy of the book in her hands as well. The Kindle supposedly isn't harmful to your eyes, but this is only in regards to the non-touch kind. Any Kindle with a touch-screen is an LCD screen, which IS bad to be staring at for hours at a time. If I were still living in DC, I might consider purchasing one because it's convenient for someone who commutes daily on the bus or metro, but otherwise I feel as though the time invested would not be worth the price tag.
ReplyDeleteWhat's unique about our generation is that we grew up with print textbooks, but are generally comfortable using computers for items like communication or music (whereas older generations are generally less comfortable). I wouldn't be surprised if our future students are completely comfortable reading textbooks digitally, and that we're the old curmudgeons who are just too uncool to be handing out textbooks digitally, lecturing on the sentimentality of having a hard book in your hands.
One of your most interesting points is in regards to the achievement gap. It's an issue that is often overlooked when discussing technology, and it brings to mind Module 1 from Dr. Alfano's EdPsych book. Some classrooms have six LCD computer monitors in each classroom, which others are getting by with a PC from the stone age. Though this is not to say that effective teaching can not take place without technology, the point is that we would be failing to prepare these children for the real world which is so digitally immersed.
I believe that at some point the government (either federally or at the state) should be providing assistance to high-needs and low-budget schools who are unable to purchase the minimum amount of technology needed to induce meaningful application. I'm not saying that every school should have six LCD monitors in each classroom, but a happy medium should be set as a minimum and strived for. Ideas might include a minimum of two computers per classroom, no more than five years old.
Education in the use of this technology is a must too. What are the consequences of pirating music? How can potential academic sources be evaluated? These are the questions that must be addressed in an ongoing discussion as an interdisciplinary topic.