A brief overview of each chapter:
Chapter 6- Computer Literacy: Limping Toward Tomorrow’s Jobs
- A White House report stated that by the year 2000, about 60% of the nation’s jobs would demand the use of computer skills and would be better paid than a job where computer work was not involved. However, many employers (even IT employers) who were surveyed felt that computer skills were not that important to them. They were more concerned with things such as, a deep and broad base of knowledge, strong character, the ability to speak, write, and comprehend, and the ability to work as a team.
- When using computers only 2 senses are engaged, hearing and sight.
- SCANS (the Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills) report issued by the Department of Labor came up with a proposal for schools that involved learning through real world problems.
o Many schools did not have a problem with the proposal but had a problem with carrying it out.
o Teaching this way takes an unruly amount of time and patience.
o Was quickly forgotten and replaced with testing and accountability.
(Sorry we got a little carried away with this chapter)
Chapter 7- Bulldozing the Imagination
- Getting rid of hands on activities or cutting certain subjects and replacing them with computers hinders “the experiences that build students’ inner foundations and their imaginations."
- Using a computer may be too technical for younger students (through 3rd grade) who have not yet developed experiences in the human and physical world and would therefore be most effective if done in the upper grades.
Chapter 8- The Spoils of Industry Partnerships
- Once again it’s all about the benjamains.
- Instead of helping the schools, companies often created more problems by marking up equipment by adding additional costs, not carrying out promises, not delivering equipment that it promised, not properly installing equipment and not training teachers.
Chapter 9- The Research Game: Faith and Testing in Las
Vegas
- President Bush stated that before any new program could be adopted it had to be scientifically proven to be worthwhile. This brought about a problem for schools: How do we evaluate the claims of scientific research?
- A lengthy discussion about the scientific research about Renaissance Learning’s products, Accelerated Reader and Accelerated Math is then discussed.
Chapter 10- Education’s Holy Grail: Teacher Training
- Major problem: Education’s approach to training its teachers.
- Teacher training involves large amounts of time, money, and effort and districts only invest anywhere from 1-3 % of their resources on this.
- Teachers are often trained by someone who does not have a background in teaching.
In chapters 6-10 Postman refers to several educational e-lusions about technology. They are as follows:
- A rush toward technology is the best guarantee of security in the years ahead.
- Parents faith in technology’s power may be quite a misconception.
- With computer technology, the choices for teachers of how to use the technology can be a mirage.
- Teacher training will solve technology’s problems.
- Students and teachers rarely have time to do justice to both challenges, or even to one. (using computer simulated programs and learning the core subjects)
Comments that we agreed with:
1. Bonnie Beach’s (an Ohio University professor) lesson on technology: “Schools should actually avoid being on technology’s cutting edge.”
2. Theodore Sizer’s comment on testing: “Tests tend to test how one individual performs on that kind of test.”
3. “Unfamiliarity with computers remains surprisingly common within education circles. “
Reasons:
1. Technology in education is constantly changing and it never fails that just as teachers start getting comfortable with the technology they are using that something new comes along. The school system feels the need to replace what is currently being used with this new technology. This becomes a problem for all teachers, especially those users who are less “tech savvy.” Teachers have to be trained on the new equipment (if training is offered), taking away even more of the free time that was almost non-existent to begin with. Therefore, if school systems would just sit back and watch to see what happens with a certain program, there would be less change, less money wasted, and probably happier teachers.
2. It has been stated numerous times that students have many different learning styles. Some are visual learners while others are kinesthetic learners. Since teachers are suppose to use various teaching styles to reach all of the students within their classroom, why do tests not do the same? For this reason, we should look at other measures when assessing students other than just tests because they may not be able to efficiently express themselves through this medium. One example of this is with BCR’s (brief constructed response questions). We are constantly having students practice them because they are part of MSA. However, some students can easily solve the problem they are given and tell you how they did it, but have a hard time putting their explanation into words (which is where the majority of their score rests).
3. Since we both have a role in teaching teachers how to use different aspects of technology we could definitely relate to this comment. Both of us have encountered teachers who do not know how to use a mouse, check their email (which is suppose to be done on a daily basis), and properly shut down their computers. To us, these are simple tasks, but to many teachers these are very difficult tasks that make the thought of incorporating technology into the classroom a very frightening and intimidating task.
Kerri and Marcy
15 comments:
I agree with many of your points.
Reason #2- I think performance assessments would be great to do instead of so much multiple choice/scantron testing. I see the same things with BCRs and with test anxiety in general with these formal tests. I think more focus needs to be not on how to write BCRs but how to help kids be able to use words to explain their thinking. To me, those are different.
Reason #3- This quote makes sense because I think you have to have a willingness to learn, take the time, and understand. The technology wave has brought more training sessions(sometimes), an added element to teaching, constant changes, problems, etc. For most, it is an instant turn off and the lack of support has formed people's attitudes against technology.It is important to think about what is in our control to change and how to make the best of the situation, especially becuase most of us don't have control over the big picture. It is also important to remember that technology "experts" don't have all the answers and attitudes need to be checked at the door...in some way or another, we are all or have been in the same boat at one point in time.
I agree with your point about school systems showing an interest in new computer programs. However, there are basic skills that teachers should know that usually can be used across various software programs. These such skills are creating and saving a document, navigating the internet, and basic trouble-shoot skills. If a teacher knows these technological skills then they can apply them to any new program that comes along. After all, we know that if we teach students the building blocks of learning in math such as basic addition and subtraction they will be more successful in the more difficult objectives than if they did not master these basic skills.
However, as mentioned in the book, Ben’s training sessions consisted of sitting in an auditorium while watching visuals on a screen. This does not give the teachers a chance to apply what they are learning and as mentioned in the book, they will forget what they were “taught” in the lesson because they were not given the opportunity to internalize what they learned. This goes to show that our training sessions need to be hands-on and meaningful in order for teachers to be motivated and confident in using these skills in the classroom. Then and only then will the knowledge of computers be passed down to our students.
Hopefully with the pending technology jobs opening up in Howard County we will see an increase in both student and teacher comfort levels with computers.
I also agree with Reason 2 (especially since MSA is in a few weeks and the teachers and students at my school are feeling the pressure). As Kerri and Marcy said, I think we should look at other measures when assessing students. I find it extremely frustrating to see bright students struggle to express their thoughts and explain their answers in BCR format, especially when how they score on MSA is taken into consideration when placing students for the next school year (at least at my school). Michael Beck as stated in Oppenheimer says "that no single test should determine a student's fate, let alone an entire school's" I found this to be very true; however don't feel school systems do. An example of this is Annapolis High School in Anne Arundel County. After four years of not meeting testing standards the Superintendent told all staff, including the cafeteria and custodial staff that they had to reapply for the jobs they currently hold. I think this is a perfect example of how standardized tests are currently ruling the classroom or as Oppenheimer put it standardized tests have become the "implacable boss" in the classroom.
Ellen mentioned two ideas that struck a cord with me. First, referring back to the commonality of teachers’ unfamiliarity with computers, Ellen mentions that it is essential to have “a willingness to learn, take the time, and understand.” I agree that this is an essential first step but I think it is not necessarily that simple. An individual’s willingness to learn is in their own hands yet can be cultivated within the school. Attaining teacher buy-in, providing sufficient opportunities to learn, and allotting time to collaborate with other teachers, an administration can motivate teachers and cultivate a willingness to learn. To take the time to understand technology and how to implement it effectively is asking something very different from different teachers. For some, this may be a handful of workshops, classes and a few hours of individual practice, while for others it may be much, much more. In most schools insufficient time is allotted for technology-focused professional development leaving the latter group of teachers in an exasperating situation.
Secondly, Ellen mentioned the constant changes and problems that have accompanied the arrival of technology. I think these regular occurrences have a direct effect on the aforementioned willingness to learn. A teacher may have begun as motivated and willing to learn and implement technology, but along the journey was faced with countless road blocks, detours, and changed destinations. As problems and changes increase, frustration also increases and motivation decreases. Hearing veteran teachers speak of the problems they have encountered along their personal journeys with technology, I am not surprised that their willingness to learn has become quite tarnished.
I agree with the comments about schools being on the cutting edge of technology. I feel that if a school can successfully find a way to use technology in their classrooms, then that is half the battle. There shouldn’t be a constant need to always have the latest devices especially if you haven’t successfully mastered the former equipment you are first given. I understand that certain things need to be upgraded, but not all schools need things like white boards or scanners. Items such as these would be a waste in my school as most teachers don’t even find the time to figure out how to use the technology they already have. I think there needs to be some sort of evaluation process to determine who will actually use the new technology before money is spent. Since teacher support seems to be an issue in many schools,that has to be considered before presenting teachers with new things. I know in my situation I would rather have working windows and blinds, or perhaps air conditioning, before a new shiny computer.
I agree with Maggie’s comment concerning the need for hands-on and meaningful training sessions for teachers. I am stunned with the manner in which professional development material is often presented to teachers. After passively sitting through many professional development lectures, I have left frustrated and feeling less ‘developed’ than when I entered. With many topics, but especially technology, a lecture format is ineffective. Maggie noted the importance of teachers being “motivated and confident in using these skills in the classroom,” which should be the goal of technology workshops. However, one cannot expect these results by curbing teachers’ hands-on experience and time to practice these skills. The type of professional development described as typical in comparison to the hands-on workshops needed reminds me of the Chinese Proverb - Tell me and I’ll forget; show me and I may remember; involve me and I’ll understand.
In the original post, Marcy and Kerri briefly mention the e-lusions that Oppenheimer reveals in Chapters 6 – 10. I have found the elusions throughout the book to be central in tying together Oppenheimer’s thoughts. Seemingly intent on pulling the wool from the reader’s eyes in regards to technology, Oppenheimer refers to e-lusions to assist in this process. Through school case studies, citing research, and a historical overview of technology, Oppenheimer attempts to shed light on many e-lusions that have apparently deceived the public.
The following e-lusion mentioned in this section was particularly interesting to me: parents’ faith in technology’s power may be quite a misconception. At my last parent-teacher conference, a parent informed me that my class and my instruction were of no use to her son now that they had purchased an Algebra II CD-ROM. Stunned and insulted, I was temporarily at a loss for words. Not to imply, but to testify that my teaching had been replaced by a computer program left me brooding over a sense of unemployment. I did attempt to explain to her that the experiences and information her son had access to in class were beneficial to his education and personal development, yet the words were futile. She had complete faith in the power of the technology. Unfortunately her faith and the CD-ROM were not enough to produce results as her son’s performance steadily declined.
Oppenheimer brings forth his concerns of technology’s negative effect on the body’s brain and research to support these concerns. When children spend much of their time using technology, they miss out on so many indispensable experiences. It seems that parents trying to provide opportunities for their children through technology may instead be sacrificing developmental opportunities and harming their children inadvertently.
Maggie stated that there are computer skills that teachers should know that they can use across various software programs. I agree that this should be the case, however what they should know and what they do know are often very different. I have trained hundreds of elementary school teachers on how to use a program to take attendance and input their grades electronically. Through this process I have encountered many teachers who are very “tech savvy” and would be fine with any new program that their school system were to adopt. However, I also encountered numerous teachers who were on the other end of the spectrum. Some of these teachers had never even turned their classroom computer on prior to our training. It would be nice for all teachers to have the same base of technology knowledge, but is it fair to expect them to possess certain skills? We don’t expect all of our students to learn at the same pace, so why should this be expected of teachers?
I also agree with Theodore Sizer’s comment "Tests tend to test how one individual performs on that kind of test.” I think Ellen is right in saying that teachers need to incorporate more performance assessments instead of consistently using and creating paper and pencil tests. I believe there needs to be some sort of balance. I have witnessed this first hand with a student in my 4th grade science class. She took the two page paper and pencil test I gave her on a unit we had just finished. After studying very hard and having a conference with her parents after they received her final score on the test, we all agreed that perhaps because of her dyslexia we could give her the test over again-this time by asking her the questions and her giving me the answers orally. As expected she received an A on the oral version of the same test as opposed to a D on the paper and pencil test. This goes to show that every student does learn differently and sometimes it's just a matter of recognizing each students learning style and providing various types of assessments to meet all learning needs.
I believe as educators we rely way to much on pencil and paper tests because it is what we are use to giving and its the easiet and fastest to create. Teachers need to be more cognizant and creative when thinking of different ways to assess their students so that they can meet all learning needs.
Maggie_fed says in her response that inservices should be more "hands-on and meaningful in order for teachers to be motivated and confident in using these skills in the classroom." I have to say that the majority of the workshops I have attended have thankfully been hands-on. I'm the so-called liasion between the county's tech department and my school. I am presented hands on workshops featuring new programs (or otherwise programs they've installed on our computers and would like for us to use) and it is up to me to take that information back to my staff. These hands-on opportunities occur twice a year. As a matter of fact, when I first signed on to be this POC, I was inserviced for a 4 or 5 half days during the summer in order to catch me up to the Year 2 POCs who had already received training throughout the previous school year. Of course, as a technologically interested person, I absorbed most of it, and was proficient at it, but it takes more than just hands-on and meaningful experiences to internalize new ideas. It takes repitition. Isn't this what we tell our kids? Practice makes perfect?
Robin mentions the proverb worth repeating: - Tell me and I’ll forget; show me and I may remember; involve me and I’ll understand.
Kerri and Marcy commented in their summary of chapter nine that "President Bush stated that before any new program could be adopted it had to be scientifically proven to be worthwhile. This brought about a problem for schools: How do we evaluate the claims of scientific research?" In the book, we were given numerous claims that Accelerated Reader had made about the successfulness of their product. One claim, on page 252, said, "...schools which owned AR performed better than non-AR schools on virtually all subject tests..." It was later reported, on page 255, by the the National Reading Panel that, "...the studies were so handicapped by design flaws that it was impossible to tell what was going on." Going back to the question above, I don't think schools or teachers do or should have to evaluate the scientific claims made by companies like AR. We have neither the time, nor the scientific training for the most part, to evaluate these claims. I think schools need to leave that up to the experts like the National Reading Panel, to evaluate these claims. Once schools receive the evaluations, then they can make proper judgements as to whether to purchase the products or not. This goes back to the point made by many in this discussion that it is not beneficial for schools to be on the cutting edge of technology.
Back to Kerri and Marcy’s post about chapter 7- As I was listening to the news last week
I heard a story that stated that fast-paced computer games are creating ADHD children. They really didn’t say much more about it than that. It was a very short statement with little to back it up. However, Oppenheimer wrote this same thing in book back in 2003 and today we are still talking about this problem. How do we know if this is actually true? How can they test it?
Oppenheimer also states that technology can hinder a child’s imagination. He states that students suffer in creativity, social and cognitive development and physical health. I think that this is true in many ways. Children are not using their imagination as they once were by playing games that are hands-on and that use all of the senses. They are also not playing outside as frequently with their peers. I think that some of this is due to technology. However, some students are not playing outside because their neighborhoods are unsafe. If physical health is really being compromised then schools need to stop reducing recess minutes and increasing the amount of time on the computer.
In class last week we talked about how filmstrips were once used as time-fillers. We can say the same about www.unitedstreaming.com and other websites that are used in the classroom. PG County has placed this website in all areas of the curriculum guide for teachers to use. A movie can not replace an actual walk in the woods where all of the senses are being used. However, what if there are no woods, etc? Is it OK to show the movie or website in order to give students the knowledge about a certain subject? I think that it is OK as long as the information is being monitored. As stated in Oppenheimer's book, technology needs to be administered with "a firm hand" :)
"Therefore, if school systems would just sit back and watch to see what happens with a certain program, there would be less change, less money wasted, and probably happier teachers."
Are you suggesting stagnation? This will cause as many problems as it will fix. While it is problematic that schools sometimes get on a merry-go-round of innovation after innovation without giving anything time to settle in, we also need to be sure that we are creating an innovation-friendly culture where teachers have the freedom to innovate.
Dawn mentioned a story claiming, “fast-paced computer games are creating ADHD children.” It seems that a common problem exists with separating children with short attention spans from those with ADHD. Many possible causes and factors are cited as contributing to ADHD from television to sugar consumption to fast-paced computer games. It seems reasonable that these factors would affect attention span resulting in children that lose interest in material quickly and desire constant and changing activities at school. But do these factors create ADHD children or are children with short attention spans being mislabeled?
In school, students are expected to concentrate on material, work through problems, and remain focused for extended periods of time. However, computer games, commercials and television programs to which children are regularly exposed undermine this type of diligent concentration. When a student does not demonstrate the expected attention span, a usual assumption is the student has ADHD. With the amount of labeling and medicating of students occurring within schools, I think that a serious examination of the difference between short attention spans and ADHD must be examined.
I am by no means suggesting stagnation. I fully agree that teachers need to have the freedom to innovate, but I think that this should be the case all the time and just not when the school system brings in a new program. I think that schools too often put a new program in place, because of research claims that they have read, and when it doesn’t meet their expectations, they are quick to turn to something else, making many educators very frustrated. If they were to allow the teachers and students to become familiar with the program even if it doesn’t do exactly what they were told it would do right away, I think that they would be very surprised by the outcome.
Post a Comment