This week I would like to weigh in on the issue of whether schools should remain on the leading edge of technology.
While many points were raised last Friday during the Point / Counterpoint Presentation, there was one type of reservation, which many people shared, that failed to convince me. A common concern among the audience was that schools should regularly attempt to ride the second wave of technology, instead of surfing on the leading wave. By focusing time and money on preparing for the second wave, some of the audience members thought school would be able to incorporate the technology more effectively. However, this thinking process seems quite Machiavellian, if not selfish. Is it fair to risk the time and effort of one school for the benefit of one’s own? If other schools struggle and flounder, is it right to use this information to satisfy one’s own “ends”?
I believe schools should always attempt to learn alongside the other schools risking their resources in order to develop the technology and methods that will increase the academic livelihood of its students. As educators, we need to think about not only what are students know by the time they leave high school but also what are they capable of learning after they leave. Our students need to be prepared to learn new skills, simplistic and advanced, and with the technological job market share exponentially growing from year to year, our students need proper training. If the world’s information base is doubling every two years as some statistics report, then teachers must focus their efforts on teaching a perpetual learner. One way that teachers can offer students a fighting chance in the future is to help them embrace the technological frontier.
On a different note, I would like to share a story about a school in Pennsylvania that David Warlick mentioned recently in his blog. In the school, each core (English, Math, Social Studies, and Science – sorry World Languages) classroom will receive the following technology and services:
• one laptop per student desk (cart of 25)
• a teacher laptop
• a printer/scanner
• imaging software
• productivity software
• a web cam
• an electronic whiteboard
• a projector
• up to three digital still cameras (per eligible school)
• up to five digital video cameras (per eligible school)
• Infrastructure (wireless network, servers)
• technical support
Imagine what we could do with these toys. The question immediately arises, however, whether too much technology in a classroom inhibits the learning process. Can all of this technology be carefully wielded? Perhaps, David can show them how.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Kevin, I see your point. How can a school jump on a second wave if they are not even up to date on the first? I think there is a struggle here, because I think it is important that schools be up to date in the technology that is out there, but more importantly, the technology the students are using. However, you cannot sacrifice the important of preparing kids for the future, and you don't necessarily need technology to achieve this task. The issue is finding a balance of staying up to date, but also making sure the kids are learning things important to their future.
Hi Kevin
I'm back--trying to catch up on all the blogs.
I wanted to comment on your thoughtful post. One problem with technology in schools over the last decade has been that schools purchase technology BEFORE they know what they are going to do with the technology. Therefore much of it goes underused. I think that to combat this with the "2nd wave" is to make sure the school has a strategic plan to integrate...and only purchase and learn the resources that will help meet those goals (rather than purchasing the latest and greatest and not really using them). Therefore it may not be an issue of the 1st or 2nd wave but rather what your classroom learning goals are. Thank you for posting on this, because I think many other MACers are encountering similar issues in their placements.
Post a Comment