Technology in schools: overrated?

Sounds like a problem of presentation. Give the teacher absolute control over what’s on the screen and you can ensure that they read it. Don’t give them the option of skipping around.

Why? Do you think this is a matter of projected light over reflected light? I’ve noticed this myself, and that’s what I think it is. School computers could have screens like Kindles in that case.

This is not a necessary aspect of the medium, this is a production problem and is not relevant to the medium.

Yeah I’m not buying it, some of the smartest people I’ve ever met are in their early 20s. I know a lot more about a lot of things than my Father. I consistently run into the problem of talking to him about subjects and running into the wall of his phenomenological field. He’s a smart guy too.

Well that I agree with. We should be focusing on Visual, Auditory and Kinesthetic methods of teaching children, and computers can only address visual and auditory concerns.

I teach second grade with a Smartboard. Examples of how I use it:
-Every day, students enter their lunch choices on an Excel spreadsheet. The spreadsheet creates one of a variety of graphs (bar graphs, pie charts in different formats), and we discuss the results. Through this, students learn basic computer uses, as well as learning to read graphs.
-When I do read-alouds of picture books, I generally place the book under the document camera (sort of like a fancy overhead projector that doesn’t need transparencies). Students may thereby read along with me, and they can see the pictures in the book very easily. Without the document camera/smart board, I could either prevent students from reading the text, or limit myself to a very small selection of “big books” that can be read from a distance.
-When something cool scientifically comes up (a crop of mushrooms outside, an interesting spider, colorchanging leaves in fall, etc.), we can look at it magnified magnificently under the document camera and discuss our observations. This is mostly just fun, but it’s also good for building scientific observation skills. (We do this once every week or so–it’s just a perk)
-When teaching about Venn Diagrams (for example), I can build one on the smart board, and we can drag concepts around in it. We read two similar books (Oliver Button is a Sissy, and Amazing Grace), discussed traits of each, and then built a Venn diagram with similarities and differences. Doing this on a white board would have been much more difficult.
-When we’re brainstorming ideas as a class (e.g., on the benefits of a private ballot), I can sit in the back of the room and lead the discussion by typing the ideas on the board, using my remote keyboard. I can also walk around the room with the keyboard, using proximity to quell off-task behavior, without stopping the lesson. With a whiteboard, I’d have to keep my back turned to the class whenever writing ideas. Also, I type neatly at about 80 wpm; I write at about a quarter this speed, if that, and pretty messily.
-It’s great for teaching math concepts: for example, I created a screen full of different shapes and had student drag congruent shapes over one another. When teaching about multiplication as repeated addition, it’s easy to copy a set multiple times.
-If something comes up (“What’s a gnu?” was a recent question), I can turn the smartboard off, Google a picture on the connected computer that faces away from the class (smartboard off so that I can prevent students from seeing the picture of the topless woman riding a gnu that somehow made it past the filter), and turn the board back on. Picture, often with some text from National Geographic or something. Without the Internet connection or large display, I could still do this with a set of encyclopedias, but displaying the information would be much more difficult.
-When we’re revising student writing, I can plop a sample under the document camera, and everyone can see the concepts we’re working on, and we can do it together. Without the document camera, I could do this with a chart, but it wouldn’t be authentic student work, and it’d take me a helluva long time to set up.
-When we’re working on phonics, I generally create my lesson ahead of time (for example, a chart with various consonant blends), enabling me at lesson time to pull it up quickly instead of having to create it on the spot on the board.

I use it in almost all whole-class lessons. It has many advantages over the old technologies. Yes, it’s just a tool, like a hammer–but if you think carefully about how to use it, it offers tremendous advantages over the old tools.

Daniel

Much more useful than making sure every kid has a computer is
A. MAKING SURE THEY SHOW UP EVERYDAY FOR SCHOOL, HAVING DONE THEIR HOMEWORK THE NIGHT BEFORE AND READY TO LEARN.
B. MAKING SURE THEY KNOW HOW TO BEHAVE IN THE CLASSROOM, AND INFLICTING HARSH CONSEQUENCES UPON THEM IF THEY DON’T.
c. MAKING PARENTS HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR MAKING SURE THAT A) AND B) ARE DONE!

Technology?? What technology?? Give me a kid who does A, B, and C like mentioned above, and I can teach them to get 4.0 GPA’s using only a pencil and a notebook.

Technology is grossly overrated.

Er, no. I like technology a lot. And it helps my kids learn, trust me!

But understand too that the most important pieces of technology driving their school day are the stove and the alarm clock.

That and computers are now the primary medium.

Ooh, interesting! As a teacher, I never thought of turning in attendance every day to an office–and they in turn never thought of calling parents whose kids didn’t show up and (eventually) sending them letters threatening legal action. I never thought of prioritizing homework. Nor did it ever occur to me to teach appropriate behavior. Thanks for the ideas–this is going to radically change how I teach!

“What technology” indeed. Do you think pencils and notebooks are naturally occurring phenomena? They’re every bit as much technology as a Smart Board is technology. It drives me crazy when pedagogues use the word “technology” to distinguish computerized equipment from noncomputerized equipment.

Pencils, as a technology, have the distinct advantage of having been around for centuries. They’re damn near perfect as a technology. Computers are much newer and are still being improved on; they’re nowhere near perfect. But they have capabilities that a pencil doesn’t have.

Yes. We should teach in the woods, wearing animal skins held together by our hands. No roofs, no lights, no pencils, no paper, no computers, no technology.

I love it. This is definitely true. A kid who shows up late, without breakfast, isn’t going to learn from my lesson, whether the lesson be taught using chart paper or a Smart Board.

Daniel

Dorkiness: You would be amazed.

I taught in an inner city school 1991-1997, and then in the opposite extreme rural farm school in 1998 before I changed careers all together.

I assume you teach in a cushy suburban school somewhere?

You would be amazed.

You would be amazed as to the difference between teaching in an inner-city school, vs a rural school, vs a suburban district. (I never taught in a suburban district so I wouldn’t know about your situation).

You write sarcastically, which means you might be part of impediment towards real progress rather than addressing the underlying real problem.

It’s one reason I got out of teaching: Know-it-all-teachers and administration who get all defensive about their profession anytime real reform is proposed. That and the piss-poor salaries (another reason I got out of it).

I repeat: If you have children who are present and willing and actively ready to learn, and parents who are held accountable to their children’s actions, you can achieve a lot with a pencil and pen. Is technology grand? Yes it is. But Technology is not MORE important than readiness and accountability.

Look, you can surround a child with all the technology in the world, but if the child isn’t willing to learn and/or comes from a household where education isn’t valued or supported, all the technology of NASA isn’t going to amount to much. If you fail to understand this you are part of the problem.

You CAN’T turn a 1.0 child into a 4.0 child with technology alone.
But you CAN turn a 1.0 child into a 4.0 child using only a pencil and notebook . . . if the child is A, B, and C as described in my first posting.

Dig?

You assume wrong.

To say more:

My sarcasm is not because I’m “part of the problem” (what a developmentally delayed idea!). It’s because your suggestions are bleedin’ obvious. And as you well know, having worked with kids from difficult home lives, recognizing the problem of kids whose parents are educationally useless does very little to solve that same problem.

My second graders occasionally get in fights because of the gangs in their local neighborhoods. I’m not talking a cushy school here.

But there’s only so much you can do regarding the home life. I can’t shackle parents to the kitchen table and make them stay there until their kid has done the homework. I can’t send a patrol car to bring a parent to the conference. My discipline options are highly limited.

So what can I do? I do the best I can to maximize your bleedin’ obvious things (thus the sarcasm: of COURSE we do what we can there). Beyond the bleedin’ obvious, I get creative with the tools at my disposal.

If I can’t make a kid do homework, well, maybe I can make my lesson interesting and compelling and accessible to the kid.

But thanks all the same for pointing out the basics! Perhaps if you tell me your job, I can chastize you for not doing the things you do at your job.

Daniel

Than you should know better.

Indeed: anyone who isn’t ignorant must agree with you. What humility, what reasonable arguing!

Oops–there goes that sarcasm again. Still part of the problem!

You ARE agreeing with him, so I think it’s time to shut up.

Read more carefully, please.

Do you know what a strawman is?

No one claimed technology was a panacea, merely a tool that can be very useful when used properly, which it often isn’t.

Exactly.

Nobody disagrees about the Bleedin’ Obvious points raised. Nobody thinks that attendance should be deprioritized, or that it’s unnecessary to teach proper behavior, or that parents shouldn’t be involved.

The disagreement is on whether computerized technology should have a significant place in the classroom (which, coincidentally enough, is the topic of the freakin’ thread).

I disagree with shallora on another point, but this may be due to poor phrasing on his/her part:

Well, maybe you can–but if A,B, and C are true, then why is the kid a 1.0 child? Chances are that they have some sort of learning disability, or have had really crappy teachers up to this point, or something similar–and none of these are simple things to solve, either.

If s/he’s suggesting that good teaching can happen without computers, then of course that’s also true. My claim isn’t that computer equipment is necessary for teaching–merely that it can be a very useful tool.

Daniel

LHoD, any thoughts on the work my brother was doing? I realize I was describing it in very general terms, but I’m not an educator myself.

He has since returned to the classroom full time.

This sounds like good stuff. When we got our Smart Boards, we went through a weeklong training in designing multiweek reserach-based projects that incorporated Web 2.0 technologies; we also have monthly tech trainings; we also have a tech team (of which I’m part) that tries to encourage people to use their Smart Boards effectively.

The Open Office idea is very interesting. I’m very ignorant about Open Office (I know it exists but have never used it). I can see two sides to it:

  1. On the one hand, the cost for Office is significant.
  2. On the other hand, MS Office is the norm, the default out there. Teaching kids to use the most common software will be the most authentic education on computers that they can get.

Last year, I had my students revise handwritten stories and then, as a final part of a monthlong project, type them onto a kid-oriented word processor our school had. It was a nightmare. The software was dumbed down in a way that actually made it extremely easy for students to lose their documents (you could only have one page open at a time, you had to save each page as a separate document, and a kid who clicked “save” when they should click “open”, or vice versa, would lose their work). I had kids crying all over the place. I’ll never use that kid-oriented software, at least not for word processing.

That said, I almost never use PowerPoint. At older grades it can be helpful, but for second-graders, I don’t think it’s very appropriate. I try to make my stuff as interactive as I can, even if it’s just writing student answers up, or drawing and manipulating things real-time. If teachers are gonna use PowerPoint, I think they need som serious training in what constitutes good usage of the program.

Also, part of why I use MS Office is that for 10 years I worked in admin, and I’m a freakin’ guru of the suite. If shortcut key knowledge were sexy, I’d be Hugh Jackman. If our school decided to adopt Open Office (which it won’t–it just bought Office 2008), I’d learn it enthusiastically, but I already have such a strong base in MS Office that I wouldn’t advocate for that change.

Web 2.0 is great. I’ve not really figured out how to use it effectively at the second grade level, but I know that older grades are using it to correspond with classes around the world. Again, you could do this with pen and paper, but the rate of correspondence, the immediacy of it, is a real advantage to Web 2.0.

Daniel

The appropriate word is ‘Then’

I have no idea whether this was a general proposal - he told me he made it to a school system in West Virginia that was extremely cash-strapped. In that circumstance it might be appropriate, given that the alternative seemed to be only getting any kind of word processing software to a fraction of the high schoolers.

I’m unfamiliar with how the program works pragmatically regarding laptops or computers in every classroom: how many disappear or are defaced beyond usable? What penalties are there if a kid comes in and his laptop has a busted screen? And if he can’t afford to replace it out of pocket?
Is a student assigned a laptop in 8th grade then keeps it until he graduates, or is it returned and upgraded every year?
I can see networked stations at every desk in the classroom being very useful, but also as very unlikely to be upgraded regularly.
I graduated in 97 and aside from a few limited access machines only had access to a DOS lab from a technology grant ten years earlier that wasn’t much good for anything but word processing and simple BASIC programming (not enough memory to run any complex programs). Missing or mushy keys and scratched screens were par for the course.
I guess today’s personal computers can stand up for a few more years against the outside flow of technology, but not the careless nature of kids.

I’ll parrot the sentiment that technology is not overrated but underutilized.